Fred Thompson-N-Mo

From the Missouri House of Representatives’ Former Speaker Pro Tem

  • About Carl Bearden

    Carl is the former Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri House of Representatives and one of the earliest supporters of Fred Thompson for President. Initiating a petition for his fellow caucus members to sign, the Speaker Pro Tem garnered the support of over half of the Republican House members (63%, to be exact). More information about Carl can be found at his wikipedia page. Simply search "Carl Bearden".
  • Top Clicks

    • None
  • Help the Cause

    I'mWithFred - Contribute Now

Archive for the ‘GOP Primary’ Category

Why I Endorse Fred Thompson for President

Posted by tommyd4 on December 27, 2007

While Fred Thompson is not leading the polls, Thompson does have a majority of endorsements from prominent conservative bloggers. Here are some of the higher profile conservatives on the Internet who have come out and endorsed or support Thompson (H/T to Josh Painter):

Polipundit, IMAO, Pejman Yousefzadeh on Red State, SayAnything blog, Rick Moran of rightwingnuthouse and the American Thinker, Rightontheright, Bob Krumm, Eugene Volokh, Beldarblog, FloppingAces, The DailyPundit (Bill Quick), David Hinz (The Hinzsight Report), Alo Konsen (, Gamecock ( and The Hinzsight Report), John Hawkins (Rightwingnews), Jonathan Adler (NRO and the Volokh Conspiracy), TraderRob (Opinipundit), Haystack (hick politics, Redstate), Erik Erickson (Redstate), Professor Steven Brainbridge,

There are many more, but not enough space or time to mention them all. Blogger endorsements obviously don’t have a large impact on the actual voting process, but what is important is that all of these pundits follow the race and the candidates closely, and make up their minds not only on soundbytes, but on substance and record. Some of these bloggers have been on board since the beginning, while others have only endorsed Thompson recently.

Well, it is time to officially add my name to the list. Of course, our readers here are well aware of who I support and I even work with the campaign, but I realized I have never really officially said “I endorse (insert candidate’s name) for president).” I’m not in the same league as some of these prominent bloggers, but this site has its share of readers and we hold our own against many on the web.

So, now it is time to officially announce that I, Tommy Oliver, contributor to and a member of the Federalist Society, will throw my endorsement and support behind………….

No surprise………. Fred Dalton Thompson for President of the United States.

How did I come to this decision? Well, since I actually have supported Thompson from the beginning of the draft campaign in March, it wasn’t a very hard decision. My endorsement is based on this criteria (in no particular order): philosophy, trust, policy, and the ability to appeal across the board to conservatives. However: before today, I thought that since everyone who reads my posts on the internet would obviously have a pretty good idea of which candidate I supported and I didn’t see any point in saying anything official, but today Rick Moran said that the bloggers who have a good size audience need to stand up and make your pitch explaining why they support Thompson, if they haven’t done so already. Time is running short, and this post is not only for our regular commenters here, but for those who just read this site for updates and those who might just be passing through.

Let me explain why Thompson is the candidate that measures up the best to my standards:

  • Philosophy:
  • My personal philosophy is deeply rooted in federalism. I am a member of the Federalist Society, and that principle is what guides me politically. Fred Thompson is supported by a majority of the founders of the Federalist Society, and for good reason. He is the most conservative viable candidate for the nomination, and there is little dispute of that. He has been a voice for federalist principles long before he decided to run for President this year. His views on the role of government have been consistent since the early 1960’s. Although his book, 1975’s At That Point in Time, was not necessarily about political ideology, one could have an understanding of his beliefs after reading it. From the time he was elected to the Senate in 1994 until he left in 2002, he was always guided by his principles. He was the author of the Federalism Accountability Act, which he introduced in 1999. He was the first to introduce a bill for defining term limits for members of the House and the Senate in 1994. In 2000, Thompson was the recipient of the “Restoring the Balance” Award from the National Conference of State Legislatures, which is awarded to national policymakers committed to federalism and its impact on issues involving state legislators. The following is from the press release announcing the award:

    Thompson’s dedication to the principles of federalism and sound government policy has resulted in the Committee’s advancement of the Federalism Accountability Act, and Senate passage of the Regulatory Right to Know Act, the Federal Financial Information Assistance Management Improvement Act, the Truth in Regulating Act, and revision of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

    In 2000, Thompson authored a report that was aimed at specifically reducing the size of government and wasteful spending in DC.

    On his website, Thompson wrote at length about the need for federalism in today’s atmosphere:

    When you hold firm to the principles of federalism, there’s another advantage: our federal government can better carry out its own defining responsibilities – above all else, the security of our nation and the safety of our citizens. Sometimes I think that our leaders in Washington try to do so many things, in so many areas, that they lose sight of their basic responsibilities.
    We saw some improvement in the post-1994, “Contract with America” takeover of Congress – strings to federal programs were cut, more federal programs were being turned over to states, historic legislation to reduce unfunded mandates became law, and we rolled back the Clinton anti-federalism executive order. But in recent years we’ve seen backsliding.


    It is not enough to say that we are “for” federalism, because in today’s world it is not always clear what that means. What we are “for” is liberty for our citizens. Federalism divides power between the states and government in Washington. It is a tool to promote freedom. How we draw the line between federal and state roles in this century, and how we stay true to the principles of federalism for the purpose of protecting economic and individual freedom are questions we must answer. Our challenge – meaning the federal government, the states, our communities and constituents – is to answer these questions together.

    Out of the viable candidates for the Republican nomination, this is one area where Thompson is clearly head and shoulders above the rest of the field, with the exception of Ron Paul. No other candidate has outlined a clear set of principles that would guide their presidency, and among some of them, those principles that guide them are not exactly clear. After Thompson, Rudy Giuliani probably has spoken about the need for federalism the most and spoke at the Federalist Society Lawyers Convention, but he was not a known believer in federalist principle during his time in office, and didn’t claim to be at the time. John McCain’s beliefs are rooted in federalism and when he has voted on the issue in the past, more often then not, he came down on the right side of the argument. McCain has a record that, more often than not, strengthens his case. At the same time, McCain is famous for his maverick tendencies, which makes it harder to pin him down to a consistent set of beliefs. Mitt Romney has spoken about federalism during his run for the nomination, but Romney is also a pragmatist and a manager. While there are obvious advantages to that type of experience, it doesn’t necessarily lend itself well to identifying a philosophy that guides a politician. Romney is a candidate who would likely govern conservatively, but what his definition of conservatism is cannot be readily identified. Mike Huckabee’s candidacy is not based upon the need for federalism, and though that is not a negative in some areas, it is at odds with my values. Ron Paul is a strong, principled candidate, but there are too many areas of concern for him to be my pick.

  • Trust:
  • This is another area where I feel Thompson is the best representative of the Republican nominees. Thompson has become known for his refusal to pander or fudge on his facts. If one checks after every debate, Thompson is the one candidate whose facts check out each time. He is not afraid to tell the truth about what is going wrong and what he believes is the best remedy to fix the problem. His policy proposals are strong and firm. Even those who do not support Thompson for the nomination don’t question his substance. With Thompson, what you see is what you get, and his word is firm. He doesn’t weasel his way around an issue, for he has shown that he will tackle the toughest problems head on. No other GOP candidate has touched an issue as politically dangerous as social security besides Thompson, and he has done it repeatedly throughout the campaign. According to NumbersUSA, Thompson introduced the toughest immigration proposals, and although he didn’t recieve Tom Tancredo’s endorsement, the majority of Tancredo’s staff has gone with Thompson, as has Steve King, the immigration hawk from Iowa.

  • Policy:
  • Once again, when it comes to conservative policy proposals, Thompson comes out on top. Thompson has been the leading voice for reducing the size of government (with the exception of Ron Paul). For a more detailed outline on Thompson’s policies, check out his proposals on his website here, and read this article from NRO:

    Fred Thompson may have started his presidential campaign late, but he is the first candidate in either party to come out with solid plans to reform Social Security and immigration. And while most candidates have called for increasing the size of the military, Thompson laid out a detailed plan to achieve that end in a Tuesday speech at the Citadel Military College. On these issues, Thompson has set a standard for specificity, conservatism, and soundness that we would like to see the other Republican candidates measure up to.

    It’s obvious why conservatives see something to like in Thompson. He has offered clear, conservative ideas on fixing Social Security, policing immigration, and expanding the military. We encourage the other candidates to follow his lead.

  • Across the board Appeal To Conservatives:
  • Thompson has the advantage over his rivals is that he is the one candidate that can unite the base. Every other candidate either has issues with certain segments of the base, or has questions that remain unanswered. Rudy Giuliani would have real problems uniting the social conservatives. John McCain has angered many on the right, making it more difficult for him to enjoy universal support inside the party. Mitt Romney has been saying the right things, but the questions about his movement towards the right remain. Mike Huckabee has a very strong base of support among social conservatives and the Religious Right, but has real problems outside of his core support. Ron Paul? I like the guy, but he can’t realistically unite the GOP around his candidacy. In the end, all of the candidates have their strengths, and each one is strong in their own right, but only Fred Thompson has the ability to unite the conservative movement completely behind his candidacy.

  • Foreign Policy Experience:
  • This is an area where the republicans have more than one solid choice. Out of the top tier candidates, two have extensive experience in dealing with foreign policy, and one could make a legitimate claim that Rudy Giuliani would make three. Most who follow the race closely would agree that John McCain is probably the most experienced candidate in this particular area, but the gap between him and Thompson is not that large. One would only have to look at Thompson’s resume to realize this:

  • Chairman of the International Security Advisory Board of the Department of State currently; a high-level panel charged with evaluating long-term threats to U. S. security
  • Served on the US-China Economic Review Commission
  • AEG Scholar specializing in Diplomatic Relations and Foreign Intelligence
  • Special Counsel to both the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations under President Reagan
  • Member of the powerful Senate Committee on Finance, which has jurisdiction over, among other things, international trade
  • Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
  • Member of the National Security Working Group, which observes and monitors executive branch negotiations with foreign governments
  • Member of the American Enterprise Institute for Policy Research, studies national security and intelligence, with a focus on China, North Korea, and Russia
  • Member of the U. S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee
  • U.S. Senate Finance subcommittee- Member, International Trade
  • In 2008, the United States needs a President who has experience dealing with affairs on an international level, and Fred Thompson’s resume is quite impressive.

  • National Security:
  • Once again, more than one candidate has experience dealing with national security. John McCain and Fred Thompson both have the experience of being legislators during 9/11 and the build up to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Rudy Giuliani served on the Baker Committee and was the Mayor of New York during 9/11, performing admirably. Mitt Romney has experience dealing with security from his time running the Salt Lake City Olympics and serving on the Homeland Security Advisory Council.

    Since McCain’s credentials match any of the other candidates, I am taking it for granted that everyone feels that he is strong in this area. Fred Thompson’s resume is impressive in its own right. Note that some of these overlap with his foreign policy resume:

  • Chairman of the International Security Advisory Board of the Department of State currently; a high-level panel charged with evaluating long-term threats to U. S. security
  • Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
  • Member of the National Security Working Group, which observes and monitors executive branch negotiations with foreign governments
  • Chairman of the Government Affairs Committee 1997-2001 (which covered Homeland Security)
  • Chairman of the Youth Violence Committee in the Senate
  • Member, Technology, Terrorism and Gov’t. Information Committee in the Senate
  • Special counsel, Senate Committee on Intelligence, 1982
  • Important Proposals, bills and Inclusions Introduced while in the Senate:

  • Nuclear Proliferation Act
  • Aviation Security Bill Amendment
  • Homeland Security Workforce Act
  • Homeland Security Education Act
  • Thompson Amendment to the National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act
  • The Federal Emergency Procurement Flexibility Act
  • The Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA)
  • The Thompson Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act
  • The Truth in Regulation Act
  • The Thompson Amendment Requiring Stricter Performance Standards for Aviation Security
  • The China Regulation Act
  • co authored the Homeland Security Act
  • Thompson served as Chairman of the Government Affairs Committee from 1997-2001, and then as the Ranking Minority Member from 2001-2003, when it was renamed the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. The committee has always been responsible for national security measures in the federal government, and had an even greater role during Thompson’s tenure, before the creation of the Homeland Security Department.

    Here are some words from people I respect on Fred Thompson:

    “Fred Thompson has, over his career, much better defined federalism than almost anybody else in Washington. He is one of very few people voting against feel-good popular legislation that was not the proper domain of the federal government.”
    -Pat Toomey, President of the Club for Growth

    “the genuine moderate as opposed to conservative aspects of three of the top-tier, four of the top-tier candidates were on full-fledged display last night. There was one candidate who did not display any moderateness or liberalism or have any of his past forays into those areas displayed, and that candidate was Fred Thompson.”
    – Rush Limbaugh

    “he shows great political courage in taking on half of the single most important long-term economic issue facing this country (the other half being the long-term Medicare mess). On this proposal, conservatives ought to be rallying to Thompson’s defense, not greeting him with silence.”
    -Quin Hillyer

    ”Good for Fred. Good for his excellent, broad based, tax-cut plan — including a flat-tax option and a corporate tax cut… Good for Fred for mentioning National Review and Investor’s Business Daily for speaking positively about his candidacy… Good for Fred for showing fire, energy, and animation throughout the interview. It’s the same fire in the belly that I witnessed in our CNBC interview earlier this month.

    I vastly prefer positive policy visions to down-in-the-mud trashing. (I know, I know, criticizing each other on the issues is a key part of politics.) But my great hope is that the Republican contenders will emphasize their key policy visions as the race heats up.”
    larry kudlow

    ”That’s why I’m pleased that Fred Thompson has thrown his hat into the ring. Thompson has been talking and writing about his belief in federalism. In a recent speech, he argued that “centralized government is not the solution to all our problems…this was among the great insights of 1787, and it is just as vital in 2007. Thompson rightly argues that the abandonment of federalism has caused a range of pathologies including a lack of government accountability, the squelching of policy diversity between the states, and the overburdening of federal policymakers with local matters when they should be focusing on national security issues. Federalism “is a tool to promote freedom” as Thompson puts it. So for the supposed heirs to Ronald Reagan who are running for president, let’s hear more about expanding our freedom by cutting the federal government down to constitutional size.”

    – Chris Edwards, Director of Tax Policies at the CATO Institute

    “Fred Thompson says that he will base his campaign on the ‘first principles’ of ‘individual freedom and limited government.’ If he follows through, he will have an opportunity to position himself as the only small-government conservative in the race. … Does Fred Thompson, then, offer an alternative for small-government conservatives? While he is not quite the second coming of Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan, a look at his record shows that he has generally supported limited government. … Of course, spending the last several years in Hollywood has enabled Thompson to avoid taking positions on many current issues. Now that he is in the race, he’ll have to be much more specific about his positions. But, given the fact that McCain, Romney, and Giuliani are clearly big-government conservatives, Thompson has an opportunity to seize the small-government mantle.”

    – Michael D. Tanner, Director of Studies at the CATO Institute

    One reason President Bush has lost the trust of the American people is his secrecy and the extension of the executive arm. Out of all the Republican candidates, only Thompson has clearly made the case of a more open White House. Thompson is a candidate who holds a cautious view of executive secrecy. Matthew Nather, of Congressional Quarterly, thinks this has everything to do with his professional experience.

    According to Nather in the 12/20/07 issue of CQ:

    ”As the counsel in the 1970s to the Republicans on the Senate Watergate Committee and as the Chairman in the 1990s of what is now the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Thompson has much more experience than any other candidate in leading congressional investigations of presidents. He has spent much of his career, in fact, thinking like a prosecutor and standing up for Congressional oversight responsibilities.”

    Nather also reminded readers that it doesn’t mean that Thompson would necessarily give away presidential power:

    As one of the main authors of the 2002 legislation that created the Department of Homeland Security, Thompson defended Bush’s insistence on having maximum flexibility on hiring and salary decisions for the departments employees. He claimed that a Democratic alternative would “actually diminish the president’s national security authority that other presidents have had.”

    In his 1975 memoir, Thompson wrote that “He (Nixon) undoubtedly felt that the institution of the presidency, and he as the holder of that office, were so powerful that no force on Earth was strong enough to make him relinquish the tapes. In this, the master politician misjudged Congress, the Supreme Court, and the American people.”

    From his past experiences, from serving on the Watergate Committee to his investigations in the Senate, out of all the Republican nominees, Thompson is the one who seems to have an understanding of the responsibility of the President to the Constitution and the American people.

    I endorse Senator Fred Thompson for President.

    To Join me in helping Thompson win the White House, click here. Now is the time to step forward.

    Crossposted from:


    Posted in GOP Primary, Sen. Thompson | Leave a Comment »

    Huckabee and Green

    Posted by tommyd4 on December 10, 2007

    From the Arkansas News Bureau in 2004:

    Gov. Mike Huckabee said Wednesday that his religious background and belief in redemption played a key role in the high number of state prisoners he has pardoned or turned loose early.

    “I would not deny that my sense of the reality of redemption is a factor,” the former Baptist pastor said in a radio interview with KUAR in Little Rock. “And I don’t know that I can apologize for that because I would hate to think of the kind of human I would be if I thought people were beyond forgiveness and beyond reformation and beyond some sense of improvement.”

    The governor has been criticized publicly by prosecutors in Pulaski and Saline counties for his release of violent criminals.

    “Let’s face it, I give a reason every time I do one of these, but it may not be as extensive as a publicity-seeking prosecutor is going to want,” Huckabee said. “How much information do they give when they plea bargain?”

    Why is it that Huckabee always attacks the messenger?

    In 2004, the Arkansas Board of Parole reviewed 77 clemency cases, and 74 of them were considered to be without merit. Included in the 74 cases considered to be without merit was the case of Glen Green. Here is the link to the ARBOP report that includes Greene’s case.

    Governor Huckabee, at the time, rejected the Boards opinion and decided that he would grant Green Clemency. Eventually, pressure forced Huckabee to relent on his decision. If this was an isolated case, then it could be considered a grave oversight, but it is just one out of many cases where Huckabee used questionable judgement when deciding whether to grant clemency.

    Huckabee’s criteria for granting clemency was, at the minimum, unclear:

    Until Tuesday, Huckabee didn’t even demand that these killers admit their guilt before asking for clemency. The Rev. Johnny Jack-son, who had arranged the aborted clemency deal for Glen Green with his friend the governor, describes Green as a humble Christian man – apparently one of Huckabee’s criteria for clemency.
    But the state requires that a killer express remorse for his actions, which Green refuses to do, calling the murder “an accident.” The Rev. Jackson says he accepts Green’s “account of the incident”

    How can one express remorse over a crime this brutal and be believed?

    Green, a 22-year-old sergeant, kidnapped Helen Lynette Spencer on Little Rock Air Force Base, where he beat and kicked her as he tried to rape her in a secluded area. She broke loose and ran toward the barracks’ parking lot, where he caught up with her and beat her with a pair of nunchucks.
    He then stuffed her into the trunk of his car and left her there while he cleaned up. Several hours later, he drove down Graham Road, past Loop Road and stopped near a bridge in Lonoke County. Green told investigators he put her body in the front seat and raped her because her body was still warm.
    He dragged Spencer out of his vehicle and put her in front of the car and ran over her several times, going back and forth. He then collected himself long enough to dump her body in Twin Prairie Bayou.

    Huckabee eventually had to rescind the clemency from pressure he was facing; DuMond deja vu?

    After weeks of pressure from victims’ families, prosecutors and this column, Gov. Huckabee has changed his mind about granting clemency to several murderers, including a psychopath who killed a Gravel Ridge woman.

    “I’ve thought about it a great deal and now realize that the greater good is served if a more detailed reason is provided,” said Huckabee, who will face a hostile Legislature next year that will almost certainly clip his clemency powers.

    It’s a humiliating retreat for a governor who thought he was unstoppable. Until yesterday, he said his critics were politically ambitious prosecutors, but when prosecutors from his own party spoke out against his clemencies, Huckabee realized that if he didn’t back down, he’d hurt the Arkansas Republican Party for a generation.

    The DuMond case could possibly end in a he said/she said stalemate. The Democrat parole board vs. Huckabee’s word. The problem is that Huckabee, as governor, used the same line of defense until even the republicans turned on him in 2004. Today, he has gone back to that same line of defense with the media picking up on the DuMond story. With Green, maybe his change of mind is enough to silence some critics, but the fact is that it took pressure from his own prosecutors, lawyers, and party to finally say that enough is enough.

    Posted in GOP Primary | Leave a Comment »

    Mitt Romney’s Social Distortion

    Posted by tommyd4 on November 15, 2007

    crossposted from here

    Mitt Romney’s Social Distortion: Is He Being Honest With the American People About His Position Regarding the Human Life Amendment?
    Tommy Oliver

    In February of 2007, James Bopp, who had endorsed Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination, wrote in the National Review that Romney “has fought for a federal marriage amendment and McCain and Giuliani oppose one.”

    This was, at the time, seen as damage control after Governor Romney had given an interview with Marc Ambinder for the National Journal. Here is the transcript of that interview:

    Ambinder: You would favor a constitutional amendment banning abortion with exceptions for the life of the mother, rape and incest. Is that correct?

    Romney: What I’ve indicated is that I am pro-life, and that my hope is that the Supreme Court will give to the states over time or give to the states soon or give to the states their own ability to make their own decisions with regard to their own abortion law.

    Ambinder: If a state wanted unlimited abortion?

    Romney: The state would fall into restrictions that had been imposed at the federal level, so they couldn’t be more expansive in abortion than currently exists under the law, but they could become more restrictive in abortion provisions. So states like Massachusetts could stay like they are if they so desire, and states that have a different view could take that course. And it would be up to the citizens of the individual states. My view is not to impose a single federal rule on the entire nation — a one-size-fits-all approach — but instead allow states to make their own decisions in this regard.

    Now, this type of retraction happens on a fairly regular basis in politics, where a spokesman has to clarify a candidate’s statement. Opponents will regularly catch one candidate misspeaking, and then try to capitalize on their misfortune. Mr. Bopp, a lawyer, helped write the 2004 Republican Party Platform which supports the Human Life Amendment. It was later revealed that Mr. Bopp advised the governor that,“ there are a wide range of possible human life amendments; ranging from a total ban on abortion to an amendment that let states make the decision. On top of that, getting both houses of Congress and 38 out of 50 states to support a constitutional amendment is unrealistic.” Ramesh Ponnuru (NRO) recently said that Romney does support a constitutional ban.

    Later on in the summer, when Governor Romney gave an interview with ABC News, he went further in stating his support for the amendment to outlaw abortion on a federal level when he indicated that he supported the pro-life plank of the GOP platform, which means he would support establishing legal personhood for all unborn children in all 50 states.

    The date of that story was August 8, 2007. Since then, Romney’s advisers and supporters have used this to champion their candidate in numerous instances- riding it to strong showings in straw polls and surveys. The campaign has used the momentum to define its “3 legged stool” of conservatism, and Governor Romney, himself, has claimed to speak for “The Republican Wing.” The candidate’s numbers have risen in the polls, and he is now seen as possibly the most conservative candidate in the field. When Fred Thompson received the endorsement of the National Right to Life Committee this week, the Romney campaign was up in arms, and his supporters cried foul. They wondered why the leading grassroots pro-life organization would snub their favored candidate for someone who refused to support a federal ban on abortion.

    Romney supporters truly believe that he supports a Human Life Amendment, but at the same time, it was always advisors or supporters who were actually saying that. Paul Weyrich, the co-founder of the Moral Majority, stated that he believed Romney’s recent conversion to the pro-life cause to be “sincere.” Romney also won the endorsement of Bob Jones III, the president of the evangelical university that carries his name.

    However, besides Romney’s interview with ABC news, the candidate has never actually stated that he supports the amendment. The actual interview transcript says:

    “You know, I do support the Republican platform, and I support that being part of the Republican platform and I’m pro-life.”

    The former Governor said that he would support the platform of the party, as has all the other candidates. The question is… “ Just how up front is Romney actually being with the voters?”

    The answer may lie in a statement he made in South Carolina, on April 13, 2007. This date was well after James Bopp’s clarification in February that Romney does support the amendment. On that day, while speaking to a small group of business owners, Romney said:

    “I would like to see each state be able to make its own law with regard to abortion. I think the Roe v. Wade one-size-fits-all approach is wrong.”

    Let’s repeat that again…

    I think the Roe v. Wade one-size-fits-all approach is wrong.”

    The question remains… When I read the statement, he says that a one size fits all approach is wrong. One could make the argument that Romney is saying that Roe Vs. Wade is wrong, but then he used the words “one size fits all is wrong.” He didn’t have to go this far, but he did. In April, while James Bobb and Hugh Hewitt were arguing that Romney was a supporter of this amendment, the candidate said the opposite.

    Somebody was not being up front with the voters. It was either Romney, or his advisors/high profile supporters. The real problem is that it further muddies how much one can trust the candidate, or the people who either represent or speak for him. If Romney was disavowing Bopp’s claim, then how is one not to suspect that he changed his mind when he saw that it only hurt him more, opening him to attacks from then-candidate Sam Brownback.

    It’s difficult for the Governor to distance himself from a statement this blunt. Of course, one could consider that he meant “Roe vs. Wade” is a one size fits all approach that is wrong, and a human life amendment would not be. The problem with this theory is that it directly contradicts the sentence before it. Let’s look one more time at the statement.

    “I would like to see each state be able to make its own law with regard to abortion.”

    First, he said that he would “like to see each state be able to make its own law with regard to abortion.” That’s a pretty straight forward, federalist approach:

    “I think the Roe v. Wade one-size-fits-all approach is wrong.”

    Strict Federalism. Romney says that a “one-size-fits-all approach is wrong.” That he would say “one-size-fits-all” when making a statement about Roe vs. Wade, but then turn around a support the Human Life Amendment, is very unlikely, at least on that date.

    What happened? Only Governor Romney really knows, but it’s a direct contradiction that dates from 2007, not 1994 or 2002. Other than saying he wouldn’t overturn the platform in his ABC interview, he didn’t say that he would support a Human Life Amendment. If he has said that since, it would seem to have been a political calculation.

    Posted in GOP Primary | Leave a Comment »

    Huckabee favored Bush immigration proposals before it became unpopular

    Posted by tommyd4 on November 13, 2007

    from the Washington Post:

    On immigration, Huckabee aligns himself with President Bush rather than more conservative elements of the Republican Party, favoring a pathway to citizenship for those who at one time entered the United States illegally.
    To think that we’re going to go lock up 12 million people or even round them up and drive them to the border and let them go might make a great political speech but it’s not going to happen, said Huckabee.
    He downplayed the political consequences of the issue, insisting that while there is a segment of people who are “truly exercised about this and virtually nothing but this,” the vast majority of voters are not up in arms over the idea of offering illegal immigrants a chance to be citizens. “I just don’t believe that at the breakfast table in most homes in Arkansas the first thing that happens is the man throws his cereal spoon down and says: ‘Let’s talking about immigration, honey, said Huckabee.

    Posted in GOP Primary | Leave a Comment »

    Mitt Flips Again

    Posted by tommyd4 on October 24, 2007

    Check out this winning quote from Mitt Romney in 2005, courtesy of the New York Observer:

    And it was Mr. Romney, making the very same calculation, who traveled the G.O.P. circuit this past winter and spring warning about the compromise legislation Mr. McCain had crafted to create a 13-year path to citizenship for undocumented workers. Of course, Mr. Romney simply called the plan “amnesty” for illegal immigrants, making sure to refer to the legislation as “McCain-Kennedy.”

    What infuriated Mr. McCain may not have been Mr. Romney’s opportunism as much as his hypocrisy: As recently as 2005, before Mr. McCain got in his way and before he realized the value of immigration-bashing, Mr. Romney called Mr. McCain’s plan “reasonable” and made a point of correcting those who equated it with amnesty.

    Posted in GOP Primary | Leave a Comment »

    Conference Call Recap with Bill Lacy

    Posted by tommyd4 on October 9, 2007

    This morning, I participated in a live blogger conference call with Fred Thompson’s campaign manager, Bill Lacy. There were quite a few people participating, including David Brody, Jim Geraughty, Erick Erickson, and even a representative from IMAO. Here is a recap of the conversation:

    New Media Consultant, John Henke, will be live blogging the debate at the Fredfile. In opening, Lacy said that the reason the debate was being held at 4 pm is because it is when the markets close, which ties it in to it being broadcast on cnbc. Lacy said that the campaign feels that they are in a strong position, and the challenge is to translate that into the early states. One point he made is that Thompson polls best in states that Bush carried in 2004, which are awarded over 300 bonus delegates for the convention. He repeatedly brought up the fact that although the MSM has been critical, Thompson has seen an upswing in Iowa, according to the last few polls. He noted that it doesn’t matter if Thompson walked on water at the debate, the MSM would still be critical of him. He needs a strong showing in the debate, but doesn’t need to showboat. He will emphasize on his small town roots and his record on financial and management abuse/waste while in the senate.

    Points made during the questions:

    Lacy, speaking for himself, believes that the Republican Party is at a crossroads, and Thompson believes in taking in a “Goldwater direction,” with emphasis on government reform. He has done a number of mock debates and a lot of prep. He said that he learned in 1994 that one good thing about Thompson is that he was a very successful trial lawyer and knows how to prepare himself for debates.

    Lacy doesn’t see him directly going after Giuliani or Romney tonight. It’s going to be focused on defining him, and may not be a time to throw darts.

    On Chris Matthews: Lacy said that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, including Matthews, but there isn’t a need for the candidates to attack the moderator.

    They were extremely pleased with the fundraising for the third quarter. Lacy pointed out that the campaign raised over 5 million dollars in the three weeks after he announced, and more importantly, signed up over 80,000 new donors. He reiterated that the campaign was focused on financial responsibility in getting Thompson’s message out.

    On Dr. Dobson’s comments, he said that they have been very encouraged by the support they have gotten. He said that “Thompson has a set of principles, and that he doesn’t compromise on those ideals.”

    The organization is very focused on the South Carolina primary. The challenge is going to be having momentum going into it. They plan to “build a strategic bridge” to South Carolina by being competitive enough to still be considered a viable candidate. He stated that he doesn’t have to win the earlier primary states, but that they need to do well enough to still be considered a factor in the race going into the south, where Thompson is his strongest. Note: Their internal polling must be producing some very solid results in the region.

    There are no dates set to unveil specific plans, but they are coming. He said Thompson will eventually begin taking part in the Sunday morning talk shows, but that Thompson is at his best when he is among voters.

    They are happy Darrell Hammond is playing Fred on SNL.

    Overall, it seemed to go well. After the conference was over, David Brody told me that it was “very genuine and real” and he enjoyed it.

    Posted in GOP Primary, Sen. Thompson | Leave a Comment »

    FDT Keeps Rackin’ It UP!

    Posted by carlbearden56 on October 5, 2007

    I’m in Washington this week and will be watching FDT address a gathering of over 1500 grassroots volunteers from around the country (7 of the other Candidates will also be addressing the crowd but who will notice?).  His address couldn’t come at a better time.

     The third quarter campaign finance numbers are in and they are blockbusters for FDT’s campaign.  Romeny and Guiliani raised slightly more ($10 million and $10.5 million respectively) but FDT, who only announced his formal candidacy a little over a month ago, raised $9.3 million!  FDT also beat the other guys in people supporting his campaign.  FDT had 80,000 contributors support his campaign compared to Romney’s 20,000+.  So a guy who just recently entered the race kept pace with the guys who have been running for ever.  Not a bad job and you helped make it happen!

    The other campaigns can say what the want but the indisputable facts are that FDT is more than even with the others in fundraising and leads them all in the polls.  It’s only a matter of time before the real crying begins but get ready for the fur to start flying.  FDT is on his way and with your help, will put it over the top on February 5th.

    In case you didn’t see it, here is the official press release from the campaign.  Go to for more information. 


    CONTACT: Karen Hanretty 
    October 4, 2007 571-730-1010

     Thompson Reports $12.7 Million in First FEC FilingMore than 80,000 Donors Demonstrate Campaign’s Strong Grassroots Appeal McLean, VA – The Thompson for President campaign will show total donations of more than $12.7 million in its first report to be filed this month with the Federal Election Commission.  Sen. Thompson has received donations from more than 80,000 supporters in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and has $7 million cash on hand.   “The financial support Sen. Thompson has received from more than 80,000 donors demonstrates his huge grassroots appeal for Republicans who’ve been waiting for an authentic conservative to enter the race for president,” said campaign manager Bill Lacy. “We feel great about future fundraising, knowing there’s a big well of support to go back to, since people who’ve given once are likely to give again.”  The average dollar donation to the campaign is $176, with 22,000 donors contributing online and 200,000 Friends of Fred signing up online to support the campaign.   The total raised for the third quarter filing (July 1st – September 30th) is $9.3 million.  Since Sen. Thompson officially declared his candidacy on September 5th, the campaign has raised an average of $200,000 per day.  “Some of the other campaigns have spent tens of millions of dollars so far, only to lose support among voters; yet, Fred is running strong in most of the early primary states without having spent a dime on advertising,” noted Lacy.   “We are on plan and will have the funding we need to get Fred’s message to voters.” The filing covers all donations received to date by the campaign, from June 4th through September 30th # # #

    Posted in GOP Primary, Sen. Thompson | Leave a Comment »

    Pundits Talking (heads) – Public Not Listening – Fred Leads the PACK!

    Posted by carlbearden56 on September 24, 2007

    You have heard them on TV or radio, those “political pundits” who know all, see all, and are smarter than us.  You know, people like toe sucking Dick Morris for example.  Many of them have said and some still say FDT can’t get the job done and win the nomination. 
    No names, but other campaigns, especially those from Massachusettes have been trying to fan the flames also to no avail.  They have all been busy trying to disprove the old adage “You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”  The old adage has once again proven itself worth its salt because despite their constant attacks and assaults, FDT continues to capture the heart of the voters.

    The folks at Rasmussen once again tell us where the American people are in all of this mudracking.  Read about it here:  Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a mid-term election.

    You will continue to hear about how good things are going for others and how bad they are going for FDT.  If you have heard it and didn’t buy it welcome to the majority.  If you had been inclined to believe it or perhaps had believed it at one time, there is still room for you on the FDT Victory Wagon.  Get onboard!

    Posted in GOP Primary, Links, Missouri, Sen. Thompson | Leave a Comment »

    Now’s the Time for Action

    Posted by carlbearden56 on September 14, 2007

    Eight days after his announcement, FDT is pulling ahead of the pack.  Giuliani remains within 2 points but Romney continues to fall (only has 10% support in Rasumussen’s poll) and McCain holding steady ahead of Romney.  In the last 57 days of Rasmussen polling, FDT has had an average of 23%, Giuliani 24%, Romney 13% and McCain 11%.  This week alone FDT has averaged 27%, Giuliani 20%, Romney 11% and McCain 12%.  FDT is clearly on the upswing.

     In case you missed it, here is FDT’s announcement on the Tonight Show.   “FDT Tonight Show Announcement Part 1” and “FDT Tonight Show Announcement Part 2” .

    Also, here is his formal announcement.  “Fred Thompson Formal Announcement”

    Watch it.  If you aren’t convinced FDT is the man for the job, you need to watch it again and pay attention this time 🙂

    Posted in GOP Primary, Missouri, Sen. Thompson | Leave a Comment »

    Well, At least we know who broke the 11th commandment

    Posted by tommyd4 on September 10, 2007

    From the Washington Post:

      A top adviser to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney appears to be behind today’s launch of a new Web site attacking GOP presidential rival Fred Thompson.

      The site,, paints an unflattering picture of Thompson, dubbing him: Fancy Fred, Five O’clock Fred, Flip-Flop Fred, McCain Fred, Moron Fred, Playboy Fred, Pro-Choice Fred, Son-of-a-Fred and Trial Lawyer Fred. [View an image of the Web site]

      Shortly after a Washington Post reporter made inquiries about the site to the Romney campaign, the site was taken down.

      Fred Thompson in period dress — from the Phoney Fred Web site. ( it vanished, the front page of the website featured a picture of a regal Thompson dressed in a frilly outfit more befitting a Gilbert and Sullivan production than a presidential campaign. Under the heading, “Playboy Fred,” the site asks the question: “Once a Pro-Choice Skirt Chaser, Now Standard Bearer of the Religious Right?”

      Nowhere on the site does it indicate who is responsible for it. But a series of inquiries leads directly to the website of Under the Power Lines, the political consulting firm of Warren Tompkins, Romney’s lead consultant in South Carolina.

    They left the section called “Pimp Fred” out of the article, but you can click on the article link and see that it’s there. Pimp Fred, Mitt? Nice way to show your true values. Let’s continue…

      The site brings up the homepage for “Under the Power Lines,” which lists Tompkins as “Partner, Consultant,” along with Terry Sullivan and Welsley Donehue.

      South Carolina politics is known to be rough-and-tumble. In 2000, it was in South Carolina that then-candidate John McCain ran into an organized effort to tar his character, including anonymous allegations that he had fathered a black child.

      At the time, then-candidate George Bush was desperate to stop a surging McCain, who had just won a stunning upset in the New Hampshire primary. Tompkins was the chief strategist for Bush in South Carolina at the time, though Bush campaign officials have always denied that the campaign was responsible for the attacks.

      A spokesman for Romney’s campaign said he would look into questions about the anti-Thompson site. “Our campaign is focused on the issues and ideas that are of paramount concern to voters,” said spokesman Kevin Madden. “The website we are focused on is”

      Tompkins did not return calls or emails for comment.

    Posted in GOP Primary, Sen. Thompson | Leave a Comment »