Captain's Quarters -

In the print version (which I'm holding in my hands, at the moment), the WaPo actually does apply the "Maverick" label to Fred in the headline of the continuation of the story on page A5. That headline reads, "A Conservative Maverick, Much Like McCain."

It's not up to the base. Not up to ideologs. Not up to the name callers, on the right, or left.

As a matter of fact, on view, today, is france. Where you're seeing a man versus a woman contest. And, the surprise, according to the Drudge headline, is that turnout is better NOW, than it's been in 40 years.

The winnah? He's racing with a lot of steam coming from the populace.

Lincoln taught the same lesson.

When the political heads get together; the thing the smartest team will realize FIRST, is that winning is everything.

In the past? The donks didn't mind seeing the GOP walk off with presidencies. Why not? Well, the powers to the purse rest in Congress.

For Reagan? This meant finding ways to fight the Contras, that were not "according to Hoyle." But worked out fine. (Still leaving in place though, terrible problems. A rock we'd overturn when Bush went for Saddam's head. And, you can argue "with provocation. Or without it." The Saud's still haven't gotten borders moved to them, as yet.)

But people seem to be paying enough attention. So that what's going on in DC, is on the minds of some. And, is recognized by many. Whether they sort through the puzzle pieces. Or not.

The other given? Just like in France. Women vote.

If half the populace is the same sex as the one running for office, to whom does the benefit go?

In other words? Does the woman win? Or is it the opposite?

There are ways campaigns are designed. Some work best when turnout is poorest.

But after what seems a famine caused by the White House, would it be surprising to learn that it pays to anticipate a bigger, rather than a smaller, turnout in 2008?

True. The most candidates currently visible, belong to the GOP.

While on the left all you really see is Hillary.

Now, when you wonder why McCain can't re-ignite his old flame; isn't it possible Hillary would be equally lackluster?

One of the attritbutes we can't study, IF the donks are holding their fire; and will attempt, ahead, to schtupp in a Blue Dog ... How does that sail?

Once Pelosi grabbed the reins of power, it seemed she was "dipping left." But then on the right, where's the working policy? WIthout considering that you always get buyer's remorse. And, lots of folks have left the train station.

When Reagan won in 1980, a fight broke out between his real friends. And, the new DC set. And, I remember Lyn Nofziger wasn't the only one who felt the powers ebbing from his hands.

Who would Fred Thompson bring along? Because to run things; the real power is in who you hire.

Hopefully, the turds like Dan Quayle, Alberto Gonzales, Condi Rice; and, by the way, George Tenet, was a system used by the Bush Family Business.

From where I sit I know see these as "cut outs." Inferiors in top jobs; with deligated authority down. But then you can't pin anything on anyone. Even with the "cape of invisibility" it's not covering the stink.

And, there ya go. How do you win in 2008? If it's not an ideolog's environment, against larger numbers of people?

I will never, ever, forgive McCain for putting terrorists' rights ahead of American safety.

Period.

My second priority is a fence along the Mexican border. I will vote for whichever candidate can manage to make that happen.

I really don't care if we stay in Iraq or pull out, since they're all barbarians there and it will take a couple of generations for them to sort themselves out. But the Mexican avalanche is a problem for *all* of America right now - and it needs to be tended to. And I don't mean by granted 12 million unemployed drunk drivers amnesty.

McCain is also weak on immgration which is another reason I would never, ever, put a tick next to his name.

I think the WaPo is doing a bit of "fishing" here. I point to a couple of things.

1. The WaPo points to Thompson's support of McCain in 2000. And at the same time, Cap'n Ed points out the main objections to McCain as, " BCRA, the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill, and especially not after the Gang of 14. " My question then is this: Didn't McCain's support and involvement in BCRA, McCain-Kennedy Immigration reform and the Gang of 14 occur AFTER 2000? That would be me saying that I fully supported Richard Nixon and went on record doing that BEFORE Watergate.

2. WaPo wants to point ouf that McCain was/is Thompson's "best friend" in the U.S. Senate. So what? My best friend in the whole world is a conservative democrat. He voted for Kerry - he's not my friend because of his stance on fiscal responsibility and hands off government, he's my friend because of the person he is.

If Fred!'s starting to worry al-WaPo that's all the more reason to like him.  Watch for al-NYT to help him out with a hit piece any day now. He's not perfect; he did support BCRA and he does not support deporting illegals en masse (which I realize is minority position), but he does support an effective border and he has the best podium persona I've seen since Reagan or (as much as I hate to say it) maybe Billy Jeff Clinton.

I added an excerpt and link to my 2007.05.06 Decision '08 // Dem Stupidity Roundup. (I ended up renaming yesterday's roundup "2007.05.05 Fred! '08 Roundup.") 

The Ballad of Freddy Thompson

Born in a little burg in Tennessee
Greatest state in The Land of The Free
Raised in the woods so he knew every tree
Beat up a Lib when he was only three.
Freddy, Freddy Thompson,
Please won't you run next year.

The Wa Po just doesn't understand the base. I will never forgive McCain for the immigration stance and for his gang of 14, NOT to mention it seemed like he did everything he could to derail President Bush in office. He was a sore loser. Which disappoints me and shows a character flaw because I used to like him.

The whole education system can not be reforemd no matter what without vouchers. I think we need to scrap all public education and privatize the whole thing with vouchers. The market place will sort itself out.

IMMIGRATION

One huge difference between Fred and McCain, and the rest of the "big three", that Captain Ed didn't mention but should have.

Fred Thompson has come out for the most common sense Immigration position supported by 70% of the American people, but rejected by our politicians:

ENFORCEMENT FIRST.

Mitt, McCain and Rudy all have come out for "Comprehensive Immigration Reform", which is just a euphasim for "screwing the American public just like in 1986 and making the problem even worse".

I am delighted that Thompson has had the guts(?) to come out for Enforcement First on the border. I say "guts" because it seems like a tough stance to take, since every other major candidate is afraid to. But I put the question mark by "guts" because the position is so overwhelmingly popular with the American people.

I won't vote for a candidat who advocates "Comprehensive Immigration Reform".

If Fred Thompson runs - I won't have to.

Nobody at Post reads CQ and checks the links. Had they checked the links provided by a reader at YouTube they would have seen a night and day difference between Fred and John. Fred is against a pardon and for making our borders secure if for no other reason athan to keep terrorists out. John is an open borders guy who is not worried about Jihad here in America. Comparing them is like comparing Winnie and Neville they both were in the same party but had different outlooks on Socialists threat to world peace. Winnie was right on and Neville was dead wrong! The Socialists were a danger as they proved in 1939.

Good Post. I do hope Fred runs. Maybe if he wins, he put his good friend John McCain at Defense. I can't think of a better place. He look after the men and women in uniform and stop making dumb laws or getting in his party's way.