Thompson to Drop Out?

I don’t have any special information, only what I have read on other sites, but there are three important facts that seem to point very strongly to Fred Thompson’s exit from the race:

  1) Fred Thompson’s mother’s condition is not good, and seemingly getting worse. This isn’t a political issue, but I think we have to accept the possibilities and their consequences.

2) According to Fox News, Fred’s staff has said that he “has no plans” to attend the upcoming debate in FL – although, apparently, he has not officially pulled out of the debate.

3) According to some people – and I have no way to confirm this, but Fred has pulled some fundraising links on his website, or something to that degree. Like I said, I can’t confirm it, but it deserves a mention.

Fred’s Fall

From the point of view of an unaligned political watcher, the rise and fall of Fred Thompson  has been interesting to observe. From the point of view of a strong Romney supporter, it has been a dizzying wave of polls, speculation, and news stories – finally culminating in what seems to be a labeling of Thompson as an irrelevant also-ran.

I know too much about politics to declare Fred as dead on arrival, but for the man who once led national polling, and had commanding leads in several southern states, the facts are startling. Not only is Fred barely keeping his #2 spot in national polling, but his support in early states has dropped so far that he is not even listed by name in the latest Boston Globe poll of New Hampshire voters. In South Carolina – once considered a stronghold for the Thompson Campaign, and an important early state, Thompson now leads by less than 2% over Mitt Romney.

So, why has Thompson’s support collapsed? I believe there are two reasons. Firstly, Thompson does not seem to have the energy or dedication to win the primary, much less the Presidency. Even throughout the pre-season, Thompson never really seemed more than half dedicated to running, leading many to speculate that he was being dragged into the race by supporters, and, possibly, his wife. Secondly, Thompson’s supporters (who were responsible for much of the pre-announcement buzz surrounding Fred), severely exaggerated their candidate. Rarely, are the terms “never” and “always” – or similar – used correctly.  So, when Fred Thompson supporters began selling their guy as a man who had “never” done anything counter to Conservative principles, and the guy who had “everything” to be President, they were bound to be proven wrong. Thompson’s supporters probably doomed themselves by proclaiming Thompson to be “our only hope” and a “Republican Messiah”, they only left one way for him to go once he entered – down.

 The Thompson candidacy has almsot been like a shopping trip for the American voter: They listened to the over-hyped promotion, bought the product, took it home, found it wasn’t what it was made out to be, and took it back for a refund.

Fred Thompson: Just Another RINO

I’ve openly questioned Fred Thompson’s positions on social issues before, pointing to past statements on abortion as evidence that he may not be any more Conservative than Giuliani on said issues, well, now I know he is no better than Giuliani. Apparently, although he is “personally opposed” to Gay Marriage, he would have no problem allowing states to legalize it. He also attacked the GOP for trying to protect the life of Terry Schiavo – the Florida woman who died after days of being starved of food and water when her husband had her feeding tube removed.

In case anyone hasn’t listened to Mitt Romney on the issue of Gay Marriage (after being governor of MA – where the Supreme Court imposed the institution), its not just about allowing two people to “marry” – it has numerous other unintended consequences. After Gay Marriage was made legal in Massachusetts, the Catholic Church could no longer run an adoption service – because it would only place children in homes with both a mother and a father.

Let me make it completely clear: Fred Thompson is not a Social Conservative, and any Republicans who thought he was needs to think twice before supporting him.

Hypocrites 1 and 2 (Also Known as John and Fred)

Hypocrites. People who accuse someone of something, only to turn around and do the same thing themselves. People who lie through their teeth for personal gain. People John McCain and Fred Thompson.

It all started yesterday when Mitt Romney in an attempt to highlight the difference between himself and the more liberal Rudy Giuliani, assured Nevada Republicans that he “stood for the Republican wing of the Republican Party”. Virtually everyone knew he was taking a swipe at Giuliani, yet Giuliani was not the first to respond. Instead, John McCain lashed out at Romney, making the following statement (from The Politico:

“As we all know, when he ran for office in Massachusetts, being a Republican wasn’t much of a priority for him,’ McCain said of Romney. “In fact, when he ran against Ted Kennedy, he said he didn’t want to return to the days of Reagan-Bush.”

“I always thought Ronald Reagan was a real Republican.”

But McCain wasn’t done. Dipping into his campaign’s trove of opposition research, the maverick senator alluded to Romney’s contribution of $250 to former New Hampshire Democratic Rep. Dick Swett in 1992 and the former governor’s backing of Massachusetts senator and Democratic presidential hopeful Paul Tsongas in the Bay State’s 1992 primary. Additionally, McCain cited Romney’s refusal to support the Contract for America in his 1994 Senate bid and his “embracing the Democratic position on many major issues of the day.”

“I don’t think he was speaking for Republicans,” McCain said of Romney after each of his digs.

“So you’ll understand why I’m a little perplexed when Mitt Romney now suggests that he’s a better Republican than me, or that he speaks for the Republican wing of the Republican Party.”

McCain eventually had to back off some of those statements, admitting (or at least saying) that he did not believe Romney was trying to con voters into supporting him.

Now, the McCain camp said, when asked about the anti-Romney rant, that the candidate had just been rubbed the wrong way by Romney’s “Republican wing” remarks. If you ask me, however, McCain is getting worried. He knows that the race is quickly becoming a two man competition between Giuliani and Romney, and he doesn’t want to be left out. While understandable, that desire does not justify hypocrisy and lies. For one, John McCain is no more of a Republican than Mitt Romney is – and the last thing he should want is a fight over who is more Conservative. One only needs to look at McCain’s support for Amnesty for illegals, limits on free speech (under the guise of Campaign Finance Reform), along with other things, to determine who really stands for Republicans. McCain also trys to get away with calling Romney a flip-flopper, trying to promote the blatant lie that “Senate bid and his “embracing the Democratic position on many major issues of the day”. Of course, the facts say otherwise, but why would McCain care? If you want proof that McCain is wrong, just read Romney’s 1994 campaign mailer, and remember, this is the race where he was supposedly the most liberal.

But enough about McCain, because, Fred Thompson is the real hypocrite in this fight is Fred Thompson. Firstly, lets see exactly what it is that he said:

“In 1994, Mitt Romney accomplished what people had long thought was impossible: He ran for Senate to the left of Ted Kennedy. I didn’t know there was any room there. For him to now claim to represent the Republican wing of the Republican Party is yet another Mitt Romney flip-flop.”

Obviously the “left of Ted Kennedy” garbage is easily debunked by the Romney campaign mailer that I talked about above, but the real issue here is that Fred Thompson has just as many black spots on his record as Mitt Romney, and, considering that he has done his best to hide them, I would say he has MUCH more to worry about. Lets not forget, that Fred Thompson is the third author of McCain’s CFR legislation, and that he once called abortion a “distraction” and lobbied for a pro-abortion group.

Clearly, neither of them are prime examples of Conservatism.