Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
Posted on 12/24/2007 12:08:24 AM PST by County Agent Hank Kimball
Edited on 12/24/2007 12:43:32 AM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
Even his harshest critics would likely concede that Fred Thompson had a good campaign swing through Iowa this week.
But as he headed home to Virginia on Saturday for a three-day Christmas break before returning to Iowa for the second half of his Iowa bus tour, the question that this last-minute effort began with still stands.
(Excerpt) Read more at desmoinesregister.com ...
I’m for Hunter or Thompson. But if Thompson loses this thing, it can be blamed on his failure to simply endorse the Human Life Amendment and the Federal Marriage Amendment. All he had to do was say, “yes, I support those amendments”. They aren’t a matter for the president to have to deal with, so why not just endorse them and move on? Instead, by opposing them he made a lot of people wonder about his commitment to pro-life and pro-family causes and that allowed Huckabee to exploit those concerns.
I understand the states’ rights argument on those issues, but there’s no constituency for it. People either think human life and traditional marriage are worthy of constitutional protection, or they support Roe vs. Wade and would like to see a similar ruling forcing same-sex “marriage” on the whole country. Nobody wants to see a situation where same-sex “marriage” is legal in Illinois but illegal in Indiana. That would lead to government and businesses in Indiana constantly being dragged into court over some issue arising in the neighboring state. Or where there are twenty abortion mills in Camden, NJ to “service” women from Pennsylvania, where abortion has been banned.
States’ rights will simply never work on those two issues. It would have been fine for Fred to say, “We don’t have the votes right now to pass those amendments, and they’re really outside the scope of the executive branch, but I want to foster a positive culture which will start us down a path which will eventually lead us to a society where life and family are once again sacred”. But he didn’t and he may lose the nomination because of it.
Nope! Just another hick from Hope.
Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
When I was very young, and involved as a volunteer for the bad guys (forgive me), one of the things I did was organize voters in certain precincts in an open primary state to vote Republican and vote for the worst of the electable candidates on the slate, not so much to ensure that the dummy would win the primary, but to try to knock off the best candidate. We called the practice “plinking,” but I am not sure if that terminology is still current.
Rudy, Mitt, Fred, McCain, even Duncan Hunter have been mocked or ridiculed in one way or another on FR, they all have supporters and detractors. If you actually supported Fred, how does Huck now getting his from freepers change your vote? Can Huck not handle the scrutiny? Look back on the personal attacks on the rest of the candidates.
Rudy= gay loving adulterer.
Mitt= phony slick lying flip flopping Mormon.
McCain=traitor to his party, back stabbing, illegal loving Rino.
Fred= lazy old pervert robbing the cradle with his trophy wife.
Huck= self righteous liberal preacher from Hope.
Then he would not be Fred, and he would be lying to make people happy. He would simply be pandering.
I thought we were trying to avoid that, indeed it appears we have more than enough of that from some others in the race on both sides.
If there was truly a question of Fred's dedication to life, he would not have received the endorsements from the Right to Life groups.
I got one for ya.How about romney trying to pass himself off as a conservative and doing it with a straight face. Talk about creeping somebody out.
Interesting....
Please. Huckabee is soft on hard core criminals and never met a tax he didn’t like.
NOT my kind of President, for sure.
That is how we kept Jesse Helms (R-NC) in office so long. Until a few years ago, only D’s voted in D primaries, R’s in R primaries and independents could not vote. We registered Democrat, voted for their most beat-able candidate, then voted for Jesse in the general election. That is why the MSM calls us “Jessecrats”.
Well by that logic, why not support Mitt Romney. Fred has attacked him as well and he has the support of some serious evangelicals.
Or support Bush for a third term, since Huck attacked him.
Or Maybe Rush since Huck’s people attacked him.
Wait you can support Mitt, he attacked Fred and Huck....
Can’t support Rush, he attacked back....
I am not supporting anyone in the primaries, because I don't like any of them anymore, but I will vote for the nominee just to stop a Dem victory. Until recently, my tag line was Freddie T is the one for me!
I think the difference is that Huckabee wants to use the power of government to advance his 'christian' beliefs - amnesty to illegal immigrants (OK, go home & hours later return for citizenship) because that is what he thinks Jesus would do, restrictions on industry because global warming is poor stewardship of the earth, a federal no smoking law because we'll all be so much healthier, smaller cars because it is part of energy independence and God wants us to be self sufficient, etc, etc.
My problem is two-fold: A) a government big enough to smite my enemies is only an election away from smiting me, and B) I disagree with his interpretation of how Jesus would respond (in Huckabee's description, I drink a different 'Jesus juice'...which strikes me as close to a blasphemous phrase, BTW.)
I'm a conservative. Some of my fellow Southern Baptists are liberals. I disagree with their politics, but I understand that two people trying to do what God wants might come down differently on the issues.
For example, I don't think God wants us to encourage illegal behavior. I don't think global warming exists other than in long term trends far greater than anything a human can create. I don't think God really cares about smoking.
Scripture teaches us the goals we should work towards. Politics is about what steps you take to achieve those goals. Everyone wants to ease the suffering of the poor, but how best to do it?
Unlike Huckabee, Fred has a coherent political philosophy of limited government. As a conservative, he recognizes the limits of our knowledge and power. He won't create a government that will punish my enemies, and be an election away from being a tool for my opponents to punish me.
Also, Huckabee strikes me as a liar. I know many Huckabites disagree, but I've been watching his reactions and looking at his record, and I've concluded that he doesn't know what honesty and integrity are all about. Fred isn't perfect either, but he is more honest about his faults and less likely to tickle the ears with whatever they want to hear.
That is why I donated to Fred the other night.
Uhhh, no.
Huck may be the "real deal" but that's a hand I'll pass on.
He's whacked.
Huckabee is pro-amnesty. In an interview a couple of weeks ago, he was asked about how his platform married up with his former position...he said illegals should get citizenship, but that they needed to return to their home country and apply - and that they could be back in the US in days, on a path to citizenship. That is amnesty.
Huckabee's tax plan is to replace the income tax with a sales tax. Anyone who has watched Congress knows it will NEVER pass. It would be a huge loss of power for Congress, which is why it will never get close to 50% support. Someone advocating that as their only tax platform is either very ignorant about Congress, or dishonest.
Huckabee's anti-abortion plan is to pass the HRA. Given how hard it was to get Alito on the Bench, no sane person would conclude Congress would pass a HRA. Supporting the HRA is tantamount to doing nothing about abortion.
On Iraq, his comments scare me. Based on his speeches and published articles, he doesn't have clue one about how the world works. His comments that we haven't tried to negotiate with Iran reveal either gross ignorance, or gross stupidity. It simply ignores the facts. His comments about invading Pakistan were stupid when Obama made them, and aren't any better coming out of Huckabee's mouth.
This isn't about Christianity, it is about HOW TO ACHIEVE our goals. And Huckabee, weighed in the measures, falls short. Way short!
A well reasoned argument. Fred is best on the issues. People who support Fred often fail to emphasize it and instead ridicule Huck or Romney. In a few short days, things will change. We will know who will be going to the playoffs. Fred is playing for a wildcard slot and he is now a longshot to finish in the top 3 in Iowa or the top 5 in NH. The questionis what then. Do the Fredheads take their ball and go home or do the line up behind who Fred endorses?
It is ok to support no one, but in doing so, you should not make any comments biased for or against any of them either, unless you plan on balancing the load.
BTW that is impossible to do.
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.