Mark Alexander: About Fred Thompson

Mark Alexander of the Patriot Post knows Fred Thompson personally. In Patriot Post Vol. 07 No. 36; September 7^th 2007 he wrote:

… Traditionally, Presidential candidates have announced their intentions after Labor Day, but that tradition has give way to “campaignus infinitum ad nauseum.” Criticized by media talking heads for his “late entry”, Thompson express his doubt that voters will say, “That guy would make a very good president, but he didn’t get in soon enough.”

If you look at Fred Thompson’s congressional record and political career, you will find he is a man of thought, and he doesn’t always jump quickly into an issue or endeavor. However, when he does, he remains solid in his convictions. In other words, Mr. Thompson is not politically programmed. If he does not agree, it doesn’t matter if the issue has been brought up by a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or an Independent. Except for his specific stance/involvement concerning the McCain-Feingold bill, his record is clear cut and in compliance with his convictions upon the issues.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, arguably the most articulate constitutional constructionist to hold that post in the last century, recently offered this assessment of the political process: “What’s the job of the candidate in this world? The job of the candidate is to raise the money to hire the consultants to do the focus groups to figure out the 30-second answers to be memorized by the candidate. This is stunningly dangerous.” …
To his credit, Thompson is not a “formula candidate.” He doesn’t comport with the expectations of Beltway politicos, commentators and media types, and his campaign won’t be as slick as some of his opponents in both parties.
For the record, however, I know Fred Thompson – the man, I know his character, his intellect and his sincerity, and I know his views on the supremacy of our Constitution. Fred’s style is evocative of [Ronald Reagan’s [ http://Reagan2020.US/ ] strengths. Like Reagan, Thompson speaks right over the heads of his opponents and the Leftmedia, directly to the people. For that reason and more, the Democrats fear Fred Thompson.
In 1993, Tennessee’s Republican leadership convinced Thompson, a relative unknown, to campaign for the unexpired Senate term of then-Vice President Albert Gore. He could have been just a sacrificial lamb, but on the campaign trail Fred demonstrated his ability to win the hearts and minds of Republican and Democrat voters. Despite all the support Bill Clinton and Al Gore could muster for Fred’s opponent, popular six-term Democrat Rep. Jim Cooper, Thompson won a landslide victory in 1994, garnering 61 percent of the vote. It was the largest victory margin in any statewide political contest in Tennessee history. … Rest assured, the DNC fears Thompson. … His voting record is clear, and it establishes his standing as an unequivocal constitutional constructionist. For this reason, he garnered not only the respect of his constituents, but also the admiration of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
Like his primary opponent, Rep. Ron Paul, Thompson loathes politicos who subscribe to the notion of a “Living Constitution,” those who, for political expediency, have abandoned their oaths to “support and defend” that singular document.
”Our people have shed more blood for liberty and freedom … than all the other countries put together,” says Thompson, yet the central government “can’t seem to get the most basic responsibilities right for its citizens.”
Like Rep. Ron Paul, Thompson’s commitment to uphold the plain language of our Constitution has put him on the short end of a couple of votes during this tenure (99-1 in the Senate), and his devotion to his oath of office led to several controversial votes. In 1999, for example, when the Senate voted on the impeachment of Bill Clinton, Thompson voted in the affirmative on the question of whether Clinton had obstructed justice, but joined nine other Republicans voting against conviction on the perjury charge, believing that this charge did not meet the constitutional test for removing a president from office.
Thompson’s philosophy and record are most clear in regard to constitutional exegesis pertaining to federalism and state’s rights, as specified by the Tenth Amendment to the Bill of Rights.
That amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This language is specific about the limitations our Constitution places upon the central government and the rights and responsibilities reserved by the several states and the people. Nonetheless, Democrats, and the judicial activists who do their bidding, have, for five decades, evaded the plain language of our Constitution by insisting that it be [adulterated by judicial diktat – http://PatriotPost.US/alexander/edition.asp?id=330] in order to serve the special interests of their constituents.
Those who have been readers of The Patriot Post for many years know that we began life as The Federalist, a journal of federalism and states’ rights, and that our mission “to restore constitutional limits on government and the judiciary” is, by definition, the restoration of constitutional federalism, as outlined by Ronald Reagan’s “Presidential Executive Order 12612”.
It is notable, then, that on Fred Thompson’s campaign website, under the category of “Principles,” there is only one item: Federalism. …
In his exposition on federalism, Thompson notes, “Before anything else, folks in Washington ought to be asking first and foremost, ‘Should government be doing this? And if so, then at what level of government?” But they don’t. The result has been decades of growth in size, scope and function of national government. Today’s governance of mandates, preemptions, regulations and federal programs bears little resemblance to the balanced system the Framers intended. … A government powerful enough to give you everything can take away from you, anything. Our government must be limited by the powers delegated to it by the Constitution.” …
On that note, it is clear that Thompson will give Republican front-runners Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, both “big-government Republicans,” a run for their money. …

The Republican candidate LPJ top lineup is: Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, [Also: LPJ Dossier] and Alan Keyes. On the Democrat side of the LPJ top lineup: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Al Gore. The latter is not officially in the primary election, but talk in Washington and political circles indicate he may jump in at the last minute.

Fred Thompson, although some may say he is “fuzzy” on the abortion issue, remains a person devoted to America and its people, who is protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights – above politics, above the “good old boys” club in Washington, and above even the political party he is affiliated with. And, as Mark Alexander, Patriot Post writes:

Unlike the frontrunners, Fred Thompson does not “need” to be President in order to satiate arrogant ambition. He is driven by one motive – to humbly serve his countrymen, to promote our national security, unity and prosperity – and do so within the constraints of our Constitution.

As of November 11^th, 2007 this is my take on the candidates of choice for the primaries for the Presidential Election of 2008.

[See Fred Thompson LPJ Article, Candidate Fred Thompson and Freedom of Speech]