SwiftVets.com

[AMOS]

The Next Reagan (food for thought) 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 hypocryt.

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.

Conservative Truth

note: Link Added...BBCode enabled...text corrected/me#1

[Me#1You#10]

WOO-HOO! Say AMEN!

(see below...and use it)

[GenrXr]

I read somewhere that Thompson was a Goldwater follower, which would probably makes him a true conservative.

The only 2 true conservatives of the past 50 years inside the Beltway were Goldwater and Reagan.

He could be using Goldwater to get cred with the NRO crowd, but doubt it. I think Thompson is the real deal.

Russel Kirk--->William F. Buckley---->Barry Goldwater--->Ronald Reagan--->Fred Thompson? (I Hope So)
_________________
"An activist is the person who cleans up the water, not the one claiming its dirty."
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-1797), Founder of Conservative Philosophy

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

I like everything I've read about him... but it's what I don't hear about him that has me wondering.

Where does he stand on abortion?

If we don't stop legally murdering babies in this country, we deserve insecure borders and tax hikes and every other scourge and plague that DC can throw at us - by commission or omission.

I am still a one-issue voter - it's just that my one issue has shifted from "anyone but Kerry" to "anyone prolife and not afraid to say so."
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother

[Me#1You#10]

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

Indeed that does help - he should put this on his web site. (A search of "I'm With Fred" for "abortion" or "pro-life" yields nothing.)

Glad to hear this because Fred Thompson is an electable candidate.

I really like Romney, but I think the left is going to be successful in smearing him with the "religious fanatic" brush - meaning that his electability is probably short-lived.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother

[AMOS]

I, too, like Mitt, but he's a Mormon. And that matters, you know. Why? I dunno.

I like his record (SLC Olympics) and he hasn't been a senator. But we all know his religion is a more important issue. More important than Wild Bill's oralness, Shrillary's flip flop, liar, liar pants on fire (and her pants suits, too, ARG!), sKerry's VN circus and Edwards' raping the insurance companies. I need to find a cave in which to hide. LOL.

So, Fred's the guy, but PLEASE be more vocal on abortion issues (particularly the partial birth murder), gun control, pardon border patrol agents, amnastey (sic), etc.

[dusty]

I've been making the comparison between Thompson and Reagan for a few months now. All of what Bruce Walker said I agree with.
I'm for Fred.

Dusty
_________________
Left and Wrong are the opposite of Right!

[sixdogteam]

Me too!
_________________
HHC 212th CAB MMAF RVN '70-'71

[dusty]

Fred Thomposon president.....Mike Huckabee VP.

Good ticket.

Maybe we'd finally get rid of the IRS. HUckabee supports the Fair Tax plan.

Dusty
_________________
Left and Wrong are the opposite of Right!

[C-130 Son]

[Theresa Alwood]

I really like Fred Thompson....I really, really like him. Although I have supported President Bush...he was not my first choice, but Fred Thompson is. As a more moderate republican I could stand behind Senator Thompson and vote without any regrets. President Bush really disappointed me in his amensty support and allowing Harry Reid to bring that illegal immigration bill to resurface...we need someone in the White House who would veto such a thing. I believe Fred Thompson would do just that. I expect Senator Thompson to be annoucing within the next 60days....will be interesting to see how the far right of the party will vote once Newt Gingrich also gets in the race. I expect that announcment in Sept. I would vote for Senator Thompson over Newt due to the fact that I think Senator Thompson has more appeal to middle of the road republicans like myself who would sit on the side lines and note vote in Rudy won the nomination. There are alot of republicans who would not vote for Rudy because of his pro-choice stance and allow a democrat to take over the office. These far right republicans would just stay home rather than vote for someone who is pro-choice. Sad but true. So we will see how this turns out. I just hope we get the base out to vote regardless or who is gets on the ticket.
_________________
Born to raise a little hell!