Author Topic: Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?  (Read 1632 times)

Offline Gumbeau

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 164
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #45 on: May 01, 2007, 04:27:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Actors should never be trusted as politicians.

Politicians may be actors, but how does acting prepare one for a political career?  

Oh yeah, popularity, cuz that's all that's important anymore right?


He was a US senator which is plenty of preparation based on the historical record.

Thompson is a federalist which is enough for him to get my vote.

He does a radio show regularly now.

Here are a few links to his own words.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTQ3OWE3ZTY2N2U4MTFhOTBhYWRiYzhlMmFlMWU1ZmM=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDQwYmI1OGQ0NWM0NTFlMDA1MGE1NGExMDRiMTc2Y2U=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzQ1ZWJmZGJlNGFkNDJmMTdmYmE2ZjIwZjFmYmEzZjk=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDBjNzI5ZTQ4YzMzZTBlMDUwOGIwOGQ0NWQ1YWQ4YWE=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWM0OGRmY2E4ZmZmYzlhYWQxZjE4MDZlNzZhYjRhODc=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTIwYzMyZmQ1YzQ1MDNmZTMyYzQ1Y2U3YTU4YzNmNGE=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjgyNTIzNTM2NjQ0MTZiODQ0OGE3ZDI4MzQwYjhiODU=

and the NRO archive to some more
http://author.nationalreview.com/?q=NDEyMg==

learn all you need to know about the man

Offline Dadano

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 714
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #46 on: May 01, 2007, 04:27:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by tedrbr
Absolutely NOT.  We don't need a conservative.  We don't need a liberal.  
We need a Leader.  We need a moderate, since that's where the majority of the American population are at, in the middle.   We need someone who will look after the nation's interests and the interests of the people, not a political party or special interests.  We need someone who will be able to work both side of the isle to actually get something done.

We need to get away from the extremist politics in D.C.  We need to pull  the teeth of the fanatic-religious right and hyper-liberal left.  When the appointment of Federal judges and Supreme Court nominees all comes down to their "political position" (and not legal basis) on one sole issue, which has left many of those seats empty, the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.  With all the other problems facing the nation that effect people's everyday lives, security, well being, and their future are overlooked for "school prayer" and "flag burning", it is time to re-prioritize in a major big way.


I can agree. Good thoughts.
Dano
Army of Muppets

"Furballing is a disease, and we are the cure... Oink."
-Twitchy

Offline Gumbeau

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 164
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #47 on: May 01, 2007, 04:32:27 PM »
Moderates are only people without a clue what they stand for.

Give me some examples of the 'moderate' position on some issues.

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #48 on: May 01, 2007, 04:40:22 PM »
Thompson has a strong track record as a public servant.  Acting is more of a hobby....but he's very good at that as well.

I disagree with rpm about Thompson's younger wife being a problem for his candidacy....or the fact that he's divorced.  Reagan was divorced, and it never materialized as a campaign issue.  And is being married to a younger woman really as objectionable as getting lip service from an intern young enough to be one's daughter?  If a large part of the population couldn't get worked up about THAT then they certainly won't be taken aback by a 35 year old wilfe.

Frankly, Thompson just isn't carrying much baggage.  If he wants it, the office is his for the taking.

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #49 on: May 01, 2007, 07:11:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm
What about Rick Perry? He's been doing a lot of chest thumping lately. He's the conservative poster boy and squeaky clean.


I don't think he's done that good of job as Texas Gov and no one knows who he is as of yet.

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #50 on: May 01, 2007, 08:10:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gumbeau
Moderates are only people without a clue what they stand for.

Give me some examples of the 'moderate' position on some issues.


Okay, I consider myself a moderate:
 
IRAQ: Going into Iraq in the first place: Big mistake (SSG Dixie Chick, that's me).  The handling of the war is going to make a great Military Channel special on "Screwing Up By the Numbers" someday.  BUT We absolutely cannot pull out of the country in it's present state --- we created the mess, our national economic and security interests are still tied to that region's stability, we obligated to see it through at this point, though it will take years, lives, and dollars to do so.

IMMIGRATION:  Amnesty heck, it's simply recognizing the reality.  Those already living and working in the United States, work out a way toward citizenship.  Deal with it and move on.  At the same time, secure the blasted borders already!

ELECTIONS and SPECIAL INTERESTS:  National fund.  All recognized candidates that meet the requirements and get enough signatures on petitions or however, get a percentage of that year's campaign funds.  Not along party lines.  Equally.  No monetary donations.  Equal time to promote their agenda and position.  Watch the lobbyists closely.

ABORTION and SEX ED:  I believe a woman should have control over her body in a modern, free society.  The way to reduce the number of abortions is to educate and make available the alternatives to those kids.  Making abortion illegal and hoping all the kids abstain till they are married is just plain dumb and naive. Give them the knowledge, the alternatives, and the support to work their way through the issue.  I don't care at all about the religious angle, and those on the 'all life is sacred' platform should visit Darfur.  Life is very cheap.

DRUGS: Legalize. Tax. Regulate. Tax. Spend the money from the war on drugs and enforcement and prison space instead on treatment and education.  Operating under the influence of drugs handled like DUI's are now.  Companies can still dismiss employees who test positive if that is their company policy under legalized drugs (same as for alcohol today).  Oh, And tax the drugs.  
IMHO, such a move would eventually make a big dent in national crime statistics as well.  Prohibition did not work.  Neither is the War on Drugs.  Just creating different criminal organizations.

MILITARY:  A strong, well trained, versatile military.  Hi-tech toys are fine and all, but develop what you need for low intensity conflicts in the mud and city streets as well.  Consider use of National Service requirements to fill ranks, or American Foreign Legions as an option.  

NATIONAL SERVICE:  Yes.  Very much.  Some form of service at some point in your life between 15 and 30.  Military.  Medical or Emergency fields.  Teaching.  Volunteer Work.  Conservation work.  Some of the Sciences.  Volunteer Firemen or Paramedic.  National Guard or Reserve enlistment.  It could take many forms with various lengths of time and effort to commit.   Even put a dollar amount on it so the rich can buy their way out of it (without any tax breaks) -- heck, I don't care.  I'd go for a less strict rather than over the top bureaucracy --- which means there would probably be loopholes and cheats, but no matter.  The overall effort and results should be positive.

OIL ECONOMY: It is in the National Interest to develop alternative energy resources and conservation efforts in order to not have to depend on oil resources from dwindling supplies located in less than stable parts of the world.  This is a Manhattan Project or Apollo Program level effort. Private enterprise and the markets are NOT going to tackle this one to any great effect.  Raise fuel economy levels up to those of Europe, Japan, and China.

MEDICAL CARE and SOCIAL SECURITY:  The Third Rail of Politics.  Agree that politicians are not going to solve this on their own before it goes off the cliff.  Assemble a non-partisan group of experts to study every aspect and come out with a viable solution and then bite the bullet on this one.  Everyone will lose something, but there is no other way these issues will ever get solved.  There are no solutions that doesn't hurt some.  Some benefits will get added.  Many benefits will get cut back or disappear.

EDUCATION:  Current system sucks.  Time for school vouchers.  Competition.  Privatized schools not just private schools, but company operated, like some cities, towns and prisons are now run by companies (and often much better than government run ones).  Teachers Unions will scream murder..... so what, they are part of the problem anyways.  Continue to try and fix things from the government side, but it is time to try other things.  Current system does not work.  

In short:  Do what will work.  What is in the best interests of the nation and it's people.  The good of the many outweighs the idealogical dogma of the few.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #51 on: May 01, 2007, 09:10:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by tedrbr

IMMIGRATION:  Amnesty heck, it's simply recognizing the reality.  Those already living and working in the United States, work out a way toward citizenship.  Deal with it and move on.  At the same time, secure the blasted borders already!

 


So you are in favor of one more in a long line of amnesties?

How will this next one be any different? How would it solve the problem? None of the others did.

Quote
The first United States amnesty was in 1986, and it allowed millions of illegal immigrants to receive a Green Card which could then lead to U.S. citizenship in later years. Before this first amnesty was granted, the United States government had only given amnesty on a case by case basis. In the cases where the government gave amnesty to illegal immigrants, it was only done on a small scale. For a period of over 200 years this was how the government granted amnesty, but in 1986 Congress introduced new immigration legislature. They passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act or IRCA which gave approximately 2.8 million illegal immigrants legal status in the United States. In addition, their immediate relatives or dependents which included about 143,000 individuals also qualified for the same status. The result of the amnesty introduced by Congress was that illegal immigration grew in significant numbers.

When the Immigration Reform and Control Act was passed, it was only meant to be a “one time” amnesty but it actually turned out to be the beginning of many amnesties that would follow. To date there have been additional amnesties that have been granted to illegal immigrants which include:

Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens.

Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens.

Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994.

Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America.

Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti.

Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens.

LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens

The are currently several bills in the United States congress that could possibly create the 8th Amnesty.


Enough amnesty. Secure the borders FIRST. Then round 'em up and ship 'em home for keeps.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #52 on: May 01, 2007, 09:25:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by tedrbr
Okay, I consider myself a moderate:
 
IRAQ: Going into Iraq in the first place: Big mistake (SSG Dixie Chick, that's me).  The handling of the war is going to make a great Military Channel special on "Screwing Up By the Numbers" someday.  BUT We absolutely cannot pull out of the country in it's present state --- we created the mess, our national economic and security interests are still tied to that region's stability, we obligated to see it through at this point, though it will take years, lives, and dollars to do so.

IMMIGRATION:  Amnesty heck, it's simply recognizing the reality.  Those already living and working in the United States, work out a way toward citizenship.  Deal with it and move on.  At the same time, secure the blasted borders already!

ELECTIONS and SPECIAL INTERESTS:  National fund.  All recognized candidates that meet the requirements and get enough signatures on petitions or however, get a percentage of that year's campaign funds.  Not along party lines.  Equally.  No monetary donations.  Equal time to promote their agenda and position.  Watch the lobbyists closely.

ABORTION and SEX ED:  I believe a woman should have control over her body in a modern, free society.  The way to reduce the number of abortions is to educate and make available the alternatives to those kids.  Making abortion illegal and hoping all the kids abstain till they are married is just plain dumb and naive. Give them the knowledge, the alternatives, and the support to work their way through the issue.  I don't care at all about the religious angle, and those on the 'all life is sacred' platform should visit Darfur.  Life is very cheap.

DRUGS: Legalize. Tax. Regulate. Tax. Spend the money from the war on drugs and enforcement and prison space instead on treatment and education.  Operating under the influence of drugs handled like DUI's are now.  Companies can still dismiss employees who test positive if that is their company policy under legalized drugs (same as for alcohol today).  Oh, And tax the drugs.  
IMHO, such a move would eventually make a big dent in national crime statistics as well.  Prohibition did not work.  Neither is the War on Drugs.  Just creating different criminal organizations.

MILITARY:  A strong, well trained, versatile military.  Hi-tech toys are fine and all, but develop what you need for low intensity conflicts in the mud and city streets as well.  Consider use of National Service requirements to fill ranks, or American Foreign Legions as an option.  

NATIONAL SERVICE:  Yes.  Very much.  Some form of service at some point in your life between 15 and 30.  Military.  Medical or Emergency fields.  Teaching.  Volunteer Work.  Conservation work.  Some of the Sciences.  Volunteer Firemen or Paramedic.  National Guard or Reserve enlistment.  It could take many forms with various lengths of time and effort to commit.   Even put a dollar amount on it so the rich can buy their way out of it (without any tax breaks) -- heck, I don't care.  I'd go for a less strict rather than over the top bureaucracy --- which means there would probably be loopholes and cheats, but no matter.  The overall effort and results should be positive.

OIL ECONOMY: It is in the National Interest to develop alternative energy resources and conservation efforts in order to not have to depend on oil resources from dwindling supplies located in less than stable parts of the world.  This is a Manhattan Project or Apollo Program level effort. Private enterprise and the markets are NOT going to tackle this one to any great effect.  Raise fuel economy levels up to those of Europe, Japan, and China.

MEDICAL CARE and SOCIAL SECURITY:  The Third Rail of Politics.  Agree that politicians are not going to solve this on their own before it goes off the cliff.  Assemble a non-partisan group of experts to study every aspect and come out with a viable solution and then bite the bullet on this one.  Everyone will lose something, but there is no other way these issues will ever get solved.  There are no solutions that doesn't hurt some.  Some benefits will get added.  Many benefits will get cut back or disappear.

EDUCATION:  Current system sucks.  Time for school vouchers.  Competition.  Privatized schools not just private schools, but company operated, like some cities, towns and prisons are now run by companies (and often much better than government run ones).  Teachers Unions will scream murder..... so what, they are part of the problem anyways.  Continue to try and fix things from the government side, but it is time to try other things.  Current system does not work.  

In short:  Do what will work.  What is in the best interests of the nation and it's people.  The good of the many outweighs the idealogical dogma of the few.


:rofl   You may call yourself a moderate.  But every other single person that has more then 2 brain cells to rub together would call you a socialist.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline Trell

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 693
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #53 on: May 01, 2007, 09:37:48 PM »
I guess most of the Country are socialists.   Except for the idiots preaching  Behind computers for a revolution where the rich wipe out the poor.

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #54 on: May 01, 2007, 09:49:54 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
So you are in favor of one more in a long line of amnesties?

How will this next one be any different? How would it solve the problem? None of the others did.

Enough amnesty. Secure the borders FIRST. Then round 'em up and ship 'em home for keeps.


Not a realistic solution from a practical, political, or geopolitical aspect those.
It's not going to happen.  See my posting in the Devils' Advocate Thread .  Hispanics in the United States are the largest minority now.  They have a large and growing influence.  Many politicians are very busy courting the Hispanic voting block.  That influence will only grow in the future.  Those politicians are not going to vote for rounding up large numbers of Hispanics and deporting them en mass, while trying to court that same vote.

It will also be a PR nightmare for the State Department to deal with other Latin American countries, many of which are leaning toward socialist agendas, and are being courted by China --- there are many in South and Central America that are looking to China as a friend more than they do the United States.  It's been a growing trend for years.  Mass deportations could only make that situation worse.  We want to encourage a dozen more Cubas to our south?

And, finally, they will never be able to pull it off.  They could round up some --- many even.  Many will slip back in.  Split up some families.  Lot's of bad press and horror stories.  Create all the worst possible public relations blunders you could imagine, and STILL there will be MILLIONS of illegals in the United States.  They just don't have the manpower and resources to pull it off.  There are what, 11 million?  11,000,000?  More? Across the entire nation?  We going to go with Internment Camps, toss in all those of Hispanic origin, and sort out those that can stay?

YES; secure the border.  Soonest.  But all this political hay about deportation done en mass is smoke and mirrors.  No good can come of it, but plenty of bad.  Sure, in some districts, it makes for good political hay, but as to reality and national interests among the other nations in the Americas, it's a bad road to take.  

Secure the border, work the illegal immigrants into citizen status, or at least work visas.  Identify and deport the violent criminals among their population when possible.  

I prefer to go with what can realistically work.  National politics OTOH has devolved into stratified, polarized, fundamentalists, idealogical camps under siege.  Lot's of noise, but nothing ever gets accomplished.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2007, 09:55:25 PM by tedrbr »

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #56 on: May 01, 2007, 10:07:42 PM »
the war is lost , we must surrender to mexico now.

Offline Speed55

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1263
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #57 on: May 01, 2007, 10:13:59 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llwI9-H7OOU

After that poll from months back this guy has really grabbed my interest.
"The lord loves a hangin', that's why he gave us necks." - Ren & Stimpy

Ingame- Ozone

Offline Odee

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
      • 49th Fighter Group
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #58 on: May 01, 2007, 10:17:41 PM »
I think he'd be the next Ronald Reagan... Only Fred remembers things. :aok
~Nobodee~   Get Poached!
Elite: Dangerous ~ Cmd Odeed

http://www.luxlibertas.com/

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
Fred Thompson....Your Thoughts?
« Reply #59 on: May 02, 2007, 01:24:35 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Odee
I think he'd be the next Ronald Reagan... Only Fred remembers things. :aok


That could work against him.  Not remembering things was Reagan's biggest asset during Iran-Contra.  

And, boyo, was Nixon maaaaadddddd: "&*$^#@%@&!  You mean all I  %&$%^@#*  had to do is say I didn't ^%$*#&*#@   remember ???!!!  $^#*@@!!!!!! " --- quoted from transcripts of the recordings.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2007, 01:39:43 AM by tedrbr »