I miss him!

n/t

general election opponent than McCain.

it’s a shame he never got his balloon off the ground in the primaries.

He was one of the only ones who talked about issues and ideas, while the others were posing for their pictures.

To think what may have been with Fred at the helm.

As previously mentioned, this leaves no room for wondering why Fredheads were so proud!

No one smacks back like Sen. Thompson.

I think it’s a sad day in American history when Fred Thompson has to resort to bitterly ironic, snarky rhetoric to describe the American economic situation. When I do it as a loudmouthed blogger, it’s only because I’m a nobody, hacking away behind a keyboard.

The really sad thing is that it’s the only mode of rhetoric that fits, and it has to come from a former Presidential candidate.

One thing he could have mentioned along with Medicare and the other entitlement programs was an article from the Washington Post of all places, talking about how America wastes half the money it spends on healthcare:

Talk to the chief executives of America’s preeminent health-care institutions, and you might be surprised by what you hear: When it comes to medical care, the United States isn’t getting its money’s worth. Not even close.
…
“Our health-care system is fraught with waste,” says Gary Kaplan, chairman of Seattle’s cutting-edge Virginia Mason Medical Center. As much as half of the $2.3 trillion spent today does nothing to improve health, he says.

These aren’t fringe activists or staffers from pressure groups with six employees and a website: these are the executives who run the health care system. We’re going to waste spend even more unless the situation changes.

Believe it or not, this is not a slam against Palin but when you think about it, Fred Thompson should have been the Republican VP nominee. He had none of the weaknesses of the others, to a great extent his own weaknesses would have been covered by McCain, and he provided his own strengths.

Sarah Palin may have excited the (social) conservative base but she also turned off a lot of people with her inexperience. And quite frankly, although many were vocal in their lip service, PUMAs simply did not vote for her or McCain. Besides, as much enthusiasm as Palin did bring to the conservative base, I honestly think Fred could have done the same.

Fred Thompson’s major problem is that he could “enthuse” anyone outside of the conservative base. While that was supposed to be McCain’s forte — and an area that, all-in-all, McCain failed at — Thompson would not have scared “independents” away. Even among my more liberal friends, Fred Thompson is generally well-regarded. If nothing else, he played a great character on Law and Order and I think his NBA commercial with Charles Barkley is hilarious.

Also, I don’t think there is a currently better conservative spokesman that Fred Thompson. He is far more of a “full spectrum” conservative than Mitt Romney and does not exude the “smarminess” that some people find with Romney, either. Indeed, just look at him here.

Finally, since Thompson and McCain are long-time, personal friends, I think their natural rapport would have kept McCain on track. Perhaps, just perhaps, Fred Thompson could have gotten McCain to come out against the bailout package (which I think would have been a very good thing although I recognize that some here on RedState would disagree).

Truth be known, I think I and many here on RedState were guilty of our own brand of “identity politics” for not mentioning and even pushing for Thompson as McCain’s VP. Let’s face it, just about all of us considered Fred Thompson “too, old, too ‘white,’ and too male.” But the more and more I think about it, Fred Thompson was the obvious, and best, choice.

But I think you are missing the point. Whoever the Republicans choose, the liberal MSM would have attempted to trash. My thing is, I think Fred would have created the enthusiasm of Palin but would not have had the drawbacks.

And quite frankly, if McCain had won, I would have been MUCH more comfortable with the idea of Thompson stepping in if something should have happened to McCain than I was with the idea of Palin taking over.

Once the MSM has painted someone with their broad bush of a persons identity the general public makes decisions based on sound bites.

I am vehemently opposed to the discussion of topics when they are prefaced by; old, white guy, or we need a new young, black face. Any conversation based on this is already headed into dangerous territory of reinforcing the concepts that were intended to be removed years ago. none of these descriptors provide examination of a persons character. And ID politics is just simply character assassination in a milder form.

The MSM used these tactics on almost everyone at some point in the process (except 1 who shall not be named).

I think the best comment I have heard on the race issue was by Morgan Freeman. Going from memory it went something like this; We will not have racism any longer when we quit referring to people as black or white.

The past history of using color to distinguish a person tends to draw upon characterizations of a past that should be left to die.

And I’m sure there are other vibrant comparisons that could be made for any number of other subjects.

Sorry for the rant. I was worked up…

Thanks again, Republicans. Like Achance said, you suck.

I wish he would put one of these out a week. It may be the only way I can laugh about what we just did.

I knew there was a reason I liked Fred so much.

“Ask not what your country can spend for you, ask what you can spend for your country.”

Priceless.

nt

Fred is clearly correct. But the key point is that we cannot change this economic course by discussing only economics. We are in this situation not because economists and politicians don’t understand basic common sense ideas about overspending. They do what they do because their interest is short term. Why?

Because fewer and fewer people care about the next generations. Society is going the way of Europe, i.e., toward demographic extinction. When you don’t care about having/raising children you don’t have any interest in the future.
So the problem is not economic but cultural/social. If the country were run by families there would be a willingness to sacrifice for the next generation. If the country is run by a sterile elite, there is no such interest.

Therefore the way to solve the economic problem is not via persuading economists but by changing the culture. In fact, Fred’s commentary shows that there is no contradiction between being socially and economically conservative. The latter cannot succeed without the former.

but one the intelligentsia (read Washington career politicians on both sides) don’t want you to realize.

If we all do what we’re being told to do, borrow and spend we won’t actually improve our situation. We’ll be come MORE dependent on our government because soon we’ll be in too deep to get out on our own. Once this happens the New Aristocracy will explain how they’ll take care of us. We’ll become used to the government teet and then we’ll not know any other way. The socialist will have won and the American people will have been their willing accomplices. Of course, history will never mention this because, of course, it will be written and taught by the same government, but that’s a different post…

I still struggle to figure out why the Republicans ran an anti-Republican to beat the illuminati leftists. We can’t out Democrat them, and no “maverick” is going to come close. ugh…