To Jerry Jan 16, 2008 7:24:54 PM

Fred placed third in Iowa, second in Wyoming. He didn't really run in NH or MI because of the crossovers and moderate Republicans there who are sold on McCain and Huckabee. His campaign is smart- this is going to be a long and drawn-out process and these candidates need to focus where they can best use their resources; for Fred this is the conservative South.

I like Fred. He is likable, however, he also IS presidential. He can look anybody in the eye and go toe to toe with them. Fred isn't slow. He is measured. Yes, he is an actor, but that does nothing but help his presentation and like it or not ob=ne must have that or he will never get anything across to us fickle and highly critical of everything Americans. We can Trust Fred. His past is the best forcast of the future. I like Romney. He is an incredible CEO and like it or not, we need a nominee with that quality as well. I don't get it. All you have to do is listen to the MSM and they will tell you who to vote for. They slam Fred and Romney the most, therefore they fear them the most. But, please get informed before you vote and if you don't get informed, PLEASE DON'T VOTE...

I think that this is a a great article for Fred, especially the Title. Fred is against the other candidates because at some point, the others differ from the principles that have made our nation great: Federalism, Limited Gov't, restrained spending, low taxes, pro-growth, free market solutions, etc.

Disclaimer: I'm an active evangelical Christian and I do not want Huckabee for president. He doesn't understand the unintended consequences of violating the principles I listed above.

"He basically promised the federal government would come in and bail out Michigan when he got elected President – very conservative notion, don't you think?"

Only, Romney actually did not "basically" promise this at all, not in the least; and to the contrary, Romney specifically said that he was not open to a "bail out". So, no matter how Thompson interprets Romney's pledge to increase the U.S. commitment to industry and innovation, to the point of higher investments, it's not a bail out by any means.

I have to note, Fred didn't disagree with his old friend McCain about McCain-Feinglod, the bill that Thompson helped get through the Senate. But, I guess, that's because Thompson has never repudiated his support for it.

"He's not campaigning against the democrats - but I'm sure he'll cross that bridge when he gets there."

Given that he managed to work in a reference to Ted Kennedy, I'd say he's already found a way to drive off of cross that bridge.

Drat! No preview function. I meant to say:

Given that he managed to work in a reference to Ted Kennedy, I'd say he's already found a way to "drive off of" ... whoops!... make that "cross" that bridge.

Life with a liberal veil over your eyes can warp your view of what is actually going on in our political world. News agencies such as ABC, NBC, and CNN only give praise to those who are most tainted by the dark side (liberal). Most of the news agencies are owned by companies such as GE look at their loyalties, They support ($) only liberal organizations and candidates. As for FOX they are trying to be politically correct, and are also supporting the most liberal of all the candidates that are running, to attract a broader audience. An other thing they all have in common is downplaying those that are the most conservative.

Fred is indeed the best chance we have for the salvation of the US.
He was the lead prosecutor in the downplayed CHINAGATE scandal
(Didn’t hear about it, What a surprise!)

Who was involved in the scandal?
_maybe... the Clintons

And what did they do?
_maybe sell nuclear secrets to china

He has always had the best interest of us all in mind. He is running for president not because of furthering his resume but to make and keep the US a safe place for his and our children to live and prosper...

Do the RIGHT thing
VOTE FRED!!!

Fred Thompson is the only CONSISTENT conservative in the Republican field. All the other have either conveniently changed positions on conservative issues recently (Romney on abortion and NRA membership; and Huckabee just flip flopped on his anti-smoking position a few days ago) or still hold to more liberal positions (like McCain on immigration and taxes, or Rudy on a whole bunch of positions).

Gregh, Fred has repudiated his support for McCain-Feingold. American Spectator last year sometime.

There's a problem with Fred being an actor? Good thing Ronald Reagan didn't know that.

Go Fred!

So what if Fred is an actor. IIRC one of the most consistant criticismx of GWB is that he mangles his delivery and doesn't "sound Presidential".

I think the majority of the criticism from the MSM has not been over policy but how GWD "sounds".

Fred does not have that problem. He just answers in his Tennesee drawl and doesn't let himself be hurried.

It would be nice to have another President that realizes that the press is there to listen to him, not he to them. They aren't qualified to have an opinions anyhow.

Fred is either lying or ignorant about Romney's "federal bailout" of Michigan.

He said no such thing. What he did say is that he would increase federal investment in a variety of areas including energy, materials, fuel AND automotive research: Read it yourself:

"But taking off all these burdens is only half the solution. If we are going to be the world's greatest economic power, we must invest in our future. It's time to be bold. First, I will make a five-fold increase – from $4 billion dollars to $20 billion dollars – in our national investment in energy research, fuel technology, materials science, and automotive technology.

"Research spins out new ideas for new products for both small and large businesses. That is exactly what has happened in health care, in defense, and in space. Look how industries in other states have thrived from the spin out of technologies from our investment in these areas. So if we can invest in health care, in defense, and in space, why not also invest in energy and fuel technology here in Michigan?"

Bush's approval is down because of his failure to secure the borders, and failure to enforce laws against employing illegal aliens.

Iraq has contributed 400,000 men to their own security, men knowledgeable about Iraqi culture, and able to identify foreign troublemakers at a glance. Iraq is won, and has made it to the ranks of creaky third world nation, rather than Police State, or Charnel House.

"Look how industries in other states have thrived from the spin out of technologies from our investment in these areas. So if we can invest in health care, in defense, and in space, why not also invest in energy and fuel technology here in Michigan?"

Note that all that investment in other areas resulted in business creation in states other than Michigan.

Note that all the new automotive jobs being created by Honda and Toyota are being created in states other than Michigan.

Why is that? I think it has to be something about Michigan in particular, be it demographics, education, tax rates, climate, infrastructure, or the strength of unions there.

So how does Romney propose to "invest in energy and fuel technology here in Michigan"? Are all energy and fuel technology programs going to be earmarked "Michigan only"? When NASA or the DOE licenses something like a breakthrough fuel cell technology, is the license going to include a clause saying "This product can only be manufactured in Michigan?"

Romney was BSing. There's no way around it.

Thompson is the only consistent conservative in the group. Yet identity politics is busting the party apart. It may even promote the most liberal Republican, John McCain to the forefront.

McCain will destroy America with amnesty of 15million new Democrats. He will carbon tax us into recession to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

He will expand his unconstitutional censorship of free political speech.

McCain is death to America.