Skip to comments.The New Fire in Fred’s Belly
Posted on 11/19/2007 9:19:11 AM PST by Fred
The New Fire in Freds Belly
A revitalized Thompson has an honest, clear, straightforward message of economic freedom and problem solving.
An energetic and forceful Fred Thompson sat down with me last week on Kudlow and Company to talk politics and the economy. The former Tennessee senator was in good form more animated than Ive seen him, and definitely a different person than the one I interviewed six months ago.
I asked him about Dick Armey, the former Republican House majority leader. Armey recently predicted that Hillary Clinton will be the next president, reasoning that the GOP has departed from the first principles of limited government and lower taxes. Armey said budget overspending and the proliferating corruption of earmarks are what led to the landslide defeat of Republicans a year ago. To date, Dick Armey is unimpressed with the circa 2007 GOP message.
And Thompson agreed. He said, If we dont tend to business we are going to be in big trouble. Pendulums swinging against us. We are down in the polls. Independents are leaning the other way [where they] used to lean with us. So weve got to . . . adhere to the principles that made us a great party and a great nation.
That was a strong dose of honesty and self-examination. Good for Fred Thompson.
Speaking of limited government and budget overspending, I asked if a President Thompson would veto the $300 billion earmark-pocked pork-barrel farm bill now before Congress. He called this legislation disgraceful, noted that it wouldnt even help small family farms, and that it would block the expansion of world free trade.
When I asked him about Warren Buffett, the famous investor billionaire, Thompson turned up the heat. In testimony before the Senate last week, Buffett advocated a whole series of tax hikes, such as an increase in the death tax, higher capital gains and dividend taxes, and more taxes on private partnerships, hedge funds, and private-equity buyout firms. Thompson labeled this policy dead wrong. He said Buffett is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Democratic party. He argued that the wealth of the government is the not the same thing as the wealth of nations, and that history proves lower tax rates promote economic growth.
And he said Hillary Clinton and the other Democratic candidates are blind to all this. He noted that the top 5 percent of income earners now pay 60 percent of all tax collections; that the tax code is progressive enough; that theres plenty of economic mobility in the country; that for those who have fallen behind, the problem is poor education, not tax rates; and that America is the freest, most prosperous, most powerful nation in the history of the world.
We talked about his controversial Social Security reform plan that would slow down future benefits by indexing them to inflation rather than wages, while providing for add-on private savings accounts with a government match, much like the system for 401(k)s.
Lower benefits? Isnt that the proverbial third-rail of politics? Not according to Mr. Thompson. He said big problems ought to be tackled: If you cant do the right thing, say what you believe and what everybody really basically knows, why do it? Why bother? Life is too short for the aggravation.
Thompson wants to tell the truth about Social Security and force everyone else in the game to respond. This issue is a real character-building definer for Fred Thompson. No one else on the campaign trail, in either party, is willing to discuss Social Security in such frank terms.
But thats the revitalized Fred Thompson. The more I challenged him, the more animated he became. He simply refused to stand down.
Some people say Thompson doesnt have the fire in his belly to go the distance. I dont think thats true. And Im not picking or endorsing any candidates here. But Thompson has an honest, clear, straightforward message of economic freedom and problem solving.
Then I brought up the CNBC/Wall Street Journal debate of a few weeks ago, when Thompson slammed Rudy Giuliani. I asked if he intended to continue to pound Giuliani on the campaign trail. He said, I havent pounded all day. I asked, What about yesterday? He said, Well, were pointing out some policy differences. [Giuliani] believes in federal funding for abortion. He went to court to stop our bill outlawing sanctuary cities. Hes never met a gun-control bill he didnt like.
A sharp-edged Fred Thompson.
Can he win? His campaign strategists told me they are pouring tons of money into Iowa advertising. They see a strong opportunity for a Thompson surge in the state, undermining Romney and inflicting damage on Giuliani. Walking off the set, Thompson told me this election will be about peace and prosperity. And he intends to fight hard.
Larry Kudlow, NROs Economics Editor, is host of CNBCs Kudlow & Company and author of the daily web blog, Kudlows Money Politic$.
THIS man has charactre.
He said my tagline! Yay!
In before the “FLATTERING ARTICLE ABOUT FRED!” ping! :-)
Dude, FDT reads Free Republic!
Go Fred Go!
For those complaining about a lack of "fire in the belly", Thompson has been pacing himself and intends to peak on election day, not three months early...
My big concern is that every few months, Fred has to get out the message that's "really" in the race. I remember back around June, people wondered if he had decided not to declare. The message came out: He's in!
Then there wasn't too much going on for a few months. By the end of summer, people wondered if he had decided not to declare. The message came out: He's in!
But for most of the fall, he's kind of languished. I've heard people wonder if his heart's really in it. But I think the message from Kudlow is clear: He's in!
You really can't keep doing that.
I hope so.
BINGO! Fred knows exactly what he’s doing.
[waves madly at her favorite candidate]
Say hi to the kids from us, FRed! God bless your campaign and presidency! :-)
If he does, I’m gonna try to sell him on Neo-Ciceronianism.
Are you suggesting that Fred Thompson is French?
I saw him a couple of weeks ago in Dover, NH. He seemed pretty animated and lively then as well. With him in the GOP mix, we’ve got a chance.
I don't think he'll be reciting mine outloud anytime soon!
Probably not. But it would be hilarious if he did, though.
For those complaining about a lack of "fire in the belly", Thompson has been pacing himself and intends to peak on election day, not three months early...DING! DING! DING! DING! DING!
I’m of Jewish origin; no comprendo Latino.
All I know is the Romans knocked down the Temple and coined the word “Palestinia” to piss us off.
Couldn’t have said it better myself! I would love to see a Thompson/Hunter ticket.
My primary vote will be going to Duncan Hunter, but I will support WHOMEVER is the party’s nominee in November. I would love to send a message by voting for a third-party candidate, or staying home, but I’m not sure my personal constitution could make it through another lesson like the one we learned in 2006!
But I saw this interview; Fred did look better than usual.
I’ve always thought he had “fire in the belly” although I don’t like that expression. He has a better reason for running than anyone else. It is nice to see someone else say it though. Encouragement is always helpful.
Thanks for posting this.
GO FRED GO!!! For the sake of our country, GO FRED GO!!
Don't forget to vote in the new FR poll!!
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
You’re reflecting our culture of instant gratification and entertainment politics. God forbid, we should have maturity and statesmanship and focus among the candidates for President. That’s exactly what Fred brings that the rest do not. The self-control and character he is showing will carry him along very well in his plan (which of course, he has) to lead him to victory next fall. He will be the one to go up against Hillary, and the contrast, even for Direhard Dems, will be startling. That’s my prediction.
It’s leadership we need — at every area of the POTUS — and it’s true leadership that we will get from Fred for the long haul (not Guliani, who writes a BOOK about “Leadership”).
I like Duncan a lot also — and i hope Fred chooses him as his running mate. He could redefine the whole office of VP by putting someone of substance and competence in there.
Actually the word goes back at least 500 years before the Romans destroyed the Temple...Herodotus refers to Palestinians and Syria Palaestina when describing the Persian Empire. I don’t know if the term was ever in official use before Vespasian, but it derives from the name of the Philistines so must have been coined before they were utterly forgotten. It’s not clear how large an area Herodotus means by the term, perhaps just the area the Philistines had inhabited.
You win a CEE-GARRR! I do not see any reason a VP has to be a wallflower. We are paying his salary, let's put him to work!
Dick Cheney does not sit around autographing flags, why would Duncan?
This is a huge deal for me. Big bump for Thompson.
You’re right about Cheney — HOWEVER,the media still will NOT give him the respect he has deserved from Day One. If there was a Dem VP worthy of the same level of respect, it would be different. Maybe I’m dreaming to think the press will ever change idealogically....but a girl can dream, yes?
I sent more money today...I will give the entire amount...unfortunately in increments.
Happy to hear about the ‘fire in the belly.’
Now perhaps he would be kind enough to set fire to the NeoConNaysayers over at NRO who (with one exception I know of) are writing him off for dead.
Oh, sure, there are earlier references, but the Phillistines were sea-farers and coast-dwellers (and have no relation to the arabs who call themselves Palestinians, but that is another issue entirely).
Long story short, though, using the name for the entire territory came about because the Romans, in order to basically put us Jews in our place, used the name of our old enemy as the name of the land.
And, since the Romans made the maps, the name has stuck.
Great interview! I’m gonna bookmark the site to return often.
Perhaps but will the voters respond in just 45 days and on Feb. 5??? That is the real question.
This is FRed. :)