FRED WINS BY DEFAULT

Republican Presidential candidates gathered in St. Petersburg, Florida, Wednesday evening for a debate sponsored by CNN and YouTube. The previous Democrat incarnation of this debate was a monstrous joke that included a question on global warming from an animated snowman. For me, that alone discredited the entire forum. The snowman was absent this time, but the slant from CNN was not (more about that later). Once again, Fred Thompson distinguished himself as the best candidate of the field. His opponents have slowly but surely eliminated themselves for one reason or another, and this debate provided each with the opportunity to show us all once again why Fred is the man. The Republican Party as a whole must decide whether it will remain a party of conservative values, or moderate those views for perceived political advantage. Republicans win when they follow bedrock conservative values, and Fred Thompson is the best man to represent and express those values.
>
The venue itself does not exactly lend itself to intelligent debate, and CNN showed their usual bias in the choice of questions. The Clinton News Network did its best to prop up distortions and myths about conservative issues. Starting with a question about black on black crime clearly outside the scope of the federal government, a string of ridiculous little clips left no doubt about CNN's slip color. Next was a Muslim woman from (of all places) Alabama asking how America can "repair its image in the Muslim world." Throw in a little confederate flag, Bible, and abortion, and the question list looks like a DNC document. The crowning bit of liberal media poison came in the form of BG Keith Kerr asking about gays in the military. While everyone respects BG Kerr's 43 years of military service, he did not become openly gay until he retired, so there's clearly some crusading being done by the general. Then moderator Anderson Cooper allowed BG Kerr to deliver a speech from the audience in response to the candidate answers CNN had to know he would not like. BG Kerr got way too much time on an issue that seems microscopic to other issues facing our military. The last part of the debate was wasted not on finalizing statements, but instead on Mars exploration and a Yankees / Red Sox debate between Romney and Guliani that nearly made me ill. None of the debates for either party so far have addressed deadly serious issues in a detailed manner, and this one was certainly no exception. Including the YouTube element drives intelligent discourse toward entertainment, and that is not a good thing for Presidential politics. Animated snowman did have an understudy, though: a poorly animated, saggy-faced Dick Cheney asking about allocation of executive power to the VP. Fred got a chuckle from the live audience when he responded by saying he at first thought the cartoon Cheney was supposed to be him. Still, these debates are simply beneath the dignity of the office.
>
Let me issue specific disqualifications to Fred's opponents. Rudy is the easiest to start with because he's simply not a conservative. Being in favor of gay rights, for gun control, and pro-abortion is not conservative, so support for his candidacy is puzzling and troubling. Nominating Guliani would be a tragic departure from the values the party has espoused for over thirty years and would lead to defeat in the general election. His flimsy defense of New York's sanctuary city policy is normally topped with blaming the federal government. There is some element of truth to the accusation that Rudy is riding 9/11: he used the phrase six times Wednesday evening. Sorry, Rudy, but for the reasons listed and more, I can't vote for you.
>
Romney seems like a nice enough guy, but his recent conservative conversion is disturbing. He seemed flustered during an early confrontation when Guliani accused him of employing illegals at his "sanctuary mansion." His complete lack of military experience is not alone a disqualifier, but it's a thumb on an already heavy scale. Something about the guy gives me the willies. And he looks like Count Chocula, so Mitt is out.
>
While I greatly respect John McCain's service in Vietnam and five years spent as a prisoner of war, he has too often stood in opposition to conservative causes. His support of campaign finance laws and amnesty for illegal aliens are pokes with a sharp stick to the conservative eye not soon forgotten or forgiven. McCain is right on when it comes to the Iraq front and America absolutely not using torture, but that's not enough. I am indeed concerned about his age and health. I respect John McCain, but I cannot give my vote to someone who has so often offended me in the past.
>
Mike Huckabee is all the rage with the media, but I don't get it. He may be right on most of the issues, but the charisma to win the general eleection just is not there. He got in the best joke of the night by suggesting Hillary should be on the first rocket to Mars, but his propensity to slip into preacher mode is unsettling. The President is not a member of the clergy, so I don't want his speaking style to sound like he is. Again, nice guy, be he is not electable.
>
California Representative Duncan Hunter is a good man. He's right on just about all the issues, especially immigration. The problem is that he has zero name recognition nationally. More about Hunter later.
>
Representative Tom Tancredo is a single issue candidate. He's right on immigration, but it isn't enough to carry a general election campaign. His presence at least adds the immigration issue to each debate, and maybe that's his mission.
>
I will not give the other debate participant, a certain elderly House member from Texas, the privilege of printing his name. Suffice to say this fossil supports a policy of extreme isolationism long ago discredited. The man is a jackass and has no place in the debates or the modern geopolitical world.
>
Now to Fred. He is absolutely one-hundred percent dead right on all the issues. His speaking style and demeanor are ideal for the office. It's his ability to express conservative ideals in a plain-spoken manner that makes him the best Republican candidate for the general election. All of the other candidates have major flaws, with the exception of Duncan Hunter. That's why Fred should choose Hunter as VP. He fills the one void in Fred's resume, and that's military experience. Thompson/Hunter is a powerful combination to face the Democrats next November. Let's just hope the party is smart enough to stay committed to it's ideals. If it does, Fred Thompson will be the nominee, and he will win by articulating conservative values for a stronger America.
>
JINGOCON