Fred Thompson on Concealed Carry


PDA






DagoRed
April 21, 2007, 05:55 PM
Don't know if this has been posted, my apologies if it has.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTIwYzMyZmQ1YzQ1MDNmZTMyYzQ1Y2U3YTU4YzNmNGE=

The man will get my vote if he runs.

If you enjoyed reading about "Fred Thompson on Concealed Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
camacho
April 21, 2007, 06:01 PM
Fred is the man!

awkx
April 21, 2007, 06:35 PM
Ron Paul would be my first choice. We need someone who gives the Constitution the respect that it deserves!
Fred Thompson would be my 2nd choice.

bestseller92
April 21, 2007, 08:08 PM
Fred Thompson is our next President!

I'm gonna send him a check when he announces his candidacy.

Dave R
April 21, 2007, 08:46 PM
The more I learn about Fred, the more I like him.

TrybalRage
April 21, 2007, 08:53 PM
+1 Awkx

Thompson seems like he would be a pretty good candidate, I'd support him if Ron wasn't in already.

maasenstodt
April 21, 2007, 09:14 PM
I'm supporting Ron Paul for President, but that was a well written essay to be certain. Kudos to Fred Thompson. :)

High Planes Drifter
April 21, 2007, 09:17 PM
Ron Paul would be my first choice. We need someone who gives the Constitution the respect that it deserves!
Fred Thompson would be my 2nd choice.

+1

DagoRed
April 21, 2007, 09:27 PM
Is Ron Paul electable? By that, I mean, does he have a chance?

I think Fred has the name and face recognition to do it. Remember the average American votes more on charisma than anything else.

Liberty.45ACP
April 21, 2007, 09:53 PM
I don't know. I've known about Ron Paul for years, while I've never heard of Fred Thompson until sometime last month. His support for McCain-Feingold and the Patriot Act also trouble me...

awkx
April 21, 2007, 10:07 PM
Is Ron Paul electable? By that, I mean, does he have a chance?
I think he has a better chance than may be expected. Suppose that he wins the Republican primary and runs against Hitlary Clinton in the general election. All the communists would vote and Hitlary, and I'm pretty sure that none of the hard-core Republicans would. This leaves the middle ground, the fence-sitters. What would they do? I have a feeling that a large number of them are sick and tired of the usual politics and of Bush's policy of using the Constitution as toilet paper. So, they may very well be inclined to vote for an eccentric candidate with uncompromising integrity and a deep respect for the Constitution.
Or maybe I'm just being too idealistic. :)

Guntalk
April 21, 2007, 10:10 PM
>>I've known about Ron Paul for years, while I've never heard of Fred Thompson until sometime last month.<<

A U.S. Senator and well-known actor?

CDignition
April 21, 2007, 10:17 PM
Ron Paul has Zero chance, so supporting him would be a waste of effort. Fred Thompson IS electable and has much better odds of making a difference. Support who can actually win, anything else is a waste of time and effort.

awkx
April 21, 2007, 10:35 PM
Ron Paul has Zero chance
If that is what we believe, it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. For the time being, I'm supporting both Ron Paul and Fred Thompson.
Also, even if Ron Paul doesn't win, at least he brings to the table the issue of obeying the Constitution.

'Card
April 21, 2007, 11:26 PM
Interesting article about Thompson at Slate.com.

1. Fred Thompson was a co-sponsor of the McCain-Feingold bill. You know, the bill that every pro-gun organization in the country uses to justify their hatred for McCain?

2. Fred Thompson was the co-chair of McCain's 2000 presidential campaign. You know, the McCain that everybody is busy pretending is anti-gun?

3. Remember Clinton's impeachment? Thompson was one of the only Republicans that voted against it.

4. Thompson believes states should be allowed to sanction same-sex unions if they want.

dralarms
April 21, 2007, 11:59 PM
card,

Where did you get your info? please post links for us all to see.

AlaskaErik
April 22, 2007, 12:03 AM
His support for McCain-Feingold and the Patriot Act also trouble me...

I agree, but these are things that can be fixed. But once the gun grabbers take our firearms, we'll never get them back. That's why a Second Amendment supporter is so important to me.

AlaskaErik
April 22, 2007, 12:06 AM
4. Thompson believes states should be allowed to sanction same-sex unions if they want.

Not exactly. Thompson doesn't feel this should be decided at the federal level. Rather, states themselves should be able to decide for themselves. Kind of fits with the 10th Amendment.

Gaiudo
April 22, 2007, 12:08 AM
Back in 2000, Mccain was a viable candidate. This was before some very serious flip-flops, and showing tendancies to swerve in leftward directions. I was fairly pro-McCain back in 2000, and have since left that behind. I would hope that Thompson would also have remained conservative, as opposed to Mccain.

One of the stated reasons that Thompson is considering running is that he isn't satisfied with the current pool of Republican candidates. Given a close personal lrelationship with Mccain, this says alot to me.

Anotherguy
April 22, 2007, 12:30 AM
Ideal candidates dont come around too often. Obviously were all inclined to vote for the candidate whom we view as such. I just hope that if either Ron Paul or Fred Thompson gets the nomination that those of us who are staunch supporters of one or the other will still vote their second choice if their first choice does not get the nomination.
Personally there are things about both of them that make them less than ideal to me but Id happily vote for either one of these men. There is way too much on the line to sit on the sidelines out of spite.

dzimmerm
April 22, 2007, 08:52 AM
That is what I would like to see.

dzimmerm

Liberty.45ACP
April 22, 2007, 11:01 AM
The question in my mind was whether his stated beliefs on guns was accurate given his history. Not being from Tennessee, I wasn't familiar with him. These are valid concerns.

Granted, so far he looks like the second choice for me behind Paul. I wouldn't vote for Giuliani or McCain, even if Hitler arose as a zombie to run against them. :)

GTSteve03
April 22, 2007, 11:45 AM
3. Remember Clinton's impeachment? Thompson was one of the only Republicans that voted against it.

4. Thompson believes states should be allowed to sanction same-sex unions if they want.
I'm still trying to figure out how those are negatives.

helpless
April 22, 2007, 11:56 AM
Quote:
Ron Paul has Zero chance
If that is what we believe, it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. For the time being, I'm supporting both Ron Paul and Fred Thompson.
Also, even if Ron Paul doesn't win, at least he brings to the table the issue of obeying the Constitution.

yup

Bob M.
April 22, 2007, 11:59 AM
Thompson for Prez, Paul for Vice Prez

That is what I would like to see.

Same here.:)

TrybalRage
April 22, 2007, 08:57 PM
A U.S. Senator and well-known actor?

Nope and nope. Only place I ever heard of him was here. I heard of Ron Paul on a "shock jock" fansite.

Guntalk
April 22, 2007, 09:01 PM
Dude! You gotta get out more. <grin>

Geno
April 22, 2007, 09:09 PM
Any possibility that we might see a combination (may be a fantasy) Ron Paul for President, Fred Thompson as VP?

ravnew
April 22, 2007, 09:33 PM
I would vote for Thompson in a heartbeat.

Thompson for Pres and Paul for VP would be idea to me.

Sylvan-Forge
April 23, 2007, 01:05 PM
Thompson is a CFR member. 'Nuff said.

Thompson is a former President of the Federal City Council in Washington and a current member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is also a Visiting Fellow with the American Enterprise Institute.


http://www.uscc.gov/about/commissioners/thompsonpg.php

Skibane
April 23, 2007, 01:29 PM
Thompson is a CFR member. 'Nuff said.

Some other CFR members:

* Dick Cheney
* Jonothan S. Bush (GWB's 1st Cousin)
* Condoleezza Rice
* Paul Wolfowitz
* Robert M. Gates
* John D. Negroponte
* Colin Powell
* Henry Kissinger
* Alan Greenspan
* Paul Volcker
* Brent Scowcroft
* George Shultz
* James Woolsey
* Thomas Friedman

Yep, sounds like a pretty sinister bunch, alright...:rolleyes:

Colt
April 23, 2007, 01:52 PM
Thompson for Pres and Paul for VP would be idea to me.

This seems the only realistic way Paul could ever ascend to POTUS. Let him come on board as Fred's VP. If he does a good job as VP, he could be a logical choice to replace Fred when the time comes.

I just don't see an independent or other 3rd party winning a national election to POTUS. But a Thompson/Paul ticket could be a way in, albeit roundabout.

Sylvan-Forge
April 23, 2007, 02:28 PM
Look, if Ron Paul was a CFR member, I'd have dropped him without further thought.

Need I mention that it was the CFR that hatched the plan for the NAU?

Need I comment that the CFR member list contains a one George Soros?

How about Clinton?


The CFR is as anti-constitution as they come.


By the way, Paul is running as a rupublican.

He also pulled the 2nd highest amount of loot in New Hampshire fundraising.

Edit to add:
Skibane, your attempt at dismissal is actually pretty helpful.

ArfinGreebly
April 23, 2007, 02:47 PM
Fred Thompson is the only (potential) candidate with a shooting event (http://www.gunweek.com/2000/feature0810.html) named after him.

While he may not be the "perfect" candidate, I'd trip all over myself to vote if we could get him and Ron Paul on the same ticket.

Sean85746
April 23, 2007, 02:50 PM
Fed Thompson is about the ONLY conservative around who doesn't have the Late Great Barry M. Goldwater trurning over in his grave.

Mr. Thompson is old school, Reagan conservative.

Bless his heart!

PressCheck
April 23, 2007, 08:03 PM
If your still wondering about Fred.
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Fred_Thompson.htm

Skibane
April 24, 2007, 01:50 AM
Need I comment that the CFR member list contains a one George Soros?

Need I repeat the fact that the CFR member list also contains a one Dick Cheney?

Have you even LOOKED at the CFR charter?

Do you know what the word "bipartisan" means?

berettashotgun
April 24, 2007, 02:37 AM
Liberty.45ACP The question in my mind was whether his stated beliefs on guns was accurate given his history. Not being from Tennessee, I wasn't familiar with him. These are valid concerns.

Granted, so far he looks like the second choice for me behind Paul. I wouldn't vote for Giuliani or McCain, even if Hitler arose as a zombie to run against them."

WHAT ? please don't say crap like that, it isn't very THR.
I liked Fred in several of his movies; and that essay (written by someone else more than likely) sure smells fishy.
I just don't trust a PROFESSIONAL ACTOR being a PROFESSIONAL LIAR.
He might be able to fool everyone- that scares me.

Jamie C.
April 24, 2007, 02:49 AM
I just don't trust a PROFESSIONAL ACTOR being a PROFESSIONAL LIAR.
He might be able to fool everyone- that scares me.

I think you're giving Fred more credit than he deserves...

Y'see, every movie I've ever seen with him in... every interview I 've ever seen with him.. all points to the fact that "what you see is what you get".

I don't think Fred can act. I think Fred is always just being Fred. ( Why else would his first movie role be him playing himself? )

Given that, I'll bet my vote on him. I don't think he can be anything other than what he's shown us.


J.C.

Ratzinger_p38
April 24, 2007, 03:03 AM
Need I repeat the fact that the CFR member list also contains a one Dick Cheney?

Have you even LOOKED at the CFR charter?

Do you know what the word "bipartisan" means?

Still doesnt change the fact that the CFR still sucks.

Sylvan-Forge
April 24, 2007, 03:27 AM
Skibane,

I see why you think I am pushing republicans. Let me assure you, I am not.
I've said on this board that they are a Hobson's choice. The two parties at the top, are the same.

When I said he is running as a Republican, what I was attempting to clarify, were there any misunderstanding or not, was in regards to Colt's comment about 3rd parties. I just wanted it to be clear that Ron Paul is in fact running as a Republican and may therefor take advantage of the diehard, 'vote republican no matter what' group.

The CFR .. Check out the North American Union (NAU).
It spells the end of American sovereignty and of the Constitution.
Thanks to the www, people are starting to wake up to this.
As Ratzinger says, the CFR very much sucks.

Liberty.45ACP
April 24, 2007, 10:54 PM
I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers. I compared no one to hitler, etc. Just stating that I won't vote for either of those two under ANY circumstances.

The more I look at Fred, the less I like - while he may be better than most that are running, he's from from a staunch supporter of gun rights:
http://gunowners.org/pres08/thompson2.htm

Is everyone desperate or do they really see something in Thompson that is that appealing?

CannonFodder
April 24, 2007, 11:26 PM
Fred Thompson supported the Patriot Act... and still supports it, even after we've seen the abuses that it has allowed.

Sad to say, that's a deal breaker for me.

ConfuseUs
April 25, 2007, 08:32 AM
Well the crux of the matter is Ron Paul is outpolled by Giuliani, Romney, and McCain while Fred Thompson shows the potential to suck votes away from the Tripod of Evil and win the nomination. Thompson is well-known outside of Republican party politics but I think Ron Paul is well known only to the Libertarian wing of the Republican party. Thus I am hoping Fred Thompson will run so I can avoid picking the less odious leg of the Tripod of Evil/vote for a guy with no chance in the primaries. If he doesn't run I'll vote for Ron Paul in the primaries but be expectedly disappointed when Rudy McRomney the RINO wins the nomination.

Eleven Mike
April 25, 2007, 08:45 AM
I only hear about Ron Paul on boards like these.

I only hear about Thompson on talk radio, and lately on gun boards. (I don't have TV.)

It seems obvious that Thompson wins the name recognition contest.

22-rimfire
April 25, 2007, 08:56 AM
Fred Thompson's politics are conservative overall. He took the Senate seat that Al Gore Jr. vacated when he became vice president. If you never heard of him, well... you don't follow politics very much and you certainly don't watch TV movies much. I have heard that Fred Thompson was a bit casual in terms of attending day to day Senate functions when he was a senator. We don't need a casual president. Everything will come out if he officially announces. As far as a vote goes, I will wait until the primary's.

Liberty.45ACP
April 25, 2007, 11:05 AM
I'll grant you that Thompson seems better than "Rudy McRomney", however, from the listings of his previous votes, it would seem he's more part of the same crowd. Big talk, but when it comes down to it voting to crush individual rights quite often. I really wanted to find out what I was missing that made him so appealing, but I haven't found it as of yet. If he winds up with the nomination, I may vote for him, where others I won't under any circumstance.

But after all these years of voting for someone because they aren't quite as bad as another candidate, I've decided to vote for what I think is the best candidate. I'm frankly tired of the "you're just throwing your vote away" crowd. If everyone that said "sure candidate A is the best, but he can't win" voted for candidate A, maybe he would win.

Correia
April 25, 2007, 11:06 AM
If everyone that said "sure candidate A is the best, but he can't win" voted for candidate A, maybe he would win.

Nope, we still make up only a tiny fragment of the voting population. If a candidate is going to win, they need recogniation.

ScottsGT
April 25, 2007, 11:09 AM
Thompson for Prez, Paul for Vice Prez

That is what I would like to see.

Same here.


Exactly, that way, Ron Paul could be "groomed" for the job, or should I say, the public be "groomed" to accept him 9 years from now as a Presidential candidate.

Colt
April 25, 2007, 11:15 AM
Exactly, that way, Ron Paul could be "groomed" for the job, or should I say, the public be "groomed" to accept him 9 years from now as a Presidential candidate.

That was my thinking as well.

I'll go one farther - if Paul managed to step up to POTUS after serving as VP for 8 years, he might be able to "groom" the GOP. Get them to back away from some of their current big-government and amnesty positions. Maybe even take a new look at the Patriot Act.

Correia
April 25, 2007, 11:22 AM
And how old will Ron Paul be in 8 years?

ScottsGT
April 25, 2007, 11:27 AM
Just Googled him. He's 71. 9 years from now will be too late.

coltchris
April 25, 2007, 11:41 AM
Fred Thompson gets my vote if elected.

Colt
April 25, 2007, 11:52 AM
Too bad about Ron's age. He could still be very influential as VP, though.

Gaiudo
April 26, 2007, 12:15 PM
http://gunowners.org/pres08/thompson2.htm

That website ranking is a joke. How do they label wiretapping, free speech, judge appointees, surgeon general appointees, anti-terrorism, incumbent protection, etc. etc. pro-gun/anti-gun topics?

Its fine to argue individual issues, but lets keep the topics clean and clear.

Mr. Designer
September 6, 2007, 12:42 PM
Unfortunately, Ron Paul doesn't see the radical Islamic threat.

Correia
September 6, 2007, 12:55 PM
This thread predates the rule changes to the Legal forum.

If this thread was just about a candidates position on CCW, that is perfectly fine, but this thread had long since drifted into a political thread.

If you enjoyed reading about "Fred Thompson on Concealed Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!