Thompson Drops Out of Race

Not good. When the rational candidates start leaving the race, it ain't good. Not good at all. Bad news day - dow dropped 440 points too.

Thompson Drops Out of GOP Race Washington Times

Thompson Ends Race, Immediate Endorsement Unlikely. NAPLES, Fla. (AP) — Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson quit the Republican presidential race today, after a string of poor finishes in early primary and caucus states.

"Today, I have withdrawn my candidacy for president of the United States. I hope that my country and my party have benefited from our having made this effort," Thompson said in a statement.

Thompson's fate was sealed last Saturday in the South Carolina primary, when he finished third in a state that he had said he needed to win.

In the statement, Thompson did not say whether he would endorse any of his former rivals. He was one of a handful of members of Congress who supported Arizona Sen. John McCain in 2000 in his unsuccessful race against George W. Bush for the party nomination.

I hope he doesn't endorse anyone. I would prefer that than a McCain endorsement. (which could be in the making).  No RINOs in the White House

UPDATE: Stop the ACLU has more

Comments

[lowandslow]

There's not one decent candidate left. The new GOP. *spit*

[epaminondas]

Fred wanted to BE president, not run for it.

[Harcourt Fenton]

Please explain to me how John McCain is a RINO. He openly speaks out about Islamofacism as being the main challenge we face in the world arena. He has a solid plan for victory in Iraq. He, of all the chicken hawks seeking the nomination, is the only one who actually served in the armed forces. His two youngest sons, Jack and Jimmy, are in the military - one at the Naval Academy and one in Iraq - protecting many of the positions that you, Pamela, say are important on this site. Where is the dedication of Romney's sons? What about Romney himself? Truth is, Kerry has more stones than Romney.

McCain a RINO - just because he doesn't goose-step? Just because he doesn't believe that money should buy political races? Just because he can reach across the aisle once in awhile?

If you think McCain is a RINO - that you would not support him like a Rush LImbaugh dittohead - then you are dooming us to 8 years of Hillarygate.

[magnus andersson]

Yes. Not nice. Thompson got 12 percent in the last Florida poll. Mitt Romney in the lead with 25 percent. I would have liked if Thompson had tried one more debate with his conservative voice and a test on Florida. Now one must hope Romney or Giuliani fix McCain. Romney seems good and Giuliani ...will start now...? Maybe Romney will get more votes when Thompson has left? McCain may beat Hillary but is way too non-conservative and Huck is a solid socialist catastrophe with some Christian conservative family values... I guess.

Probably Mitt will be fine. (Giuliani wasn't that good on Islam when he praised the religion Islam as a genuinely peaceful religion...)

-

BTW readers: Don't forget to give some economical support to Pamela!

[Harcourt Fenton]

Magnus - You'd rather have a Giuliani or a Romney or a Thompson than a McCain? I don't get it. I especially don't get the Thompson thing. He is a Hollywood actor; yes, he's been Al Gore's successor, but he hasn't dedicated his life to this country like McCain has. Giuliani and Romney - they may give lip service now to the whole illegal immigration topic - but where were they on the issues when they actually governed?? Isn't McCain actually saying what makes sense, what Giuliani and Romney actually did in practice when they controlled enforcement of the law?

What - you think McCain will be soft on the war on terror? Rudy was good under pressure to calm a nation's nerves - but, in reality, what did he really do in support of this county's security other than build a ridiculously placed bunker in Building 7, throw Yasser Arafat out of the Metropolitan Opera and go to a lot of funerals? He didn't prevent 9/11 - he was merely the eloquent spokesperson for our recovery. And in Viet Nam? Deferment after deferment after deferment after maybe becoming a priest after deferment.

How about Romney? Not bad, but he was the Governor of Taxachusetts!!! He's "evolved", so he says, to many of his current positions - at least McCain is consistent. Oh, and Viet Nam? Deferred.

McCain - He volunteered to serve and protect his nation. So did his sons (one of whom is in Iraq now as a Marine and one of whom is in the Navy). Andrew Giuliani is "too busy with golf" to even serve in his father's campaign. Romney's sons? Their service to their father's campaign is their service to America - the fact that Romney could even repeat that line without throwing up shows how much of a phony he is.

Now - I'm not saying that the only criteria for elected office is to serve in the military or that we should be reinstituting the draft; however, it seems to me that there is a lot of war support on this site and other conservative sites - maybe we should have someone in the Oval Office who (a) knows what it is like to actually fight a war, (b) actually has direct family members in the military whose life is directly affected by the decisions he makes and (c) didn't run away from war service when others in his generation were forced to serve in a conscripted, non-voluntary, service.

[Miluimnik]

Maverick McCain is an poor excuse for an "American"...that's all. Those of us in Arizona realise what a fraud he is...(open borders, Sham-nesty..etc.)

These 'elections" are a pre-determined fraud! Expect at least 40 years of Bush, Clinton, Bush. Clinton, Bush, Clinton.......

The cause? Americans are mere "residents" who lack the brains and balls to behace as "Citizens".

The Founding Fathers warned us of this...!

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years."

[Harcourt Fenton]

Hey Miluimnik - You sound like the Viet Cong!! Looks like you support Hillary.

[EJO]

Dear Pamela;
Obviously, one of the reasons that Fred Thompson pulled out of the race, is that he could hardly get anyone to vote for him.
And I believe, one of the reasons for this is his inability to deliver a speech with any discernable amount of gusto. And then there's his bovine gait, and plodding mannerisms. There is no excitement in Fred. I can't imagine Fred getting excited about anything. I would never invite him to a party. He'd bum everybody out.
Consequently, he couldn't get enough votes to win.
But I was routing for him. Because I think he was the most conservative candidate.
Sincerely;
EJO

[Shy Guy]

John McCain - The Challenge of Radical Islam.

"I admire the Islam."

Frankly, unimpressive.

John Bolton for president. Nothing less will do.

[Shy Guy]

Please explain to me how John McCain is a RINO.

Posted by: Harcourt Fenton | Tuesday, January 22, 2008 at 04:48 PM

The Jawa Report: Why I Could Never Back Sen. John McCain.

If you think McCain is a RINO - that you would not support him like a Rush LImbaugh dittohead - then you are dooming us to 8 years of Hillarygate.

You may be right here but "the lesser of two evils" is not worth cheerleading for.

This might come as a shocker to you but many of us have no interest in Limbaugh and much of what he says.

BTW, my opinion is that which ever of the existing candidates wins this election, they won't win a 2nd term.

[RISE_UP]

Two things about McCain. He is too old,imo,for the rigors of that office.And he would most certainly be considered a lame duck in his first term because of it.He was a prisoner of war so was a lot of men but McCain being a prisoner of war,makes him subject to being soft on terrorist prisoners as he has already said.(waterboard) What you see is not what you get. Fred Thompson seemed lazy but he was a man of character,of morals,and not easily panicked. A patriot.He was my choice. Now,I go for Romney.I believe he can run this country both in a time of economic crisis and war. And whoever it is, will have to deal with Iran and I expect right away. imho Thanks Pamela for a great site.

[Harcourt Fenton]

Rise Up -

He may be old, but he's in better mental shape than Reagan; he wasn't ONLY a POW (although there weren't as many as you indicate), he was also a 20 year veteran of the Navy, a combat aircraft carrier pilot, retiring as a Captain (or the Army equivalent of a Lt. Colonel). Soft on terrorist prisoners? Are you kidding? He has said he wouldn't use waterboarding (which everyone here rails at as if they really know what the hell that entails and what results you get from it), but he didn't say he wouldn't authorize interrogation. Romney? Maybe, but talk about a flip-flopper!!!

Shy Guy - Maybe you don't support Rush, but if the only reason you don't support McCain is because of his stance on immigration, how do you support Bush, Romney or Giuliani?? Bush ran with a modified version of McCain-Kennedy and both Romney and Giuliani allowed benefits, etc. to illegal immigrants in Massachusetts and NYC respectively. In fact, Romney was employing illegal immigrants to mow his lawn!!! McCain recognized that, unless you want to behave like Saddam, it is impossible to simply throw out all of these people in one mass transfer and came up with a practical solution to deal with the situation. And let's face it, much of the rhetoric about illegal immigration is not about the illegal entry into the country but rather who is coming into the country. McCain wasn't calling for open borders, he was calling for actually dealing with an issue that we purposefully stick our head in the sand about because we know that the health of our economy (at least out west) depends on this large source of cheap labor.

[Shy Guy]

Shy Guy - Maybe you don't support Rush, but if the only reason you don't support McCain is because of his stance on immigration, how do you support Bush

I don't.

Romney

I don't.

or Giuliani??

I don't.

That's my problem. I don't support ANY of the Republican candidates and I will have to resort to casting my vote to whom I think is the lesser of 3 or 4 evils. I see no leadership material in any of them.

[Harcourt Fenton]

Shy Guy - OK, points taken. But there is never a perfect candidate (at least one who is viable) - you always have to compromise. I don't agree with everything these guys say - for example, I think their positions on stem cell research, for example, are standing in the way of critical research on cures to various ailments (all for the sake of the sanctity of blastocytes at the expense of the sanctity of cancer patients) and will allow revenue from the treatments that China or India or Israel develops to stay overseas and weaken America as the scientific leader.

I see Clinton as a leader - just not my type. Giuliani - he has experience, but you better not cross him or get him agitated. Romney - he's led a number of enterprises that would translate well. McCain - he's been able to effectively lead across the political spectrum and has a solid voice (most of the time) on various important issues.

But the McCain bashing that goes on here (e.g., he's a "poor excuse for an American") is not just wrong (both politically and morally), but will lead to Clinton Part III.

[RISE_UP]

Another thing is, I do not believe McCain can beat Hillary if indeed she is the nominee and I hope she is, rather than obama muslim. And do remember Hillary has already beaten Giuliani handily. Sure it was New York but still a telling sign.Actually, I don't have a big problem with any of the republican candidates save for ron paul.I'm just cautious about how it can play out later. And as far as waterboarding goes, I was just using that one example. The fact is, a lot of info was obtained because of it though. and if it is to prevent americans from dying. Hell yes I am for torture and McCain is not. No matter, this is what he said. And I believe a president should be ready to stick his head into the lions den to save his country no matter how unpopular he may become to the rest of the "hearts and minds BS" world.

[Shy Guy]

I tend to agree with most of what your last post says. Right now I see what the RP should stand for as a rudderless ship, drifting wherever the waves take it.

In certain ways, it is similar to what has happened to Israel's Likud Party over the last 20 years. Over that time, it has drifted to left of center, resembling the socialist Labor Party of Yitzchak Rabin in the early 90's.

Israel is also a good learning example to understand that there's much more to being a loyal patriotic politician than previously being a heroic military officer.

Learn from our mistakes.

[Harcourt Fenton]

Shy Guy - The Likud Party was never "conservative" in the American sense. Israel's baseline is non-bolshevik "summer camp" socialism (and both Labor and Likud have moved toward market capitalism over time and Likud is slightly more economically conservative than Labor). Jobotinsky and Begin and Shamir and Sharon are primarily defined by their Hawk vs. Dove outlook on how to deal with Israel's neighbors (both Sharon and Ben-Gurion would rather have been farmers). Likud, traditionally, believed that the only way to deal with the Palestinian populace was to push them out or defeat them militarily - that the Arab occupants would never make a true peace and, accordingly, are a fundamental danger to the existence of the state (but even Jabotinsky allowed for Arab equality if they supported the State). Jabotinsky was also more for a middle-class oriented economy than a socialist one (but this could not be replicated initially in Israel and was not the main difference of the Labor/Likud divide). Labor, traditionally, while also hawkish (traditionally) in responding to immediate threats, pushed the realpolitik notion that peace is ultimately achievable if the proper incentives and deterents are put in place. Unlike in America, conservative religious parties have been on both sides of the fence.

So, if Likud is drifting to the center, it is not on the "socialist" front - both parties are farther from socialism than they ever have been (although the true left-wing is based in the Labor party). It is the existential issue of how to survive long term that has moved Likud to the center - realistically - they cannot push the Palis out of Judea/Samaia/Gaza - and, also realistically, we now know that unilateralism doesn't work either.

McCain's heroic service is not the only thing that defines him - as Sharon's (and Barak's and Rabin's) heroic service weren't what defined them - I don't know what the term "loyal patriotic politician" means - I am not one who thinks that those on the left are not loyal and patriotic - I just think they are much too trusting of the Cumbaya method of international affairs - i.e., the goal is world harmony even if that means drowning out those with legitimate interests.

RISE UP - We have no idea what information was or was not obtained through the use of waterboarding or whether such information was viable or not. In fact, the US has not officially admitted that it has used waterboarding at all, although a CIA officer has recently so admitted and the head of the CIA is reported to have asked for executive office permission that it be banned in interrogation. Even from what has been reported, it appears that it has only been used a few times by the US and not since 2003. It is very controversial as to whether any viable information can be gained by this technique - if someone will say anything to get it to stop - he will say what you want him to say - which is useless unless you just want to prosecute him rather than prevent the next 9/11. McCain understands this because he has been subjected to torture and knows its effect. One of the secrets that McCain revealed under torture was the starting formation of the Green Bay Packers.

[Ron]

McCain is not a RINO. At least he fought for the USA. Flip-Flopney and you have not. And trust me waving the flag is the VERY least you can do. Flip-Flopney is unfit for command! Having been a ground commander I will rely on my combat experiance and Norms as well. In my opinion unless you were in the military you should NOT be allowed to vote PERIOD!!!!!

[RISE_UP]

One name: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He revealed much of ongoing plots against the u.s. And as far as giving out useless info or even lies, I believe our own intelligence would know the difference right away. And that might lead to some more torture. Hell yes, torture their asses. And I don't mean over sized panties on their heads.

[Harcourt Fenton]

Rise UP - I didn't realize that you were an intelligence officer stationed in Guantanamo Bay and accordingly know first-hand that KSM actually gave us new actionable intelligence that has resulted in the prevention of numerous terrorist events and the capture of Osama, other than confessing to being the mastermind behind every single terrorist event from the 1993 Trade Center bombing to the Daniel Pearl murder. The foregoing may be true but neither you nor I know it and KSM may actually get off because of the inherent unreliability of waterboarding as an interrogation technique. As for believing our "own intelligence", right now our "own intelligence" doesn't believe that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, nor does it believe that any military action is required against Iran's nuclear development sites. Go figure!! At least McCain understands that Iran is the lynchpin in the terror trifecta.

[Jesuslovesyou]

The ONLY thing I have respect for McCain on is his service and his deadication to our military and the war on terror. Beyond that, nope, not happening. He is pro too much stuff I am against! To include amnesty!!!!

[Jesuslovesyou]

Ron, saying that unless you have served in the military (and I have) you shouldn't be able to vote, is tragic indeed. LOL just immagine, less then 2million people determaning the fate of, how many is it now, 6 - 7 million? That is VERY unrealistic! The result would be akin to Stollin and the USSR or any other communist rule! Having 1st hand knowledge of the military, even during war, doesn't always make you the best candidate, not when you have domestic problems that need to be resulved and directly are not influenced by the war on terror or the military.

[RISE_UP]

You are absolutely correct. You don't know who the ell I am.Nor do I have first hand knowledge anymore than you have first hand knowledge of anything McCain may have done as a pow.The starting formation of the Green Bay packers..hmmm what a story.I guess since John Kerry I'm a bit jaded. Truth is, McCain has done nothing that is significant that I am aware of, in all that time in washington.He is just another washington do nothing. Too old...to gentle with terrorist. My opinion.. I would rather vote for Hillary

[RISE_UP]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,436061,00.html

[Harcourt Fenton]

Rise Up - Go vote for Hillary. Your true colors are flying. If McCain has done nothing significant, you are jaded. Yeah, he's "gentle with terrorist". What baloney! As for McCain, there are quite a number of witnesses and a historical record regarding his time as a POW and since. There is no public record regarding the folks at Guantanamo yet, so you're blowing smoke, just like you are blowing smoke about Hillary beating Giuliani in New York. They simply never faced each other - Giuliani was out of the Senate race before it began with prostate cancer. Hillary faced a neophyte and of course beat him.

[Shy Guy]

Shy Guy - The Likud Party was never "conservative" in the American sense. Israel's baseline is non-bolshevik "summer camp" socialism (and both Labor and Likud have moved toward market capitalism over time and Likud is slightly more economically conservative than Labor).

Posted by: Harcourt Fenton | Wednesday, January 23, 2008 at 12:39 PM

Please show me historically when and where the old Likud ever espoused the trappings of socialism.

Jobotinsky and Begin and Shamir and Sharon are primarily defined by their Hawk vs. Dove outlook on how to deal with Israel's neighbors (both Sharon and Ben-Gurion would rather have been farmers).

The Likud leader's economic policies always attempted to steer Israel toward an open market economy, as much as that was possible within the limits of Israel's established structure and economic condition and dependencies.

Likud, traditionally, believed that the only way to deal with the Palestinian populace was to push them out or defeat them militarily - that the Arab occupants would never make a true peace and, accordingly, are a fundamental danger to the existence of the state (but even Jabotinsky allowed for Arab equality if they supported the State). Jabotinsky was also more for a middle-class oriented economy than a socialist one (but this could not be replicated initially in Israel and was not the main difference of the Labor/Likud divide).

Sort of agree. The Likud was not a pro-active promoter of capitalism and was unable on its own to break down the barriers imposed by Israel's socialist economic structure.

Nevertheless, the Likud did not actively support or approve of Labor's socialist policies. Far from it!

Labor, traditionally, while also hawkish (traditionally) in responding to immediate threats,

This is not "hawkish". It is the human instinct to live and survive. Actually, what you're seeing in today's Israeli politicians is the complete lack of normative thinking. This is no less than a divine miracle.

pushed the realpolitik notion that peace is ultimately achievable if the proper incentives and deterents are put in place. Unlike in America, conservative religious parties have been on both sides of the fence.

Don't forget that the US's wars are more often than not wars that shape policies, rather than directly defend the US itself from imminent attack. The major exceptions are Afghanistan and Iraq.

Israel is not dealing with such a 'luxury'.

So, if Likud is drifting to the center, it is not on the "socialist" front - both parties are farther from socialism than they ever have been (although the true left-wing is based in the Labor party). It is the existential issue of how to survive long term that has moved Likud to the center - realistically - they cannot push the Palis out of Judea/Samaia/Gaza - and, also realistically, we now know that unilateralism doesn't work either.

The Likud's shift is a result of chasing after votes and not sticking to the party's still-declared principle clauses.

Labor's shift to the radical left is like a gambling addict who is certain that the next spin of the peace wheel will come up with the winning number. Just one more. OK, a last spin. No, let's try again. I can't stop! I can't quit when I'm down! I'll make things right. Just watch me!

[Shy Guy]

I would rather vote for Hillary

Posted by: RISE_UP | Wednesday, January 23, 2008 at 05:55 PM

That's an interesting thought. Let's pretend. What if there were no other choices but Clinton and Obama. Who would you vote for?

I might actually cast my ballot for Obama. Anyone who's seen my posts here on what I think of Obama can conclude how much disdain and fear I must have for another Clinton in the White House.

I scared myself.

[RISE_UP]

I sincerely hope you do see my true colors.I have stated them.Don't read beyond that or you might end up as clouded as you are about some other things. As far as voting for Hillary or Obama...I would never vote for Obama. And..I would never vote for McCain or Ron Paul. In saying that, I might be forced to vote against someone rather than for someone. It's my vote Harcout Fenton. Where is your faith in McCain? I am just one vote.
Or perhaps there is a bigger trend here in my personal thinking?