The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Where Were You in '94?

Text Size

As promised the Thompson folks have sent around a memo asking whether it isn't "fair" to ask where the other candidates were in 1994. This seems an unwise tactic for four reasons. First, Thompson's strength is not biography or resume. It is being the "comfort food" for conservatives hungry for a soothing figure. Sending them down memory lane is not playing to his strength and raises the "but what did he do?" comeback. Second, the answer to the Thompson question is not self-evidentially "yes." Why would it be fair or relevant to pick that year? Why not 2003 when McCain started criticizing Rumsfeld's failed policy or 2002 when Thompson retired and Romney took over Massachusetts? Or 1995 when Thompson championed McCain Feingold? Third, Fox -- which seems utterly untaken by the Thompson candidacy -- has this devastating critique essentially saying Thompson wasn't a true conservative and didn't even sign the Contract With America. (Do Jim Mills' friends carry a grudge or what?) And finally, this lets Rudy who had pretty remarkable run in the '90s stress his strength which is his resume. (Sure enough Katie Levinson sent this around: "Rudy Giuliani wasn't just watching a revolution take place, he led a Republican revolution in New York City. It really comes down to the difference between saying and doing. Rudy isn't just reading a political script -- he has the record of results to back it up. He cut taxes 23 times, got people off the welfare rolls, cut the bureaucracy, dramatically reduced crime and made New York City safe for families." ) So why did Thompson go this route? To quote a certain candidate: I dunno.

topics:
Taxes