Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Giuliani? Thompson? No President Will Lead a Moral Revival
North Star Writers Group ^ | August 20, 2007 | Dan Calabrese

Posted on 08/20/2007 6:26:08 AM PDT by John Galt 72

Giuliani? Thompson? No President Will Lead a Moral Revival

By Dan Calabrese

August 20, 2007

A friend recently indicated his strong preference for Fred Thompson over Rudy Giuliani in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. The issue, he said, is morality. Giuliani’s past marital infidelity, fractured relationships with his children and support for abortion rights and gay rights call his moral judgment into question.

That, say this friend and many other social conservatives, is not the kind of man we want to elect to lead a moral nation.

Any defense of Giuliani on these points can wait for another day. But a look at statistical indicators of Americans’ morality over the past 30 years shows an interesting lack of correlation between moral trends and the moral character of the person sitting in the White House.

Read the entire column here: http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc102.htm


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; democrats; electionpresident; elections; fredthompson; giuliani; gop; moral; polls; president; republicans; thompson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last
To: goldstategop
The President is NOT a moral leader.

"I'm just trying to suppress my natural impulses and get back to work." -- Bill Clinton to Jim Lehrer, Jan. 21, 1998.

I don't want a President who is going to force his religious faith down our throats -- which, by your mention of the "clergy," seems to be the point you are trying to make. But the President has to BE moral at his core, and lead by example. There is no place for immorality in the Presidency.
21 posted on 08/20/2007 7:05:29 AM PDT by RepublitarianRoger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

No, but character does matter. I believed that in 2000 and I believe it today.


22 posted on 08/20/2007 7:07:11 AM PDT by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Like it or not, but the President 'sets the standard' for acceptable conduct in our country. Like it or not, but some people actually look to our President for leadership in other ways than domestic and foreign policy.

I don't want our President 'lowering standard' for acceptable personal conduct in our country. For example, I'm sorry, but I don't think our Oval Office (nation's highest office) should be turned into a President's PERSONAL MASSAGE PARLOR (i.e. Bill Clinton).

23 posted on 08/20/2007 7:09:28 AM PDT by stockstrader (We need a conservative candidate who will UNITE the Party, not a liberal one to DIVIDE it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom; Sturm Ruger; jellybean; 2ndDivisionVet

ping!


24 posted on 08/20/2007 7:09:31 AM PDT by lesser_satan (Fred Thompson '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sono

The Presidents of the United States played no particular role in the great moral revival that swept the United States in the period 1815-1835. That event, which sparked the missionary movement, was dominated by church leaders and by the people themselves. I can’t think of a president who led a moral revival, but I can think of presidents who by their upright example set the tone for a nation. If anything, there is a need for a moral revival in the Church.


25 posted on 08/20/2007 7:10:45 AM PDT by Melchior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: John Galt 72

Charles Barkley once said he was NOT a role model, but we all knew he was, because of his status and celebrity. We get down on those guys when our culture elevates them and then they act like trash. How much more so then, should the President of the United States be a role model? More than a role model, they are moral barometers of the state of this nation. This is so because we as a people must choose if we care about the moral integrity of the person we choose to lead us.

Many on this board discussed how terrible it was that Bill Clinton was such a poor moral role model. Are so of those same ones now taking the opposite position when the fellow THEY want to build a “Cult of Personality” around has led a less than wholesome life?

I don’t trust Mitt Romney, but I know his wife can trust him, and I respect that. If a man’s wife can’t trust him, how can I?

There are candidates in this race whose personal lives are exemplary and models of virtue. I suggest we direct our support toward them.


26 posted on 08/20/2007 7:17:32 AM PDT by Hail Spode
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Galt 72

Neither will be elected president.


27 posted on 08/20/2007 7:18:31 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo
Each of the candidates running have good attributes, and maybe just maybe a few of them have what it takes to beat Hillary, but where will they take the party?

I consider all the candidates to be placeholders until a strong conservative leader can emerge. The fact that conservatives didn't have a strong candidate in waiting for 2008 suggests great disarray in our ranks.

I know some people will respond with "what about Fred Thompson?" I like Fred's views and will probably vote for him in the primaries and definitely in the general election, if he gets the nomination. But when I review his Senate record, I come away unimpressed. I still maintain if he weren't an actor, he would get about as much attention as the other Thompson who had a much more impressive political record. If Fred is the best we can do, then conservatives are in trouble.

28 posted on 08/20/2007 7:22:44 AM PDT by CommerceComet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hail Spode
Great post. It's incredible that some 'so-called' conservatives are now indirectly taking the position that conduct no longer matters. It's amazing.

I'm sorry, but CHARACTER DOES MATTER!!!! Not only does it matter--it matters MORE 'at the top'.

29 posted on 08/20/2007 7:26:29 AM PDT by stockstrader (We need a conservative candidate who will UNITE the Party, not a liberal one to DIVIDE it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: John Galt 72

Regardless of moral leadership issues (on which Thompson beats Guliani hands down, IMO), Thompson is by far the better choice to lead the country.

Fred Thompson ‘08!


30 posted on 08/20/2007 7:36:48 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hail Spode

“There are candidates in this race whose personal lives are exemplary and models of virtue. I suggest we direct our support toward them.”

How a candidate handles himself personally is one part of the equation. Certainly there are lines over which they shouldn’t cross. In my mind, Fred Thompson’s personal credentials are just fine, and I expect he’ll make a great President. He has my vote and campaign contribution once he declares.

Romney, Hunter and other wannabes simply have no chance of winning the primary. Sorry.


31 posted on 08/20/2007 7:42:41 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Ohh Ohh! Can President Hunter please appoint them as ambassadors to Reality??? Pwetty Pweese?


32 posted on 08/20/2007 7:43:07 AM PDT by perfect_rovian_storm (President Hunter should appoint Senator Katherine Harris to his cabinet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy

He was single. Unmarried.

In other words, so what? Is an unmarried man not allowed to date in your world?


33 posted on 08/20/2007 7:44:09 AM PDT by RockinRight (Fred Thompson once set fire to a crowd of liberals simply by puffing his cigar and staring real hard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: perfect_rovian_storm

How adult of you.


34 posted on 08/20/2007 7:45:15 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: CommerceComet
If it’s all about record, would you vote for the man who said the following during a campaign speech?

“It is time we stopped thinking of our nearest neighbors as foreigners. I would immediately seek the views and ideas of Canadian and Mexican leaders. I would be willing to invite each of our neighbors to send a special representative to our government to sit in on high level planning sessions with us, as partners, mutually concerned about the future of our continent.”

35 posted on 08/20/2007 7:46:02 AM PDT by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo

You mean Reagan?

;-)


36 posted on 08/20/2007 7:51:51 AM PDT by RockinRight (Fred Thompson once set fire to a crowd of liberals simply by puffing his cigar and staring real hard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo
Fred Thompson is a communicator of great things and I am honored to be behind him.

Well, he IS a pretty good actor, and as long as he has some good script writers of staff to get him to say all the right things, the American people will follow and I think he'll go all the way..

37 posted on 08/20/2007 8:05:25 AM PDT by Riodacat (Ignorance is bliss. Knowledge, truth and reality sucks....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
That’s right, it was Ronald Reagan. Nov 1979

Rudy, Romney, and Fred may not be the conservative dream team that we all would like to see in the top three - but would we place our beloved Ronald Reagan there based on his pre-Presidential record alone? probably not. Yet look what he did as President.
For now we can stand behind our favorite, but when it comes down the final vote we all better stand united behind the one running against Hillary.

His Full Quote:

“We live on a continent whose three countries possess the assets to make it the strongest, most prosperous and self-sufficient area on Earth. Within the borders of this North American continent are the food, resources, technology and undeveloped territory which, properly managed, could dramatically improve the quality of life of all its inhabitants.

It is no accident that this unmatched potential for progress and prosperity exists in three countries with such long-standing heritages of free government. A developing closeness among Canada, Mexico and the United States—a North American accord—would permit achievement of that potential in each country beyond that which I believe any of them—strong as they are—could accomplish in the absence of such cooperation. In fact, the key to our own future security may lie in both Mexico and Canada becoming much stronger countries than they are today.

No one can say at this point precisely what form future cooperation among our three countries will take. But if I am elected President, I would be willing to invite each of our neighbors to send a special representative to our government to sit in on high level planning sessions with us, as partners, mutually concerned about the future of our continent. First, I would immediately seek the views and ideas of Canadian and Mexican leaders on this issue, and work tirelessly with them to develop closer ties among our peoples. It is time we stopped thinking of our nearest neighbors as foreigners”.

Ronald Reagan said the words above November 13, 1979

38 posted on 08/20/2007 8:11:21 AM PDT by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

The president should be a moral leader. The character of the national leader has great impact on the moral life and destiny of the nation.


39 posted on 08/20/2007 8:14:54 AM PDT by Mediahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat
I’m willing to overlook the fact that he “screwed around” when he was single. It’s not to his credit, but he hadn’t taken a vow of chastity. A president’s personal behavior in the White House should be exemplary, though

My concerns are:
American sovereignty. (NAFTA, SPP, NAU, etc.).
Our Constitution (First, Second, Fifth, and all the rest of the Bill of Rights).
Judicial appointments (judges who believe the Constitution means what is clearly says).
Border defense (build the damn fence and man it).
Get control of immigration.
National defense (keep our military strong).
Do away with or greatly limit the ATF, and throttle back out-of-control agencies (like the FBI).
Shake up the State Department and change course in Kosovo.
Limit the size of the bureaucracy and return rightful authority to the States.

There are a few other topics, but I don't want to make this too long.
I’m waiting for these topics to be directly addresses (no double talk).
40 posted on 08/20/2007 8:21:08 AM PDT by Hiddigeigei (Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson