3.1.07 @ 12:01AM
BITING AND NOT BUYING
Re: The Prowler’s Run, Fred, Run:
How desperate are you to fill this column every day? Fred
Thompson as a Senator was a great actor. He had many opportunities
to shine and champion the conservative cause; he chose none. Get a
— Donald J. Morrissey
Does anyone recall that Fred Thompson was one of a handful of Senators to vote against Bill Clinton’s conviction following his impeachment?
Why would he have done that?
— Joe Librandi
The Prowler reports that Fred Thompson, along with Jeb Bush, has been placed “on a conservative wish list for those not happy with the current crop of Republican presidential candidates in 2008.”
Tell me. What conservative would ever again vote for a Bush?
— Jack Hughes
I’m a conservative, and Jeb Bush is not on my wish list. In fact, I
don’t consider Jeb Bush, or his brother, to be conservatives.
Thompson, on the other hand, is someone I could possibly support,
but we don’t need more faux conservatives like the Bushes, McCain,
— Wade White
Franklin, New York
Fred Thompson of Tennessee for President? We can have: Giuliani,
the pro abortion gun grabber; McCain, the unpredictable maverick;
Jeb Bush, who runs from confrontation and conflict; Mitt Romney,
who blows hot but mostly cold; or a host of other lesser lights.
OK, I prefer Fred, but simply as the best of what’s available.
— Lifelong Conservative who votes Republican
Every time that I read or hear someone touting Fred Thompson for President, I immediately think, “Hey, get serious, will you.” I immediately run through a whole litany of reasons why such a thing makes no sense and is a flight of fancy. My problem is that the list of reasons that he couldn’t, and shouldn’t, win keeps getting shorter and shorter, and the list of reasons for him to run keep getting longer and longer.
First, he is an actor, but so was St. Ronald of Reagan, my favorite of all time. Then I remember that he really was a federal prosecutor with a record of success.
But that isn’t it. There is just something about the man that makes me want to trust him. He just looks serious and solidly intelligent, with a strong dose of common sense. Then there is his voice. He sounds like a man of seriousness, and yet a pleasant man. Darn it, he sounds like a man that you can trust to be the head of your family or the President of your country.
I don’t know that I can sensibly articulate why I am so
favorably disposed toward him, but darn it, he just seems right for
the job. I sure like him a whole bunch better than the current list
on offer from the GOP ranks.
— Ken Shreve
Conservative first, Republican second
As an avid reader of The American Spectator online, I have
been enjoying the debate concerning potential Republican
candidates. Simply having this debate, I believe, is very healthy.
One factor that I haven’t noticed in the discussion is the visual
appeal of the potential candidates. For better or worse, the
general public likes visual appeal; a lot of eyes notice the flashy
red sports car as it goes by, so to speak. I think it is important
that we acknowledge this reality, but also ensure that there is
quality of character behind the public face; sort of “check under
the hood,” if you will. With this considered I would like to offer
another ticket possibility: How about Tony Snow and J.C. Watts? I
think this would be a very appealing ticket backed by solid
conservative principles, political skill, and excellent character.
This pairing would have tremendous public appeal, not to mention
coattails for potential congressional candidates. This could lead
to eight or sixteen years of conservative presidential dominance. I
realize that neither are currently candidates, but we could draft
them. There is currently no military draft, but, with sincere
apologies to J.C. and Tony, I am not aware of any prohibition
against a political draft!
— Michael Jones
Why such worry among conservatives about the 2008 elections? So
many touted the benefits of losing in 2006 I’m convinced that a
bigger loss in 2008 is what we really need to teach those nasty
Republicans a lesson. Hey, we can throw away or afford to lose an
election or two, or at least that’s what I read one American
Spectator contributor suggesting. So let’s LOSE ONE for the
Gripers in ‘08.
— Michael Tomlinson
Jacksonville, North Carolina
If he has backing and a clean past, by all means, make him run.
I love Fred Thompson, and so does my family.
— Gene Hauber
How about Phil Gramm?
— Don Tilley
Re: Mark Tooley’s William Wilberforce Forced Left:
“William Wilberforce Forced Left” by Mark Tooley is an excellent article. It is thoughtful, well written, and witty. Mr. Tooley’s research is compelling and he is quite brave to speak about some of the lesser known attributes of Gandhi. It is obvious that he has done his homework, while Jim Wallis appears to know nothing at all of the subject matter. We are fortunate to have writers like Mark Tooley who can contain the arguments of the left with his intellect. Many people are tired of arguments from the left that lack research and evidence but substitute anger and insults for those things.
Thanks, again, Mark.
— Adam Jones
Re: Nicole Kurokawa’s Time For a Change:
As a Chicagoan, I couldn’t agree more with Ms. Kurokawa’s
article. They want to change the world from their city council
seats. Their apology to the Mormons was my personal favorite.
Thankfully, Tuesday’s election did remove some onerous alderpeople.
— S. Augustyn
Re: George H. Wittman’s Iranian Intentions:
I read your article today, and was taken aback by the nonsense I read. You talk about Iran’s nuclear weapons, which they do not possess, while at the same time ignore the fact that the USA has over 10,000 nuclear weapons and continually threatens other countries with their use.
Bush has even taken the attitude that if we think you may be dangerous, you will strike with no regard for life.
As a result of American thuggery Iraq has suffered millions of dead. How can you live with yourselves?
If another country did what the U.S. does to others, America would be up in arms.
“Do unto others as you would have done unto you”
A simple statement but one that all Christians should have as their base of understanding.
The current Bush administration are war criminals as recognized by the vast majority of the world. Look in the mirror, and you will see a country (USA) that talks about liberty, freedom, etc. but does not practice it.
Your attitude is that unless we are with you, we are against you! Nonsense!
You need to know American history far better than you show. If you do you will see that you have created a society that uses, and abuses our planet. To this end the world is in serious danger of collapse.
I am a financier businessman, age 63, who does business all over
— Rolland Miller
THE ONLY ISSUE
Re: Lisa Fabrizio’s The Rudy Dilemma:
First all conservatives have an uneasy relationship with the Republican Party. Republican victories are not unimportant to conservatives; but the interests of conservatives are not necessarily congruent with the aims of the Republican Party. A Republican win for the White House is not “the be and end all” for conservatives if the Republican President is a pale carbon copy the progressive left.
When rock-rib Republicans look askance at the social conservatives, declaring they are the ruination of real Republicanism, it all boils down to abortion. The campaign against abortion is the pesky monkey wrench in the works. “If conservatives would just drop the ‘big government’ meddling into the private lives their fellow countrymen, it would be clear sailing into majorities in congress and the White House for generations.” So it is said.
However, the “promise” of multi-generational political dominance is not realistic for any political party. After all, when things go bad for the country, the populace will turn out any party for a new leadership. This will happen regardless whether the ruling party could have done anything to avert the misfortune. But is political dominance worth the devil’s bargain of permitting the slaughter of innocents?
Abortion and other “life” issues are not just one set of issues
among others. These are transcendent issues. Abortion isn’t
objected to because it is distasteful. Abortion is unjust. It is a
callous injustice to the weakest among us. It is an injustice to
those who cannot speak for themselves. It is not just a personal
choice such as whether one chooses playing cards or dances in
public. (Yes, there are folk who still object to these things.)
Abortion is a crucial issue that says exactly what kind of people
we are. Our tolerance of this odious practice will bring shame to
those who follow us. Maybe the abolition of this wholesale killing
of innocents will take another three or four generations; but rest
assured it will happen. Our children’s children will listen in
horror when they learn of the destruction of life we permit now.
Our future descendents will look to our graves and sing a bitter
— Mike Dooley
Re: Michael Tomlinson’s letter (under “Beating About the Bush”) in Reader Mail’s A Bush Too Far:
Michael Tomlinson’s exaltation of Bush presidencies appears impassioned, but does not persuade. His assertions that Bush governs to the right of Ronald Reagan are news to conservatives, whom he then excoriates as fickle for being disappointed by Bush’s many anti-conservative actions.
A case can be made that Bush doesn’t actually govern at all. Whether it’s outgoing Clintonistas vandalizing government computer keyboards, or their henchmen stealing records from the Archives and leaking national security secrets, there are never any consequences. But let a Border Patrol agent shoot a fleeing drug smuggler, and he takes the smuggler’s side.
Comparing Bush to Reagan? No comparison indeed. Reagan faced a Soviet Union possessed of a colossal military armed with thousands of nuclear missiles — a Soviet Union on a decades-long roll of swallowing smaller nations into its totalitarian nightmare — and won. The chief terrorist mastermind at the time, Moammar Qaddafi, promptly shut up when Reagan bombed his house. Reagan overcame Carter’s malaise and misery index, leaving the nation with unprecedented prosperity that continues to this day. And he did it all despite a hostile, tenured, Democrat Congress, and a liberal media monopoly undermining him daily.
Bush has not been as successful in muzzling Osama bin Laden, whose power isn’t squat compared to the Soviets. His attempt to finish the job on Saddam Hussein that his father failed to complete is hardly a sparkling accomplishment. And it’s nonsense to suggest that Bush does anything to rein in spending, even with solid Republican majorities in both houses (which he has managed to squander), and the emergence of non-leftist media such as Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and TAS.
Throwing mud on Reagan does not help Bush’s case, nor does
attacking us conservatives who hoped for so much more from Bush. He
was given so many advantages that Reagan never had, perhaps our
expectations were unreasonably high. We thought he would limit
spending, control the borders, and take out our enemies with
extreme prejudice. What we got was $2.7 trillion dollar budgets,
torrents of illegal aliens who will never leave, and a PC war that
shows no sign of ending. We voted for him (and his dad) twice, and
if the choice arose today between Bush and a
Kerry/Gore/Clinton/Dukakis, we would vote W again. But it would be
a sad, resigned, disheartened vote. Now tell me who betrayed
— Jim Bono
BULLY OF THE BEASTS
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s He’s Ready If You Are:
Please let me add one more point to Mr. Tyrrell’s excellent Rudy
in ‘08 talking points: While George W. has allowed himself to be
slapped around by the Left, Mr. Giuliani will not put up with that
sort of thing. After all, he made his political bones in New York
City, the belly of the Leftist beast. And the word to the Left in
contemplating a Giuliani candidacy must be, “Be afraid, be very
— Bob Foster
Albuquerque, New Mexico
SHE’S THE ONE
Re: Elaine Kyle’s many missives to Reader Mail:
I thought Marine Corps drill instructors were tough and scary
and wanted to kill America’s enemies with extreme prejudice. Then I
read Elaine Kyle’s letters. Go, Elaine Kyle!
— Christopher Holland
Sign up for our weekly newsletter:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
By John Corry
By Mark Steyn
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
By Mark Steyn
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
By Brit Hume
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.
Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.