View Full Version : Fred Thompson
Stoner
03-18-2007, 04:42 PM
This would be my dream pick for running for POTUS. I have followed this man's career for a while. I personally love this candidate and can't think of anyone better right now to run for the republicans.
He holds all of the traditional republican values (pro-life, anti-abortion, pro-gun), very charismatic and one of the few truly honest politicians left.
Any other republicans like Thompson?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Dalton_Thompson
Alonzo
03-18-2007, 05:02 PM
In doing so, he became the first serving U.S. Senator concurrently to hold a full-time television acting job; however, his first scenes as Branch were filmed during the Senate's August 2002 recess, so he missed no legislative time in order to act on television. His acting career did, however, prevent him from engaging in normal Senate related business that Senate Recesses are scheduled for.....
On June 29, 2002, Thompson married Jeri Kehn, a political media consultant at the Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, and McPherson law firm in Washington, D.C.
He was 17 when he married Sarah Lindsey. The couple, who divorced in 1985, lived in public housing for about a year when they started out.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e2222.htm
Sounds like a true republican and supporter of the moral majority.
Stoner
04-04-2007, 03:34 PM
Here is Thompson discussing a broad variety of issues.Â*Â*
What I love about Fred Thompson is he isn't afraid to tell you where he stands unlike most politicians who constantly flip-flop depending on whose vote their after.
You may not always agree with Fred Thompson but you will always know where he stands and what he believes in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sagvVMfAUa4&mode=related&search=
Stoner
04-06-2007, 04:26 PM
It's not official yet but definitly a good sign.
If he officially announces his bid to run I think McCain and Rudy might be in a little trouble.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3429.html
Survivor
05-27-2007, 08:56 PM
Fred Thompson's values are similar to those of President Reagan who I greatly admired.
CheesyMuslim
05-27-2007, 11:15 PM
Sorry bout that,
1. Yes, there is a solid buzz of wings flapping that supports Fred.
2. I for one think he's going to be on the ticket one way or another.
3. He seems to be very solid in his political views.
4. People are wondering with great care, as to when he decides to test the waters.
5. He will probably get in this race at the perfect time.
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
Buck Laser
05-27-2007, 11:36 PM
Fred Thompson's values are similar to those of President Reagan who I greatly admired.
Yep. Gimme some that good old Hollywood Morality.:P
Survivor
05-28-2007, 10:26 PM
Fred Thompson's values are similar to those of President Reagan who I greatly admired.
Yep. Gimme some that good old Hollywood Morality.:P
You should be so lucky.
manu1959
05-31-2007, 03:06 AM
WASHINGTON, May 30 — Former Senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee shook up the Republican presidential field today by making clear that he is likely to run for the White House.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/30/us/politics/30cnd-thompson.html?ei=5065&en=0234c4d66b0acc3d&ex=1181188800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
looks like he is in......:D
Ok I read both article and both are pretty much the same thing. Hooray! Most like Ronald Reagan! Mentions on his Law and Order career, he was a senator...... But I see absolutely nothing on how he stands on issues, except a small mention of pro-life. While I can understand the excitement....how about some stance on the issues.
manu1959
05-31-2007, 05:33 AM
Ok I read both article and both are pretty much the same thing. Hooray! Most like Ronald Reagan! Mentions on his Law and Order career, he was a senator...... But I see absolutely nothing on how he stands on issues, except a small mention of pro-life. While I can understand the excitement....how about some stance on the issues.
or this....http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=fred+thompson%27s+voting+record&spell=1
go to his website? http://www.fred08.com/
i like this.....
— On tax cuts:
‘‘In fact, Treasury statistics show that tax revenues have soared and the budget deficit has been shrinking faster than even the optimists projected. Since the first tax cuts were passed, when I was in the Senate, the budget deficit has been cut in half.’’
— And on the NFL draft:
‘‘Why do these teams keep drafting players with character defects you can see at 100 yards in the dark with your back turned?’’
Drocket
05-31-2007, 05:34 AM
A couple of weeks ago, Jon Stewart made a sarcastic comment about the Republican debates, the part where they were falling all over each other to outdo each other with scenarios from 24: it was something along the lines of, "I know what the Republicans' problem is: the country they want to run is fictional!" That's pretty much Thompson in a nutshell.
Seriously, at 90% of the people excited about his entry into the race know absolutely nothing about him beyond the fact that they saw him on TV, and he was all tough and manly.
manu1959
05-31-2007, 05:37 AM
A couple of weeks ago, Jon Stewart made a sarcastic comment about the Republican debates, the part where they were falling all over each other to outdo each other with scenarios from 24: it was something along the lines of, "I know what the Republicans' problem is: the country they want to run is fictional!" That's pretty much Thompson in a nutshell.
Seriously, at 90% of the people excited about his entry into the race know absolutely nothing about him beyond the fact that they saw him on TV, and he was all tough and manly.
really........90% of the people think that?
the country he wants to run is no more fictional than the one where if we just be nice to everyone they will like us and if we just take from the rich and give to the poor everything will be fine....
Drocket
05-31-2007, 05:41 AM
— On tax cuts:
‘‘In fact, Treasury statistics show that tax revenues have soared and the budget deficit has been shrinking faster than even the optimists projected. Since the first tax cuts were passed, when I was in the Senate, the budget deficit has been cut in half.’’
Yippee-skippy: the deficit that didn't exist before they created it is a bit smaller than it was. It's also not entirely honest, because a massive amount of spending that USED to be part of the normal budget is now being done through spending bills. (See the recent Congressional Iraq bill, a large chunk of which is going towards things that used to be paid for out of the standard military budget - body armor, equipment upgrades, etc.) Most of the 'balancing of the budget' over the past few years is little more than smoke and mirrors.
— And on the NFL draft:
‘‘Why do these teams keep drafting players with character defects you can see at 100 yards in the dark with your back turned?’’
Sounds like the Republican candidate field to me...
manu1959
05-31-2007, 05:43 AM
— On tax cuts:
‘‘In fact, Treasury statistics show that tax revenues have soared and the budget deficit has been shrinking faster than even the optimists projected. Since the first tax cuts were passed, when I was in the Senate, the budget deficit has been cut in half.’’
Yippee-skippy: the deficit that didn't exist before they created it is a bit smaller than it was. It's also not entirely honest, because a massive amount of spending that USED to be part of the normal budget is now being done through spending bills. (See the recent Congressional Iraq bill, a large chunk of which is going towards things that used to be paid for out of the standard military budget - body armor, equipment upgrades, etc.) Most of the 'balancing of the budget' over the past few years is little more than smoke and mirrors.
— And on the NFL draft:
‘‘Why do these teams keep drafting players with character defects you can see at 100 yards in the dark with your back turned?’’
Sounds like the Republican candidate field to me...
would you expect them to sound like the dems?
can you tell me how clinton "balanced" the budget?
go to his website? http://www.fred08.com/
Well.........that helped a lot!
Why Fred Thompson in 2008?
Republicans want a presidential nominee who can bring our Nation together and who stands squarely on the conservative principles of Ronald Reagan.
We want a nominee who can carry a vision of a great America with clarity and conviction and who can translate this vision into meaningful public policy.
Fred Thompson can reach this high standard - it is one he has defined for himself throughout his public service career.
Fred Thompson’s record is solid. He does not waffle. He knows where he stands because he is sure of what he believes.
Fred Thompson inspires optimism, kindles courage and emboldens a belief in the greatness of our Nation.
Fred Thompson brings the right leadership for America
manu1959
05-31-2007, 05:47 AM
go to his website? http://www.fred08.com/
Well.........that helped a lot!
Why Fred Thompson in 2008?
Republicans want a presidential nominee who can bring our Nation together and who stands squarely on the conservative principles of Ronald Reagan.
We want a nominee who can carry a vision of a great America with clarity and conviction and who can translate this vision into meaningful public policy.
Fred Thompson can reach this high standard - it is one he has defined for himself throughout his public service career.
Fred Thompson’s record is solid. He does not waffle. He knows where he stands because he is sure of what he believes.
Fred Thompson inspires optimism, kindles courage and emboldens a belief in the greatness of our Nation.
Fred Thompson brings the right leadership for America
nice substance......LOL....thought you would get a kick out of that....
you been to all the other candidates? some are thin some are not....
nice substance......LOL....thought you would get a kick out of that....
you been to all the other candidates? some are thin some are not....
No just what I read in the paper and saw on the debates.
manu1959
05-31-2007, 05:53 AM
nice substance......LOL....thought you would get a kick out of that....
you been to all the other candidates? some are thin some are not....
No just what I read in the paper and saw on the debates.
been to all the dems and pubs websites...watched both debates....looking back on the past several elections....it would seem america tends to pick the guy the would like "work for".....fred seems to have that quality......
Well, the way they are talking about him, he has more charisma that Obama.........if that's possible and sorry that's what scares me about Obama. Like I say I know nothing about how he stands on anything....but from what the Democrats have to offer right now, I can see why they would be excited with anyone else.
manu1959
05-31-2007, 06:03 AM
Well, the way they are talking about him, he has more charisma that Obama.........if that's possible and sorry that's what scares me about Obama. Like I say I know nothing about how he stands on anything....but from what the Democrats have to offer right now, I can see why they would be excited with anyone else.
obama is very likeable....but fundemntally he wants to take all i have worked for and give it to those who can not do what i have done .... sorry no ..... hillary is the same for me .... so is edwards
i like rudy and fred .... the rest of the pubs don't do anything for me....
haven't heard of any indies....
obama is very likeable....but fundemntally he wants to take all i have worked for and give it to those who can not do what i have done .... sorry no ..... hillary is the same for me .... so is edwards
Yes, Democrats as a rule do take care of the more needy of the country.....I prefer my money to stay here, instead of funding the war. Also Democrats would like to get rid of this mounting debt hanging over our heads.
i like rudy and fred .... the rest of the pubs don't do anything for me....
Not to keep giving the same argument, but Rudy is for everything that I thought Republicans hold dear and so far you haven't given me anything to go on Fred.
haven't heard of any indies....
I can't remember the two that were thining about it, but with no incumbent at this time, there wouldn't be much of a chance. Both parties want to gain control.
manu1959
06-01-2007, 03:32 AM
obama is very likeable....but fundemntally he wants to take all i have worked for and give it to those who can not do what i have done .... sorry no ..... hillary is the same for me .... so is edwards
Yes, Democrats as a rule do take care of the more needy of the country.....I prefer my money to stay here, instead of funding the war. Also Democrats would like to get rid of this mounting debt hanging over our heads.
i like rudy and fred .... the rest of the pubs don't do anything for me....
Not to keep giving the same argument, but Rudy is for everything that I thought Republicans hold dear and so far you haven't given me anything to go on Fred.
haven't heard of any indies....
I can't remember the two that were thining about it, but with no incumbent at this time, there wouldn't be much of a chance. Both parties want to gain control.
speaking of financial debt.....we are in love with foriegn goods....america has lots of disposable income....we will always have a debt......further inflation and interest rates are rising in foriegn countries and are flat in the us at the moment.....so the dollar is weak....
unless the dems are going to start running other countries or rasie intrest rates or institute trade embargos.....you can't change much...
speaking of financial debt.....we are in love with foriegn goods....america has lots of disposable income....we will always have a debt......further inflation and interest rates are rising in foriegn countries and are flat in the us at the moment.....so the dollar is weak....
Economy isn't my strong suit. I was talking about how far we are in debt because of this war and how much further we will be. You were talking about not wanting money to go to the poor here. Perfect soulution would be a box oh the income tax forms.......hey that might even stop the war, if the citizens refuse to pay for it!
unless the dems are going to start running other countries or rasie intrest rates or institute trade embargos.....you can't change much...
Well I'll tell you something gotta give and I'm not blind enough to think that the Democrats are going to be our saviours.......but one thing for sure, it can't get much worse.
manu1959
06-01-2007, 04:21 AM
speaking of financial debt.....we are in love with foriegn goods....america has lots of disposable income....we will always have a debt......further inflation and interest rates are rising in foriegn countries and are flat in the us at the moment.....so the dollar is weak....
Economy isn't my strong suit. I was talking about how far we are in debt because of this war and how much further we will be. You were talking about not wanting money to go to the poor here. Perfect soulution would be a box oh the income tax forms.......hey that might even stop the war, if the citizens refuse to pay for it!
unless the dems are going to start running other countries or rasie intrest rates or institute trade embargos.....you can't change much...
Well I'll tell you something gotta give and I'm not blind enough to think that the Democrats are going to be our saviours.......but one thing for sure, it can't get much worse.
spent all day with my financial advisor today....he explained all kinds of things to me.....very enlightening day today.....
i have always thought the check box idea would be a cool idea....sends a clear essage to our elected officaials how we would like our money spent.....i would like to check no raises for elected officials till the actually do something...
That would be another good one........do you think they'd take a post it seriously?
manu1959
06-01-2007, 04:31 AM
That would be another good one........do you think they'd take a post it seriously?
the IRS would probably drop by.....
Fred Thompson wants to destroy American Sovereignity.
Hes a member of CFR and he is on board with the North American Union which will dissolve our borders with Canada and Mexico. Texas Gov Rick Perry has already begun the Super Highway that will bypass American ports and increase trucking traffic. Mexican drivers will not have to stop at any border check point until they reach Kansas.
1. CNN - Lou Dobbs: North American Union (4:15)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA
(Quick poll at the end of the segment: "Do you think maybe someone should take a vote, if we're going to merge Canada, Mexico and the United States?")
2. CNN - Lou Dobbs: North American Union Orwellian Brave New World (3:42) -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H65f3q_Lm9U
3. CNBC - The Amero - The coming North American Currency (2:15) -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98
4. Connie Fogal On The Corporate North American Union (54 mins, 5 stars) - http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-1355300745194023737&q=north+american+union
5. Pretext For The North American Union (NAU): Intro, Part 1 & Part 2 (SPP) (38 mins) - http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2268341860482102257&q=north+american+union
6. The Dangers of the "North American Union" (27 mins, 4.5 stars) - http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-5581854975245721437&q=north+american+union
Napa Valley Register (http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2007/06/12/opinion/commentary/doc466e3daf5c89f563905246.txt)
Thompson's immigration answer not good enough
By Kevin Eggers
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Rep. Thompson’s recent editorial in the Napa Valley Register on May 27 (“Thompson on North American Union”) in response to my concerns about NAFTA, the Security Prosperity Partnership of North America and a possible North American Union leaves me more than a little disappointed.
Besides asking him to speak publicly about the SPP and what appears to be the merging of laws and economies between the United States, Canada and Mexico, I also requested that Rep. Thompson to explain the questionable policies adopted by this government that the major media is hiding from public view.
It is because of Rep. Ron Paul. R-Texas, — a presidential candidate — and his newsletter, the “Freedom Report,” which I mentioned in my letters to Rep. Thompson, that I became familiar with many of the hidden policies of this government. I was hoping he would write something similar to the “Freedom Report,” so that his constituents would be as well informed as Ron Paul’s are about the direction our country is headed.
Ron Paul was a doctor before becoming a congressman and has voted 100 percent in support of our United States Constitution since taking office approximately 30 years ago — this means that if it isn’t allowed for in the Constitution, he doesn’t vote for it. Rep. Thompson’s voting record is somewhere around 50 percent. He took an oath to the United States Constitution, as did Ron Paul. Who should I trust more, someone that takes his constitutional oath seriously or Rep. Thompson?
This was Rep. Thompson’s response to my letters.
more... (http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2007/06/12/opinion/commentary/doc466e3daf5c89f563905246.txt)
For the life of I me ...I cant believe this asshat is in front of Ron Paul in the polls.
For the life of I me ...I cant believe this asshat is in front of Ron Paul in the polls.
I honestly think it's the character he plays on TV, also his speaking voice and "comfort". It's all about image for some.
Theres plenty of dirt on him, im just not seeing it in this thread
check this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tp1TGBFtgEI
preservanation
06-23-2007, 11:05 AM
Theres plenty of dirt on him, im just not seeing it in this thread
check this
Side splitting. You Tube, ha, what a country.
Taking political advice from a lib is like buying the first car a salesman tries to sell you.
Theres plenty of dirt on him, im just not seeing it in this thread
check this
Side splitting. You Tube, ha, what a country.
Taking political advice from a lib is like buying the first car a salesman tries to sell you.
It wasnt supposed to be funny. Are you familiar with vote caging?
These 2 links will explain it better than me
a) What the Heck is Vote Caging and Why Should We Care? (http://www.gregpalast.com/raging-caging-what-the-heck-is-vote-caging-and-why-should-we-care/)
b) Senators Demand Justice Dept. Investigation Into Tim Griffin, RNC 2004 Vote Caging Allegations (http://www.gregpalast.com/senators-demand-justice-dept-investigation-into-tim-griffin-rnc-2004-vote-caging-allegations/)
Greg Palast bought a parody email which recieved incriminating evidence about caging. Heres just a nutshell: (from link "a" (http://www.gregpalast.com/raging-caging-what-the-heck-is-vote-caging-and-why-should-we-care/) above) Vote caging is an illegal trick to suppress minority voters (who tend to vote Democrat) by getting them knocked off the voter rolls if they fail to answer registered mail sent to homes they aren’t living at (because they are, say, at college or at war). The Republican National Committee reportedly stopped the practice following a consent decree in a 1986 case. Google the term and you’ll quickly arrive at the Wizard of Oz of caging, Greg Palast, investigative reporter and author of the wickedly funny Armed Madhouse: From Baghdad to New Orleans—Sordid Secrets and Strange Tales of a White House Gone Wild. (http://www.amazon.com/Armed-Madhouse-Baghdad-Orleans-Sordid-Secrets/dp/0452288312/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-6028175-2915147?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1180634631&sr=8-1) Palast started reporting allegations of Republican vote caging for the BBC’s Newsnight in 2004 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkvWkwv7UVo). He’s been almost alone on the story since then. Palast contends, both in Armed Madhouse and widely through the liberal blogosphere, that vote caging, an illegal voter-suppression scheme, happened in Florida in 2004 this way:
The Bush-Cheney operatives sent hundreds of thousands of letters marked “Do not forward” to voters’ homes. Letters returned (”caged”) were used as evidence to block these voters’ right to cast a ballot on grounds they were registered at phony addresses. Who were the evil fakers? Homeless men, students on vacation and—you got to love this—American soldiers. Oh yeah: most of them are Black voters.
Why weren’t these African-American voters home when the Republican letters arrived? The homeless men were on park benches, the students were on vacation—and the soldiers were overseas.
Palast supplies evidence linking Tim Griffin, then-research director for the RNC, to this caging plot; specifically, a series of confidential e-mails to Republican Party muckety-mucks with the suggestive heading “RE: caging.” The e-mails were accidentally sent to a George Bush parody site (http://2004.georgewbush.org/deadletteroffice/). They also contained suggestively named spreadsheets, headed “caging” as well. The names on the lists are what Palast’s researchers deemed to be homeless men and soldiers deployed in Iraq. Here are (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4594)the e-mails
Reposted from the Freds Pants thread I read those posts and watched the videos and see little more than assertion. Your video tries to say that he supports keeping black people from voting and that he is evil for being a CFR member.
Right, its more than "assertion". I offerred photographic proof (see actual email below) of election tampering by a US Attorney, a fraudster that Thompson is courting for his own immenent election!!
If he gets Tim Griffin it will ONLY be to rig the election....he has had great success with Rove as an accomplice, in election FRAUD. You know the big fuss about Roves missing emails?? Greg Palast has some of them and the Senate is going after Rove and Griffin.
Heres what they look like:
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4458/gregpalasttimgriffincagvt4.jpg
To see the emails and read the story go here (http://www.gregpalast.com/raging-caging-what-the-heck-is-vote-caging-and-why-should-we-care/) and here (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4594) (the RED link (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4594)has the actual pics of emails)
Boogy,
A) Are you on board with One world government. Destroying Americas sovereignity, to gain world domination?... like Thompson is?
B) Are you OK with Election Fraud?
Its real simple. Tim Griffin was appointed (never a confirmation hearing) to a US Attorney seat as a reward for putting bush/cheney in office by FRAUDULENT means.
BTW;
I am not just saying Griffin is a bigot; Blacks by and large, vote Democrat. Republicans are the oppressors. The enemy of civil rights. Griffin would not risk prison out of petty bigotry... he did it for partisan power.
... and he will be going to prison (http://www.gregpalast.com/senators-demand-justice-dept-investigation-into-tim-griffin-rnc-2004-vote-caging-allegations/).
Raging Caging (http://www.gregpalast.com/raging-caging-what-the-heck-is-vote-caging-and-why-should-we-care/)
<snip>
And while bouncing voters from the rolls on the basis of their race violates federal law, it’s not beyond imagining that eager young “loyal Bushies” (http://www.slate.com/id/2166850/)aren’t all that bothered by federal laws, especially if there’s a way to bend rather than overtly break them.
From the point of view of the ongoing DoJ scandal, perhaps what’s most urgent about the vote-caging claims is that they go a long, long way toward explaining why Karl Rove and Harriet Miers were so determined to get Griffin seated in the Arkansas U.S. Attorney’s office, and to do so without a confirmation hearing. If, as the Justice Department has continued to insist, Griffin was eminently qualified (http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2007/04/14/WashingtonDCBureau/341733.html)for the position, why did he need to be spared the hearing at all costs? And once it became clear that he would undergo a hearing, why did Griffin sideline himself with the colorful observation (http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002674.php) that undergoing Senate confirmation would be “like volunteering to stand in front of a firing squad in the middle of a three-ring circus?” Griffin—who is now in job talks with the Fred Thompson campaign (http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Arkansas_Senator_happy_to_see_top_0530.html)â€⠀ťsure looks like a guy hiding something, and if vote caging is that something, it becomes even more interesting that the White House was pushing him forward.
Combined with the rigged results in Florida; and the statewide fraud at every level, in Ohio... bush/cheney "won" the two swing states and had to pay the pipers. That brings us to "Attorneygate".
In fact, while subject to the attack on their right to vote, none of those targeted, including homeless persons and soldiers sent overseas, were found to be fraudulently registered.Guilty only of voting while black. Their votes were not counted, their ballots were "caged" on metal shelves... suspect only because of power mad opportunist profiteers like Griffin and bush and rove. And they numbered plenty to switch the vote which was won by a very narrow margin.
So we have Tim Griffen, Ken Blackwell and Karl Rove roaming free on the streets.... but they got Paris!!
feel safe now?
Heres that damning email that will put US Attorney, Tim Griffin in prison
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/5171/gregpalasttimgriffincagpr0.jpg
preservanation
06-24-2007, 04:55 PM
DANG: Republicans are the oppressors. The enemy of civil rights. repeating your propaganda over and over still doesn't make it true.
What you need to do is take a page out of Chavez's playbook, and shut down all media which disagrees with you, or was it Marx?
BoogyMan
06-24-2007, 05:38 PM
Wow, if Greg Palast said it, it MUST be true. LOL
Egads....
Wow, if Greg Palast said it, it MUST be true. LOL
Egads.... Typical. Cant beat the facts? Shoot the messenger.
Everything is well documented. Palast isnt a blow hard. He is an old fashioned Investigative Reporter. Not a corporate tool.
Check it out:source (http://www.gregpalast.com/senators-demand-justice-dept-investigation-into-tim-griffin-rnc-2004-vote-caging-allegations/)
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/4738/ussenatesealpk5.jpg
UNITED STATES SENATE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 18, 2007
CONTACT:
Laura Capps/Melissa Wagoner (Kennedy), 202-224-2633
Alex Swartsel (Whitehouse), 202-228-6293
Senators Demand DOJ Investigation Into Voter Suppression Allegations
Kennedy, Whitehouse Ask Whether Justice Officials Knew Former Rove Aide Allegedly Engaged in Illegal “Vote Caging” Before Naming Him Interim U.S. Attorney
<snip>
Today, Senators Kennedy and Whitehouse demanded an investigation by two DOJ watchdog agencies to determine whether Griffin may have violated the Voting Rights Act or other federal laws, and whether Justice Department officials knew of Griffin’s potentially unlawful activity when he was named U.S. Attorney.
Kennedy and Whitehouse are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is conducting its own investigation into the unprecedented firing late last year of several U.S. Attorneys. Senator Kennedy, a longtime champion for voting rights, will chair a Judiciary Committee hearing this Thursday on oversight of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. Whitehouse served as U.S. Attorney for Rhode Island from 1994-1998.
“It is very disturbing to think that Department officials may have approved the appointment of a United States Attorney knowing that he had engaged in racially targeted vote caging,” the senators wrote. “Moreover, it is very disturbing to think that senior officials were aware of this practice and did nothing to refer their information to relevant officials within the Department for investigation and a determination as to whether it was a violation of a consent decree or law within the Department’s jurisdiction to enforce.”
The full text of the letter is below.
June 18, 2007
Alberto Gonzales
Attorney General
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Dear Attorney General Gonzales:
We write to request that the Department of Justice promptly investigate allegations that the Republican National Committee engaged in “vote caging” during the 2004 elections. We also ask that you investigate whether any Department officials were aware of allegations that Tim Griffin had engaged in caging when he was appointed United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, and whether appropriate action was taken. Caging is a reprehensible voter suppression tactic, and it may also violate federal law and the terms of applicable judicially enforceable consent decrees.
Caging is a voter suppression tactic whereby a political campaign sends mail marked “do not forward” to a targeted group of eligible voters. A more aggressive version involves sending mail to a targeted group of voters with instructions to sign and return an acknowledgment card. The campaign then creates a list of those whose mail was returned undelivered and challenges the right of those citizens to vote – on the ground that the voter does not live at the registered address. There are many reasons why registered mail might be “returned to sender” that have nothing to do with a voter’s eligibility. A voter might be an active member of the armed forces and stationed far from home, or a student registered at his parents’ address. Even a typographical error during entry of the voter’s registration information might result in an address that appears invalid.
The Republican Party has a long and ignominious record of caging – much of it focused on the African American community. For example, in 1981 the RNC sent a mass mailing into predominantly African American neighborhoods in New Jersey and used the resulting 45,000 letters marked “undeliverable” to challenge those voters’ eligibility. In 1986, the RNC used similar tactics in an effort to disenfranchise roughly 31,000 voters, most of them African American, in Louisiana. These tactics led to litigation and the RNC’s eventual signing of two consent decrees, still in effect, which bar the RNC from using “ballot security” programs ostensibly intended to prevent voter fraud as a tactic to target minority voters.
In 2004, however, allegations of caging by Republican officials arose again – this time over an effort to suppress votes in Florida. Emails sent in August 2004 by Tim Griffin, then Research Director and Deputy Communications Director of the RNC, demonstrate his knowledge and approval of a spreadsheet listing caged voters in predominantly African American neighborhoods in Jacksonville, Florida. (See attached.) Two years later, Mr. Griffin was appointed, without Senate confirmation, as United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Such actions appear plainly to violate the consent decrees signed by the RNC in 1981 and 1986. We ask that you investigate whether in these circumstances Mr. Griffin or others may also have violated the Voting Rights Act, the National Voter Registration Act, the mail fraud statute, or any other federal statute.
It also appears that high-ranking officials in the Department knew of Mr. Griffin’s involvement in caging. Monica Goodling recently testified to the House Judiciary Committee that she discussed concerns about Mr. Griffin’s involvement in caging with Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty during a session to prepare for Mr. McNulty’s Congressional testimony. It is very disturbing to think that Department officials may have approved the appointment of a United States Attorney knowing that he had engaged in racially targeted vote caging.
Moreover, it is very disturbing to think that senior officials were aware of this practice and did nothing to refer their information to relevant officials within the Department for investigation and a determination as to whether it was a violation of a consent decree or law within the Department’s jurisdiction to enforce.
We, therefore, ask the Office of the Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility to conduct an investigation to determine who in DOJ knew about Mr. Griffin’s potentially unlawful activity before he was named interim U.S. Attorney, and whether appropriate action was taken on that knowledge, and to recommend whatever action is appropriate.
At a time when the Department’s political independence and its commitment to enforcement of civil rights statutes have been called into doubt, it is vitally important that the Department thoroughly investigate these allegations of unlawful voter suppression, and the apparent failure of Department employees to forward to the appropriate authorities information they had about this practice.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
United States Senator
Sheldon Whitehouse
United States Senator
cc:
Paul D. Clement, Solicitor General
Alice S. Fisher, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division
Wan J. Kim, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division
Glenn A. Fine, Inspector General
H. Marshall Jarrett, Director, Office of Professional Responsibility Not only is the Senate going after these guys (FINALLY having subpoena powers that only comes with majority) Conyers too, has latched on. Just because Griffin resigned his post as US Atty (US Attorney Resigns Following Conyers’ Request for BBC Documents (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0706/S00040.htm)), doesnt mean its over!! BTW; he wasnt just "involved" in the voter caging, he DIRECTED it. Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee investigating the firing of US Attorneys, met Thursday evening in New York with Palast. After reviewing key documents, Conyers stated that, despite Griffin's resignation, "we're not through with him by any means."
Conyers indicated that he thought it unlikely that Griffin could carry out this massive 'caging' operation without the knowledge of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Rove.
Griffin, who was chosen as US Attorney at Rove's request, has not responded to requests by BBC to explain the 'caging' memos.
source (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4620) You should be thanking Palast for delivering us an Honest-to-God Traitor!!
But, no. He's your traitor. As long as your side wins the election.... it doesnt really matter HOW they did it. RIGHT?
BoogyMan
06-24-2007, 07:13 PM
I laugh at Palast as his allegations cannot be proven and his methods are dubious. You have bounced around to so many topics and made so many ridiculous assumptions about my beliefs that I will now give about 2 seconds worth of consideration to your line of argumentation.
This isn't a bash bush thread, or a vote caging thread, it is a Thompson thread. Greg Palast is a left-wing agenda pusher and as such has no credibility. None.
Focus man, just for a little while.
Greg Palast is a left-wing agenda pusher and as such has no credibility. Actually he is non-partisan (http://www.gregpalast.com/fear-and-libel/).
BoogyMan
06-24-2007, 08:29 PM
Greg Palast is a left-wing agenda pusher and as such has no credibility. Actually he is non-partisan (http://www.gregpalast.com/fear-and-libel/).
After that I can barely contain myself. ROFL
This is the equivalent of the old "he is a great guy because he says so" line of argumentation. Palast is a left-wing agenda pusher.
From the Conservative rag, HumanEvents.comSource (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15233)
North American Union Already Starting to Replace USA
by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted: 05/30/2006
<snip>
This is not a theoretical exercise being prepared so it can be submitted for review. Instead, SPP is producing an action agreement to be implemented directly by regulations, without any envisioned direct Congressional oversight.
<snip>
What we have here is an executive branch plan being implemented by the Bush administration to construct a new super-regional structure completely by fiat. Yet, we can find no single speech in which President Bush has ever openly expressed to the American people his intention to create a North American Union by evolving NAFTA into this NAFTA-Plus as a first, implementing step.
Anyone who has wondered why President Bush has not bothered to secure our borders is advised to spend some time examining the SPP working groups’ agenda. In every area of activity, the SPP agenda stresses free and open movement of people, trade, and capital within the North American Union. Once the SPP agenda is implemented with appropriate departmental regulations, there will be no area of immigration policy, trade rules, environmental regulations, capital flows, public health, plus dozens of other key policy areas countries that the U.S. government will be able to decide alone, or without first consulting with some appropriate North American Union regulatory body. At best, our border with Mexico will become a speed bump, largely erased, with little remaining to restrict the essentially free movement of people, trade, and capital.How long will it take for chaos to break out and they will HAVE TO declare martial law?
How about that nerve.... Acting like a king. Get a rope.
Did you guys know Thompson was a mole for Nixon (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/07/04/not_all_would_put_a_heroic_sheen_on_thompsons_wate rgate_role/)??
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_Party_Photo/2007/07/04/1183542649_2985.jpg
The Senate Watergate Committee chief counsel, Samuel Dash, crouched to confer with Fred Thompson (left) minority counsel, and Senator Howard Baker during a July 1973 hearing. (James Atherton/ Washington Post/ File)
Not all would put a heroic sheen on Thompson's Watergate role
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | July 4, 2007
WASHINGTON -- The day before Senate Watergate Committee minority counsel Fred Thompson made the inquiry that launched him into the national spotlight -- asking an aide to President Nixon whether there was a White House taping system -- he telephoned Nixon's lawyer.
Thompson tipped off the White House that the committee knew about the taping system and would be making the information public. In his all-but-forgotten Watergate memoir, "At That Point in Time," Thompson said he acted with "no authority" in divulging the committee's knowledge of the tapes, which provided the evidence that led to Nixon's resignation. It was one of many Thompson leaks to the Nixon team, according to a former investigator for Democrats on the committee, Scott Armstrong , who remains upset at Thompson's actions.
"Thompson was a mole for the White House," Armstrong said in an interview. "Fred was working hammer and tong to defeat the investigation of finding out what happened to authorize Watergate and find out what the role of the president was."
Asked about the matter this week, Thompson -- who is preparing to run for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination -- responded via e-mail without addressing the specific charge of being a Nixon mole: "I'm glad all of this has finally caused someone to read my Watergate book, even though it's taken them over thirty years."
more... (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/07/04/not_all_would_put_a_heroic_sheen_on_thompsons_wate rgate_role/)Stick a fork in him.
Marley
07-06-2007, 01:21 PM
He looks good with hair.
Remember, most sane folks don't make politics their religion, it's only (appropriately) politics.
In the post modern world the US president seems to be required to be a "front man" i.e. Sinatra, Tom Jones, whatever, the front man of the SHOW.
Reagan HAMMERED the Demcorat establishment pulling this off.
A dirty little secret is Slick Willy was a disciple of Reagan, it has been witnessed and reported that Slick spent hours, "all nighters," studying, training and emulating Reagan's every subtle move. Knowing this and observing, I'm convinced Slick started this practice with Elvis, emulating every nuanced piece of body language.
It's all some hybrid of mass psychology and show business, and liberals eat it up like ice cream. LOL
But anyway, people in general are beginning to recognize this prerequisite for the presidency and Thompson possesses the requisite skills as well as the general ideology.
Big Dave
07-06-2007, 04:48 PM
President Bush gets beat up for not being at home in front of the camera. Reagan and the Impeached One are lionized for being adept on-camera.
It would seem in that context that Fred Thompson's acting career would be an advantage.
Marley
07-06-2007, 05:09 PM
Reagan and the Impeached One are lionized
Huh?
"Lionized?"
No sir, I did not celebrate either.
Maybe your having a vocabulary problem, what is it you're struggling to express?
I wrote it, I wasn't celebrating, "lionizing" anything.
Let me know, I'll help as best I can.
Big Dave
07-06-2007, 05:20 PM
You didn't Marley, but lots of other people did.
Actually, if you beat up Bush for being tongue-tied in fron tof the camera, aren't you tacitly demanding someone who is polished before the camera?
Poor Abe Lincoln - not reputed to be much of an orator in his day.
He looks good with hair.Better than a bald mole, I guess.
Remember, most sane folks don't make politics their religion, it's only (appropriately) politics.You want to downplay that he wants to be a politician again?
Just until he rigs the election he has no chance of winning legitimately, right?
We need to put that in front of everything he says. That he is interested in Vote Caging. He wants to rig the election. Griffin hasnt been charged yet. I hope it happens right after Thompson hires him so the glaring light will expose these cockroaches.
In the post modern world the US president seems to be required to be a "front man" i.e. Sinatra, Tom Jones, whatever, the front man of the SHOW.Right...and have an megalomaniac behind the curtains with all the power. Like Cheney. That defines us now? The Globalists/Terrorists have won?
It's all some hybrid of mass psychology and show business, and liberals eat it up like ice cream. LOLYou are the one who wants a TV personality for president. Who was an undercover operative when he WAS in office.
But anyway, people in general are beginning to recognize this prerequisite for the presidency and Thompson possesses the requisite skills as well as the general ideology.That he is courting the guy who stole the election for the current presitard? We need more cheaters and crooks to lead us into complete destruction?
Do you think a lazy work ethic and espionage are sexy?
You mentioned a lot of shallow people in your last post. Why didnt you compare him to Justin Timberlake?
The Dems dont have to say anything except; "We are not them"
Phyxius
07-06-2007, 08:09 PM
This whole discussion is academic, really. The reality is that 2008 is Hillary's to lose, and no amount of wishing for a Messiah for George Orwell's Party is going to change that.
I know that idea gives some of our conservative members here seizures, but it is the truth. Deal with it...
Marley
07-06-2007, 08:26 PM
The reality is that 2008 is Hillary's to lose
Not YET.
The Clintons have only won 3-way races, they've never won a head-to-head 2-way race, ever.
They've never had the numbers, they've never won more than half the popular vote. And they're negatives are always too high to make a 2-way race feisable, probable.
I know that idea gives some of our liberal members here seizures, but it is the truth. Deal with it...
The right has been trying to define Hillary as our choice for years now.
She just isnt. She is not much better than bush, really.
She is pro terrorism (as long as its our terrorism). She voted to attack Iraq and has not apologized yet (as far as I know).
She voted for the bankrupcy bill and helped legalize loan sharking.
She is not the choice for the left.
The left is against World Domination. Mrs Clinton is a NWO proponent.
Hillary is pro NAFTA too. Thats slavery.
And Obama is not the 2nd best either. He hates Ohio Black people.
Dr. Debate
07-06-2007, 09:56 PM
Up until recently, I've been a follower of Rudy Giuliani. However, just the other day I realized Rudy is Pro-Choice and Pro-Gay Marriage. As a christian and neo-conservatist, I disagree with both, and I sought out for new great candidate. Then I stumbled upon a famous actor from "Law and Order" running for the Republican Party. His name was Fred Thompson. After look at his past records and beliefs, I am now a strong follower of the man. Very moral and great for our country.
Big Dave
07-06-2007, 10:22 PM
Hillary is the inevitable Democratic nominee. Barack Hussein Obama will self-destruct. Hillary's organization is too good.
Hillary will galvanize the GOP. She very much IS their worst dream come true. She will bring out 110 million people to vote against her.
On the other hand, the Democrats are busy running against President Bush. They will be sorely disappointed when he is not on the ballot.
On the other hand, the Democrats are busy running against President Bush. They will be sorely disappointed when he is not on the ballot.
He's not, but his policies still are.
Either Thompson is Lying or he has Reagans Alzheimers....
Either way, he is saying he wasnt a lobbyist for abortion rights!
LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-thompson7jul07,0,54260.story?coll=la-home-center)
Thompson, as a lobbyist, took abortion rights assignment
A spokesman for the GOP presidential hopeful denies he did the work, a claim an ex-colleague calls 'bizarre.'
By Michael Finnegan, Times Staff Writer
6:34 PM PDT, July 6, 2007
Fred ThompsonFormer Tennessee Sen. Fred D. Thompson, who is campaigning for president as a "pro-life" Republican, accepted an assignment from a family-planning group to lobby the first Bush White House to ease a controversial abortion restriction, according to a 1991 document and several people familiar with the matter.
A spokesman for the former senator denied that Thompson did the lobbying work. But the minutes of a 1991 board meeting of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn. say that the group hired Thompson that year.
His task was to urge the administration of President George H. W. Bush to withdraw or relax a rule that barred abortion counseling at clinics that receive federal money, according to the records and to people who worked on the matter.
The abortion "gag rule" was a major political flashpoint at the time. Lobbying against the rule would have placed Thompson at odds with the anti-abortion movement that he is now trying to rally behind his expected campaign for president.
Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo adamantly denied that Thompson worked for the family planning group. "Fred Thompson did not lobby for this group, period," he said in an e-mail
more.... (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-thompson7jul07,0,54260.story?coll=la-home-center) The "Lazy Candidate" takes whatever money he can get.... as long as he doesnt have to work.
Principles? Who needs steeenking principles?
Big Dave
07-07-2007, 02:55 AM
Do you really believe a reporter from the Los Angeles Times?
I understand that people are going have problems with abortion.
I feel the decision belongs solely to the woman. The husbands opinion should be considered.
But it is a private matter between a woman and her husband.
The church can gofuckitself.
The politicians can gofuckthemselves.
It is a private matter.
The boyfriend and the rapist and the pedophile and the incestor.... have no say in the matter....whatsoever.
I have an issue with politicians who claim to be pro-life yet are warmongering sociopaths.
I also have an issue with hypocrites...those who say and vote and live one way...while their tongues and actions spew forth the lies of another way.
Do you really believe a reporter from the Los Angeles Times?
Which part dont YOU believe?
A) That he ever lobbied for the pro-choice group?
B) That he forgot/lied about it?
Big Dave
07-07-2007, 06:33 PM
What do I not believe?
Every word, sentence and comma written by the MSM.
Stoner
07-07-2007, 06:49 PM
It's great news to see libs start to bash Thompson. It shows he's a danger to them. If he wasn't a threat to libs they wouldn't be posting lies and so forth about him. But definitly good news to see the left bash him. It means he has a good chance.
In case you libs out there are confused here is a quick lightning round of questions about major issues with Fred Thompson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sagvVMfAU...ed&search=
quiet man
07-07-2007, 09:12 PM
Ok I read both article and both are pretty much the same thing. Hooray! Most like Ronald Reagan! Mentions on his Law and Order career, he was a senator...... But I see absolutely nothing on how he stands on issues, except a small mention of pro-life. While I can understand the excitement....how about some stance on the issues.
maybe we should examine this actor a little closer. the gop needs excitement from anywhere thats positive. ;)
What do I not believe?
Every word, sentence and comma written by the MSM.
Just curious, Dave. If you don't listen or read the main stream media, where do you get your news from?
Stoner wrote:
It's great news to see libs start to bash Thompson. It shows he's a danger to them. If he wasn't a threat to libs they wouldn't be posting lies and so forth about him. But definitly good news to see the left bash him. It means he has a good chance.
Bash? Big Dave made a statment and Dang refuted it.
quiet man wrote:
maybe we should examine this actor a little closer. the gop needs excitement from anywhere thats positive
Well, in all honesty, we can see the same with just rumors that Gore might run. With that said, I have a feeling when Cheney goes in to get his pace maker fixed, the doctor will say he's under too much stress, Bush will be forced to name a new VP........and that will give them a viable candidate in '08.
He is not a threat to libs.
He is more of the same. Just one more unworthy sack of crap.
He is a threat to American values. He supports scooter Libby, Destruction of our borders, And ELECTION FRAUD....isnt that all we need to know?
(Granted, I will keep you informed as the sun slowly rises to exposed these asshats.)
Stoner;
"The url contained a malformed video id."
BTW; Stoner....if you are a republican who smokes pot... doesnt that make you a libertarian?
Big Dave.... I assume you are armed with unsubstantiated opinions, if you cant offer sources to support your um, vagaries.
Spin away.... I will try to remember to step aside.
Fred Thompsom answered Project Vote Smart (http://vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=22003), thus:Abortion
9. If elected to Congress, which of the following general principles or specific proposals will you support concerning abortion?
X Abortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy.
Edit to add:
Media Matters (http://mediamatters.org/items/200706010008)reports:
In fact, on July 29, 1993, the Memphis Commercial Appeal reported that Thompson, then running for a Tennessee U.S. Senate seat, said during an interview that he "supports the Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade decision that established a constitutional right to abortion." In an October 21, 1994, article, The Washington Post similarly reported that "both" Thompson and his Democratic opponent in the 1994 Senate race, then-Rep. Jim Cooper, "believe in legal abortion."
Further, as The New York Sun's "Latest Politics Blog" reported, Thompson indicated in a 1994 Project Vote Smart questionnaire that he believed "[a]bortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy" (while also indicating his support for numerous restrictions).
Big Dave
07-08-2007, 03:01 AM
"Abortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy."
Big Dave's response:
Isn't that the Roe v. Wade decision in a nutshell? How did Roe get expanded to cover partial-birth abortion.
Yes, we are being lied to - by the MSM. 9:1 Democrats. The MSM considers Dan rather a hero after he got caught trying to pawn off fictionm supported by forgery as the truth.
The MSM considers Dan rather a hero after he got caught trying to pawn off fictionm supported by forgery as the truth.
Sorry Dave, that simply is not true. 60 minutes ratings and the fact that Rather "stepped down" will show you that........but you still didn't answer my question. Where do you get your main source of news?
Just because Dan Rather was fed a fake document of a real event.
Does not mean gw bush shouldnt stand before a firing squad for wartime desertion of his post.
AWOL is 30 days. Bush deserted for 11 months.
Stoner
07-17-2007, 06:47 PM
Looks like it's about that time.
Wamp: Thompson is close to joining ’08 race
By Klaus Marre
July 17, 2007
Rep. Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.) said Monday that he expects former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) to soon join the race for the White House.
“My view is that he’ll enter the race at some point just in the coming days,” said Wamp, a key supporter of Thompson.
The lawmaker said the actor turned senator turned actor did not want to join the race too soon but is “doing everything a presidential candidate should do.”
Thompson has long been expected to join the race and the Law & Order star has traveled the country and raised millions. He will take part in a large fundraising event in Washington, D.C. on July 29, but Wamp did not say when a formal announcement would come. The lawmaker said, however, that “a couple dozen members” of the House would publicly support Thompson at the event.
With regard to the race for the Republican nomination, Wamp said he believes it will come down to Thompson and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
With Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) campaign fading, Wamp believes Thompson, Romney and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani will become the “big three” in the Republican primary.
“I’ve talked to quite a few of McCain’s supporters in the House of Representatives, a couple in the United States Senate, that are concerned about McCain’s standing right now and the fact that he's lost his momentum,” Wamp said on MSNBC. He added that Thompson is the second choice of many McCain supporters.
The lawmaker also said that, with conservatives determining who will be the GOP candidate, Giuliani’s chances are not as good as those of Thompson and Romney.
“I feel like Giuliani’s running on 9/11 fumes and those fumes are slowly evaporating because there’s got to be the substance and the policy,” Wamp said. “And [Giuliani] doesn’t connect with the base of our party.”
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/wamp-thompson-is-close-to-joining-08-race-2007-07-17.html
Buck Laser
07-17-2007, 07:35 PM
I thought he was supposed to declare on July 4.
I have a reason to believe he wont run. He would be just another "also ran"
Today: AP poll: 'None of the above' leads GOP field (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-07-17-none-of-the-above_N.htm)
Ron Paul, believe it or not is the most exciting candidate on the right.
He's the only contender who will actually keep the oath of office.
Tyler7940
08-26-2007, 07:33 PM
This would be my dream pick for running for POTUS. I have followed this man's career for a while. I personally love this candidate and can't think of anyone better right now to run for the republicans.
He holds all of the traditional republican values (pro-life, anti-abortion, pro-gun), very charismatic and one of the few truly honest politicians left.
Any other republicans like Thompson?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Dalton_Thompson
Stoner, It's really amazing how our minds seem to work the exact way. I would love to see Thompson run and, win the election. I was looking on Fox News one day and It said "Thompson quits race for presidency", I was pissed. It turned out not to be Fred. Fred Thompson reminds me of Reagan and I garuntee you that if he becomes president, America will be better off than it has been in a long time.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.