Jump to content
Spidey's mom Spidey's mom (Guide) Guide

Fred Thompson Drops Out

Politics   (4,180 Views 54 Comments)
3 Followers; 76,694 Visitors; 30,283 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.

:o:bluecry1::smackingf

Now what is a conservative supposed to do? :cool:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UB4A7G0&show_article=1

NAPLES, Fla. (AP) - Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson quit the Republican presidential race on Tuesday, after a string of poor finishes in early primary and caucus states. "Today, I have withdrawn my candidacy for president of the United States. I hope that my country and my party have benefited from our having made this effort," Thompson said in a statement.

Thompson's fate was sealed last Saturday . . . . . .

steph:urgycld:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't say as how I'm shocked. He never seemed (to me, at least) to be taking his candidacy seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I listened to just about every interview he did - it could have be ME talking!!

Now I'm hearing that his mom is very ill. Hard to find breaking news . . .

Rush announced it a few minutes ago . . . he said his brother had written a nice piece last week endorsing Thompson . . . he said he was going to ask his bro to write an endorsement for McCain and when McCain then drops out, write one about Huckabee. :cheers:

steph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd vote for mccain....the rest of the pubs....hmmm. :thnkg:

even fred thompson doesn't think he will become president. chatting off-air to a television reporter, a stunningly candid off-the-cuff quip from the hollywood actor cemented the impression that his heart is not in the 2008 race.

trying to encourage his studio to hurry up so an interview could start, carl cameron of fox news said into his microphone: "the next president of the united states has a schedule to keep." standing beside him, a deadpan mr thompson interjected: "and so do i."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/06/wuspols106.xml

(story is from 7/07, btw)

i can't listen to rush or his liberal counterparts. they all get on my nerves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone really surprised? He did not have the fire in the belly needed to win the job. He was the tallest dwarf among the republican dwarves this year but still a dwarf.

McCain is probably the best candidate but I think his time in the sun was 2000 not 2008. Time will only tell which candidate will emerge.

Bowing out as I wouldn't vote for any of the Republican candidates anyway. :twocents:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually - I listened to him many many times and he did seem to have a desire to be President in order to help America with conservative principles.

Not sure "fire in the belly" is a prereq. ;)

steph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is david limbaugh's column on the 17th of january. used with permission.

january 17, 2008

new column: answering fred's call

commentators are citing the unpredictability of the republican primary contests as proof that reagan conservatism is dead when precisely the opposite conclusion is warranted.

the main reason the conventional wisdom is being shattered in the primaries is that conservative voters, so far, have not been persuaded there is an electable, reliable conservative in the race.

but as i've stated before, i believe fred thompson is a reliable, consistent conservative. there are others in the field i could support, but not without some reservations. the more i learn about fred and observe him in action, the more convinced i become that he's the right choice.

i was among those who urged fred to step up and prove to the people he wanted the job. regardless of whether fred actually had "fire in his belly," the unmistakable perception out there was that he did not, so i encouraged him to add a little spring to his step.

but i've also appreciated fred's unwillingness to be somebody he is not. he will not respond like a puppet when a debate moderator tells him to raise his hand to signify a childishly simplistic approval or disapproval of a certain policy. he will not be goaded by interviewers into saying things he doesn't feel comfortable saying. he won't divide us with class envy or pretend we can be friends with rogue regimes or terrorists. he does not promise a chicken in every pot or pander to liberals on global warming.

he will not otherwise tailor his positions to suit the demands of particular constituencies. for example, he has the courage to preach that social security is in trouble, but unlike most others, he doesn't surrender to the oppressive populist seduction to urge government fixes for it or for health care. instead, he courageously tells us -- if we'll listen -- that the answers lie in greater market forces. (listen up, conservatives.)

fred does not run from his record -- more to the point, he doesn't need to. he shoots straight without the constant self-serving reminders that he does, as in telling us he's driving the "straight talk express."

more importantly, fred is right on the issues, and there's little doubt his positions are firm. research his stances; read his position papers. you'll find he's very strong in all areas important to mainstream conservatives, including national defense, taxes, spending, life, immigration, federalism, appointing originalist judges, health care and education.

i'm not drooling over fred or saying his record is flawless, but i am saying he's the real deal, and it's a bit disappointing that more haven't taken a closer look.

i think this is due partly to his laid-back personality and partly to his timing. he peaked about the time he was contemplating entering the race but not acting on it. by the time he jumped in, it was anticlimactic, and he still hasn't recovered from that reversal.

there has also been a negative momentum hovering over his already-stalled campaign, acting as a psychological barrier to his catching fire among conservative voters.

there is simply too much herd mentality among us about electability. we tell ourselves a candidate is not inspiring, then pretty soon we're convinced he's unelectable, and, voila, he almost becomes so. yet, at that very moment, he's proving to us that he is quite presidential, quite electable and quite motivated for the job -- if we can only shed our predispositions against his "electability." since electability is often a matter of collective perception, it can turn on a dime, as with the reversal of the respective fortunes of screaming howard dean and somniferous john kerry in 2004.

this primary season, relatively speaking, has just begun. but fred is now up against the wall. how can we expect him to have done much better than he has to date with everyone prattling on about the overwhelming odds against him? the "experts" continue to be wrong at almost every turn, so why can't they be wrong about fred, too? it's time to quit empowering them by following their dictatorial doom-prophecies. it's encouraging that john zogby's latest south carolina poll shows that while levels of support for mccain and huckabee "have remained static," fred is starting to move up.

supporters have asked fred to step up, and he has -- he has shone brilliantly in the last month, setting himself head and shoulders above the pack in many cases. now it's time for conservative voters to step up and quit placing artificial limitations on fred, and on themselves.

fred has answered the conservatives' call. shouldn't we answer his?

posted by david limbaugh at january 17, 2008 07:32 pm

http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archives/2008/01/new_column_answ.html#more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am disappointed to learn this, as Fred Thompson was the only true conservative in the field. I met some of Thompson's campaign staff on a flight a few weeks ago and enjoyed my conversation with them tremendously. I would have been honored to support their candidate in the primaries, but didn't get the chance to do so, as NE doesn't vote until May.

Like other conservatives, I'm not forced to make a choice between the lesser of the remaining evils, which won't be easy to do. Which important principle do I give up in order to support another candidate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am disappointed to learn this, as Fred Thompson was the only true conservative in the field. I met some of Thompson's campaign staff on a flight a few weeks ago and enjoyed my conversation with them tremendously. I would have been honored to support their candidate in the primaries, but didn't get the chance to do so, as NE doesn't vote until May.

Like other conservatives, I'm not forced to make a choice between the lesser of the remaining evils, which won't be easy to do. Which important principle do I give up in order to support another candidate?

My husband, my oldest son, and myself are disappointed.

My husband and I have been discussing just these issues this afternoon.

We shall see . . .

steph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure "fire in the belly" is a prereq. ;)

Well, if they're not taking seriously their campaign, then why should I as a voter take seriously their promises?

I wouldn't have voted for him anyway, but I would still feel this way were it McCain or someone else I might consider voting for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred Thompson on Healthcare , ".... Access to affordable, portable health care can be made available..." HOW?

Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some, however, choose not be insured; others cannot afford it. Every American should be able to get health insurance coverage that is affordable, fully accessible, and portable. Coverage should meet their individual needs and put them in control. Those who propose a one-size-fits-all Washington-controlled program ignore the cost, inefficiency, and inadequate care that such a system offers. Access to affordable, portable health care can be made available for all Americans without imposing new mandates or raising taxes. Current government programs must also be streamlined and improved so that those who truly need help can get the health care they need. I am committed to a healthcare system that:

* Realigns programs and creates a system around individual consumers and patients by providing more information and more opportunities to choose affordable health care options that best meet their needs and those of their families.

* Improves the individual health of all Americans by shifting to a system that promotes cost-effective prevention, chronic-care management, and personal responsibility

* Modernizes delivery and administration of care by encouraging the widespread use of clinical best practices, medical information technology, and other innovations.

* Increases competition and consumer choice while streamlining regulations through free-market solutions that benefit individuals and reduce costs for employers.

* Promotes and speeds medical research and life-sciences innovation.

http://www.fred08.com/Principles/PrinciplesSummary.aspx

His web site states, "I am committed to a healthcare system that.......

What system IS it and HOW can it be accomplished?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FIRE IN THE BELLY - "an unquenchable thirst for power or glory; the burning drive to win a race or achieve a goal. As a political phrase, the expression is usually used to indicate a Presidential candidates' desire to win, particularly the willingness to endure the long contest. It first appeared in print in 1882, in an essay by Robert Louis Stevenson, in which he compared historians Thomas Carlyle and Thomas Babington Macaulay.The source of the expression is not known. Perhaps this metaphor for ambition comes from stoking a potbellied stove or from the fiery sensation of heartfelt heartburn." From "Safire's New Political Dictionary" by William Safire

I still think from what I heard, he had a desire to win and make conservative changes.

Just because a person has a certain demeanor doesn't mean you can judge a person's motives by that.

I was born with a face that when relaxed, looks grumpy. People have been telling me all my life to "smile". Now, you guys don't know me except for the words here . . . do I seem like a grumpy person to you?

steph:spin:

p.s. Just let us conservatives have our time of grieving . . . . and cry in our beer :cheers: or wine . . .*wine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×