As I've said, there are admirable qualities in Thompson and he appears, other than Ron Paul, to be the most sane among republican candidates. But if he's going to run he will have to step away from Bush on the war, unlike McCain. If he doesn't, he's doomed to failure.

I like Thompson. I respect him despite the fact that he is a conservative because he appears to have moral integrity.

Fred Thompson is the unknown quantity, that sparkles in the distance, and seems all the brighter as we examine the known quantities of Romney, Giuliani and McCain.
But brought into the light, and the scrutiny that he will surely face, a lot will come out, we just don't know that much about him, and I'm betting that if what we don't know was all good, it would be pretty well publicized right now.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Don't you mean "if what we don't know was all bad, it would be pretty well publicized right now." Our media thrives on gossip and negative reporting. Positive stories don't sell nearly as many newspapers as negative ones.

__________________
Election 2008 – Addicted to Placebos

No, I mean that if Fred Thompson won the Medal of Honor, set up a camp for crippled children, and volunteered at a homeless shelter every weekend we would already know, that kind of stuff is what fills press releases.

Fred Thompson hasn't had the full spotlight of public scrutiny turned on him yet.
But if he does run, the same political machine that did hit jobs on John McCain and John Kerry will be aimed at him, and it will dig out, and make up what it can't dig out, enough to take the shine off the apple.

He was an attorney, a lobbyist and spent 20 years in Hollywood, if you don't think that theres some spinnable negatives in that you are beyond naive.

When a new candidate appears, the first blast of information is all positive, and people tend to fill in the blanks with what they hope to find there.
As the blanks get filled in with reality, the picture becomes less glorious, that's all I'm saying.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Thompson is probably winning more points by not running. If he wants to run, I think he'll let the current crop of candidates campaign and spend their money for several more months.

By the middle of summer a lot of people will probably be sick and tired of the never ending campaign, and then Thompson can enter the race as the fresh face. He'd still have plenty of time to put together a campaign. He'll probably jump to the front of the republican line, but his honeymoon period will be short.

It is a little odd, at least to me, that the conservatives are once again ready to turn Hollywood for a candidate. Maybe I shouldn't be since it worked out pretty well for them last time.

I think the only certainty is that by the time Nov 2008 rolls around the majority of people regardless of party will be sick to death of the presidential campaign. It's hard to believe that the election is is 18 months away.

Spinnable negatives are what fill the press. The major media rarely rises above the muck it rakes. FDT has already been the target of hit pieces, but they have yet to come up with anything serious. He has already publically addressed what are considered to be his biggest potential problems. If there were any significant skeletons in his closet, I don’t think he’d even consider running, as he would know it would be dredged up. I think in order for the rumors and innuendo to have any real traction, it’s going to have to come out before he starts campaigning. He connects well with people.

__________________
Election 2008 – Addicted to Placebos

the More I learn about the man the more I like.

I liked his stand in for Paul Harvey and now I heard abc is going to make same sort of thing for Thompson.

i look forward to that.

__________________
Hardcore Conservative !

I said Conservative not necessarly Republican or Democrat. Liberals are in both of those parties.

Thompson still remains a big question mark. Because he's not running he hasn't had to come forward and explain his politics or thoughts on the war. If he comes out guns-a-blazin' for the war, he'll be as dead as John McCain, who he seems to admire.

His remaining in the dark may be a positive for him now, but at sometime he's going to have to step into the light.

He hasn’t said much, but he opposes time tables. It sounds like he wants to leave strategy to the Generals; a wise decision, as military experience is one area in which Thompson is lacking. Then again he may lean on his running mate on military matters, depending on who that ends up being.

Possible candidate Thompson opposes timetable for Iraq pullout - Newsday.com

__________________
Election 2008 – Addicted to Placebos

Nashville is filling up with opposition research types, looking for dirt on Thompson, the word is that this wave is from his Republican Primary opponents.

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/in...&news_id=55917

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

So Thompson running is a lock, Good News. Thanx Goober.

__________________
Election 2008 – Addicted to Placebos

so does he oppose the war, like 60% of the voters, or does he support it.

Either way, once he starts taking positions, he starts losing his shine.
And we don't know what those opposition research people will come up with, but we'll have a clue when the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth change their name.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

This is the only thing I could find about FDT’s stance on the war.

It appears that he doesn’t oppose the war, but he doesn’t approve of the way it’s been waged. It looks like he’ll rely on the judgment of the commanders in the field.

__________________
Election 2008 – Addicted to Placebos

A Commander in Chief who defers to the judgment of subordinates isn't really a commander is he?

Either he supports the war or he doesn't, he's either for getting out or getting in in a bigger way.

While he's not in office, and not running for office, he can defer and be equivocal, but once he announces, he's got to answer the questions or he looks indecisive, and the reality of the upcoming election is that the position that wins the GOP primary, loses the General election.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address