Giuliani Blog Tracking the likely Presidential candidacy of Rudy Giuliani

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Giuliani Notes: South Carolina - Thompson 25% Rudy 21% McCain 7% Romney 11% in Latest Mason-Dixon Poll

Cross Posted from the FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog

giulianijune12aweb

SC poll has Obama, Thompson as frontrunners

South Carolina appears poised to shake up the 2008 presidential race, with Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Fred Thompson the frontrunners in a new state survey by Mason-Dixon.

With strong support from the African American community, Illinois Senator Obama has assumed a strong lead over New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. On the Republican side, Thompson zoomed to the top spot, slightly ahead of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, even though he hasn’t yet announced his bid for the GOP nomination.

The Mason-Dixon poll, made available to McClatchy Newspapers and NBC News, offered disappointing news for two candidates who previously had been polling well in South Carolina. John Edwards, a South Carolina native who won the primary in 2004, was well behind Obama and Clinton on the Democratic side. Arizona Sen. John McCain, meanwhile, appeared to have lost many of his supporters to Thompson, and was far back in the GOP field.

The GOP NUTS:

Thompson - 25%

Rudy - 21%

Romney - 11%

McCain - 7%

The latest Real Clear Poitics South Carolina GOP Poll Averages:

giulianijune17a

The big story here is John McCain’s collapse amid the illegal immigration furor on Capitol Hill.

But, it may not be just one issue - all of the little insults to the GOP base are being remembered and returned in kind to Senator McCain.

Flap thinks McCain’s campaign is all but over. In fact, Flap will be very surprised if McCain is around after Labor Day - particularly if the Senate passes the illegal immigration bill.

Also, Fred Thompson LEADS the poll without declaring his Presidential candidacy.

All in all a decent showing for Rudy Giuliani who was not expected to contend in South Carolina. Does this show Rudy’s inherent strength in this race?

You bet

And demonstrates tough going for Mitt Romney in southern conservative states.

Previous:

The Rudy Giuliani Files


Technorati Tags:

Find this post interesting? Get posts
from this blog in your inbox once a day:

2 Comments:

At 8:25 AM, Blogger myclob said...

Fred Thompson



* “I know there’s been some speculation among Republicans about a certain former senator from Tennessee getting into the presidential race. Everyone is waiting and wondering, all the hype is building. I feel great comfort in the fact that no one in this room, not a single person, will be voting for Al Gore.”
o Governor Mitt Romney



Mr. Thompson is a well known conservative politician who has a strong following of many Americans. That said, he is also a competitor of GMR. As was mentioned many times in yesterday’s GOP debate, FT has yet to be challenged by the public in any meaningful way.



Those who have studied all of the candidates carefully and thoroughly know that many Americans neither have the time nor the disposition to research all of the candidates to know their differences. I have spoken to many people like them. Unfortunately, in this country many times a person’s public facade matters more to the voter than any stand they may take on any important issue.



FT may eventually be President of the United States, but if he is to one day be so elected, it is our goal to first reveal as much about his history as we can so that the voting public can make a discerned and educated choice. Therefore, to contrast Governor Romney against any of his competitors is one important purpose of this site. FT’s television character is awesome. However, by contrast to GMR, many of us believe he is simply a weak politician and certainly not a leader.





Few people blink as they deride GMR for his religion or even his steadfastness to “old-fashioned” values. Yet many celebrate candidates of amoral backgrounds who have had multiple wives (not used here in reference to FT necessarily). We don’t know that much about FT yet. As GMR is going through the fire of public scrutiny, so will FT. Some have already challenged whether FT is a Christian; I choose to believe he is. Some have challenged whether FT has “fire in the belly” to run for President (I don’t think he does). Some have labeled him as “lazy” for many reasons. FT himself has dismissively and humorously discussed the period after his first marriage as a time in which he “chased many women and many women chased me” as if that is something to be proud of. Maybe it is for him.



But generally speaking, Americans really don’t know FT well and we hope to reveal character traits of his. Our goal with GMR and any other candidate by contrast is to publish fact. We have no intention whatsoever to create what some call “hit pieces” on any candidate and in fact we would generally follow the example of GMR himself when asked about other candidates. He generally sticks to the facts surrounding competitor policies and position statements.



Speaking for myself only, I happen to think that the character of any given woman or man is absolutely critical as we judge fitness to be president of the largest entity in the history of the world. Contrary to what liberals would have us believe (rewind to the Clinton years), a man’s personal choices, reflective of character values, are very important. The example of Bill Clinton is a simple one: If the person he holds up in public to be the most important person in his life, Hillary his wife, cannot trust him, how does a man like that expect those whom he does not know to trust him? Therefore, a person’s character is important to consider in all aspects. Choices and decisions made are a measure of the man and can be a very important measure indeed.



GMR’s character, proven executive leadership over decades, integrity, and multiple proven successes are all above reproach. The same cannot be said of others. Therefore, we would be remiss if we did not contrast the many ways GMR is superior to other candidates, including to FT. To allow the inferior leadership skills of others to remain hidden only serves the inferior candidate, not the American voters.



The honest American studying all candidates, their characters, their core values, and their policy statements I believe will find that GMR is superior in just about every way.



As regards FT specifically, GMR has the vision that FT lacks. GMR has the executive experience that FT lacks and will never have. GMR has succeeded dozens of times in major endeavors that FT has not even attempted. GMR has the “fire in the belly” to be President that FT has never had. GMR is not being pulled into the presidential race by others; he seeks the office out of a burning desire to serve his country. GMR has delivered on every major campaign promise as a conservative governor against the liberal naysayers of one of the most liberal governments on Earth. GMR’s track record is one of strategic planning, execution, and delivery. By contrast, FT has accomplished what as a leader? And GMR has never been lazy and has never been accused of being lazy.



We very much appreciate every new and returning visitor to this site and welcome all honest seekers of truth in the search of a statesman to lead America as its executive leader. We will continue to promote Governor Romney and compare his leadership attributes to those of the other candidates. And as always, we seek your opinions; please continue to express them.



* “It’s his accent that tells conservatives he’s one of their own.” I guess we’re a regional party now.
o Allahpundit



* "Right now, the Democrats’ best hope may be for the Republicans to veer right and nominate an erratic aging boy like the seedy Newt Gingrich or a Hollywood caricature of vintage 1910 American small-town life like the phlegmatically pithy Fred Thompson, whose homespun act feels tired and looks tired."
o Camille Paglia, Slate, June 13, 2007, "Run, Al, run!"


Fred Thompson On CNBC


The New Reagan? I knew Reagan. And you sir, are no Reagan. He is not "the great communicator" not even close. Watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2NBrSuNgN4



I am not making this transcript up. Every single one of the “ah”’s that I type, came out of Fred Thompson’s mouth. Every one of the commas are pauses where he thought about what he was going to say. Every time I repeat a word, Fred Thompson repeated the word, word, word. Watch the video yourself, and tell me if I got the transcript wrong. Actually please post any corrections. Writing these transcripts really stinks, and I am a bad speller.



Larry Kudlow: How would you go after, I know these are complex subjects and we don’t have time, so if you can just give a thought or two…

Fred Thompson: They’re pretty complex for a fellow who hasn’t announced for, ah, anything, ah, Larry…

Larry Kudlow: The issue is Tort Reform. You voted against limitations to, ah, tort reform settlements, class action lawsuit penalties. That’s a huge issue in the US Business community. A lot of American business is going over seas in search of a less punitive, ah, class action system. Some of your critics say it is because you used to be a trial lawyer.

Fred Thompson: Yeah…

Larry Kudlow: …why did you vote against tort Reform?

Fred Thompson: I can’t wait to get back to trying those intersection collision cases, ah, Larry, but, ah, no, the one, several of those issues, I don’t remember that particular one, I, I, voted for class action reform, ah, ah, I know on a couple of different occasions, because I consider that to be a national issue…

Larry Kudlow: …Well you voted against some caps…

Fred Thompson: …well…

Larry Kudglow: you voted against some caps…

Fred Thompson: …well… well… the..

Larry Kudlow: …which is really the heart of the matter

Fred Thompson: …well…

Larry Kudlow: ..as you know venue shopping has been one of the big issues with the trial lawyers

Fred Thompson: …let me…

Larry Kudlow: …they all want to go to Madison county.

Fred Thompson: …let me…

Larry Kudlow: … so they can get outrageous settlements…

Fred Thompson: …let me give you an answer that covers, I think, every one of those so called tort reform, ah, votes, ah, there have been things that have been the purview of the states for two-hundred years, and ah, for ah, Washington, ah, and in one case the Judiciary committee to sit and calculate attorneys fees, appropriate attorney’s fees, negotiated on the state level is preposterous for one thing and is against the principles of federalism, ah, ah, ah, on another level. I had a couple of 99 to 1 votes where I was the one vote where mom and apple pie kind of things were, ah, were, were, put forward, because they felt like it was a good idea to federalize those traditional state things, and without commenting on the merits of the case I just said the federal government can not do what it is supposed to be doing competently now, were, were, were, rife with, with, inabilities from ah, ah, computer technology, to ah, ah, our people, people passing an audit, but the federal government hasn’t passed one, ah, ah, for 10 years so why keep arrogating these type of responsibilities to Washington DC with some kind of a so called fix, ah, when we are ah, supposed to be, ah, federal system under the constitution, and if you got a problem with state, you know, this is a competitive system out there, and a lot of other states out there, and the competition is, ah, is a good thing among the states and some times you even get some innovation among the states.



Notice this is all one sentence. He never finishes his idea, but keeps tacking stuff on. Is it something to be proud that the senate voted on things and it was 99 to 1? I mean if you are right about an important issue, is Fred Thompson really the only one in the senate who saw the truth of the issue? When he started talking about vague random mom and apple pie stuff, that had nothing to do with the question, I was dumbfounded. Oh my gosh, what a dork. Am I listening to Bill Clinton here, or is he going to answer the question? He is just making stuff up. We don’t want lawyers coming up with innovative ways of suing companies do we? What is he talking about?



Larry Kudlow: …how…

Fred Thompson:… in fact that is where welfare reform came from… So, ah, you know we got to be a little bit careful if we are true to our principals, that when it comes to some subject matter ah, that we feel strongly about that it’s not, ah, just another an answer that we feel strongly about it, the question is whether, the question is at what level of government it should be dealt with.



Hillary would eat this guy for lunch, what does this have to do with anything? No wonder he is afraid to debate Rudy, McCain, and Romney.



Larry Kudlow: Sometimes states are really bad laboratories, sort of killing off the animals that they are testing and guess I have to ask you…

Fred Thompson: Well there is not very…

Larry Kudlow: let me just ask this question because businessmen are really interested in this, how would you as a president Thompson either cap these lawsuit penalties or perhaps more to the point stop frivolous lawsuits, weather its securities lawsuits or medical malpractice lawsuits, or asbestos lawsuits, that literally put thousands of businesses, 10s of thousands of workers out of work and just muck up the whole capitalist system. How do you stop that sir?

Fred Thompson: Larry in state after state, and you know after leaving their little communities getting in their car, driving past their state capital, getting to the airport, flying to Washington DC, to get Washington DC to do something about something that happened in their locality there, in that regard, with regard to tort reform, state after state took it on themselves as they should to change outrageous, ah, ah, supreme court members who, ah, who, ah, were doing ah, things that were ah, in the trial lawyer’s pockets and things like that and they went to the voters and got changes made. (Lets start naming the only states that would vote for you). In Mississippi, in Alabama, in Texas and a number of states it just shows that it works… the easy solution often times is to go to the federal government… now there is there is certain things that without question, that ah, have become nationalized because, ah, globalization and the communication and transportation changes in our society , but you have to take a new look at it, you have to have a federal response to legitimate federal issues, but I think the first thing we often do sometimes, as conservatives, supposedly, is jump to the, ah, to the, ah, unilateral federal, ah, option, ah, before you give the states the responsibility. You can’t say that you believe in freedom ah, ah, ah, with regard to someone, ah, as long as someone does what you want them to do.



Oh hear we go, please don’t say anything about apple pie again. You know it’s not story time Fred. We aren’t elementary school students. Just answer the question. Can we be any vaguer? What happened to the people who flew to DC? Things like what? What are you talking about? You know he is talking bad about trial lawyers, but he was one.



“spookynshadow” is the first person to comment on this video.



If you go to this link:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2NBrSuNgN4



You can be the second.



spookynshado says, “Fred Thompson will be the next President of the United States. FACT who ever this a** hole is that is screaming at Fred would do himself well to let Fred answer the questions and listen, not talk”



First of all, spookynshado, Larry Kudlow did not “scream” at Fred Thompson. I would much rather have Larry Kudlow be our next president instead of Fred Thompson.



This is why, I think, the DNC keeps calling Mitt Romney smooth talking, because they want us to nominate someone like George Bush or Fred Thompson, so they can perpetuate their stereotypes about republicans.


I think Fred Thompson looks like the creature from the black lagoon. What do you think?



Here is the original video on CNBC



Here are some of my thoughts about Fred Thompson, with reasons to agree and disagree. If you post reasons to agree or disagree, I will add them to the list.



1. Fred Thompson is not the best Republican candidate for 2008.
2. Fred Thompson opposed Tort Reform for Medical Malpractice Cases.
3. Fred Thompson is not like Reagan.
4. Fred Thompson is not Aurthur Branch.
5. The republican party needs to move past Reagan.
6. Fred Thompson completely lacks executive experience.
7. Fred Thompson will not play well in the General election.
8. Fred's candidacy is weird.
9. Fred Thompson needs more make-up than Hillary Clinton.
10. Fred Thompson is more like Bush than Reagan.
11. Fred Thompson is more like Carter than Reagan.
12. Fred Thompson is more like Clinton than Reagan.
13. Fred Thompson's marriages reflect poorly on him.
14. Fred Thompson's single life reflect poorly on him.
15. Fred Thompson didn't really do anything while he was in the senate.
16. Fred Thompson is lazy.
17. Fred Thompson is shameless.
18. Fred Thompson has not shown an skill except reading lines that others write.
19. Fred Thompson is a lawyer. We don't need any more lawyers in the white house.
20. Fed Thompson was pro-choice during his first campaign.
21. Fred Thompson looks like a bear crossed with a basset hound.
22. Fred Thompson is an insider not an outsider.
23. It is unfortunate that Fred Thompson is an actor.
24. Fred Thompson is corrupt.
25. Fred Thompson got with more ladies than Bill Clinton.
26. Fred Thompson is not the Washington outsider he acts like.
27. Fred Thompson is an actor.
28. Fred Thompson is a hypocrite.
29. Fred Thompson has a bad memory.
30. Fred Thompson has a problem with nepotism.
31. Fred Thompson is not motivated enough to be president.
32. Fred Thompson has a pattern of letting other run his life.

Reasons to agree:

1. There have been many articles and blog posts challenging FT on the “why” question. Why is he running for President? He did not seek the Senate seat, he was pulled in by supporters. He did not seek his job as an actor, he was pulled in by supporters. He is not seeking the presidency, he is being pulled in by supporters. So it is correct to ask a simple but very important question of him: “Why do you want to be President?” Do you want it simply because the flattery of others is motivation enough?


Questions for Mitt Romney on Fred Thompson

1. Mike Allen
1. What do you make of all the attention being given to Fred Thompson?
2. Hugh Hewitt
1. Do you look forward to his formal announcement?




EARTH TO LAMAR: FRED THOMPSON LOOKING THE PART AIN'T ENOUGH





Lamar Alexander on Hardball, pushing Fred Thompson for president confirms the obvious: Fred's top asset is his stage presence, followed closely by his presidential and other executive experience... on film.



Fred's geography and ideology seal the deal for Lamar, the former being pure South and the latter, pure enough Right.


Vote for Fred Thompson… He is from the South!

Zach Wamp on Fred Thompson

“He is from Lawrenceburg Tennessee so he is innately conservative. You don’t grow up in his skin Lawrenceburg Tennessee without having traditional family social conservative values deep in your DNA.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZheKLJuLOQ



Sounds kind of racial. Because of his DNA he deserves to be president? Sounds kind of jingoistic. Because he was born in the South he deserves to be president? Because he was born in the south he is conservative? Do we want someone who fits the republican stero-type, or do we want someone with crossover appeal… someone who can appeal to highley educated, urban people from Purple states? Romney who has a record for turning things around, competence, and can redefine the conservative movement as something that metrosexuals can adopt, or do we want to just play to our base: the south, and people who think that because you are born in the south, you deserve to be president?



So it doesn’t matter that Fred Thompson divorced his first wife (Sarah Elizabeth Lindsey) who worked to put him through law school, while they had 3 kids, and then he divorced her once he was a Hollywood star and married a trophy wife 25 years younger than him. Because he is from the south, he is the “Family” candidate. Way to go Zach Wamp



He supports states right on gay marriage, and so is against the federal marriage amendment, but he is the “family” candidate because he is from the south?



Fred Thompson on McCain-Fiengold backlash: "I wouldn't be too concerned about Christians and conservatives…Christianity has to do with saving souls and uplifting people, and not raising large amounts of soft money to run attack campaigns on folks."



Huh? Rewind the tape. Oh, wait, can’t do that here. Is he saying in a broad sense that Christians should stick to the pews and not try and influence the political process? Probably not but he’s going to need to explain himself on this topic. I’m told by someone who has met with Thompson that he has said in private that the intent of campaign finance reform is no to go after Christian groups and that will be something he’ll make clear when the time comes.



Speaking about making these clings, I’m sure he’ll have to revisit some past statements he made about John McCain. Remember, Thompson was one of McCain’s national co-chairman when McCain ran for President back in 2000. Here’s another little tidbit The Brody File found from back in 2000. Once again, from CNN’s Late Edition:



CALLER: Yes, hello. Senator Thompson, my question is for you, sir. How could a hard-core conservative like yourself support such a wishy-washy conservative like Senator McCain?



THOMPSON: He's not a wishy-washy conservative. If you look at his voting record over his entire career, whether you look at the conservative's rating or the liberal's ratings, John McCain is a conservative by any measure. He's been right there on all the conservative core issues his entire career. They're misrepresenting the effect of campaign finance reform. What John McCain recognizes is that it takes money in politics, but he thinks there should be some reasonable limit on it.



Aside from McCain-Feingold, in his six years in the Senate, Thompson was the primary sponsor of only four pieces of legislation, none of any significance. “I worked for the music business for years when Fred Thompson was the senator from Tennessee,” Hilary Rosen, former chief lobbyist for the Recording Industry Association of America and now a Democratic strategist, said on MSNBC. “So I worked with him in his office fairly regularly, and I have to say, as nice a guy as he is, he is lazy. He was a lazy senator.”



“I’ve been friendly with Thompson for years,” Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund said on The Journal Editorial Report. In the Senate, Fund said, Thompson “had a reputation for being a little lazy.”



Even Thompson’s high school football coach, Garner Ezell, told the Nashville Tennessean, “He was smart, but he was lazy.”



Fred Thompson’s chief operations officer will be Thomas J. Collamore…former vice president of public affairs for Philip Morris Companies Inc.



[http://www.old-time.com/commercials/1950's/Ad%20Philip%20Morris%20Candid%20Mike%202.jpg]





"Thompson is sure to face sharper criticism from those who say that his eight-year Senate record was undistinguished and that his credentials as a conservative are marred by his support of campaign finance reform. Some also say he is a lackadaisical campaigner, pointing to his sometimes rambling maiden speech last month in Orange County, Calif., as evidence that he is overhyped.

Republican pollster Neil Newhouse, who helps conduct the NBC-Wall Street Journal Poll with Democrat Peter Hart, said an analysis of their most recent poll indicated that Thompson's entry could initially hurt Giuliani and McCain." --a Michael Shear and Dan Ballz story in The Washington Post, 5/31/07



Fred Thompson appears not to think as highly of the First Amendment as he does the Second. He voted for both the McCain-Feingold and Shays-Meehan campaign finance "reform" measures - gross perversions and restrictions of free speech rights.

Government should regulate politics, Thompson believes -what is said, when it's said and how much of it can be said. It's outrageous.



Only the Sedition Act of 1798 - making it a crime for anyone to write or publish "any false, scandalous and malicious writing against the president or the government in general"- had a more chilling effect on political discourse.



Clearly, Congress is constitutionally forbidden from legislating on matters involving free speech: "Congress shall make no law... ." Yet Fred Thompson was, and apparently remains, convinced otherwise.



Feel free to scream.



How can Thompson be so right on so many issues but so blind on this issue? It is an ideological inconsistency of such import that it could - and perhaps it should - scotch Thompson's exploratory candidacy before any formal Independence Day kickoff.

Indeed, and as great orator Daniel Webster once said, "Inconsistencies of opinion, rising from changes of circumstances, are often justifiable." But not this one. For the Constitution says what it means and means what it says, no matter the meddling of its temporary legislative and judicial custodians.



If the First Amendment is so easy for Fred Thompson to rationalize, what amendment, what article, what section will follow?



Call the maintenance department. Back to storage goes the Republican throne; back to the display case goes the GOP crown.


Coulter vs. Thompson on impeachment



I'm With Fred



No wonder he's waiting so long to announce....he didn't have to perform on his feet and off the top of his head during the last three debates! I honestly don't have any clue what this man just said. He needs a scripted response and can't seem to put a clear thought or idea together fluently enough to have people understand him, or want to stick around long enough to wait for him to finish his response.



The curtain is beginning to rise on the fallacy that FT is Ronald Reagan reincarnate. He may have appeal to the conservative right that don't really know much about him and/or are enamored with his recently invented good ol' boy character or hollywood character, but he's going to have about as much appeal to young, information aged voters as a black and white version of The Constant Gardener, with subtitles.



I think we're getting something rammed down our throats. I've read in more than one MSM article that he's a "fresh face". LOL Sometimes the hypocracy of the parties overwhelms me. If you were to ask a Conservative Republican who they would be most likey to vote for, a lobbyist, a lawyer, a senator or a hollywood actor, they'd choose none of the above. FT is all of the above and he's being heralded as the savior of the republican party and this great nation in a time of war? I just don't get it.



FT can't hold a candle to GMR in the arena of ideas or anywhere else for that matter. And he's certainly no Ronald Reagan. RIP



JMHO


National Security

1. Voted NO on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)



Liberal democrat Al Gore has a better record on immigration than Thompson. Fred Thompson or Al Gore? Americans for Better Immigration gave Thompson a "C" grade while Gore has an "A". While Californians were fighting for Prop 187 in 1994-1998, Thompson was in the Senate contributing to the immigration problem we have today. The fact that Al Gore and 32 Congressional Democrats have a better record on fighting immigration than Thompson warrants his inclusion in the Kennedy wing. Thompson should remain in his current career as an actor


Tricky clientele


Lobbyist



Thompson made nearly $1.3 million over about two decades of lobbying both before and after his eight-year Senate stint, according to government documents and media accounts from his successful run for the Senate in 1994.



Some of Thompson's clients could prove tricky to explain, from a British reinsurance company facing billions of dollars in asbestos claims to deposed Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.


Trial lawyers



Before Thompson won his Senate seat, published reports said his private law practice handled personal injury cases and defended people accused of white-collar crimes. And in the Senate, he opposed some legislation intended to rein in escalating jury verdicts and attorneys' fees.



Trial lawyers are bogeymen for conservative groups, which consider them Exhibit A for a legal system that rewards greed over industriousness.




Backed McCain-Feingold which strengthened people like George Soros and moveon.org



Thompson was among the leading Republican backers of the sweeping package of campaign finance reforms commonly known as McCain-Feingold.



Since it passed into law in 2002, conservative activists have derided it as an infringement on their free speech and have held a grudge against its GOP sponsor, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), whose presidential campaign has struggled to win over conservatives.



Expect conservative groups and rivals to emphasize Thompson's support for the bill, even calling it "McCain-Feingold-Thompson."


Centrist senator



He backed a 1998 bill that would have established a temporary farm worker program and a 1996 bill to increase the minimum wage. And he voted against one of the two impeachment charges brought against President Clinton in 1999.


Pro-choice?



On candidate surveys in 1994 and 1996, he answered that he favored abortion always being legal in the first trimester of pregnancy and opposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution "protecting the sanctity of human life."



According to the Nashville Tennessean, Thompson included a handwritten clarification with the latter response, reading, "I do not believe abortion should be criminalized. This battle will be won in the hearts and souls of the American people."



After Thompson again intimated, during a Fox News appearance this month, that he'd oppose criminalizing abortion, conservative columnist Robert Novak wrote that Thompson "came close to alarming his pro-life constituency."



On a 1994 Eagle Forum survey, Thompson said he opposed criminalizing abortion. Two years later, on a Christian Coalition questionnaire, he checked "opposed" to a proposed constitutional amendment protecting the sanctity of human life. In a campaign policy statement filed in the archives, he also said he believes "the decision to have an early term abortion is a moral issue and should not be a legal one subject to the dictates of the government." During an interview with the Conservative Spectator, a Tennessee newspaper, he claimed to be pro-life but also said that, "The ultimate decision on abortion should be left with the woman and not the government."


Clinton



Fred Thompson joined only 11 other Republicans when he voted not to indict Bill Clinton.


Links

1. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0812905369
1. The reader may become as weary as Thompson seems at book's end--he has no strong opinions on Nixon while his sketches of congressmen and fellow investigators are unmemorable, Kirkus Reviews Copyright (c) VNU Business Media, Inc


Fred on Abortion



I wonder if Evangelicals will be hold Thompson to the same standard as Romney after viewing this…




Fred Thompson Ends Fund That Paid $178,000 to Son

Avni Patel Reports:



Former Tennessee Senator and potential Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson has shut down a political action committee that paid out more money to his son than it did in political donations.



Federal Election Commission records analyzed by the Blotter on ABCNews.com show Thompson’s committee paid $178,000 to his son’s political consulting firm, Daniel Thompson Associates, since 2003.



In contrast, the committee made only $66,700 in contributions to other campaigns and political committees in the four years since Thompson retired from the Senate.



The payments to Thompson’s son were described as for management and consulting services.



While it is not unusual for members of Congress to hire family members to work on their campaigns, the high payments to Thompson’s son’s consulting business deserve close scrutiny, according to Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics.



“It raises eyebrows and calls into question whether this is self-dealing,” says Krumholz .



Contacted at his Nashville, Tenn., political consulting business, Daniel Thompson told ABC News he couldn’t talk because he was “about to leave for a business trip” and referred all questions to a spokesman for his father, who did not return calls from ABC News.



When Thompson left the Senate in 2002, he converted more than $370,000 in leftover campaign funds into a “leadership PAC,” which allowed him to contribute to other politicians at a $5,000 limit and pay for a variety of other expenses, including travel and consulting services.



Krumholz says retired lawmakers, like Thompson, often keep leadership PACs as a “slush fund” to help them set the stage for a run for higher office.



“Often it is simply a way to keep their foot in the door and keep them in the spotlight,” says Krumholz.



Romney won’t make a big deal out of this because it would backfire politically. But I think there is a big difference between Fred and Mitt on this issue.



I backed up the text of all of Mitt Romney’s press releases, before the State of Massachusetts took them down when he left office. I don’t know anyone from the campaign and no one told me to do this. If you go here, you can see all of Romney’s press releases from 2003. His very second press release from his first week as an elected official Mitt Romney let the world know that his life in office was going to be different.



Fred Thompson has already served 8 years as a US senator. He had time to think about this Issue (nepotism). He was a co-sponcer of McCain-Fiengold. So again he thought about this issue a lot, unless he was too lazy to think about it. But yet it didn’t stop him from taking money from his campaign, given to him from people who believed in him, and giving it to his son.



Romney’s second press, from January 9th 2003 says the following:



* 01-09-2003; Governor Mitt Romney names professional human resources director; Issues new Executive Order designed to curb nepotism



Here is the text of that press release:



The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Executive Department

State House Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4000



MITT ROMNEY

GOVERNOR



KERRY HEALEY

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

January 9, 2003 CONTACT:

Shawn Feddeman

Nicole St. Peter

(617) 727- 2759



ROMNEY NAMES PROFESSIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR

Issues new Executive Order designed to curb nepotism



Governor Mitt Romney today announced the appointment of Ruth N. Bramson as Director of Human Resources. Romney also issued an Executive Order putting in place so-called “sunshine provisions” requiring new employees to identify family members working in state government.



Bramson, of Dover, was most recently Senior Vice President for Human Resources at Shaw’s Supermarkets, Inc. At Shaw’s, a $4.5 billion, 187-store supermarket chain, Bramson was responsible for servicing the human resources needs for 35,000 employees.



Romney said Bramson will work with Cabinet officials to recruit and hire their staffs and advise the Governor on professionalizing the human resources function throughout state government.



The move follows the abolition of the position of Chief Secretary. Previously, the chief secretary was the individual in charge of placing political supporters in jobs throughout state government.



“Ruth Bramson is a proven professional with a strong set of organizational skills,” said Romney. “Many people from all walks of life have expressed an interest in joining our administration. I look to Ruth to help us put together the best team of people to address the challenges ahead.”



The “sunshine provisions” in Romney’s Executive Order require individuals applying for positions within the Executive Branch to disclose in writing the names of all immediate family members as well as people related to immediate family members by marriage who serve as employees or elected officials of the Commonwealth. The information will be available to the public upon request.



“People with political connections should not be barred from state employment, but the public needs to be reassured that state employment needs are being filled on the basis of experience and capability. These new sunshine provisions are designed to open up the process,” said Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey.



Bramson said she was “tremendously honored to be part of the exciting changes taking place in state government under Governor Romney.”



In 1998, Bramson founded the non-profit organization, Suited for Success, with the mission of helping economically disadvantaged women move from welfare to lives of self-sufficiency for themselves and their children. More than 100 women have benefited from the program since its creation. Bramson continues to serve as Chairman of the Board and President.



Bramson holds a bachelor’s degree from Columbia University and a master’s degree in Organizational Development and Training from Boston University.



This is one of the reasons why I love Romney. It’s not just one issue with him. It is that he bring a whole new approach to Washington. Something that Romney figured out his first week in public service, and that one of the biggest proponents of McCain Feingold: Fred Thompson, still hasn’t figured out.


Outside Links

1. Conservatives against Fred
2. http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/?cat=147
3. http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/?ml_video=88623
4. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/29/dobson.thompson/index.html
5. http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070328/28dobson.htm
6. http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/fred_thompson_speaks_on_aborti.php
7. http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/the_american_spectator_thompso.php
8. http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/senator_thompsons_turn.php
9. http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110010089
10. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118186324620336039.html
11. http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/06/13/gore/index1.html
12. http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/2007/06/11/triple_standards.php
13. http://theactblog.wordpress.com/2007/06/10/fred-thompson-the-manager-its-not-pretty/


Slogans:

1. Fred Thompson: The Republican Dot-Com Bubble
1. “Some say he is the Republicans’ Rorschach test: They all see in him what they crave. Or he might be the Republicans’ dot-com bubble, the result of restless political investors seeking value that the untutored eye might not discern and that might be difficult to quantify but which the investors are sure must be there, somewhere, somehow.


Great Communicator?



Reagan greatly communicated ideas and agendas. What Thompson enthusiasts are smitten by, so far, is his manner. However his deep-fried Southernness bears a strong resemblance to the Southwesternness of, say, Midland, Texas, and the country may have had its fill of that flavor.


Outsider?



Thompson, a longtime lawyer-lobbyist who will run as a Washington “outsider,” lives inside the Beltway, but outside Washington, in McLean, Va


John McCain's biggest fan!



When the resolutely uncharming John McCain ran in 2000, only four of his Senate colleagues supported him. Thompson was one. Today Thompson is John McCain without McCain’s heroism, Vesuvian temper and support for the current immigration legislation.


Strict Constitutionalist? Limited Government?



Although Thompson presents himself as a strict constitutionalist and an advocate of limited government, he voted for, and still supports, the McCain-Feingold law, which empowers the government to regulate the quantity, content and timing of speech about government.


Deep Thinker?



But as Thompson ambles toward running, he is burdened by a reputation for a less-than-strenuous approach to public life, and that opaque thought he voiced about immigration looks suspiciously symptomatic of a mind undisciplined by steady engagement with complexities.


Strategy From a historian: VDH



"Is it like the transitory Democratic infatuation with empty suit Wesley Clark that fizzled almost the moment the general bought into the adulation? Or is like madman Ross Perot’s “I’m not going to take it anymore” rightwing populism of the 1990s?… A variety of reasons both practical and personal. There are currently no… southerners in either party seriously running for President… Thompson… has been a Washington lobbyist and insider of sorts for more than thirty years… why are some Republicans pinning their hopes on a bald retired politician in his mid-sixties and cancer survivor?"


Others on Fred Thompson



"But Mr. Thompson’s challenges are real, too. He’ll have to show he’s serious–that he’s in it for big reasons and in it to the end. He’ll have to knock down the “low energy, gadfly, hops from thing to thing” charge, which has persisted so long that one assumes there’s something in it. He’ll have to show he’s not just a rote, pro forma conservative–a dumb conservative–but someone who knows times change, horizons shift. He has to show he has run something, or can run something. Romney ran a state, Giuliani a city. Mr. Thompson has run what–a career? Big whoop."



"Most importantly for him, and for all the Republican candidates for that matter, Mr. Thompson will have to answer this question: What is he running to do? Why should the Republicans get another eight years, or four years, after all the missteps they’ve made? Isn’t conservatism, or Republicanism, or whatever you call it, just tired? Isn’t it over? Isn’t America just waiting for whatever will take its place?"



"Why shouldn’t liberalism get a shot? Could they mess up more? Why should we trust Republicans with foreign affairs?" - Peggy Noonan

 
At 8:26 AM, Blogger myclob said...

The formating didn't come accross with my previous post:

Here it is with formating:

http://myclob.pbwiki.com/Fred%20Thompson

 

Post a Comment

<< Home