The Next Reagan--Fred Thompson
Got this in an email. It may have already been posted.
Yes, The Next Reagan
By Bruce Walker
Two months ago, I wrote an article, "The Next Reagan," in which I outlined many of the reasons why Fred Thompson will be the next Ronald Reagan. Events since then have confirmed my arguments. I predict that Fred Thompson will enter the Republican nomination, that he will win it fairly easily, and that he will also defeat Hillary comfortably in the presidential election.
Why? First, no Republican since Ronald Reagan draws remotely as much genuine enthusiasm among conservatives as a serious presidential candidate. Both of the Bush presidencies have been mild disappointments. Though respect for our current commander-in- chief is high, President Bush is simply not an effective communicator or articulator of conservative principles. President Bush, however, is light years ahead of Senator Dole, the 1996 nominee, and also better as a communicator and campaigner than his father. That is how bad things have been for conservatives since the Gipper left the White House.
Fred Thompson, in stark contrast, is a phenomenal communicator. His background as a film and television star combines perfectly with his background as a very persuasive trial lawyer so that he is not only comfortable in front of the camera or at the microphone, but his skills in rhetoric are unequaled in any major political figure since Senator Robert Taft over fifty years ago.
Second, Thompson has always walked the walk on ethical issues. When he was Republican counsel in the Watergate hearings - the same hearings in which Hillary cut her teeth in politics as a Democrat - Fred Thompson did not tolerate the corruption of the Nixon Administration. He can effectively point out that both Hillary and he were on the same side in opposing corruption when it was his political party that had problems. Thompson also, though, was unrelenting in his opposition to the corruption of the Clinton Administration and stood out as the lone Republican senator with real guts during the impeachment trial of Clinton. The combination of these two principled stands will allow Thompson to relentlessly condemn Hillary as an accomplice in her husband's thoroughly corrupt eight years in office, to ask her point-blank about how she became the best investor in America (with no experience), and otherwise to do more than simply suggest that Hillary is a liar, a hypocrite and a bully.
Third, Thompson would unite the whole leadership of the Republican Party. No one dislikes him and almost everyone likes him. Although some conservatives may worry about his friendship and past support for John McCain, the critical fact is that friendship is reciprocated. McCain would be a very active and passionate supporter of Fred Thompson in the presidential election.
Fourth, the rap on Thompson is that he was "lazy" when he was in the Senate. This is precisely the same sort of rap that Leftists made about Ronald Reagan. In fact, this is a strength. Because Thompson acts from principle, he does not need to engage in the Machiavellian machinations which pass for "work" in Washington. The reality is that it is absurd to consider Thompson, who has worked during his life in more real jobs than almost any politician in Washington and who today stars in two television programs as well as being the substitute for Paul Harvey and a frequent commentator in conservative periodicals as "lazy" at all. Like Reagan, he probably works harder than anyone in Washington.
Fifth, because he was an extremely popular Tennessee senator, Thompson would completely sweep the South, including problematic states like Arkansas, Florida and Virginia. Thompson, like Reagan, is one of the few modern candidates who has true regional drawing power. Thompson, though, would run very strongly in swing states outside the South like Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon and New Hampshire. His appeal to truly independent and undecided voters is real.
Sixth, Thompson cannot be demonized. His whole life has been a study in how the American Dream works. His blue collar background, his constancy of moral purpose, his lack of ambition for power for its own sake, his palpable decency - all of these will make anyone who tries to slime him look awful and any attempt will backfire in sympathetic support for him.
Seventh, because Thompson cannot be hurt in the usual ways that Leftists hurt conservative Republicans, Hillary will have to campaign him on the issues. This will create an insurmountable problem for her because, like all Leftists, Hillary has no stands on any issues. She just wants power. Thompson just wants what is best for America. We have our Reagan.
Yes, The Next Reagan
By Bruce Walker
Two months ago, I wrote an article, "The Next Reagan," in which I outlined many of the reasons why Fred Thompson will be the next Ronald Reagan. Events since then have confirmed my arguments. I predict that Fred Thompson will enter the Republican nomination, that he will win it fairly easily, and that he will also defeat Hillary comfortably in the presidential election.
Why? First, no Republican since Ronald Reagan draws remotely as much genuine enthusiasm among conservatives as a serious presidential candidate. Both of the Bush presidencies have been mild disappointments. Though respect for our current commander-in- chief is high, President Bush is simply not an effective communicator or articulator of conservative principles. President Bush, however, is light years ahead of Senator Dole, the 1996 nominee, and also better as a communicator and campaigner than his father. That is how bad things have been for conservatives since the Gipper left the White House.
Fred Thompson, in stark contrast, is a phenomenal communicator. His background as a film and television star combines perfectly with his background as a very persuasive trial lawyer so that he is not only comfortable in front of the camera or at the microphone, but his skills in rhetoric are unequaled in any major political figure since Senator Robert Taft over fifty years ago.
Second, Thompson has always walked the walk on ethical issues. When he was Republican counsel in the Watergate hearings - the same hearings in which Hillary cut her teeth in politics as a Democrat - Fred Thompson did not tolerate the corruption of the Nixon Administration. He can effectively point out that both Hillary and he were on the same side in opposing corruption when it was his political party that had problems. Thompson also, though, was unrelenting in his opposition to the corruption of the Clinton Administration and stood out as the lone Republican senator with real guts during the impeachment trial of Clinton. The combination of these two principled stands will allow Thompson to relentlessly condemn Hillary as an accomplice in her husband's thoroughly corrupt eight years in office, to ask her point-blank about how she became the best investor in America (with no experience), and otherwise to do more than simply suggest that Hillary is a liar, a hypocrite and a bully.
Third, Thompson would unite the whole leadership of the Republican Party. No one dislikes him and almost everyone likes him. Although some conservatives may worry about his friendship and past support for John McCain, the critical fact is that friendship is reciprocated. McCain would be a very active and passionate supporter of Fred Thompson in the presidential election.
Fourth, the rap on Thompson is that he was "lazy" when he was in the Senate. This is precisely the same sort of rap that Leftists made about Ronald Reagan. In fact, this is a strength. Because Thompson acts from principle, he does not need to engage in the Machiavellian machinations which pass for "work" in Washington. The reality is that it is absurd to consider Thompson, who has worked during his life in more real jobs than almost any politician in Washington and who today stars in two television programs as well as being the substitute for Paul Harvey and a frequent commentator in conservative periodicals as "lazy" at all. Like Reagan, he probably works harder than anyone in Washington.
Fifth, because he was an extremely popular Tennessee senator, Thompson would completely sweep the South, including problematic states like Arkansas, Florida and Virginia. Thompson, like Reagan, is one of the few modern candidates who has true regional drawing power. Thompson, though, would run very strongly in swing states outside the South like Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon and New Hampshire. His appeal to truly independent and undecided voters is real.
Sixth, Thompson cannot be demonized. His whole life has been a study in how the American Dream works. His blue collar background, his constancy of moral purpose, his lack of ambition for power for its own sake, his palpable decency - all of these will make anyone who tries to slime him look awful and any attempt will backfire in sympathetic support for him.
Seventh, because Thompson cannot be hurt in the usual ways that Leftists hurt conservative Republicans, Hillary will have to campaign him on the issues. This will create an insurmountable problem for her because, like all Leftists, Hillary has no stands on any issues. She just wants power. Thompson just wants what is best for America. We have our Reagan.
0
-
Yup! 0 -
Yea! Another guy who will run the next time American marines get their barracks bombed, will hand weapons over to Islamic extremists, and invade a small Carribbean nation on a trumped up reason?
Hoo-rah!
No, we don't need another Reagan and calling Fred Thomspon that does him a great disservice.
I'm not sure I agree with Fred Thompson on all the issues, but he is his own man and own politician - there's no need to slander him.0 -
But is he pro-gun? 0 -
I believe he is pro-gun. 0 -
He's exceptionally pro-gun. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
Yea! Another guy who will run the next time American marines get their barracks bombed, will hand weapons over to Islamic extremists, and invade a small Carribbean nation on a trumped up reason?
Hoo-rah!
No, we don't need another Reagan and calling Fred Thomspon that does him a great disservice.
I'm not sure I agree with Fred Thompson on all the issues, but he is his own man and own politician - there's no need to slander him.
Let's also not forget how he won the cold war, presided over a record -breaking economic expansion, restored America's confidence, reenergized the nation, brought us out of the doldrums, bombed terror-supporters, reached landmark arms control agreements, gave us the finest military the world has ever seen, cut taxes for EVERYONE (not just the rich contrary to what you and the CPUSA think), trimmed down government regulation in numerous important areas, and in general acted like THE MAN!!!!!!!!!
I'll take that over anyone you're likely to vote for anyday.[;)]
Fred Thompson '08.
BTW: "Trumped up reason?" You really, really, need to get out of the treehouse.
TERMINATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!0 -
I'd vote for Fred in a heartbeat. I think he'd have hitlery pissin her pants if he decided to run. Dave 0 -
quote:Originally posted by nemesisenforcer
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
Yea! Another guy who will run the next time American marines get their barracks bombed, will hand weapons over to Islamic extremists, and invade a small Carribbean nation on a trumped up reason?
Hoo-rah!
No, we don't need another Reagan and calling Fred Thomspon that does him a great disservice.
I'm not sure I agree with Fred Thompson on all the issues, but he is his own man and own politician - there's no need to slander him.
Let's also not forget how he won the cold war, presided over a record -breaking economic expansion, restored America's confidence, reenergized the nation, brought us out of the doldrums, bombed terror-supporters, reached landmark arms control agreements, gave us the finest military the world has ever seen, cut taxes for EVERYONE (not just the rich contrary to what you and the CPUSA think), trimmed down government regulation in numerous important areas, and in general acted like THE MAN!!!!!!!!!
I'll take that over anyone you're likely to vote for anyday.[;)]
Fred Thompson '08.
BTW: "Trumped up reason?" You really, really, need to get out of the treehouse.
TERMINATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Expanded economy? Thank you Clinton!
Won the Cold War? Thank you Gorbachev!
Sorry, but Reagan ain't all that - he's more smoke and mirrors than anything else.
Give me Eisenhower over Reagan any day of the week. Reagan's a brand name, nothing more.0 -
Not to take anything away from the man, but Reagan success was more world events working out for his (and our) benefit. Communism was going to fall, no matter what anyone did. It just happened on his watch. The economy was bound to gain steam after the Carter years. To his benefit, Reagan didn't do anything stupid to cool it off. The best thing Reagan had going for him, outside world events, was he just knew how to ACT presidential. Don't misread this. I greatly admire the man. He just came along at the right time and circumstances, more than anything, made him what he was.
That being said...Run, Fred, Run!0 -
Why do Republicans always seem on the verge of performing falatio at the mention of Ronald Reagan? 0 -
Remember, it was Reagan who gave us the 1986 BAN on fully automatic weapons, which was the most serious blow to the 2nd amendment this country has ever seen. Worse than 1934, Worse than 1968.
In not so nice terms, f*ck Reagan.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Aspen79se
Why do Republicans always seem on the verge of performing falatio at the mention of Ronald Reagan?
I suppose it has something to do with your own sexual preferences, and perceptions.0 -
Does he count as the next Reagan if he doesn't run? 0 -
Yeah, I'm for him. Looks like he's not going to "enter" the campaign until AUgust or September. Smart move. Why waste money. 0 -
Gee! I thought the 1929 sullivan law outlawed ownership of automatic weopons![:0][:0]
Fred is an older guy, cancer is in remission, to run would be a crowing achievement but maybe a stressful event for a man ready for retirement. It will be interesting to see if he tosses his hat into the ring.
If he runs he will still have to overcome the large percentage of Americans that are against the war. He is not in favor of a pullout!0 -
I already have my "Fred Thompson 2008" bumper sticker.[:D] 0 -
From what I know about him, he is my candiate right now, if he gets in. [:D] 0 -
I would certainly vote for him - pending a better understanding of his Second Ammendment views - if he were 30 years younger.
If he runs, you will be voting for his VP - who would that be?? - and I'm concerned about that.
Doug0 -
He certainly plays a good one on TV. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
19 comments