Skip to comments.The Daily FRead (October 16, 2007)
Posted on 10/16/2007 8:14:33 AM PDT by jellybean
Link only allowed due to copyright issues
Fred Thompson broadens support base
His appeal expands beyond Tenn. donors
By BILL THEOBALD
Fred Thompson Begins Calling Republicans to Come Home to GOP Ideals
Fred Thompson has made a decision that is very significant in this race for the GOP nomination -- he is going to tell Republicans the truth. Now that may seem obvious, but in this election cycle, very little of that is being done.
Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are both doing all they can to camouflage their liberal pasts to try and appear far more conservative than their track record indicates. Romney is seeking to become the actual conservative alternative to Giuliani, even though less than three years ago he was still standing up for abortion rights in Massachusetts.
But Giuliani's attempt to portray himself as "safe" for conservatives to support is even more remarkable. He entered this race with everyone knowing his pro-abortion position, and he made a calculated decision to stick with that position as he seeks the GOP nomination and assure conservatives that he would appoint "strict constructionist" judges, which would in effect help the pro-life position. So far, that smokescreen appears to be working. But as Fred Thompson begins to unmask Giuliani's liberal self, Republicans may begin to ask "what is it about Giuliani's record that would indicate we can believe him"? The answer is -- not much. In fact when you look deeply into Giuliani's record, it becomes far more troubling.
Marc Ambinder alludes to many of these troubling aspects of Giuliani's history in a post he wrote yesterday about Fred's opening assault on the facade of Giuliani's accceptability as a Republican nominee:He's not naming names -- but it's not hard, given the context of his speech and his audience -- the Conservative Party once opposed Rudy Giuliani's mayoral candidacy (although its leaders later came to be supporters) -- the speech suggests that Thompson will begin to turn his attention to the national frontrunner.Exactly. Republican values and principles have not been guiding lights for Giuliani in the past, so why should they be in the future? Once in power, what would prevent Giuliani from governing as he has in the past, guided by his true values and core beliefs? Of course, the answer is -- nothing.
The argument will probably begin with Giuliani's own words -- his appeals to Democrats and liberals, his friendliness with the Clinton administration (except for that line item veto challenge), his praise for Bill Clinton himself, his 1994 endorsement of Mario Cuomo over George Pataki (over tax cuts)... his unwillingness, in the late 1980s, to associate himself with Ronald Reagan, his disdain for Barry Goldwater, his alleged 1972 vote for George McGovern.. ... you get the idea.
The big thump here is loyalty: Thompson will argue that Giuliani hasn't been loyal to Republican causes and has instead been more than willing to throw them under the bus when it suited his political needs. And by extension, Giuliani will jettison his conservative supporters the moment he's elected president. Or the moment it suits him.
The troubling issues about Rudy's past alluded to in Ambinder's post are documented in excruciating detail in a dossier edited by New York conservative activist George Marlin. Ryan Sager of the New York Sun wrote about this 40 page document way back in March. It is available for download here. But I am going to post below Sager's summary of quotes from the document:The dossier itself is quite simple: It consists of roughly 40 pages, broken down by topic, of quotes from and about Mr. Giuliani. Topics range from abortion to gay rights to gun control to the former mayor's thoughts (while in college) on Barry Goldwater. . . .UPDATE: According to news clips, Mr. Marlin released a much shorter version of this dossier — as in four pages — back in 2005. It was then titled, "The Quotable Rudolph Giuliani"
And, so, without further ado, here are some highlights:
"I'd give my daughter the money for it [an abortion]."
"I never called for the overturning of Roe vs. Wade."
New York Newsday, September 1, 1989
* BILL CLINTON:
Most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine.
1996 statement attributed to Giuliani by Columnist Jack Newfield. Quoted in column by Newfield in New York Daily News, June 8, 1999.
* CRIME AND GIULIANI:
Giuliani has done a magnificent job in reducing crime. But his character flaws make it impossible for him to give credit to former police commissioner Bill Bratton, who put together the police team responsible for the initial successes, and to David Dinkins, whose legislation funded an additional 8,000 cops for the city.
New York Post, July 18, 1997
* CUOMO ENDORSEMENT BY GIULIANI:
"From my point of view as the mayor of New York City, the question that I have to ask is, ‘Who has the best chance in the next four years of successfully fighting for our interest? Who understands them, and who will make the best case for it?' Our future, our destiny is not a matter of chance. It's a matter of choice. My choice is Mario Cuomo."
New York Times, October 25, 1994
* GAY AND DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP RIGHTS:
"I have no objection to the concept of domestic partnership."
New York T.V. Show (PBS), May, 1993
* GAY PRIDE PARADE — GIULIANI REASON FOR MARCHING WITH LOG CABIN REPUBLICAN CLUB:
"I want to show that our campaign embraces everyone in the City of New York."
New York Post, June 28, 1993
* GAY RIGHTS AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY:
In his interview in The Advocate, Mr. Giuliani spoke out for an inclusive Republican party, saying, "There is no reason why the party shouldn't appeal to gays and lesbians in the same way it does to all Americans."
He criticized the anti-abortion, anti-homosexual oratory of Patrick J. Buchanan at the 1992 Republican National Convention as a mistake and held up Gov. William Weld of Massachusetts as a model of more tolerant Republicanism.
And yesterday he noted that he believed in a Republicanism that preaches an economic philosophy of limited government. If Republicans "were consistent – and some are and some aren't," he said, "then they'd come to the same view about someone's sexual orientation or sexual preferences, that this is not something the government was designed to get deeply involved in."
New York Times, June 18, 1994
* BARRY GOLDWATER:
He [Giuliani] described John Kennedy as "great and brilliant." Barry Goldwater was an "incompetent, confused and sometimes idiotic man."
New York Daily News, May 13, 1997
* SCHOOL VOUCHERS:
Vouchers would be a terrible mistake because they would bleed the public schools of needed financing.
New York Times, August 15, 1995
* VIETNAM WAR — DRAFT AND RUDY GIULIANI:
"Giuliani did not attend the war in Vietnam because federal Judge Lloyd MacMahon wrote a letter to the draft board in 1969 and got him out. Giuliani was a law clerk for MacMahon, who at the time was hearing selective service cases. MacMahon's letter to Giuliani's draft board stated that Giuliani was so necessary as a law clerk that he could not be allowed to get shot at in Vietnam."
Newsday, October 1, 1989
Sager has quoted the mild stuff. We'll share more from this dossier in the days ahead.
I know it has been a hard year for Republicans. Many in the GOP are running scared with Bush's low ratings, the long struggle in Iraq, the Democrats victory last November, and the unspeakable danger of a Hillary Clinton presidency looming. This fear has caused some kind of odd fog to settle over the GOP race that has lulled many conservatives into believing our only chance is to nominate Giuliani, which is exactly what he wants us to believe. But from his own words and record, the truth is that to nominate Giuliani is to virtually end the Republican party of Ronald Reagan. It would be an utter rejection of the conservative Reagan principles and agenda, and a return to the Nelson Rockefeller liberal Republican approach that Reagan fought so hard to defeat.
Fred Thompson is beginning the hard work of calling Republicans back to their senses and back to their principles and ideals. The future existence of the GOP as we know it, and as Reagan built it, hangs in the balance. Victory in November 2008 hangs in the balance as well. As Fred has begun to say bluntly, we will not defeat the Democrats by trying to become more like them. Victory, both in November 2008, and in terms of upholding the core ideals of the GOP, demand a rejection of Giuliani's liberalism and the nomination of a true, consistent conservative.
If you find any Fred news, please post it to this thread. Whenever possible link to the print version of the article. The page will load faster without all the ads and doodads clogging up the page and the entire article will be on one page rather than broken up into 2 or 3 pages.
Please check Free Republic's Updated Excerpt and Link Only or Deny Posting List due to Copyright Complaints before posting an article.
If anyone wishes to be pinged to this thread daily, let me know.
Where to find Fred on the internet:
Let me know if you'd like to be on The Daily FRead ping list.
It looks like Fred is using many of the same facts that Freepers have been using to ‘enlighten’ others about Rudy’s liberalism!! Fred, or some of his staffers, must be reading FreeRepublic.....lol
— he is going to tell Republicans the truth. Now that may seem obvious, but in this election cycle, very little of that is being done. Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are both doing all they can to camouflage their liberal pasts to try and appear far more conservative.....
Liberals continue to PROVE they are liberals. No matter how hard they try. Somehow, these guys think they can put enough dirt on their liberal bent.....that says it all. Liberalism is a disease of the mind, it is the bane of this nation, and no voter in his/her right mind will vote for liberalism, let alone hard Marxist socialism offered by Hillary.
(obligatory NY Slimes disclaimer inserted here)
Dang. He sounds a little hot about “somebody” claiming to be conservative. Downright fiery.
No...tha't can't be right. We all know he has no "fire in the belly", he's lazy, boring and is 45 seconds away from dying.
Democratic lawmakers praised the Mayor's push for gun control. "It would be great if Mayor Giuliani could become the point Republican pushing comprehensive gun control legislation," said Representative Charles E. Schumer, the Brooklyn Democrat who is the leading proponent of handgun control in the House of Representatives.
--New York Times, March 8, 1994
It looks like President Giuliani will have lots and lots of bi-partisan cooperation for his liberal social agenda (not to mention all of his liberal buddies that would flood a Giuliani Administration).
Another angle Fred should pursue- extended commentary
It is encouraging to see Fred Thompson begin to highlight his consistent conservative record vis-à-vis Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, two recent converts to some of the tenets of conservatism, and both of whom now vie to be considered the real conservative or real Republican, whichever affiliation suits your preference.
While Fred distinguishes himself from his competition and highlights the not-very conservative records of his primary opponents, another angle needs to be highlighted here- the presumptuousness of both Romney and Rudy. We've been hearing for several debates now how Mitt "can't wait" to debate Hillary; and we see Rudy taking numerous shots at Hillary as well; all of these taunts serve as a virtual siren song to conservatives who are all too eager to bring the fight to Hillary. But in reality, these two are stealing bases- their presumptuousness glosses over the fact that we are in the middle of the Republican Primary, and as such these two are not running against Hillary at this juncture- they are running against Fred Thompson, and to be the party's standard-bearer. Mitt and Rudy are attempting to gloss over both their records and less than conservative views, while they try to convince Republican primary voters, particularly conservatives, that they would best positioned to defeat Hillary.
They are both wrong. While there is much about Rudy's candidacy which is laudable, Rudy's temperament and periodically cantankerous personality is ill-advised for what is already a toxic political environment. Rudy's penchant for coming across as "mean", rather than simply as tough and resolute, could very well amount to a significant liability for him against a candidate who is all too eager to be the "victim" of boorish or aggressive male behavior, be it fairly or unfairly asserted. And while Mitt Romney's conversion to many articles of conservatism is to be commended, his track record prior to 2005 is anything but "conservative"- Mitt's record as a candidate and as governor was as a moderate to liberal Republican. His reported conversion story for becoming pro-life is also less than convincing- while I applaud his change of position on the issue and don't doubt that he is now pro-life, the rationale provided for his change on this core issue of concern to Republican primary voters seems more speciously crafted than authentically journeyed.
It is these less-than stellar records that both of these candidates are now running from. Smart conservatives realize that in a general election, both Mitt and Rudy would be tarred and feathered by Democratic strategists with the "flip-flopper" label as much as Hillary would be by Republicans, in effect making both of them appear less consistent in their stances and as candidates than Hillary Clinton herself, who is the epitome of a chameleon-like candidate. Rather than having the freedom to put forth an unobstructed clear vision of the future, Mitt and Rudy would both be submerged by the mainstream media and Clinton operatives under a deluge of "then and now" attack ads, forcing them to expend precious resources and time refuting them.
Fred Thompson is not burdened by the cumulative weight of a liberal voting record or policy stances, and as such, it is he who would be able to clearly articulate a conservative vision for the future much more effectively and convincingly than his opponents. A further thought- Fred Thompson as the Republican nominee takes the concern of a third party candidacy that can siphon serious numbers of votes away from the Republican ticket completely out of play. Here's my two cents to all interested conservatives and Republicans across the land- look to the future, and ask yourself- who is the most viable, credible conservative to shepherd us through this difficult political environment, and vote accordingly.
Fred Thompson before the Republican Jewish Coalition
The first trip he took as a senator was to Israel, Thompson says, beginning his comments to the Republican Jewish Coalition.
“Mitt and I are having a tough time coming in and following our spouses. We’re going to be something of a come-down, and there’s not much we can do about it… I’m starting to get a few, ‘Fred, if you can’t make it, that’s okay, as long as Jeri can make it.’”
Fred begins with his talk about principles. He uses the ‘we have shed more blood’ line again, and gets a respectable level of applause.
“If you need some help, you’ll get it, but if you can help yourself, you ought to. That’s the kind of country I was raised in, the kind of country we have, and the kind of country that we must protect at all costs.”
Fred talks about the “windfall” that Democrats expect from eliminating Bush’s tax cuts on the rich.
“They also tell us if we just bring the troops home, the wicked wild world will not harm us any more.”
Thompson says the Democrats’ plans are path to “comfortable mediocrity that would bring us neither peace nor prosperity…. The liberal philosophy must be rejected at all costs.”
“This war will be with us when our problems in Iraq are in our rear-view mirror… The American people need to understand that.”
It's a quiet crowd so far.
In some ways, Thompson's speeches do have the odd detail — "The terror masters of Damascus and Tehran do not see much difference between the United States of America and Israel" (Is that a Ledeen line?) or reference to Andrew Roberts' "The History of the English-Speaking Peoples" — but they generally begin at the level of grand principle and only rarely dip into the nitty-gritty of detail.
When asked about combatting media bias, Thompson feigns outrage: "As for the accusation that I'm a member of the media, that is one accusation that I won't stand for, young man! No, I did a little television and radio work... It ought to be labeled as totally, totally irresponsible. It ought to be punished by marketplace, and people ought to think about who they want to do business with. The nut cases are not the only ones who have free speech.
A nice moment of not pandering: Asked, "Would you pardon Jonathan Pollard?" Thompson responds, "Not unless some facts were brought to my attention that I wasn't aware of... He got his trial, he got due process, and as far as I'm concerned, he'll finish his prison sentence."
A woman in the audience objects to the use of the term "friendly Arab states" and asks Thompson to name some. He mentions Jordan. He said that Saudi Arabia has significant problems, and that there is "interdependence" but that the country "is not an enemy."
On Hillary: "If we react to her, and we finesse, and we worry about what she's doing, we play right into their hands."
Thompson cautions against Clinton obsession
By Susan Milligan, Globe Staff
WASHINGTON -- Republicans, it seems, have already decided they're running against New York Senator Hillary Clinton, and have made the Democratic presidential candidate a frequent target on the campaign trail.
But the focus on Clinton makes for a bad general election strategy, former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson warned today.
"I don't think we need to worry about Hillary Clinton as much as we need to worry about ourselves,'' Thompson, a late entry into the presidential race, told the group. Merely demonizing Clinton would "play into the hands'' of the Democrats, he said. Instead of telling voters what's wrong with the Clinton approach, "we need to figure out what we want to do,'' he said.
Oh, it is getting better by the day. Looks like Texas Governer Goodhair Perry, is coming out of the closet for Rudith.
This is the same Rick Perry that received campaign contributions from Cintra. Cintra is financing the construction of the Trans Texas Corridor (NAFTA Super highway). Cintra is represented by Giuliani's law firm Bracewell and Giuliani. (Thanks to Man50D). Here in Texas Gov. Goodhair Perry has a reputation somewhere between a skunk and a snake.
Getting Rudith and little ricky in the White House will virtually guarantee the Mexican Trans-Texas Corridor/NAFTA highway and non-stop behind our backs push for amnesty for the illegals.
Ya know, I am just so totally not surprised. This is the absolute epitome of butt-boy politics from the NWO/NAU bunch.
Soooo folks, does anyone think a Rudith-Gov. buttboy team is going to beat hildabeast?
Dang, I left out the best part! A lot of folks believe Texas Gov. Perry (little Ricky) is fishing for the VP slot with Rudith.
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.