Reagan's men are backing - an actor

[Naturalized-Texan]

Reagan's men are backing - an actor (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/29/wus29.xml)

Ronald Reagan's closest allies are throwing their weight behind the White House bid by the late president's fellow actor, Fred Thompson.

The film star and former Republican senator from Tennessee will this week use a speech in the heart of Reagan country, in southern California, to woo party bigwigs in what insiders say is the next step in his coming out as a candidate.

A key figure in the Reagan inner circle has now given his seal of approval to Mr Thompson, best known as a star of the television crime drama Law and Order.

As deputy chief of staff, Michael Deaver was a key member of the "troika" of aides who kept the Reagan White House on track. With the chief of staff James Baker and special assistant Ed Meese, he was the master of image and presentation.

Mr Deaver sees the same raw material in Mr Thompson as was perceived in Ronald Reagan, describing him as someone "that could really make a difference". He added: "He is very popular in his party. He could change this whole thing and turn this primary system upside down.

"As Ronald Reagan used to say, after he stole a line from Al Jolson, 'Stay tuned, you ain't seen nothing yet'."

[hellinon]

:confedflag:

[Lubbock]

:claps:

I'm almost afraid to hope.

[Naturalized-Texan]

:patriot:
What is it with the Confederate flags? Why not the American flag? After all, the Civil War was over more than 140 years ago. :patriot:
http://bensguide.gpo.gov/images/icons/usflag.gif

[hellinon]

:confedflag::confedflag:

Your obviously not from the south if you think this is just a historic symbol :rolleyes:

[Lubbock]

For me, it's nothing more than I simply love the Battle Flag.

Not as much as I love Old Glory, but I do love the Battle Flag.

[We Southerns don't refer to it as the "Confederate Flag."]

[The_Elucidator]

"As Ronald Reagan used to say, after he stole a line from Al Jolson, 'Stay tuned, you ain't seen nothing yet'."

Stole? I prefer to use the term borrowed or used. Stole? Just couldn't resist, could he!

Back on topic!

We could compare him to the great Ronald Reagan, but would that be fair? My hope and prayer is that when his two terms are up, people will be compared to him!

[Eagle1]

i may be a yankee, but i love the ole stars and bars
doesnt belong higher than the stars and stripes, but deserves respect

and to keep relevant to the thread, GO FRED!!!!

[Naturalized-Texan]

Your obviously not from the south if you think this is just a historic symbol
I'm a damnyankee who has lived in the South for 36 of my 74 years and who believes that the Confederate flag has no place in this particular political discussion.

[Rhino]

I assume it was a reference to Fred being from the south.

[dPrasse]

I'll agree with N-T ... Fred is from Tennessee ... this is his States flag ....
http://images-partners-tbn.google.com/images?q=tbn:m9Cd3B05q6uznM:www.theus50.com/images/state-flags/tennessee-flag.jpg

And this is the Flag he'll be sworn to defend after his glorious election VICTORY !!

http://www.theus50.com/images/state-flags/usa-flag-ani.gif

Run Fred Run !

[Beowulf]

:patriot:
What is it with the Confederate flags? Why not the American flag? After all, the Civil War was over more than 140 years ago. :patriot:


Yeah? Head down south, particularly to the southeast. Many southerners are still fighting the Civil War. Wanna piss off one of em? Mention the name William Tecumseh Sherman.

[Rhino]

Where Sherman is concerned, they have good reason.

[dPrasse]

Where Sherman is concerned, they have good reason.

He pretty well run rough shod in their rear areas ....

[hellinon]

Sherman... Im fuming already. He decided that it was appropriate to completely destroy the economy of an entire nation.... rat bastard

[Rhino]

He pretty well run rough shod in their rear areas ....He did a lot more than run rough shod, which is what I was alluding to.

[BuckeyeMike]

I'm a damnyankee who has lived in the South for 36 of my 74 years and who believes that the Confederate flag has no place in this particular political discussion.



Freedom of speech NT, or are you the arbiter of that too here at FC!
You get your undies in a knot over the smallest things.....it's boring!

[Rhino]

Let's not turn this into a personal battle, please.

[BuckeyeMike]

Okay!

[Lubbock]

Hey. I'm not "still fighting" anything, or "living in the past," or anything else when it come to the War of Northern Agression or the Battle Flag.

Like it or not, the Battle Flag is a part of this Nation's history, and as hard as it is for some to believe [especially some in my own family], that whole part of our Nation's history was long over before my time.

I simply like the Battle Flag, and I especially like it when it pisses off the Yankees [NT excepted] and the Blacks, but I really didn't mean to start another war.

[Rhino]

I see it as only an expression of pride in the South, and I assume that's why it was posted here. In that context, I see no problem with it being in this thread, and I can see why it was posted here.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Freedom of speech NT, or are you the arbiter of that too here at FC!
You get your undies in a knot over the smallest things.....it's boring!
As it turns out, I'm a Moderator for this forum.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Hey. I'm not "still fighting" anything, or "living in the past," or anything else when it come to the War of Northern Agression or the Battle Flag.

Like it or not, the Battle Flag is a part of this Nation's history, and as hard as it is for some to believe [especially some in my own family], that whole part of our Nation's history was long over before my time.
As I said, I agree that it's part of our Nation's history. I was merely questioning its relevance to the discussion of Reagan's men backing Fred Thompson for president.

As an aside, and going off topic again, my grandmother told me that she had 19 uncles and cousins about evenly divided between the North and the South in the Civil War. She also claimed that we are related to Zebulon Baird Vance, Colonel in the Confederate Army, Governor of North Carolina, and U.S. Senator from N.C. However, after several years of genealogical research, I have not been able to verify her claim. I even visited his birthplace near Asheville, NC, as part of my research.

Now, back to the topic at hand.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Naturalized-Texan:
I'm a damnyankee who has lived in the South for 36 of my 74 years and who believes that the Confederate flag has no place in this particular political discussion.

:moo: I agree with the hyphenated Texan. We want Thompson for president of the USA, not the CSA.

[Eagle1]

Where Sherman is concerned, they have good reason.

Sherman had good reason to do what he did as well. War is hell. He knew the fastest way to victory and he took it. Hmmm now if only we could apply that logic to other wars..........


And Fred Thompson is the MAN

[hellinon]

Sherman had good reason to do what he did as well.

Of course he had good reason, but he shouldn't expect praise for what he did.

Anyway i just posted that stars and bars cause Fred Thompsons from tennesee.

[Lubbock]

I'm a member-in-good-standing of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

I'll spare you the genealogical details.

[BuckeyeMike]

As it turns out, I'm a Moderator for this forum.

:question:

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Have y'all seen the latest of the Straw Poll posted at HotAir? Fred Thompson is da MAN! :thumb:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Fred trying to harness bloggers’ enthusiasm (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/30/fred-trying-to-harness-bloggers-enthusiasm/)
http://hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/poll.jpg

Who says a man from the South can't represent? :smirky:

Run, Fred, Run!!!! Announce, Fred, Announce!!!

[Rhino]

Sherman had good reason to do what he did as well. War is hell. He knew the fastest way to victory and he took it.Scorched earth and war on the civilian populace is never a good thing, no matter the reason, unless we decide to sink to levels that are, in my opinion, very much beneath us. In any case, that's water long under the bridge, but the folks down there do have reason to hate the man.

[Naturalized-Texan]

:question:
Read the Board Policy (http://www.freeconservatives.com/index.php?page=policy). The answer is there.

[Nutrider99]

Sherman shortened the war and saved Confederate lives, just as the atomic bombs saved Japanese and American lives. It was a brilliant strategy, actually. Had the south been able to stop them, even back them up, they would have starved since his army couldn't carry provisions. They had to eat what they could forage. Had the South employed the scorched earth policies that Russia did in the second world war, it would have been called Sherman's Folly.

[dPrasse]

Sherman... Im fuming already. He decided that it was appropriate to completely destroy the economy of an entire nation.... rat bastard

That is how wars are won ... if we'd take that approach to terrorist nations , we'd win the WoT ....

[Rhino]

And be just like the enemy.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Lubbock:
I'm a member-in-good-standing of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

I'll spare you the genealogical details.

:moo: Jefferson Davis is your dad?

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l294/Longhorn_Platinum/uhh.gif *DUCKS*

[libertyman]

I'm a damnyankee who has lived in the South for 36 of my 74 years and who believes that the Confederate flag has no place in this particular political discussion.

Too bad.

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s259/libertyman62/cioedi4ihf.jpg

[Naturalized-Texan]

Ron Paul is a hate-America traitor. Why do you put a traitor's picture in your avatar?

[libertyman]

:roar: Ron Paul is a hate-America traitor. Why do you put a traitor's picture in your avatar? :rotflmbo:

ROTFLMAO...you mean the only member of Congress who consistently abides by his conastitutional Oath in all cases is an "America hater"? The only one who asks himself, "Is this bill constitutional?" before voting "yes" or "no"? Gimme an f'n break! LOL.

Granted, Rep. Jeff Flake & Sen. Tom Coburn may deserve honorable mention in this caregory sometimes, but they don't come nearly as close to following the Constitution that Dr. Paul does.

[libertyman]

I'm a member-in-good-standing of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

God bless you! :thumb:

[Timberwolf]

Ron Paul is a hate-America traitor. Why do you put a traitor's picture in your avatar?
Um, NO, he isn't. He has consistently voted against our involvement in foreign affairs...as should be the case.

Problem is, we're there and are stuck there until we can logically extricate ourselves from it.

[Timberwolf]

Based upon your "logic", Tex, GW Bush is more of a traitor than Ron Paul...one only need look as far as the Mexican border to come to that conclusion.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Um, NO, he isn't. He has consistently voted against our involvement in foreign affairs...as should be the case.

Problem is, we're there and are stuck there until we can logically extricate ourselves from it.
Ron Paul, along with his leftist allies, has given aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war. That is the very definition of treason as contained in Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. (My Emphasis)

BTW, on September 14, 2001, Ron Paul voted to declare war on terrorism. That declaration of war was all the justification President Bush needed to invade Iraq.

Today, Ron Paul has aligned himself with the Pelosi-Reid-Kennedy-Murtha left-wing of the Democrat Party.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Based upon your "logic", Tex, GW Bush is more of a traitor than Ron Paul...one only need look as far as the Mexican border to come to that conclusion. :hahaha: :hahaha:
We are not at war with Mexico. Ron Paul has given aid and comfort to our enemies, the terrorists who are killing our troops, in a time of war against those terrorists. That is the Constitutional definition of treason.

[Timberwolf]

We are not at war with Mexico.
Maybe not, but Mexico has declared war upon us...economically. Not fighting back is not in the best interests of our country...and could be construed as "treasonous".

Ron Paul has given aid and comfort to our enemies, the terrorists who are killing our troops, in a time of war against those terrorists. That is the Constitutional definition of treason.
I might agree if Paul had changed his position - as many liberals have done - but, he hasn't. He has been against going into this war from the very beginning. He is doing nothing more than holding to his principles.

I don't agree with him because we are "in country" and our military needs the support of ALL of America...whether we agree with the war or not.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I might agree if Paul had changed his position - as many liberals have done - but, he hasn't. He has been against going into this war from the very beginning. He is doing nothing more than holding to his principles.
Wrong! He voted on September 14, 2001, to declare war on terrorism. He HAS changed his position, just as most liberals have.

His only principle now is surrendering to the terrorists, thus endangering the lives of every American. By doing so, he is giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war, a war he voted for originally on 9/14/2001.

I don't agree with him because we are "in country" and our military needs the support of ALL of America...whether we agree with the war or not.
Our military certainly isn't getting any support from Ron Paul and his leftist buddies like Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy, Murtha, et al.

[omegatrump]

That is how wars are won ... if we'd take that approach to terrorist nations , we'd win the WoT ....


Obviously the intent is Not to win the war on terror.

[omegatrump]

Maybe not, but Mexico has declared war upon us...economically. Not fighting back is not in the best interests of our country...and could be construed as "treasonous".

__________________________________________________ ____________________________________________

Bush is Treasonous, the Mexican situation is a pre war development. They have attacked our infrastructure in the Trojan Horse sort of way. The other war that is not being fought that has crossed our border is the Drug War, with all of the blessings of the ultra corrupt Mexican government. Is there anything more incidious than to have a foreign government impose a drug induced stuper on it's neighbor? Enslaving large portions of their population to an illegal substance?

The knee jerk Liberal Republicans use their buzz words to establish a talking point because they have no other option. No logic or reason. Ron Paul is an American, with an Americans concern for the future of this nation and it's Constitution. The knee jerkers play on the ficticious war on terror like it is something that is actually taking place.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Obviously the intent is Not to win the war on terror.
:tinhat: :tinhat: :tinhat: :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha:

[Timberwolf]

This is what Ron Paul had to say before he cast his vote...he CLEARLY had reservations about voting for the resolution, but as he states in this speech "doing nothing is unthinkable".


Remember, at the time, he didn't enjoy the 20/20 hindsight we enjoy today...we had just experienced the worst attack upon our civilian population by an UNKNOWN foreign enemy.


I think I can give Mr. Paul a "pass" on this one...because I know his position on us getting entagled in foreign wars. Can't offer the same to Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Kennedy, etal though...

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001/cr091401.htm



http://www.house.gov/paul/images/banner_speech.jpg (http://www.house.gov/paul/legis.shtml) <HR width="98%" color=#336699 noShade SIZE=2><SMALL>September 14, 2001

Mr, Speaker,Sadly we find ourselves today dealing with our responsibility to provide national security under the most difficult of circumstances.


To declare war against a group that is not a country makes the clear declaration of war more complex.


The best tool the framers of the Constitution provided under these circumstances was the power of Congress to grant letters of marque and reprisals, in order to narrow the retaliation to only the guilty parties. The complexity of the issue, the vagueness of the enemy, and the political pressure to respond immediately limits our choices. The proposed resolution is the only option we're offered and doing nothing is unthinkable.


There are a couple of serious points I'd like to make.


For the critics of our policy of foreign interventionism in the affairs of others the attack on New York and Washington was not a surprise and many have warned of its inevitability.


It so far has been inappropriate to ask why the U.S. was the target and not some other western country. But for us to pursue a war against our enemies it's crucial to understand why we were attacked, which then will tell us by whom we were attacked.


Without this knowledge, striking out at six or eight or even ten different countries could well expand this war of which we wanted no part. Without defining the enemy there is no way to know our precise goal nor to know when the war is over. Inadvertent or casual acceptance of civilian deaths by us as part of this war I'm certain will prolong the agony and increase the chances of even more American casualties. We must guard against this if at all possible.


Too often over the last several decades we have supported both sides of many wars only to find ourselves needlessly entrenched in conflicts unrelated to our national security. It is not unheard of that the weapons and support we send to foreign nations have ended up being used against us. The current crisis may well be another example of such a mishap.


Although we now must fight to preserve our national security we should not forget that the founders of this great nation advised that for our own sake we should stay out of entangling alliances and the affairs of other nations.


We are placing tremendous trust in our president to pursue our enemies as our commander-in-chief but Congress must remain vigilant as to not allow our civil liberties here at home to be eroded. The temptation will be great to sacrifice our freedoms for what may seem to be more security. We must resist this temptation.


Mr. Speaker we must rally behind our president, pray for him to make wise decisions, and hope that this crisis is resolved a lot sooner than is now anticipated.</SMALL>

[Naturalized-Texan]

TW: Thanks for proving my point that Ron Paul changed his position. He is no better than the Pelosies, the Reids, the Kennedys, the Murthas, et al.

[Timberwolf]

OK, Tex....since you seem to think you're omiscient, what's going to happen 5 years from today? Do you think it's a good idea to invade China? How about Iran? North Korea? Mexico? Venezuela?

Do any of the aforementioned pose a threat to our country? Have any of the aforementioned attacked our country outright (other than economically)?


You see, Mr. Paul didn't enjoy the luxury of 20/20 hindsight that we all enjoy today. Had he been blessed with said, you can bet your bottom dollar there would have been TWO "no" votes. He said he had misgivings, implying that he didn't want to vote for the measure. He did so because "The proposed resolution is the only option we're offered and doing nothing is unthinkable"
Your myopic tunnel vision is astounding.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Thanks for the compliment.

Ron Paul was and still is completely oblivious to the reality of the War on Terror. When he voted for the declaration of war against terrorism, he voted to authorize the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States."

Ron Paul ignores (or denies) the fact that Saddam harbored, trained, financed, and armed terrorists, including al Qaeda terrorist. In fact there is powerful circumstantial evidence that the 9/11 terrorists were trained at Salman Pak, just 25 miles south of Baghdad.

Ron Paul also ignores (or denies) the fact that if we don't win the War on Terror, the result could easily be the slaughter of millions, if not tens of millions, of innocent Americans, including our children or grandchildren (or maybe he doesn't care).

Ron Paul also ignores (or denies) the fact that the invasion of Iraq was as much an essential part of the War on Terror as the D-Day Normandy invasion was an essential part of World War II.

If Ron Paul isn't a traitor, he is either in a state of denial (meaning that he mentally ill and not suited to be even a congressman, much less a presidential candidate), or he is senile (again meaning that he isn't suited to be even a congressman, much less a presidential candidate), or he is just plain stupid (again meaning that he isn't suited to be even a congressman, much less a presidential candidate).

Since he is a RINO, at best, or a hate-America moonbat, at worst, I hope that a REAL conservative runs against him and defeats him in next year's Republican primary. His district deserves a real American conservative to represent it.

[M.C.]

While I myself prefer Tancredo and Brownback slightly over the other candidates, surely I would give a vote to Fred Thompson if he is the one to get the nod. Anyone but Mussilini Jr. the liberal in disguise or the liberal socialist clowns running on that blue party.

[Timberwolf]

I just love the way Tex doesn't listen and only hears what he wants to hear. :rolleyes:

[BuckeyeMike]

Can you say that about a Moderator?

[Naturalized-Texan]

I just love the way Tex doesn't listen and only hears what he wants to hear. :rolleyes:
Again, thanks for the compliment.

[Timberwolf]

Can you say that about a Moderator?
Why not? Much worse has been hurled my way...:D

[Rhino]

Dude, if folks are hurling your way, I hope you're good at dodging!