Fred Thompson declares tonite on the Tonite Show.

[Fazak]

Oh,... and this,... if you like illegal immigration, you'll like Fred Thompson as president.  He's even in favor of giving the illegals federal benefits paid for with your tax dollars.

http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=104314


Thompson Supported Benefits for Illegal Immigrants, Opposed Employer Verification System. “But on immigration, Mr. Thompson had several votes where he bucked the pack — and seemed to favor illegal aliens. The most stark example was his 1995 vote on the welfare overhaul, when he voted to preserve illegal aliens' ability to receive federal benefits. He was one of just six senators to vote that way, joining four other Republicans and one Democrat. And in 1996, as Congress considered a crackdown on illegal aliens, Mr. Thompson voted against setting up a system so employers could verify the legal status of their workers.” [Washington Times, 9/5/07]

[ncsurveyor]

Voted YES on welfare overhaul. (Sep 1995)
Voted YES on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

source: ontheissues.org


Maybe he really wanted the overhaul to pass, and just fixed the immigrant stuff later?  Politics is funny like that.

[Fazak]

Voted YES on welfare overhaul. (Sep 1995)
Voted YES on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

source: ontheissues.org


Maybe he really wanted the overhaul to pass, and just fixed the immigrant stuff later?  Politics is funny like that.

Found this on your link,... funny that you failed to mention it.

Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)

[Fazak]

In fact,.. looking over Fred Thompson's voting record, it's impossible to see an established pattern.

He votes one way on an issue,.. then votes another way of a very similar issue.

Seems to me that instead of taking a principaled stand, he's trying to vote both ways enough to appeal to as many on both the left and right as possible.

I prefer consistency,.. rather than someone who can't be counted on to reflect a political philosophy.

[SHOOTALL]

we need someone to play hardball , and someone who will cast the first vote cause they don't care how the rest vote ! now who can do that ?

[ncsurveyor]

Gee, If I was trying to hide it, Fazak, I wouldn't have quoted my source.

I addressed your post.

Before you start taking your normal attitude, keep in mind that I agree with most of Paul's stances.  I just like to get the whole story on things.

I have to admit, though, I can't remember who brought it up, but your attitude almost puts me off of Dr. Paul.

As far as voting different ways, I can't really rely 100% on any voting record information, especially on the internet, without reading the bills in their entirety and determining what riders have been attached.  Hard to say what reason someone votes one way or the other, without reading the whole thing.

[jh45gun]

Oh,... and this,... if you like illegal immigration, you'll like Fred Thompson as president.  He's even in favor of giving the illegals federal benefits paid for with your tax dollars.

http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=104314


Thompson Supported Benefits for Illegal Immigrants, Opposed Employer Verification System. “But on immigration, Mr. Thompson had several votes where he bucked the pack — and seemed to favor illegal aliens. The most stark example was his 1995 vote on the welfare overhaul, when he voted to preserve illegal aliens' ability to receive federal benefits. He was one of just six senators to vote that way, joining four other Republicans and one Democrat. And in 1996, as Congress considered a crackdown on illegal aliens, Mr. Thompson voted against setting up a system so employers could verify the legal status of their workers.” [Washington Times, 9/5/07]

Here is the link which is in talbe form which may be easier to read: http://www.cqpolitics.com/pdfs/2007_3_27thompson-keyvotes.pdf
You will notice Thompson voted pro life and Pro gun. On the welfare issue he voted the same as McCain according to the chart and as many Bills there are added provisions to what may be a good bill. Your picking bits and pieces to attack Thompson will not work,here is his Senate Record. He looks pretty darn Conservative to me.  Like I said open the link the chart is easier to read as cutting and pasteing it does not give the right format.

[jh45gun]

I have to admit, though, I can't remember who brought it up, but your attitude almost puts me off of Dr. Paul.

That was me and I would have to agree.

[jh45gun]

As far as voting different ways, I can't really rely 100% on any voting record information, especially on the internet, without reading the bills in their entirety and determining what riders have been attached.  Hard to say what reason someone votes one way or the other, without reading the whole thing.

I agree this cutting and pasting of snippets to make some one look pro or con with out reading the whole bill does not give the true picture. On reason I am ignoring most of these links that are posted they just do not give the whole picture but like most internet BS a partial truth that may be twisted to show the view of the poster.

[ncsurveyor]

As far as voting different ways, I can't really rely 100% on any voting record information, especially on the internet, without reading the bills in their entirety and determining what riders have been attached.  Hard to say what reason someone votes one way or the other, without reading the whole thing.

I agree this cutting and pasting of snippets to make some one look pro or con with out reading the whole bill does not give the true picture. On reason I am ignoring most of these links that are posted they just do not give the whole picture but like most internet BS a partial truth that may be twisted to show the view of the poster.

Believe it or not, I did a preliminary investigation on both iowapolitics.com, and the site I quoted.  trying to find out who they are, affiliations, etc.  Sometimes who says something is just as important or more than what they say.

[jh45gun]

In fact,.. looking over Fred Thompson's voting record, it's impossible to see an established pattern.

He votes one way on an issue,.. then votes another way of a very similar issue.

Seems to me that instead of taking a principaled stand, he's trying to vote both ways enough to appeal to as many on both the left and right as possible.

I prefer consistency,.. rather than someone who can't be counted on to reflect a political philosophy.

Look at any person in Congress and you will see they vote on each bill for different reasons and each may not be the same if you looked at the link I provided he was ALL Pro Gun and ANTI Abortion. Because he voted pro  on bills you are against may mean their was other parts of the bill he supported as was stated in an other link. Just like any other politician Voting on bills for ALL of CONGRESS is not black and white there are grey areas too and any one who would try to be fair and impartial and who is not trying to force a candidate down our throats would realize that.

[Graybeard]

In fact,.. looking over Fred Thompson's voting record, it's impossible to see an established pattern.

He votes one way on an issue,.. then votes another way of a very similar issue.

Seems to me that instead of taking a principaled stand, he's trying to vote both ways enough to appeal to as many on both the left and right as possible.

I prefer consistency,.. rather than someone who can't be counted on to reflect a political philosophy.

Perhaps it does show a consistency, one to follow the money and do what it told him to do?  Dunno.

jh45gun I looked over your chart and must agree he some times votes for things I'd have wanted but about as often votes what I'd call wrong. The one thing that struck me most from the chart was how closely his votes parallel those of McCain a person who I have zero use for and in fact do not even consider a Republican altho he insists on calling himself one. I have to say that only turned me off on him more. I'm still undecided but found nothing there to help me decide to support him.

I think it unwise to let the actions of a supporter of any candidate color your perceptions of the candidate as he certainly doesn't control their actions. Do as you are look at their positions and make up your own mind based on what they say but even more importantly on what they've done.

[jh45gun]

Bill I do not think any Politician is going to vote the way you want them too all the time sometimes yes and sometimes no. I have been disapointed with others on this issue so I know it is just not Thompson I think they all do to some degree and like was said with Bills having so many added on provisions hard to say why they may vote for a particular bill. The nature of Politcs I guess.

[Matt]

Hmm… Let’s see… telling someone they are talking out their ass… nope don’t think it violates any GBO rule provided the person really is… So let’s look at that for a second. First you scream that all of our sources are a joke basically and yours are gospel. Well this shows your ignorance and seeing as you are ignorant to the facts and continue to talk you are thus talking out your ass…

But let us not get confused on the issue for you have the right to vote for and campaign for any candidate that you wish. I simply think that you should take the time to do your OWN due diligence on all the candidates that claim to fit your idea of a good president.

The picture that has been painted for us by the media is that Fred is THE candidate that we need as prez. Well if the media is for him then you darn well better research his past because I can bet you that the media does not have your best interest in mind.

Oh and for those of you who are confused there are only 3 branches to the U.S. Government and they are the:
Judicial Branch
Legislative Branch
Executive Branch

No we do not have a Media Branch sorry… The folks who own the mass media are the same folks that pay the Legislative and Executive folks to vote in a manner reflective of their interest. They are also the same folks that in return for the votes will turn their backs and close their eyes to anything that the L and E guys ask them to. Oh and you can not forget about the bankers who publicly thank the media for keeping the secrets like David Rockefeller did in 1991 in Germany.

So in the end if you want to pick your candidate based on what you see on TV rather than on your own personal research and DD in to the candidates past and present then that is your right.


Oh yeah... Why the hell do you people want to go to a third party site and read any other version than the real one...
Want to know how someone voted or what the bill said... well guess what it is on the interent... oh no not the internet... its not trust worthy... get the address and have a hard copy mailed to you from the gov...

Like I siad... due diligence

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/g_three_sections_with_teasers/legislative_home.htm


Matt

[Fazak]

I have to admit, though, I can't remember who brought it up, but your attitude almost puts me off of Dr. Paul.

Vote however you want,.... but all of the GOP candidates are pro war except for Dr Paul,... and the public is totally put off by the war and the lies which continue to perpetuate the war.

If the GOP nominates a pro war candidate, the GOP will get totally bulldozed in the presidential election,.. regardless of who the Democrats stick out there.

In other words,... you can nominate Fred,.. but you're gonna get Hillary.

[Fazak]

Here's reality,.. from The Wall Street Journal, a conservative (neocon) newspaper which has been very supportive of Bush,.. from a very recent article,.. and even they admit that Bush's approval rating regarding the war in Iraq is totally in the dumper,.. and virtually *all* of the GOP candidates except for Dr Paul are for continuing the course.

If you folks want a pro second amendment Republican in the White House, there's only one possibility,.. Dr Ron Paul.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/08/27/bush-rating-on-iraq-remains-low-survey-finds/

Some 28% of those surveyed Aug. 7-13 had a positive opinion of the president’s handling of Iraq, rating his work either “excellent” or “pretty good,” down slightly from 30% in May and sharply off his high scores on the question, notched immediately after the U.S. invasion in spring 2003. In the latest poll, 67% of respondents said the president was doing an “only fair” or “poor” job, a rating unchanged from May. Of those polled in August, more respondents gave the president the lowest rating, “poor,” and fewer selected “only fair” when it came to the handling of Iraq.

[Graybeard]

Bill I do not think any Politician is going to vote the way you want them too all the time sometimes yes and sometimes no. I have been disapointed with others on this issue so I know it is just not Thompson I think they all do to some degree and like was said with Bills having so many added on provisions hard to say why they may vote for a particular bill. The nature of Politcs I guess.

True, true. Anyone who would vote exactly the way I'd like could never get elected cuz as I've said often my view seems to be the minority position on most issues in life. BTW that Matt fellow is not nearly as nice as me and was a real PITA to try to raise. But he's now got a son who is a real chip off the old blockhead and he's getting paid back. He's even apologized a few times for being such a PITA in those days now that he's seeing what it was like. 

[ncsurveyor]

Oh yeah... Why the hell do you people want to go to a third party site and read any other version than the real one...

Kind of the point, in a really obscure way, of my addressing the above post.  People get in the habit of finding a snippet and throwing it out there like the gospel.  Its misleading.  Lets just say I had a feeling Mr. Fazak would check the source.  Had my 2nd reply in my mind probably before he got done typing his rebuttal.  A little deceptive on my part, I apologize for that.

But people also get in the habit of being critical of someone else for expressing an opinion, even one's that may be ill formed.  I'm a terribly sarcastic person by nature, but now it seems to be the time to be more constructive in correction, rather than critical of someone's potential or perceived a$$ talking.

Mr. Greybeard, I would never allow the opinions of another person outweigh my own objective research, unless I knew that person well.  Mudslingers in general get placed on the "ignore" or "grain of salt" list.  Quite a few of them I see, but that's the beauty of a forum.  If nothing else, its fun to watch how the mudslingers react next.  Gives me insight on dealing with children.

When it comes to politics, no amount of information is sacred, and its easy to just read what someone else says on all topics, with the click of a button, and ta-da, you at least have a snapshot of who you can put some faith in and who you can't.

I have the senate and house websites, federal and a few states outside of my own on shortcuts.  I've read (too) many legal documents, just trying to figure out why my elected officials voted the way they did.  If I have any doubts, I write them.

Enjoy the rest of the primary's.

[jh45gun]

Yea Bill I can agree with the PITA part since he seems to think I talk out of mine. Just because I disagree with his choice of sainthood er excuse me Presidential Candidate does not mean I am stupid or talk out of my ass. Just my opinion as he has his. Remember Matt you heard it from Dad first. Is'nt that a grandfathers wish   Having a grandson just like the son was to teach the son a few things LOL  

[jh45gun]

I do not always agree with what the media says but like it or not in the last few elections the media has influenced and shaped the elections. So if that is the case unless your boy Paul does not get some media attention and momentum he stands as much chance as a snowball in hell of getting the nomination. AND I would stand by that comment even if I was for him as its the truth. He is in back of the pack and the media seems to be ignoring him. I am not talking about websites but MAIN STREAM NEWS.

[ncsurveyor]

Voted YES on welfare overhaul. (Sep 1995)
Voted YES on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

source: ontheissues.org


Maybe he really wanted the overhaul to pass, and just fixed the immigrant stuff later?  Politics is funny like that.

Found this on your link,... funny that you failed to mention it.

Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)

For informational purposes: Ron Paul:
Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers. (Sep 1998)
was  Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003)
http://www.issues2000.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm


still need to read the text of those bills, however.

Curious how you can vote to allow more immigrant skilled labor in the country, but get a 100% rating by  "FAIR".  Maybe/obviously 5 years can change a man?

[SHOOTALL]

On some subjects voters want a take charge type guy , then on war they want a guy who wins in a hurry with no or little loss ! Not being French I find it hard to run and tuck my tail when attacked ( i admit that ) . I had a chance to see Dr. Paul in the debate , nice guy some of his comments sounded OK , but i got the same feeling watching and listening to him i got with Jimmy Carter . He has good ideas but I just don't know about his ability to lead , time will tell !

[Fazak]

Now you know why Thompson has been hiding out while the rest of the candidates engage in debate.

Now that he's officially in, it won't take long for his rivals to chase him into the background.

People only support Thompson because they don't know of his past.

They're about to find out.

Just like I said,... here it comes,... from FOX News, even. I didn't expect them to get in on the act, but it appears that they're going to take the leading edge.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296339,00.html

Most Americans feel strongly that a presidential candidate should not accept any money from lobbyists. According to a recent Gallup Poll, 75 percent of Americans find it unacceptable for candidates to finance their campaigns with contributions from lobbyists — and 80 percent want candidates to return any contributions they do receive from lobbyists.

But Fred definitely doesn’t agree with them. His promising campaign is positively overflowing with advisers and donors who are lobbyists, former lobbyists or employees of lobbying firms. Aside from Thompson, there’s his wife, Jeri, who worked for the PR/lobbying giant Burson-Marsteller and law firm/lobbyists DLA Piper after she met Fred. Then there’s Ken Reitz, a senior campaign adviser, who works for 360Advantage — owned by two lobbying firms Burson-Marsteller and Quinn Gillespie & Associates. Reitz is the former CEO of Burson and became famous for creating the National Smokers Alliance — a faux grassroots group opposing tobacco regulation that was funded by the tobacco companies.

[ncsurveyor]

Wow!

article has quite the liberal tone to it for Fox.

Oh, wait.
story written by Dick Morris:
Dick Morris served as Bill Clinton's political consultant for 20 years, guiding him to a successful reelection in 1996.



spin, spin, spin.

[billy_56081]

  Well looking at this from a practical point of view I don,t think Ron Paul will even be a choice on the ballot in Nov. 08. I like some of his points but absolutely do not agree with his cowardly cut and run strategy. Next November I'll use my vote as I always do, to vote against the candidate I like the least. Whether its Fred, Mit, or Ron I do not care, just so so I can try to keep a Demoncrat out of office. Well with the way my state votes in every presidential election I gues I'll just be a protest vote. About the only way I can see me voting 3rd party is if Gukiani is running against a Scumocrat.

[Fazak]

Wow!

article has quite the liberal tone to it for Fox.

Oh, wait.
story written by Dick Morris:
Dick Morris served as Bill Clinton's political consultant for 20 years, guiding him to a successful reelection in 1996.



spin, spin, spin.

But is the article accurate?

That seems to be all that needs to be asked,... and you don't think FOX would allow *lies* to be a part of their agenda, do you?!

lolol!

[Dee]

I don't see Paul's view of Iraq, cowardly. I see it as SENSIBLE. Why loose more troops over FOOLHARDY PRIDE? Those whom disagree should get off the fence and help do the fighting. Many a good bull ride was done from the fence, but there were damn few bull riders doing the ACTUAL riding. The Iraqi does not want freedom or democracy. They tell our troops dailey, to leave.
Quit beating the war drum, put down your drum stick, and pick up an M16. They'd love to have ya over there, and so would I.

[SHOOTALL]

we are not fighting a war in Iraq we are playing police man , they want to fight a civil war , and the Bin men are using it to get in and kill our troops and causing us to second guess our leaders ! not good !
 the people in Iraq have had long enough to get up and running , they haven't ! guess they think like welfare people !
now i heard on the news that we went into Iraq and messed it up and due to honor we need to fix it , I feel we would have more luck herding cats ! and feel their ex leader and sons messed it up not us ! if we need to stay i say pick a spot and build a base and watch from there ! but stop the police BS and go back to being troops that defend and destory , you know the doable  stuff ! not being a target ! we are in a 4 way split and trying to be on at least 3 sides !
my old coach always said if it ain't no way out , run three plays and punt ! lets punt ! as far as honor goes its up to the man looking down the bbl. of his weapon to decide not some fat cat in an office trying to get votes !

[nomosendero]

I don't see Paul's view of Iraq, cowardly. I see it as SENSIBLE. Why loose more troops over FOOLHARDY PRIDE? Those whom disagree should get off the fence and help do the fighting. Many a good bull ride was done from the fence, but there were damn few bull riders doing the ACTUAL riding. The Iraqi does not want freedom or democracy. They tell our troops dailey, to leave.
Quit beating the war drum, put down your drum stick, and pick up an M16. They'd love to have ya over there, and so would I.

Having 2 sons in the military I am not thrilled with this situation for sure & especially the fact that it is now a political war.

I don't look at his view as cut and run at this point because I believe he voted against it to start with. However, I am a little concerned about how he would handle future attacks & if he would have the guts to send the military where the enemy is & KILL THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBILE!!
He doesn't seem to be a man's man to me, but I might be wrong! I doubt we will ever get the chance to find out.

[nomosendero]

Matt, I would like to add something to your logic, but alas, there is nothing to add. ALL good points. It is beyond me why anyone would choose an ACTOR over a DOCTOR, for leadership, when the ACTOR not only makes his living PRETENDING to be someone, and something he IS NOT, has taken jobs that go AGAINST, what he says he is for, and the doctor in this case, makes his living VOTING IN CONGRESS, "FOR" what he says he believes in.
Selling ones morals for money, is just what it appears to be. A LACK OF MORALS IN THE FIRST PLACE. Blindly following someone without checking his credentials is just that. BLINDLY FOLLOWING.

I would suppose then that you feel the same way about Bill Frist.

On a lighter note.

Sometimes Doctors are Actors. They act like they know what is wrong with you even when they don't, but you still pay.

I am sure glad we feel better about Doctors!