# Fred Thompson to announce his candidacy for POTUS September 6 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 31, 2007, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582 "2007-08-31T04:18:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2007, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/61 "2007-09-08T11:18:30Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Back to Thompson: My point is simply that is seems bizarre to tag him as a ‘lightweight’ or an ‘empty vessel’ when he seems to have at least the kind of qualifications of many people who run for president. I happen to think he’s far more qualified on paper than is John Edwards, Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton, and yet I don’t hear any of you calling any of them ‘lightweights’. [/quote] Look, we’ve already done this, earlier in this thread. And??? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2007, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/62 "2007-09-08T12:03:15Z")
To add to what I said all the way back in post #12, Edwards ran in 2004 on what was essentially an intellectual critique on what was wrong with the country, and what needed to be done to set it right. In his current campaign, he’s added a lot of substance and detail to that critique. It’s clear, in a fair amount of detail, where Edwards wants to take this country and how he wants to get it there. In that particular respect, he’s far less of a lightweight than any of the GOP candidates, who are running mostly on platitudes and sound bites rather than actual policy proposals. So, what’s Freddie stand for? Besides bringing back that 1994 feeling, I mean. Where does he show that he’s actually thought through some of today’s pressing issues? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2007, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/63 "2007-09-08T17:46:23Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] To add to what I said all the way back in post #12, Edwards ran in 2004 on what was essentially an intellectual critique on what was wrong with the country, and what needed to be done to set it right. In his current campaign, he’s added a lot of substance and detail to that critique. It’s clear, in a fair amount of detail, where Edwards wants to take this country and how he wants to get it there. [/quote] Economic populism is about as far from an ‘intellectual critique’ than you can get. From my perspective, just about everything that comes out of Edwards’ mouth is wrong. And what makes you think he is in a position to have any kind of insight into the problems of the world? He has no executive experience, his one term in the Senate was spent mostly running for president, he has no education in economics, or political science, or history, or philosophy. He’s basically spent his life attacking corporations and hauling in huge paychecks for beating them in court. I suspect half the people in this forum could run rings around him in a real debate. > [@](#): > > In that particular respect, he’s far less of a lightweight than any of the GOP candidates, who are running mostly on platitudes and sound bites rather than actual policy proposals. Okay, so let’s see if I’ve got it right: Thompson is an empty suit and a lightweight because he’s only got two terms as a Senator and a couple of decades in Washington on his resume. John Edwards, who only has one term in the Senate and no other real experience other than being a trial lawyer is NOT a lightweight, because he says things you agree with. Is that about it? > [@](#): > > So, what’s Freddie stand for? Besides bringing back that 1994 feeling, I mean. Where does he show that he’s actually thought through some of today’s pressing issues? Actually, he’s said more substantive things than just about any of the other candidates on either side. You may not like what he stands for, but his positions are pretty clear to most people. In case you’re not aware of them, they are: - Federalism. This has been one of Thompson’s core beliefs for decades - the federal government has usurped too much power from the states, and he wants to revert it back to some degree. - Taxes. He’s got a 100% record for supporting lower taxes. Specifically for this election term, he wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. - Entitlements. He opposed Bush’s prescription drug benefit. He thinks entitlements are out of control, and there needs to be serious reform. - Guns. He’s got a 100% rating for opposing gun control. But due to his beliefs about federalism, he won’t do something stupid like advocate federal laws allowing concealed carry. States should decide for themselves. But he’ll oppose any federal gun control laws. - Iraq. He was for it, still thinks it was the right thing to do, and he thinks U.S. troops need to be there for as long as it takes, even if it takes years. - Supreme Court. He’s the guy who led the process to pick and confirm John Roberts, and he wants more people like him on the court. The fact is, the thing people like about Thompson is that he WILL tell you what he thinks and what he believes in. If you don’t know what Thompson believes, you just haven’t been paying attention. The area where I think he’s a bit ‘squishy’ is on social policy. I suspect he’s not nearly as socially conservative as the ‘base’ demands, so he’s got a bit of a record of inconsistent statements around issues like abortion and gay marriage. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2007, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/64 "2007-09-08T17:52:08Z")
And this just in… [http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn\_report/2007/09/08/2007-09-08\_fred\_thompson\_al\_qaeda\_smoking\_ban\_pushe.html](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/08/2007-09-08_fred_thompson_al_qaeda_smoking_ban_pushe.html) **Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S.** > [@](#): > > Freshly minted GOP White House hopeful Fred Thompson puzzled Iowans yesterday by insisting an Al Qaeda smoking ban was one reason freedom-loving Iraqis bolted to the U.S. side. > > “They said, ‘You gotta quit smoking,’” Thompson explained to a questioner asking about progress in Iraq during a town hall-style meeting. > > Thompson said the smoking ban and terror tactics Al Qaeda used to oppress women and intimidate local leaders pushed tribes in western Anbar Province to support U.S. troops. > > But Thompson’s tale of a smokers’ revolt baffled some in the audience of about 150 who came to decide whether the former Tennessee senator is ready for prime time… Offered without comment. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2007, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/65 "2007-09-08T18:01:00Z")
If Fred has such firmly held principles, why does his[official website](http://www.fred08.com/Index.aspx) make it so hard to find out where here stands on the issues? Not that I won’t take your word for it, **Sam** , but I would like to see it in his own words. All I see there is a screed on federalism that is long on generalities, but very vague on specifics. What is his position on immigration? On health care? On privacy? I don’t know, and he ain’t sayin’. I would have thought he’d have worked out public positions before announcing his candidacy. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2007, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/66 "2007-09-08T18:57:35Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] If Fred has such firmly held principles, why does his[official website](http://www.fred08.com/Index.aspx) make it so hard to find out where here stands on the issues? Not that I won’t take your word for it, **Sam** , but I would like to see it in his own words. All I see there is a screed on federalism that is long on generalities, but very vague on specifics. What is his position on immigration? On health care? On privacy? I don’t know, and he ain’t sayin’. I would have thought he’d have worked out public positions before announcing his candidacy. [/QUOTE] Fred Thompson writes a column (last one Aug 27) where he makes his positions pretty clear. Here’s an archive of them: [Fred Thompson Opinion Columns](http://www.townhall.com/columnists/FredThompson). I haven’t read most of them, so I have no idea what you’ll find in them, but the couple of them that I have read left little doubt about what Fred believes. **elucidator:** Actually, Thompson’s not far off the mark. I saw a couple of interviews with Iraqi leaders from al-Anbar, and they both mentioned the al-Qaida smoking ban as something that really stuck in the craw of the Iraqi people, who are big smokers. Also, the punishment for being caught smoking was pretty severe - beatings or murder, basically. But really it was just one part of the whole Islamic nutbar crackdown on the Iraqi people. al-Qaida really screwed the pooch there. Iraqis aren’t illiterate Afghani tribesmen, and trying to force them to live under a Talibanesque regime wasn’t going to win any hearts or minds. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/67 "2007-09-09T00:01:37Z")
Why did al-Qaeda ban smoking anyway? Is there something about it in the Koran (written nine centuries before tobacco was known in the Old World)? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/68 "2007-09-09T01:24:37Z")
I am a liberal Democrat from Tennessee. I don’t like to see misinformation about any candidates perpetuated. So far I haven’t seen “the real” Fred Thompson show up on television – at least not in the ad that ran during the debates and not on the Jay Leno show. He seemed too ill at ease in both. Maybe he needs to do a little acting and just play the role of Fred Dalton Thompson for a while. > [@](#): > > **Elendil’s Heir** : Not a peep about lacking a serious work ethic (perhaps that was more during his own Senate years). > [@](#): > > **Little Nemo** : It’s not like people just invented Thompson’s reputation for laziness this week in order to attack his Presidential campaign. He had the reputation back when he was a Senator. Before that Thompson himself used to say he liked acting because it was an easy way to make money. Even his yearbook motto made fun of him because of his reputation for being lazy in high school. Do you have a cite showing that he had a reputation for laziness when he was a Senator? You see, he was my Senator for eight years and he certain did **not** have that reputation with his constituents. The man is 64 years old and you want to look at a 1961 yearbook as a source of information of his character? OK! In his yearbook, his motto made fun of _himself._ > [@](#): > > ambushed\*\*: ambushed: He is known to his former government colleagues as the laziest man ever to serve at the national level. Cite? I saw the same thing happen with Gore. He had served Tennessee for twenty-five years in Congress and the Senate. It wasn’t until he was the Vice-President that we discovered that he was “stiff.” > [@](#): > > **RTFirefly** : He’s never been “at the highest levels of government” by any definition I would apply, not for one day. Early in his Senate career he was selected to give the response to the president’s State of the Union Address. He did such an impressive job that there was talk even then that he was presidential timber. I was very disappointed when he left the Senate to return to acting. His adult daughter had died and he lost a lot of his motivation at the time. His wfie, Jeri, who should not be dismissed as merely a trophy wife, has had a career in politics in her own right. She is in her early forties. Thompson had been divorced for well over a decade when they married. They have two small children. > [@](#): > > He never had an Executive Branch position of the sort that gets you direct access to the President. No. But I know of at least one time when the president called him in to consult with him. And this was after he had returned to acting. I may not like his political stance, but he is a very intelligent and witty man. Very sly with a dry sense of humor. Very down to earth. He certainly did have a lot of crossover votes from the Democrats. If you want to see him playing himself, see the movie **Marie**. There is more to the title, but that should give you enough to find it. If this country just _had_ to have a Republican for president, I would want it to be Thompson. As I’ve said before, I’m not voting for two white guys again. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/69 "2007-09-09T01:45:11Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] If you want to see him playing himself, see the movie **Marie**. There is more to the title, but that should give you enough to find it. If this country just _had_ to have a Republican for president, I would want it to be Thompson. [/QUOTE] I’ve never seen that movie, but I have seen his _Law & Order_ episodes, where he plays District Attorney Arthur Branch, a character I have always assumed the writers crafted to allow Fred Thompson to “play himself.” And Arthur Branch sometimes states his political views, which I have assumed are generally consistent with Fred Thompson’s. Please correct me if I’m wrong. On that basis – Arthur Branch is very definitely not a man I would want as POTUS. But if the country just _had_ to have a Republican for president, Arthur Branch probably would be the least-bad choice, or else it would be a tossup between him and Giuliani. (The “least liberal mayor of NYC.” As John Stewart said, “Congratulations on being the skinniest guy at Fat Camp!” 😃 ) [QUOTE=Zoe] As I’ve said before, I’m not voting for two white guys again. [/quote] :dubious: If that describes both tickets (as it almost always has before), are ya gonna stay home?! The lesser of two evils is still the lesser of two evils. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/70 "2007-09-09T02:02:56Z")
Yeah! I mean, so we can’t dance for shit! Big deal! True, GeeDubya is white. Reagan was _very_ white. And Nixon…I mean, _damn_! was he ever _white_! ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/71 "2007-09-09T03:01:40Z")
> [@](#): > > Okay, so let’s see if I’ve got it right: Thompson is an empty suit and a lightweight because he’s only got two terms as a Senator and a couple of decades in Washington on his resume. John Edwards, who only has one term in the Senate and no other real experience other than being a trial lawyer is NOT a lightweight, because he says things you agree with. Is that about it? You keep counting years in office like it’s the only measure. The truth is that some senators do a lot in a year and some senators just get a year older. Thompson by all accounts accomplished very little of substance. He was occasionally used as a spokesman because of his undeniable charisma but if charisma was the only skill needed for the Presidency, we’d be better off electing Morgan Freeman or Tom Hanks. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/72 "2007-09-09T03:03:25Z")
> [@](#): > > The man is 64 years old and you want to look at a 1961 yearbook as a source of information of his character? OK! In his yearbook, his motto made fun of himself. My point was to refute Sam’s implication that Thompson’s reputation was something recently invented to discredit him. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/73 "2007-09-09T03:54:00Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] - Iraq. He was for it, still thinks it was the right thing to do, and he thinks U.S. troops need to be there for as long as it takes, even if it takes years. [/QUOTE] Then he’s a moron. So far we’ve got that he supported the biggest mistake in US history and still thinks it’s the right thing to do. And how much courage does it take to support tax cuts? Zero. How hard is it to run on an anti-abortion platform in the heart of the Bible Belt? Not very. How hard is it to court the NRA? Not very. What’s he ever done that requires any courage? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/74 "2007-09-09T04:53:04Z")
[QUOTE=BobLibDem] Then he’s a moron. So far we’ve got that he supported the biggest mistake in US history and still thinks it’s the right thing to do. And how much courage does it take to support tax cuts? Zero. How hard is it to run on an anti-abortion platform in the heart of the Bible Belt? Not very. How hard is it to court the NRA? Not very. What’s he ever done that requires any courage? [/QUOTE] What is this, invent-a-new-requirement-for-president week? Now the yardstick is that he has to have exhibited courage? Tell me - exactly how has John Edwards been courageous? Giving populist speeches in front of organized labor crowds? The horror. How about Hillary? Or Barack Obama? You want courage, elect John McCain. He’s got more courage than the rest of them put together. As for Thompson, he helped Marie Ragghianti, a Democratic parole board officer, bring down Governor Ray Blanton over the sale of Pardons. He was the attorney that went after Blanton. The made the movie “Marie” out of the episode, and the producers hired Thompson to play himself after failing to find someone else who fit the role. He then went on to help bring down a corrupt President, of his own party no less. And the existence of the White House tapes that brought down Nixon was discovered during Thompson’s questioning of Nixon aide Alexander Butterfield. By the way, Marie Ragghianti is still a Democrat, but [she’s supporting Thompson for President](http://www.timesfreepress.com/absolutenm/templates/politicalnews.aspx?articleid=14803&zoneid=64): > [@](#): > > Marie Ragghianti, former chairwoman of the Board of Pardons and Paroles in the 1970s, also said her former attorney, former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson, would “make a great president.” > > “He’s a person of integrity with a clear-eyed view of reality,” she said of Mr. Thompson, who has announced he’s considering a presidential bid. “He would do well in an environment where he’s the decision-maker.” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/75 "2007-09-09T07:26:06Z")
[http://static.firedoglake.com/2007/09/cthulhu-elections.gif](http://static.firedoglake.com/2007/09/cthulhu-elections.gif) Go look at this! No, _really_! ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/76 "2007-09-09T11:16:54Z")
So which candidate stands to lose votes by a Thompson campaign? I say it is Romney: Mitt shares all the same right wing conservative values (at least this week), so most of any gains by Thompson will come at Romney’s expense. Which may provide an opening for Rudy; if the conservative base is split, a moderate could slip through. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/77 "2007-09-09T11:49:58Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] What is this, invent-a-new-requirement-for-president week? Now the yardstick is that he has to have exhibited courage? Tell me - exactly how has John Edwards been courageous? Giving populist speeches in front of organized labor crowds? The horror. [/QUOTE] Why do you think the corporate media has worked so hard to marginalize John Edwards? Because he represents a threat to government run by the corporations. It would be easier to be like Hillary and suck up to corporate America but he’s choosing the harder road to hoe. Let’s not forget, he admitted that his vote to authorized the use of force against Iraq was a mistake. That required courage that nobody in the Republican party save for the corporate media-marginalized Ron Paul seems to have. The easy road is to be the patriotic bully, the hard road is to admit that the war was wrong. The American people are starting to get it, the Republican party isn’t. OK, he was part of many Republicans that turned out Richard Nixon. That was back in the days before the GOP was hijacked by the lunatic fringe. And let’s not forget what "states’ rights is code for. I’ll give you a hint, he’ll mention states’ rights when he makes his pilgrimage to Bob Jones University. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/78 "2007-09-09T14:42:02Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Economic populism is about as far from an ‘intellectual critique’ than you can get. [/quote] Well, those two words certainly don’t suffice. But the same thing is true of anything. If that’s what you’ve got, then you’ve got nothing. > [@](#): > > From my perspective, just about everything that comes out of Edwards’ mouth is wrong. And from my perspective, the same is true of pretty much the entire GOP field. But (a) that’s not exactly authoritative, and (b) that’s not what we’re debating here, is it? > [@](#): > > And what makes you think he is in a position to have any kind of insight into the problems of the world? He has no executive experience, his one term in the Senate was spent mostly running for president, he has no education in economics, or political science, or history, or philosophy. He’s basically spent his life attacking corporations and hauling in huge paychecks for beating them in court. He’s grown up among struggling working-class people, represented them in court, I’d say he has a pretty good idea of how America’s _not_ working for people who, in Clinton’s phrase, “work hard and play by the rules.” > [@](#): > > I suspect half the people in this forum could run rings around him in a real debate. I doubt it, I’m sure the same is true of the GOP field in general, and particularly Freddie Dalton Thompson, and it’s not like we’ll ever know, will we? At any rate, Elizabeth Edwards is a chronic poster to lefty blogs. Maybe you could engage _her_ in a debate sometime. Good luck, and please link to it, should it happen. > [@](#): > > Okay, so let’s see if I’ve got it right: Thompson is an empty suit and a lightweight because he’s only got two terms as a Senator I’ve corrected this factual inaccuracy before in response to your posts. Your persistence in repeating it damages your credibility. > [@](#): > > and a couple of decades in Washington on his resume. John Edwards, who only has one term in the Senate and no other real experience other than being a trial lawyer is NOT a lightweight, because he says things you agree with. Is that about it? Let’s see: the difference in their Senate service is _two years_. That’s pretty much a wash, unless you think _running for office_ is a measure of depth. But we’ve got an excellent counterexample in the White House. Second, Freddie has “a couple of decades in Washington” only if we count the time spent lobbying _for_ the big corporations that apparently John Edwards’ time fighting _against_ you disparage so much. Double standard, much? Third, it’s got nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with him. The fact is, Edwards has fleshed out his positions with a pretty good degree of detail of how they’re going to work. He’s said how his plan would achieve universal health coverage, and how it would be paid for. You may not _like_ it, but it’s thoroughly fleshed out and thought out - like his positions on quite a few other major issues. > [@RTFirefly](#): > > Where does he show that he’s actually thought through some of today’s pressing issues? > [@Sam Stone](#): > > Actually, he’s said more substantive things than just about any of the other candidates on either side. You may not like what he stands for, but his positions are pretty clear to most people. In case you’re not aware of them, they are: > > - Federalism. This has been one of Thompson’s core beliefs for decades - the federal government has usurped too much power from the states, and he wants to revert it back to some degree. > > - Taxes. He’s got a 100% record for supporting lower taxes. Specifically for this election term, he wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. > > - Entitlements. He opposed Bush’s prescription drug benefit. He thinks entitlements are out of control, and there needs to be serious reform. > > - Guns. He’s got a 100% rating for opposing gun control. But due to his beliefs about federalism, he won’t do something stupid like advocate federal laws allowing concealed carry. States should decide for themselves. But he’ll oppose any federal gun control laws. > > - Iraq. He was for it, still thinks it was the right thing to do, and he thinks U.S. troops need to be there for as long as it takes, even if it takes years. > > - Supreme Court. He’s the guy who led the process to pick and confirm John Roberts, and he wants more people like him on the court. Wow, Thompson supports all the conservative bumper stickers. Golly gee! _That_ shows me he’s not an empty suit. Nice ‘own goal,’ **Sam**. You’ve proved my case. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/79 "2007-09-09T15:42:11Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Fred Thompson writes a column (last one Aug 27) where he makes his positions pretty clear. Here’s an archive of them: [Fred Thompson Opinion Columns](http://www.townhall.com/columnists/FredThompson). I haven’t read most of them, so I have no idea what you’ll find in them, but the couple of them that I have read left little doubt about what Fred believes. [/quote] “[What I Believe](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6DTWQ3DPaU)” is great, but take, for instance, Iraq. OK, Thompson is for staying. does his rationale go any deeper than bumper stickers? Or global warming. What does Thompson propose to do about it, and why? I’ve looked at the index of Townhall columns, and…well, you know how I’ve carped at Hillary for playing smallball - of taking strong, clear, well-thought-out positions on minor but symbolic issues like violent video games, while throwing generalities at the big stuff? In those columns, Freddie makes Hillary look Presidential. The few columns I actually opened didn’t impress me any more. One about the economy [was a pretty fraudulent comparison](http://www.townhall.com/columnists/FredThompson/2007/08/07/the_economic_reality) between the economy under Bush and under Clinton, and another about [Darfur and global warming](http://www.townhall.com/columnists/FredThompson/2007/06/28/the_darfur_genocide_and_global_warming) wasn’t about global warming at all, other than an avenue to slam our guy at the UN. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2007, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582/80 "2007-09-09T16:36:13Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] …Do you have a cite showing that he had a reputation for laziness when he was a Senator? You see, he was my Senator for eight years and he certain did **not** have that reputation with his constituents… [/QUOTE] This is the [MSNBC.com](http://MSNBC.com) article where I first learned of his reputation in that regard. Take it for what you will: [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18999838/site/newsweek/](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18999838/site/newsweek/) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-to-announce-his-candidacy-for-potus-september-6/417582.md?page=5)