Rush Limbaugh on Fred Thompson
Posted on December 5, 2007
Rush won’t endorse anyone officially, but this says a lot.
Then today we have this.
Here at the Campaign Spot, we’ve previously wondered if Rush Limbaugh, officially neutral in the GOP presidential primary, prefers one of the candidates and is periodically offering statements that seem to be an endorsement-without-an-official-endorsement.
Earlier today, Limbaugh was chuckling and enjoying the following exchange between Fred Thompson and Charlie Rose — an exchange that suggests that Rose is fuzzy on the difference between “principles” and “issues.”
CHARLIE ROSE: You constantly say in this campaign that you are a conservative. What does that mean today? Is George Bush a conservative?
FRED THOMPSON: Well, let`s talk about me. (LAUGHTER) I thought we might get to that. I think that it means things that are consistent with God`s design for man. It`s consistent with human nature. It`s consistent with the lessons of history and the lessons of the ages. They found form in the Constitution, I think, and what our founding fathers believed. They understand that man can do great and wonderful things, but man is prone to error, and sometimes do terrible things. That too much power in too few hands is a dangerous thing, that power is a corrupting thing.
CHARLIE ROSE: In all of that, you didn’t mention abortion, gay rights — all things that have been part of recent presidential elections.
FRED THOMPSON: Those — well, you`re talking about different things there. Those are issues that are before us, which derive from principles. I don`t consider them to be…
CHARLIE ROSE: Principles.
FRED THOMPSON: … the first principles. But the principles are what guides you in coming to positions with regard to the issues. You know, the Declaration of Independence said that our basic rights come from God and not from man. The founders talked about, you know, life and liberty and the importance of that. And everything is based on those basic principles. And I take those principles, and you know, for example, I come to a pro-life conclusion there. And when we had issues, you know, for eight years when I was in the United States Senate about whether or not the federal government should be funding, for example, abortion-related activities and things of that nature, you know, the application of those principles in that instance told me the answer was no, properly.
See the full interview here.
Solid. Fred gets federalism and gets to his issue stances based on his first principles, and his first principles are very similar to my own. I’d quibble with him about the Human Life Amendment, since the amendment process itself is largely a state process, but I can respect his stance without agreeing with it.
Based on what I know as of this writing and not just based on what’s in this post, I would be comfortable with Mitt Romney as President. I would also be comfortable with Fred Thompson as President. Both of them and several of the other GOP candidates are head and shoulders above all of the Democrats.
I’m curious, like Ace, as to whether such an influential conservative commentator like Rush and his adoring remarks on Fred will make a visible impact sometime soon.
In related (Fred) news we have this.
“I’m telling you, I don’t think that it’s the primary responsibility of the federal government to tell you what to eat,” Thompson said to applause when asked if his health care plan included any details on preventative care, a priority for Democratic candidates.
“The fact of the matter is we got an awful lot of knowledge,†said the former Tennessee senator. “Sometimes we don’t have a whole lot of will power, and I don’t know of any government program that’s going to instill that.”
A small government conservative. A far cry from Mr. smoking ban Huckabee.
And he is running strong in South Carolina. That is good, cuz he needs to win that state if he is to have a shot at all.
Conservative Belle has more on Fred.
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, News, Politics As Usual, Video
Trackback URL
Comments
7 Responses to “Rush Limbaugh on Fred Thompson”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Rush Limbaugh remains the universal king of jaberwocky and shtink-doodle.
Fred is the one true conservative. Fred is the adult sitting at the kid’s table at a holiday dinner! I have no intention or need to talk trash about the other candidates. They have issues and we all know what they are.
For all his supposed insight Rush Limbaugh is taken in almost as easily as Bill O’reilly.
What does anyone expect Fred Thompson to say. Without the right Fred is Dead and he knows it.
I don’t recall Fred baby saying these “pure” conservative comments in the past. He is now preaching conservative theology as a last straw to salvage his otherwise lousy run campaign.
Duncan Hunter has shown his conservative credentials all along. Not just at campaign time.
He is the true conservative, but sadly can’t get any attention.
Huckabee is Elmer Gantry in a quasi conservative suit.
edward, I would love to see Thompson/Hunter. I haven’t seen one Thompson supporter say anything at all against Duncan Hunter. I wish I could say the same for the other way around.
Connie, the reason is clear they can’t in good conscience say anything against Hunter. That is simply not the case with Thompson.
He has demonstrated duplicity in the past and that is what concerns many conservatives.
Actually, edward, I just find that Thompson supporters are more pleasant and have better manners. Fred Thompson most assuredly has not been “duplicitous” in any way. The word implies deceit. Senator Thompson has been upfront and honest about everything he has said and done. I have found one issue where I disagree with him and that is on flag burning, but that means I also disagree with Hunter. It is a despicable action, but to me, it is a free speech issue.
Does anybody really care about what Rush Limbaugh thinks? Isn’t he that guy who sent his maid out to buy him drugs?