Posted on 10/02/2007 8:04:06 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Though America got where it is today by following a pattern of freedom and prosperity followed, Americans at a present political crossroads may be in danger of choosing instead a path that leads to inevitable demise, said Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson Monday in Marshalltown.
Thompson, however, advocated adhering to the country’s foundational principles and doing what is right.
“How often, when you do the right thing, it turns out to be good politics too?” he said to a full room at the Tremont on Main.
At the core of his campaign, Thompson said he stands behind a federalism based on the Declaration of Independence’s assertion that individual rights come from God, not government, and the Constitution’s separation of powers.
“I always ask myself, ‘Does government have any business doing something,’” he said.
Thompson also delved into the hot topics of the day, including illegal immigration, taxes and war.
He noted that the United States now allows twice as many immigrants as it did in the early 1990s but emphasized the need for secure borders.
“We all know the wonderful contributions we’ve received from us being a country with open borders. ... From a legal standpoint, we’re still an open and generous nation,” he said. “... But a nation that cannot or will not secure its borders will not remain a sovereign nation. ... Is it going to make it better to become more and more dependant on illegal immigration?”
On taxes, Thompson said the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 worked and that Congress should continue to offer cuts in the future. What is not working, he said, is the unfair estate tax and unrestrained government spending.
“We’re spending the money of our children and grandchildren who are not even born yet and don’t have a seat at the table,” he said.
He advocated too opening up the health care system to more freedom, choice, personal responsibility and competition rather than plans too heavily relying on employers. The result would be the same quality care at lower costs, he said.
And on the war in Iraq, he said the nation’s greatest need is not to get out as soon as possible but to show the world that America is not weak and fundamentally not divided.
“We need to send the message that we’re willing and able to do what’s necessary on any front,” he said. “... The cause was just, we were just not prepared for what we found there.”
Thompson has made unity, along with security and prosperity, a priority in his campaign for the White House.
“We have a heritage, a history of honorably sacrificing for the greater good,” he said. “We’ve shed more blood for other peoples than any other nation, and we’re proud of that.”
But being the world’s greatest nation comes with responsibility, he also said.
Assume you mean James Dobson. What's he going to do?
“I always ask myself, ‘Does government have any business doing something,’” he said.
Here is the major difference between "Presiding" and "Dictating".
Are any of the other candidates, from either party, talking about how they will "Preside", or just saying "what I intend to do is ..."?
Kimberly:
I’m sure you realize that Fred Thompson was referring to history (i.e., Ellis Island) with that statement, but you are trying to paint Fred as an “open-borders” RINO like Romney, Huckabee or Giuliani. Shame on you!
“you are trying to paint Fred as an “open-borders” RINO like Romney, Huckabee or Giuliani.”
‘If the shoe fits’....
I don’t normally comment in a personal way about Freepers, but what simply amazes me is that while you consistently and admirably have opposed illegal immigration and advocate for the effective security of our borders, you willingly ignore the obvious when it comes to Fred. If he is elected 2DV, I believe you are going to be greatly disappointed when he handles the problem no differently than any of the other ‘moderate’ Republican candidates. Our battle to prevent the OBL/CFR agenda for a mass amnesty, to get our borders effectively secured, and to stop the SPP/NAU will continue or be lost. Perhaps its just not a priority of yours, but it is mine.
Fred repeatedly has called for an end to illegal immigration.
Any other claim is a falsehood.
Now, you’re not going to propagate this falsehood any longer.
I will hunt you down.
I was at this event. I can tell you that he is clearly spoke against illegal immigration. The newspaper did not quote every word that he said.
Like a soldier that cringes on Omaha beach. Has no interest in being there, but will inexplicably crawl into the fire if called upon.Excellent analogy. I like it. And I agree that is the type of person I want as president. Not a life-time candidate, like many or most of the others.
Why don’t you post the whole quote? WE have been a nation with relatively open borders over the last two hundred years for LEGAL immigrants. You know that Fred does not support open borders for illegal immigration, because in the very next sentence he says so. Do you think we would have been a better country if we had had no legal immigration for the last 150 years?? If that is your position, you could caucus in a phone booth.
That is the kind of intellectual dishonesty, sleight of hand with a quote, which I believe your candidate, Duncan Hunter, would never engage in. You will not win converts to his cause with such tactics. People who post on Freerepublic are too well informed to buy such transparent foolishness.
Fred’s a leader, not an auntie.
What was George Washington’s qualifications?
Just what kind of power do you think he truly had in that investigation? Not only was he fighting against the Democrats on the committee, but also the RINOS and weenie conservatives who were scared to take on the Clintons for fear of the media machine that would be turned full force against them.
I'm not on the Fredwagon just yet, but I should point out that the President has absolutely no power to amend the Constitution, and no role in the process.
His fundraising didn't 'lag'. His numbers for Q3 only accounted for 24 days, because that's how many there were remaining in the quarter AFTER he became an official candidate. So if the others were raising in the range of $15 million for the quarter, and Fred raised $5mil or so in the LESS than one month he's been in, I'd say that was just about on par with the others.
Oh, and not everyone gives right away, even for their favorite candidates, so the fact that umpteen millions were not thrown at him in the first three weeks doesn't mean a thing.
Fred favors a marriage amendment that would grant homosexual marriage to states if their legislatures choose it. That would trump the current federal DOMA. He says it would make sure the full faith and credit clause could not be used to force other states to recognize the marriages, but I don’t see how. What about federal recognition and benefits? Does a homosexual married pair file federal taxes as “married filing jointly”? If so, do they become unmarried if they move to another state? He can’t have it both ways. He can’t let the state choose by writing that “right” into the Constitution and then deny those marriages federal recognition and benefits like all other marriages. If they are recognized as legitimate by the FEDERAL government then the definition of marriage has been changed for the entire nation. His plan is ridiculous and contradicts the DOMA which he voted for. It would also probably overturn the state amendments and thereby leave every state more vulnerable to a radical redefinition as soon as the liberals get a majority for even a brief time in any given state. Once conservatives win back a majority, how do you unmarry the couples? You can’t! So we would be no better off than if a judge decreed the marriages. Marriage is not something you can give and then take back like other policy issues.
She doesn't care about facts, she only cares about twisting words to make Thompson look bad, thinking that somehow Hunter will benefit accordingly.
He's definitely not into 'kumbaya' unity.
Fred was not saying 'open borders' in YOUR parlance. He is against the flood of illegals, and knows we won't continue to be secure if it doesn't stop.
‘Aspirations of citizenship’ doesn’t mean that folks will automatically be granted such because they happen to BE here. Fred said that those who would want to become citizens will have to get in line BEHIND those who have followed the rules to become citizens.
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.