POZ Community Forums
Off Topic Forums => Off Topic Forum => Topic started by: ChaplinGuy on September 06, 2007, 11:56:22 am
-
I mean this as a serious question, one that I am trying to understand given my moderate views on most political hot topics of the day.
Why are many Republicans looking to Fred Thompson as the "savior" of the GOP in the upcoming election? I mean this. I am really curious. At a time in which the conservative base has gained so much under the current Administration, when the religious overtones of domestic policymaking are fairly well-heard, and the country is more seriously faced with international pressures ... why him?
I'm left with a cloud of questions. Values? Okay, I get that. I know that for many people values (family, etc) are important. But THE most important going into this election year? I doubt it. My gut tells me that it's the over abundance of moral exactitude and blind faith of the Bush years that have left many Americans, including many on the right, disillusioned with that kind of values-based leadership.
That being said, I'm very curious to know what others think about him. (And I realize that this is an opening for Jack to post his usually non-constructive tirades. Have at it, buddy.)
Chap
-
By nonconstructive I guess you mean I refuse to succumb to socialism and the need to have government do everything for me.
I dont know anyone but the media who is hyping Fred. Anything to muddy the Republican waters? Fred was a pretty ordinary Senator,but then who isnt? The Senate is a joke. I have no idea who is supporting him. He is not a very good public speaker without a script. He has little chance,as I have said many times, its very difficult for any Senator to win the Presidency. Senators often go against their own beliefs and better judgement and vote for certain bills just because they will pass or because the polls say they should vote one way or another. They then have to defend their votes to the nation in a Presidential race. It causes such debacles as the Dole candidacy and Kerrys "i voted for it before I voted against it" or whatever he said. Its why the last several Presidents have all been Governors, they have no record of Federal votes to haunt them.
JFK was the last Senator to win the Presidency in a very close race with the Dickster. Do you think JFK could win today with his vote against the civil rights amendment? Of course he did this to gain favor with the Southern Dems but without the chicanery in Chicago and W.Virginia there would have been no Camelot.
I am not dissing JFK,he was much more fiscally conservative than the Dickster. JFK lowered taxes to promote prosperity and growth,while the Dickster instituted price controls which helped cause a major recession and destroyed the Carter administration(not that he needed any help).
-
Jack, you make some excellent points here. Well said indeed. I rescind my "non-constructive" remark in light of your astute perceptions of the former Senator and the historical realities of such a candidacy. Thanks for your post!
-
I assume the majority is looking for anything other than the previous years of Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush! Perhaps the Thompson intrigue is the result of longing for the Reagan-style era where, even though there was controversy over many of his policies and politics, the country was more united. There wasn't (or appeared not to be) the "venom" and "hatred" that has evolved over the past years.
In other words, after 20 years of the same clans we've had our fill of them! I for one, am unimpressed by the current pool of either Republican or Democratic candidates. If nothing else he would create a new era of bitchery and will hopefully allow the Congress to get to work on the country's business instead of trying to "one-up" the President and vice versa.
-
So how exactly is Thompson supposed to be like Reagan- other than both being actors?
I'm guessing you don't know really know all that much about Thompson, SirPrize. Not if you are thinking he is gonna be any big move away from "venom".
-
I think because the Republican side is lacking anything for anyone to get excited about.
I'm not talking policies and I'm not even getting into political party disctintions per se, but the Democrats have people like Hillary, Obama and Bill Richardson, who if any were elected would be a first for the presidency ( woman, African American, hispanic) that alone gives the Democrats a sense of excitement. While the Republicans are just a bunch of old white men.
This isn't a slant at all against the Republicans - merely an observation that there is nothing memorable about any of them and the lack of excitement about them has left the Republican party (and the media that covers them) starving for a bone....even if it is another old white man.
I think they should nominate Fred and make the convention song the theme from Nightmare on Elm Street....1,2 Freddy's coming for you or follow every point he makes during a speech with that *ching ching* sound from Law & Order.
It would be worth a few media clicks.
-
I remember the Episode on "Roseanne" when he played the Foreman at Welman plastics. God ! Did he piss me off, in that role. Why do I have a feeling, he's like that in real life? :P I know he was only acting !
Ray
-
PS :
This was just a clip of that episode : ( Just found it)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU2vwoGy7FM
Ray
-
While the Republicans are just a bunch of old white men.
Hey, that's most of their voters!
-
Fred Thompson.
Let's see what he has to offer.
Was a spy for Nixon during the Watergate scandal.
Was a lobbyist for special interest groups.
Is a member of the so-called Hollywood Elite.
Is anti-choice.
Voted against same-sex marriage.
Voted against adding sexual orientation to the hate crimes bills.
Voted to amend the constitution to prohibit flag-burning (because as we all know, the greatest challenge facing Americans today is the epidemic of flag-burning).
Voted for abstinence only sex education.
Doesn't believe global warming is a problem.
Voted to defund renewable and solar energy.
Voted consistently in favor of so-called "free trade" agreements that never seem to benefit the American worker.
Voted no on banning gifts from lobbyists to congressmen.
Voted no on allowing people to buy pharmaceuticals from Canada.
Voted no on banning chemical weapons.
Would continue the war in Iraq.
Voted against banning discrimination in hiring based on sexual orientation.
Voted yes on increasing penalties for drug offenses.
It's easy to see why the neocons love him.
-
He's their "good ole boy". The guy that drives an old red pickup.
Yea, he rides in his limo to his pickup, gets in the pickup and drives the 1/2 mile to a rally. Leaves driving away in his pickup to his waiting limo, and so goes the illusion. Seems American's LOVE illusion these days.
Even when is costs lives, costs people to lose their homes, and keeps your kids from getting to college.
Same-o same-o
-
I would never vote for Fred Thompson, but then again, I would never vote Republican. He didn't even take part in last night's debate. Actors seem to have charisma with some people, though, and I think that it what the hype is. To add to livbet's list, he also wants to totally stop abortion. I am pro-choice and will remain that way. No way I'd vote for this guy.
-
I hollered about this before, btw:
http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=14787.0 (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=14787.0)
To add to libvet's list above, he not only is against same sex marriage, but is once again touting Constitutional Amendment to handle it. This guy's just itching to get at the Constitution for all sorts of reasons it seems.
-
cuz he's so good looking.
http://www.americablog.com/2007/09/gop-front-runner-or-buffy-villain-you.html
-
Are we absolutely certain, that Ronald Reagan is dead, and not wearing a Fred Thompson face mask !
Ray :-\
-
well, he is not even a voting consideration for me.
-
My point regarding the "hatred" and "venom" is perfectly made in this thread.
-
My point regarding the "hatred" and "venom" is perfectly made in this thread.
It is? How? I didn't get what you meant above and I still don't. I don't see how people might be "intrigued" with Fred Thompson by way of any sort of thirst for a "Reagan-style Era" free of "venom" and "hatred". How on earth does Fred resemble any such "unified" thing as that?
There's plenty of folks on here that could argue against such a rosey view of Reagan's reign anyway, but that's another thread.
I'm still curious what your point was above and how it was "perfectly illustrated" here in this thread.
-
omg... what a nitwit!
Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S.
(http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/08/2007-09-08_fred_thompson_al_qaeda_smoking_ban_pushe.html)
-
omg... what a nitwit!
Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S.
(http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/08/2007-09-08_fred_thompson_al_qaeda_smoking_ban_pushe.html)
I'm a non-apologetic smoker and this sickens me. I find it amusing that even Iowa voters (not precisely the most cosmopolitan group of folks) finds his thesis flawed on multiple levels.
I actually do hope that Fred's the party's candidate. The chances are slim that, barring another terrorist attack, the Repubs will keep the White House. But with Fred on their side, they'd lose even then.
Brent
(Who believes that friends don't let friends vote Republican)
-
The recent news of Clintons abusing campaign laws again by using money bundlers again, is gonna hurt any chance Fred has of becoming a serious Presidential candidate.
When the FBI and CIA had evidence of Willy taking dough from Chinese army and Chinese nationals through various bundlers back before the 96 election, Fred was the guy who chose not to officially investigate it. When you dont punish criminals for crimes they commit,the will continue to commit them. Fred was told by Dems if he chose to investigate these crimes he would also have to investigate possible Republican crimes. He shirked his duty.
And something like 30 Chinese bundlers the Clintons and Dems were using fled the country. They are back.
The bundlers find people who have no money and offer them money to use their names as the contributors instead of the real contributor.
-
I think it was Bill Maher who was aksed if it's Thompson's "actor appearance" that makes him an attractive candidate and he responded with a classic Maherism and said "if you think a guy who looks like a basset hound is attractive."
I'm on Team Hillary. Her advocacy on behalf of people living with HIV/AIDS as Senator has impressed in more ways than one. From Ryan White funding to her constituency services to working to advocating for healthcare for 9/11 rescue workers - she gets my vote hands down. No other candidate out there in any party has worked as hard has her on these issues IMHO. Plus there are a lot of other reasons I think she'd be great.
Just pray we don't get Giuliani. He'll be George Bush on steroids...
:)
-
The recent news of Clintons abusing campaign laws again by using money bundlers again, is gonna hurt any chance Fred has of becoming a serious Presidential candidate.
http://www.americablog.com/2007/09/thompson-says-hes-no-churchgoer-wont.htmlThompson says he's no churchgoer, won't tout religion on stump (http://Thompson says he's no churchgoer, won't tout religion on stump)
LIKE THIS?
-
Philly, I really dont think W won because he talked Jesus or is a Christian, he won because people were scared to death of Algore and Lurch. Neither Reagan or George 1 were big on the Christian stuff,were they? My memory is going.
I remember when Thompson backed off investigating the Clinton Campaign Crimes pre 96 election. He did it because Dems said they would start investigating Republicans. Now it appears we have the Clintons and Dems using the same illegal tactics they did before 96 election to get big money in. A mailman contributing $200,000? Will the media ever check to see who really gets this money when they return it? Thompson took the low road then and I think it will haunt him before this ends, or at least I hope it does. This is what I mean when I say its tough for a Senator to become President,they are involved in so many controversial votes,that are hard to defend. Hillary is gonna be hit with all kind questionable votes and bills she is involved in.
Clintons using illegal campaign tactics against a walking dead man like Dole is very similar to the NE patriots cheating to beat the Jets. Why would you resort to cheating when your opponent stands no chance? Same reason some people lie when the truth serves them better,something Clintons did over and over again.
-
Philly, I really dont think W won because he talked Jesus or is a Christian, he won because people were scared to death of Algore and Lurch.
Right, which is why he one the first time because a bunch of Jews voted for Pat Buchanan.
-
here we go again. If you are so freaking stupid that you vote for the wrong person or you cant figure out how to vote,well, I guess that means that vote should automatically go to the Dems, because thats the IQ of their base. If you are so freaking stupid you cant figure out how to vote should you even be voting?
How did they know they voted for the wrong person? When you come out of the booth,have you ever realized you voted for the wrong person? When the Dems bussed them in,didnt they tell them to vote straight ticket?
The only person I saw trying to steal the election was Algore,but what do you expect from a guy who is now trying to scam voters with his warming hoax?
Whats really funny is the Dems and Buchanan are on the same side on Israel,so I guess that blows your argument too.
Bush may not know how to speak very well,but I would take him all day long over Algore or Lurch.
-
Yes, those 90 year old Jewish ladies are dumb aren't they? You really think they voted for Jew hating Pat?
-
Whats really funny is the Dems and Buchanan are on the same side on Israel,so I guess that blows your argument too.
link please
-
Poor, poor Fred! (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070914/ap_po/thompson_florida;_ylt=ApYGGHaXx8ghWLBcu9pSeuOs0NUE)
Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson gave no opinion Thursday when asked about efforts by President Bush and Congress to keep Terri Schiavo alive, saying he does not remember details of the right-to-die case that stirred national debate.
-
I still believe it was hoax. There is no way to tell who someone voted for after they leave the polls,unless you live in Chicago or Boston. A Democrat designed the ballots. A Democrat bussed all these people to the polls and told them how to vote and now after their guy loses they claim they voted for the wrong guy? How do they know they voted for the wrong guy?? That makes absolutely no sense. Anyone who believes this is delusional and should seek help. Reminds me of the story about George 1 flying to Iran in a fighter jet before the first Reagan Victory to make a deal to keep hostages captive longer. Just fucking crazy. Or the one about Bush knowing about 911 before it happened. Insanity.
-
Don't forget the hoax about George II winning the 2000 election!! I hope he remembers to send some BIG fruit baskets to the Supreme Court Justices when he leaves the White House.
Plus -- seems like Al Gore has convinced just about the entire scientific community about Global Warming -- so maybe he would have been a better president than you give him credit for.