Posted on 01/21/2008 10:03:16 AM PST by gpapa
Patrick Ruffini is polling Fred Thompson supporters, asking who we’ll support if Fred drops out. It’s an awful prospect. Each of the other four is deeply flawed (although none quite so badly as Ron Paul). Blogger William Sjostrom recently took me to task for having a “take my ball and go home approach”:
I am tired of the approach that says some candidates just upset me and so I would rather stay home and be virtuous than face up to real choices.
Fair enough. Mason Colley quipped that “Victory brings obliviousness; defeat, attentiveness.” The GOP is broken. Badly. As I’ve argued repeatedly, George Bush not only has wasted the conservative moment, he has done the conservative movement grave harm:
Bush was blessed with the opportunity to effect many long-term conservative goals. For most of his presidency, the GOP controlled the White House and Congress, as well as having a solid critical mass in the courts. Despite these advantages, however, what has Bush really accomplished?
Is government smaller? Have we hacked away at the nanny state? Are the unborn any more protected? Have we set the stage for a durable conservative majority?
To be blunt, no.
But it’s not just Bush. The deeply corrupt K Street gang discredited the GOP Congressional leadership, who proved to be concerned solely with clinging to power for power’s own sake.
God made the people of Israel wander in the desert 40 years so as to remake the Israelis into a people fit for the tasks ahead. The GOP seriously needs a time out so that it can rethink its role in American democracy. There are a lot of legitimate questions facing the GOP. Do you adhere to the limited government principles of Reagan and Thatcher or do you follow the lead of UK Tory leader David Cameron? As the Economist recently opined, “it seems likely that the Republican Party, as a number of its members are already urging, will have to embrace environmentalism and cuddly economics as the Tories were forced to.”
Fred Thompson was a more than acceptable Reaganesque conservative who offered the GOP a chance to delay having to face those tough choices. Indeed, to borrow a football metaphor, a Thompson presidency offered the GOP a chance to reload rather than going through the painful process of rebuilding. The other 4 are all so deeply and irredeemably flawed that their presidency likely would be doomed to failure from the outset.
If the choice is between choosing the lesser of 4 evils and teeing up a process by which the GOP reinvents itself for the 21st Century, I’m inclined to opt for the latter. Coupled with losing Congress in 2006, losing the presidency in 2008 will provide a pair of defeats that surely will prompt “attentiveness” on the part of the GOP leadership and the intellectual base of think tanks and academics who helped lay the foundation for the Reagan and Gingrich revolutions. Just as the Israelis had to be punished for listening to the 10 fearful spies, the GOP needs to be punished for having been seduced by Bush and DeLay. Just as the Israelis came back stronger and fitter for the tasks ahead, so might a chastened GOP.
So that’s why my answer to Ruffini’s poll is: None of the above.
I fully concur.
| There is one reason that we can't sit this election out: We would be betraying our troops. They need us to provide them with the best commander-in-chief possible and sitting this out would leave them with Barrack Hussein Obama or Hillary Clinton. I am mad as hell that we might have to choose between pandering liberal RINOs (McCain, Romney, Huckabee and Guiliani) but every one of the RINO's would be a magnitude better as CIC than the socialists. Don't screw the troops!!  U.S. Army Retired |
Apparently McInsane is getting a lot of Rat crossover voters who don’t like the Hildebeast nor Obamanation. So called conservatives who vote for R.P. Mcwillabee are DOOMING this country to a Hildebeast presidency. The republic could suffer a mortal blow because of their imbecilic flirtation with these RINOs
Do you honestly want this person as commander-in-chief? Have Mercy on us all, and Pray for our troops.
Voting "None of the Above" during the Presidential Election is a vote for the Democratic Candidate (likely Hillary).
Or, in Lewis Black's vanacular: "You're in a booth choosing between 2 buckets of sh**, and voting for the one least offensive to you."
I will vote for the GOP nominee no matter who it is.
Why?
One word...SCOTUS.
Bad legislation can be stopped or undone. We proved that with the shamnesty bill. But bad Supreme Court decisions are forever. SCOTUS gets to interpret the Constitution and can thusly destroy it.
I think it is stupid to sit this one out. It is a very important election and determines the direction our nation takes.....
Dumb idea
I’ll vote this election for two reasons: 1) I won’t surrender this country to Hillary Clinton. and 2) I’m gonna try my darndest to deny John McCain the Republican nomination.
mmmmmm, I don’t know, maybe; I’ve wondered a dark thought for quite some time. A Dem might not betray the troops; rather the Dem might benefit the troops by significantly lightening their load by way of a back door re-instatement of the draft. I, know, I know, that sounds utterly insane, BUT, it may not be all that unthinkable. The Dems love mandatory social engineering programs and “universal service” might just be right up their alley.
If you're okay with Obama or Clinton tilting the Supreme Court in a socialist direction, by all means, don't vote.
| That, sir, would not help the troops at all. The draft would introduce division into armed forces that are cohesive because they all choose to be there. "If" the workload is too high then increasing the size of the forces is the answer, not the draft. The services meet their recruiting goals every month. Even with a draft the force is still the same size, but less quality. Not to be rude, but that is a STUPID idea. A Democrat president would betray the troops by gutting the force ala Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines pay for that with their blood. U.S. Army Retired |
Well, I never said it was a “smart” idea; I’m pointing to the irony of it all. The Republicans fostered and created the all volonteer military, AFTER, the Dems led us to withdrawl in Vietnam after years of protesting the draft only to come back in ‘08 and reinstate the draft? Yea, none too bright a move I admit, but, oh, so, Democrat!
I don’t know too many soldiers who would be terribly thrilled to work alongside conscripts. Not after seeing a couple conscript armies in action myself.
If Fred drops out, we should try to re-draft Hunter.
I've been a proponent of principles in the primaries, party in the general, but I'm now firmly against McCain and Huckabee.
If either is the nominee, I will vote for none of the above.
FRED THOMPSON is the best person to lead this country. He is a true conservative and has been his entire life. All one has to do is check his record to see this.
During my time in the Army as an Intelligence Analyst, I personally served under both Presidents Carter and Reagan. Without argument, President Reagan was the best commander-in-chief a military person could ever have served under. Fred Thompson possesses the same qualities and vision as President Reagan in that he is strong on national defense and sees a dire need to secure our borders and control immigration.
I can think of no better person to lead this country and fix the problems we have. He is the only candidate from either party who has specific and detailed plans on border security and immigration reform; revitalization of America’s armed forces; saving and protecting Social Security; and tax relief and economic growth. These are detailed on his Web site at www.fred08.com . I challenge you to find any other candidate who has laid out specific plans to fix anything.
Fred Thompson has published his first principles, some of which are mentioned above. In addition to those, he strongly believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, federalism, traditional American values, the rule of law and is a strong proponent of the Second Amendment — all concepts established during the birth of our country and documented in our Constitution.
Again, try to find any candidate who has laid out their plans to “fix” this country. You will find they all speak in vague and abstract terms on their plans.
For those who have heard Fred Thompson speak, you will usually hear him say that the Fred Thompson you see today is the same Fred Thompson you saw yesterday and is the same Fred Thompson you will see tomorrow. He stands by his principles and values and doesn’t shift his positions based on polls or public opinion; in other words, he doesn’t say what the voters want to hear just to get elected, but remains steadfast on his views and convictions.
During his time in the Senate he focused on three areas: to lower taxes, strengthen national security and expose waste in the federal government. Fred Thompson has foreign policy experience, having served as member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Intelligence committees.
As chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, he opened the investigation in 1997 on the Chinese government’s attempt to influence American policies and elections, and this investigation identified connections with the Clinton administration (documented in the committee’s report).
As a member of the Finance Committee, he worked tirelessly to enact three major tax-cut bills. Fred Thompson remains steadfast and even though a person may not agree with all his views and he understands some may disagree with him, you can count on him to be consistent and unwavering.
Don’t be fooled by his laid back approach and what critics call his “laziness.” As a former assistant U.S. attorney, he earned a reputation as a tough prosecutor and he possesses the toughness this country needs in order to tackle today’s and tomorrow’s issues.
I ask that you take a hard look at what this country needs, then take a hard look at all the other candidates’ views, policies, their records and their track record on consistency. Fred Thompson possesses integrity, loyalty, commitment, energy and decisiveness, all traits of an effective leader, and will emerge as the best person to take this country boldly forward. Fred is still in this race to win!
Please help Fred win in Florida:
https://www.fred08.com/contribute.aspx?RefererID=c637caaa-315c-4b4c-9967-08d864cd0791
Two words debunk your theory:
David Souter.
Republican appointment.
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.