Posted on 09/23/2007 8:58:57 AM PDT by Spiff
Mackinac Island, Michigan Fred Thompson finally made clear his position on the statist campaign finance restrictions embodied in the McCain-Feingold bill. And conservatives are clearly not going to be pleased.
When the former star of TV's "Law and Order" series and newly-minted presidential candidate spoke to reporters on the porch of the Grand Hotel here, I asked Thompson whether he was proud of his role in enacting the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation in '01.
"Yes," replied the former Tennessee senator without hesitation. "You will recall that the central part of the legislation was getting rid of soft money [from the political process]." He then went on to remind me that he came from a background in the private sector and, in that sector, it would have been thought unseemly for "hundreds of thousands of dollars" to be poured in to influence someone's decision. In the public arena, "it got to be the norm" because of the soft money, upon which there were no limits for donations to the two major political parties." The contributors, he said, would then, "harass legislators before they vote on anything. This was not a good idea."
Thompson went on to remind me that it was his amendment to McCain-Feingold that, "raised the hard money index" and he was also proud of that.
If there is anything in McCain-Feingold that "has not worked out," he went to say, it is "placing limitations on ads [by independent groups] in the [political] process. Thompson hinted that he would support legislation to change this, since "the Supreme Court has better things to do with its time than hear cases on unfair limitation." (Earlier this year, by a decision of 5-to-4, the Supreme Court struck down parts of McCain-Feingold that dealt with limiting ads by independent groups.) He also said that the landmark campaign finance legislation he held shepherd to passage (and which President Bush signed in '01) has created a larger bureaucracy to enforce regulations and "that part hasn't worked out."
When he began considering a White House bid earlier this year, the 65-year-old Thompson stunned longtime friends when, in an interview published in The American Spectator, he was quoted as suggesting he might have erred in backing campaign finance restrictions, that the law could now lift the limits on campaign contributions and have instant reporting, a position most conservatives support on campaign finance. More recently, Thompson, defended McCain-Feingold passionately in interviews with syndicated columnist George Will and radio talk show host Laura Ingrahm.
Now Fred Thompson has made his position clear--and did so with passion. In a few hours, the Tennessean will join John McCain (whom he supported in 2000) as one of the main dinner speakers at the Michigan Republican Leadership Conference here. Fred Thompson Defends McCain-Feingold
by John Gizzi
Human Events
Posted: 09/22/2007
If you'd like to explain this latest flip of yours, I'm all ears. Otherwise..... *FLUSH* .... that sound is your credibility going down the toilet.
That’s what I’d like to know . The author of this article seems to have definate preferences , and it doesn’t appear that Fred is one of them .
That doesn't mean that I'm NOT going to vote for him.
If Fred's the nominee he has my vote. But I'm not going to actively support him during the primaries.
Duncan, on the other hand, IS a conservative, would finally turn around our Leftward drift, and is Her Heinousness' worst nightmare.
Your implied campaign of pre-emptive surrender against encroaching socialism seems kind of idiotic to me...
Compared to Fred, McCain, Romney, or Guilani... he’s damn near Mother Teresa...
Hmmm. You should understand more than most folks realize, this GOP primary campaign is a lot different than its been in past years. We have a full fledged liberal running for the GOP nomination. It won't help matters if you and others stick to voting for second tier candidates, thereby allowing Rooty Toot to possibly steal the nomination. Just a thought.
But “I’ll bet you already knew that” if a candidate doesn’t have some ducks in a row, there’s no point in attempting a run at the presidency. Hunter didn’t prepare for a presidential campaign. He’s done none of the things that candidates typically do to have name recognition. His resume, while certainly conservative, isn’t one that marks him as an obvious presidential possibility.
The CFR issue has really soured my support for Fred. It appears that he was a much more active & willing partner in it than previously thought. That and his speeches and not being specific on policies other than promoting "federalism." Well, the average voter doesn't know what federalism is.
WELL THAT DOES IT, I’M VOTING FOR KOOK-BOY!
(sarcasm)
Good call. You never had any support for Fred in the first place.
Opinions vary.
I emailed his campaign for an explanation.
Good call. You never had any support for Fred in the first place.
If he's nominated, then I'll vote for him. Voting for Fred is a no-brainer in the general election.
“I emailed his campaign for an explanation.”
Get one?
Just the standard “Thank you for contacting Ron Paul’s campaign” message.
I'll bet any money Thompson will select Jeb Bush or Huckabee as VP though.A fool and his money ...
bump, indeed.
As far as I can tell, Jim wants to see a good conservative candidate become the GOP nominee. One of those good conservatives Jim is backiong goes by the name of, Fred Thompson. The samae Fred Thompson who you find so unworthy of your vote.
Fred has renounced the issue ad provision of CFR and is even rethinking his position on eliminating soft money and indexing contributions to inflation. Although not to everyones satisfaction. Look, reactionary absolutism isn't gonna help keep Rooty from stealing the GOP nomination. Or don't you care?
Neatly stated.
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.