Posted on 12/29/2007 11:17:17 PM PST by ellery
WASHINGTON, Iowa — George Gerot admits he was "kind of waffling" on choosing a candidate to back in the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, but after hearing Fred Thompson Saturday afternoon, Gerot made up his mind.
"I've seen some of the others and heard a lot of TV commentators say he didn't have the fire in his belly," Gerot said. "But some of them have too much fire in their bellies. They're too willing to say whatever it is they think people want to hear. People aren't falling for that."
Gerot, of Riverside, isn't alone in coming to a decision on which Republican to back at Thursday night's caucuses that will begin the 2008 presidential nomination process. An Associated Press/Yahoo poll found that 4 out of 10 Republicans had changed their mind in the last month and almost two-thirds said they might change their mind again before the caucuses.
Heather Lindberg, of Washington, won't be one of them. She had made up her mind to back Thompson, an attorney and television actor, before hearing him Saturday. She wasn't disappointed.
"He reassured me I had made the right decision," she said
Surveying the crowd of 100-plus people who packed the Coffee Corner in downtown Washington, Iowa, Thompson, a former U.S. senator from Tennessee, joked that it might have been the first time he ever said he was happy to be in Washington. He also noted that Democrat John Edwards was campaigning down the street at the Washington Public Library.
"I hope he learns something while he's over there," Thompson said, and then launched into a 25-minute explanation of who he is and where he's been. He talked about the "notions" that have united the nation throughout its history "We live in the greatest country in the history of the world and it is every generation's obligation to keep it that way," Thompson said. American has been great because of "notions" that have united the nation, he said. Notions like "our basic rights coming not from government, but God." The U.S. "is not just a great nation, but a good nation" that has shed more blood for other nations than any other country, he said.
"We don't go looking for a fight," he said, and the best way to avoid one is to be stronger militarily than potential adversaries."
He believes the federal government shouldn't spend money it doesn't have and shouldn't be borrowing against the nation's children and grandchildren. And he agrees with the notion that the people, not an unelected federal judiciary "who make it up as they go," should set social policy.
Based on those conservative principles, Thompson said that as president he would aim to simplify the tax code, save Social Security from going broke, rebuild the military, which, he said, has been weakened by Democrats, so it is prepared for 21st Century conflicts and address illegal immigration by securing the borders, telling employers they must obey the law and telling so-called sanctuary cities to obey the law or lose federal funds.
However, Iowans won't be selecting a set of plans when they caucus Jan. 3, Thompson said. They'll be selecting "someone who could be the leader of the free world at a time when we need leadership like we haven't in a long, long time."
He talked about the current unrest in Pakistan and meeting Perev Musharraf. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto "is another indication of the mind-set of our enemy," Thompson said.
Caucusgoers, Thompson said, should ask themselves" "At the end of the day, when your worst enemy is sitting down at the table, who do you want on the other side representing you?"
When Iowans answer that question, he said, they will have answered who they want to be their next president.
"I submit myself for that job," Thompson said
Another great local Iowa newspaper article — ping!
No fluff. No pandering. No saying what he THINKS people might want to hear.
Sincere. Straightforward. Secure. A grounded, common-sense conservative.
I just hope Iowans wake up before Thursday. As a recovering Iowan myself, I beg you Hawkeye Republicans: Wake up!
Fred is the best choice for the nation, hands down!
It's clear that's where all the candidates are taking on Mitt now -- they're hammering home the point that he'll saying anything to get what he wants, and what he wants is the presidency for his ego. Combine that with Mitt's vicious attack ads and his ceiling keeps shrinking smaller and smaller. No wonder his negatives are sky high and climbing.
bump.
FRED 08!
It is always a pleasure to read an article that simply records the event and does not try to create an impression based on the writer’s agenda.
Given a level playing field, Fred Thompson easily sells himself by being himself. He is the most open, honest, and conservative candidate among the front runners and it is no mystery to me why the others in the top tier try to pretend he’s not there. But he is there and he’s been steadily building a strong loyal base while each of them has begun to falter.
.................................
They speak his name among themselves but only in whispers and from behind closed doors...
Fred Thompson
*BUMP*
Go Big Fred! Go Big Fred! Go Big Fred!
Fred: At least 6 votes, CA Primary.
With more than 50 percent of Republican Iowa Caucus voters still undecided it is anyone’s game in Iowa. I believe Fred is the best candidate bar none in the race. He is who he is and he hasn’t changed much. He is strong on federalism, he is strong on conservative social issues and he believes in a strong US and doesn’t mince words trying to please or coddle the media. We need a leader who doesn’t desire the Presidency so badly that he will say or do anything to win it.
We say we want a Reagan conservative and then we find many of ourselves in the height of irony ready to nominate a Massachusetts liberal or a another Arkansas governor who resembles in his actions Bill Clinton, Jimmey Carter, and Mike Dukakis than Reagan. Have conservatives gone mad?
I think what we see in those who have rushed to support the so called front runners is a clear message that those front runners are unacceptable to more than half of Iowa Republicans. So if that is an indicator of who can win then it is really saying that we don’t have a winner instead a slate of losers.
I will exempt Fred from that category because he arrived at a late date and he is a man apart. He has stood up for the United states when others like Huckabee couldn’t wait to apologize. He has called Michael Moore to the mat when others were calling his ilk patriots. He stood up to a media and to the insanity of global warming by not raising his hand to masses to celebrate group ignorance. Mitt raised his hand, Rudy raised his hand, and Huckabee raised his hand to salute the religion of Albert Gore. Do you think they will not disappoint us as they sniff after the media once elected? Aren’t you sick of the mealy mouthed bureaucrat speak that these guys specialize in?
That aside Fred was called to run and he based upon our calling is running. The others seem to believe that they are heir apparent and self nominated themselves to run. There is nothing wrong with that but there is something clearly wrong with the campaigns of those who have been in this race for more than a year and still find more than half of Republicans unsatisfied.
This isn’t a media popularity contest this is a test of leadership. Those who best embrace the media and bureaucratic machines are not leaders. They are a part of a problem that only continues to worsen with each election cycle. Isn’t it time for a real leader for a change? Someone that doesn’t spend his time explaining or re-explaining whether or not he walked with Martin Luther King in order to have bragging rights with black folks. Someone who doesn’t see raising taxes as the primary solution to government budgets which have long ago overgrown the means to be supported through taxes.
Isn’t it time for us to vote for someone we believe in and don’t have to apologize or make excuses for because they can’t seem to put a sentence together or don’t know how to stare the media in the face and stand up for the US without becoming a stuttering shambles. Real leaders don’t need permission to fight for the country they lead. They don’t need to second guess and kiss the asses of our enemies who spit in our faces and bad mouth us regardless of how much or how little money we provide.
I’m voting for a real leader who has demonstrated he is not afraid. That leader is Fred Thompson.
Thanks for posting this ellery!
I was at the Coffee Corner. The crowd was electric when it was over.
“Combine that with Mitt’s vicious attack ads and his ceiling keeps shrinking smaller and smaller. No wonder his negatives are sky high and climbing.”
Compare and contrast Ads by candidates are not vicious attack ads. They are stating your positions and then contrasting your opponents’ positions with those you hold. This has never been considered attack ads in the past (attack ads are ones where you go after someone personally, not on their positions). Only in our now politically correct world are pro/con position ads considered vicious attack ads. By the way, show me any proof at all you have that shows that Mitt’s negatives are sky high and climbing. There is no such proof, unless you want to believe what the MSM feeds you.
That being said, and without having to knock Mitt in order to say so, I watched Thompson’s appearance at the coffeehouse on CSpan today and he did very well. I really enjoyed listening to him, and he comes across as very relaxed and natural, and was very well received by the audience. He was good.
I also watched Romney on CSpan, mixing with the crowds at the Smokey Row Coffee House. Romney was very good also and attracted a large crowd. He too was very appealing to the audience and very humble, natural acting and friendly with the people gathered there. Both Thompson and Romney are good candidates and I’d take either one of them as my Presidential candidate for the Pubs. Romney is more articulate and Fred is more down home and easy to relate to. And both are smart. Good luck to both of them. I think the two of them are the Pub Party’s best choices to pick from.
I also watched McCain at a gathering. I must admit he too was very good working the crowd, and cracks good jokes (he has that Celtic charm). But I can’t stand his propensity to espouse Dem positions once too often, his easy willingness to cross his conservative base, and his pro-immigration, and pro-CFR positions, as well as his anti-torture ever stance, and his voting against Bush’s tax cuts twice. So he is a no go in my book.
Dear Fred,
I LOVE YOU MAN!!!
If you will accept it as not from the MSM, this from Rasmussen:
“Among the leading Presidential candidates, New York Senator Hillary Clinton and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney have the highest level of core opposition among voters. Forty-seven percent (47%) say they will vote against each of these candidates no matter who else is on the ballot.”
Wow! I think we ALL know why Hillary has such high negatives.. but Mitt??
What the heck?
Most Conservatives don't like him because he isn't a true Conservative. But to say we dislike him as much as Hillary???
Eisenhower and Reagan — rolled into one.
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.