WASHINGTON, Aug. 17, 2007
What Does Fred Thompson Stand For?
Republican Would-Be Presidential Candidate Offers Few Specifics So Far
-
Fred Thompson arrives at the Enterprise Jet Center for a rally before making his way to an afternoon fundraiser, July 25, 2007, in Houston. (AP/Houston Chronicle/Beltran)
On most public policy issues, the former Tennessee senator and "Law & Order" actor has offered few, if any, specifics. Even on the dominant issue of the 2008 campaign — the war in Iraq — Thompson has carefully stopped short of wading into what he would do about the conflict should he inherit it, although he has generally backed President Bush.
And while not yet offering a broad foreign policy vision, some of Thompson's statements on the subject border on the impolitic, including comments maligning the Mexican, French and Russian governments.
What few clues there are about the direction a Thompson administration might take come from his growing body of online writings, a smattering of recent speeches and statements, and a somewhat sparse eight-year Senate record.
Thompson, who is expected to enter the presidential race formally in September, but plans to campaign in Iowa on Friday, was not known as a big-ideas guy and was hardly a heavy-hitter when it came to legislation during his Senate career from 1994 to 2002. Still, he was considered a reliably conservative vote on economic, security and social issues alike. He backed Bush's tax cuts, a prohibition on a late-term abortion procedure and voted to give the president the authority to invade Iraq.
More prominently, he established a reputation for working to limit the role of the federal government and protect states rights — an issue that remains very important to him and, perhaps, is an indication of what may lie at the root of his candidacy.
Broadly, he favors a strong federalist approach that emphasizes personal liberties and fiscal conservatism.
"Centralized government is not the solution to all of our problems and, with too much power, such centralization has a way of compounding our problems," Thompson wrote in a recent column on his Web site. "This was among the great insights of 1787," when the Constitution was adopted, "and it is just as vital in 2007."
He adds: "How we draw the line between federal and state roles in this century, and how we stay true to the principles of federalism for the purpose of protecting economic and individual freedom, are questions we must answer."
©MMVII, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From Politics
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 49 CommentsWe are asking a man to give an assessment on his own ideas and performance. In short we want him to say whether he has succeeded or failed at his assignment, AND we expect him to either support his boss or contradict him for all the country to see. Now....if it was any of our jobs and we were told to evaluate our work and our boss--how many would say their work was a failure and their boss a liar? Common sense says Patreaus will do all he can to spin as much as he can in the way Gonzales and Bush want him too--his career does not begin and end with Iraq--but if he wants it to continue in any viable way at all, he has to continue to lick out some serious Oval office booty.
Posted by fredgrad2000 at 04:24 PM : Aug 17, 2007
Excellent post
I am an independent who believes in pro choice, the death penalty, civil unions for *** with rights but not marriage per se, I want a fiscally responsible government that puts Americans first.
I am against: outsourcing, insourcing, amnesty of any sort for illegals, most subsidy programs, social or otherwise but first and foremost--I am adamantly against this war. I have been from the beginning. I want the rule and respect of law to prevail. That includes international treaties we draft and sign as well as our Constitution and our laws. I don''t want the laws finessed or revamped to justify the infractions of certain groups for the day.
There are many things I dislike about the Democratic Party, but I believe the GOP has turned fascist and anti-American with the President ignoring subpoenas, laws and *********** on the Constitution. I believe the Iraq war is illegal and immoral. I have a choice, hold my nose and vote for a Democrat knowing I will probably also get illegal immigrants as a present, or vote for a Republican who more than likely will continue to destroy this country fiscally as well as destroying our integrity. I see scant choice on the Republican side--Ron Paul? He is not likely to get the nomination. From those who could--I loathe them all. And I know a lot of Independents who feel a lot like I do.
Posted by mudrose at 03:28 PM : Aug 17, 2007
so true--they all suck a big weenie. cowards all, and for the most part, we do not know what any of them truly stand for--because what they really stand for is just lining THEIR pockets, plotting THEIR next career moves, securing THEIR pensions, lining up THEIR NEXT contacts and hoping most of us are stupid enough or suckers enough to hire them.
The Presidency and Congress are just long job interviews and most of the candidates are lousy picks. But there is something distasteful about hiring an actor to play President, it just means when he lies, he knows how to look like he means what he says.
Like the tone of him already. Posted by mudrose at 02:08 PM : Aug 17, 2007
Stirring the people would indeed be a significant feat if "the people" comprised more than 29% of all voters. But where is the relevance? Even if 100% of Republicans backed a guy, there is no chance they can win unless others besides Republicans support him. This may be an eyeopener--but right now, being called a Republican is similar to being called stinky.
No one wants to be called that, and no one wants to get too close and no one wants to keep such a stench around. In short, unless the war front changes drastically and more and more dirt stops being uncovered about the Republican congress and their god (Bush), the Republicans can kiss the next election year cycle goodbye. There are not enough Republicans to define or make an election and face it--most states are either having paper trails or totally scrapping the dieboldt and other voting machines so that cheating option is out too.
scooter libby defense fund flack- what a patsy- nixon spy- you have to worry though when they start wearing cowboy hats- it''''s like a gang sign flashing to the bigoted masses...
Posted by jsilver2th at 02:43 PM : Aug 17, 2007
Excellent comment.
How do you tell if a politician is lying? some would say when their lips are moving, I am inclined to believe it is when they skip around on their position and try to tailor it to the crowd they want to please.
Every American voter better remember, that no matter what politicians say to us to get elected, they may not mean it. And the only ones who really can influence and have voices later are heads of corporations, lobbyists, billionaires, and higher ups in political organizations. If that ain''t you--then stop being so gullible and believing everything your guy tells you. You have something they want: like mainly that high six figure salary and the chance to use the oval office as a stepping stone to more wealth. Beyond that, most of us do NOT matter. Learn and retain this.
They have 9 or ten pitiful candidates so far, and they will just add another one. He has enough baggage in his voting record, his lobby connections, and his own words, to give the Democrats some joyful fodder.
NOTHING
Donnie900''s blessings on anybody who shoots a ******* texan.
Fred what are you going to be about this....woo hoo, what is your plan how would you get us out of this QUAGMIRE
a new poll by the network finds that a majority doesn''t trust Petraeus to give them an accurate assessment of what''s happening on the ground in Iraq.
When asked if they trust the top U.S. Commander in Iraq to report "what''s really going on," a surprising 53% answer "no." Only 43% say they trust him to tell us the real deal on the war.
Another key result: a huge majority claims that whatever he says about Iraq in September, it won''t change their minds about the war. Only 28% say a positive assessment will make them more likely to support the war, while the number who say it won''t is a staggering seventy two percent.
Mee too.... bad lying peoples
I hope not. Because then that means that you and yer carpetbagger buddies can lie to people about it to get more votes.
I hope its not a religion. We don''t need that ******* up baggage.
As a career lobbyist Fred Thompson will stand for any corporation or special interest who gives him money.
Posted by donnie900
I pray to the Second Amendment too. Sometimes I also pray to the First, the Fourth, the Fourteenth. I like my Bill of Rights. Great religion. Don''t you think.
in the hopes that these right wing republican christian snakes will see the light.
well, i''m here to tell you that the south has a dark and sordid past.
and any efforts to accomodate these redneck christian creeps will just make the situation worse.
the south never does good for america.
has only brought this country shame, death and destruction.
ha,ha,ha.
that''s the south for you, folks!
no changing it.
that''s where they find their kind of people.
rednecks, reborns, war, hate, arrogance, christian creeps, republican snakes...
you''ll never find these creepy republicans campaigning in the north.
ha,ha,ha.
nothing good comes out of the south.
Thats why I''m gonna take de ************ away from yaz. And give Texas to Mexico.. Finally be ******** rid of yer psychobabble ******** "compassionate conservatism" religious bullshyyts. Piece''a shyyt ******** macho on the end of my ******** nub.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 49 Comments