Ronald Reagan's Favorite Paper Endorses Fred Thompson

By Erick Posted in Comments (47) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

I have always viewed National Review as the established voice of conservatism. If you are an opinion leader on the right, you read National Review. At the same time, I've viewed Human Events as the voice of the base within the movement -- the middle class and blue collar conservative men and women who show up to vote in fly over country. Perhaps that is why it was Ronald Reagan's favorite newspaper. I should say here in the interests of full disclosure that they, as of last year, became our sister organization. Human Events also falls under the Eagle umbrella.

Today, Human Events releases its endorsement. You can find it here. They look at each candidate and endorse Fred Thompson. They write:

We make this endorsement on the basis of much research, having interviewed Sen. Thompson and some of his opponents, as well as examining what they have all said and done. We conclude that Thompson is a solid conservative whose judgment is grounded in our principles.

In his Senate years, Mr. Thompson compiled an American Conservative Union lifetime rating of 86.1, which is higher than both Sen. John McCain (82.3) and Rep. Ron Paul (82.3). The Club for Growth has praised Thompson as someone who has a strong commitment to limited government, free enterprise and federalist principles.

On the issues that matter most to conservatives, Sen. Thompson’s positions benefit from their clarity. He is solidly pro-life. He said that he was in favor overturning Roe v. Wade because it was “bad law and bad medical science.” As the National Right to Life Committee said in its endorsement of him Nov. 13, 2007, “The majority of this country is opposed to the vast majority of abortions, and Fred Thompson has shown in his consistent pro-life voting record in the U.S. Senate that he is part of the pro-life majority.”

Thompson’s record is solid on voting to preserve gun owners’ rights, cut taxes, reduce government spending and drill for oil in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He has voted consistently against gay marriage.

Fred Thompson came alive last night and today Ronald Reagan's favorite newspaper endorses him. Let's see what he can do with these in the next week.

« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | Debate WinnersComments (327) »
Ronald Reagan's Favorite Paper Endorses Fred Thompson 47 Comments (0 topical, 47 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

voter? I dunno.

"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." ~Professor Dumbledore

OK, probably not directly. As a movement conservative, I HEART Human Events (and am guilty of occasionally pimping them here on RedState). But we're political junkies.

Where it might make a difference is the buzz created when MORE movement conservatives feel MORE free to back him (and we quit hearing that 'if only Fred were viable' baloney -- we've had WAY too much of that at RS). If this buzz translates to the streets, then we got something. If even FoxNews troubles themselves enough to mention the Human Events endorsement, that'll help. Of course Fox has been no help whatsoever before now.

I know one thing. Ever since the start of the debate, the 'little red truck' has had cascades of cash raining down on it. SOMEBODY is paying attention....

Stare decisis is fo' suckas -- Feddie

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

So, we have two conservative papers, one endorsing Romney, the other Thompson. I can live with that.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is a closer call.

I agree its a close call. And I could switch easy, if Thompson gathers some steam and Romney falls apart. I am concerned about Thompsons lack of executive experience, but his conservative principles are good. He also has some short comings, like supporting one of McCain's initial shamesty bill, but he repudiated that later.

Watch the Rasmussen polls, the 4-day tracking, on Fred in South Carolina ( keps up with that). If you see him start moving up from 11% up to the 15-18 range in the next 3-4 days, then that means SC people were watching the debate. Plus Fred's about to drop about half a mill in ads in the next week.

If he moves the polls significantly, come on over. If he stages a win or near-win in SC (22 points or better), then he's in, and he'll be in play in every southern state on 'stupid tuesday' (except probably FL).

Stare decisis is fo' suckas -- Feddie

... and I agree with him that what's at stake here is the heart and soul of the Republican party. Glad to see Human Events call for conservatives to coalesce around Sen. Thompson!

There is only one conservative in the GOP field, and that's Fred. Fred came alive last night, I hope he stays on his game.

I'm not sure they'll be able to squeeze it in...

Stare decisis is fo' suckas -- Feddie

Fox is just like CNN in its ability to be biased; no reason to single them out.

HTML Help for Red Staters

And I see no reason NOT to single them out. I think it's fair to expect from them some even-handedness in their coverage of viable GOP candidates.

Since they've failed to provide that, a little ribbing and name-calling is just part of the day.

Stare decisis is fo' suckas -- Feddie

Good endorsement. Fred rolled last night, meet his fund raising goal, and now has a fairly big endorsement. If he can keep this up, look out. I think we all know that South Carolina is make or break time for Fred. He has to either win here, or only lose by a few votes. Otherwise I think he is done. GO FRED GO!

I think, therefore I vote Republican

What I want to know is why isn't it front and center on Fred's website???

Channeling Sean.......

"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." ~Professor Dumbledore

"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." ~Professor Dumbledore

He remains almost everybody's 2nd choice and the 1st choice of several of us.

I have friends who say Huckabee or Thompson. I'd prefer Thompson or Romney. Etc, etc.

Come on guys, jump on the Thompson band wagon (especially if you live in South Carolina).

for Fred coming today. My guess is Rush.

Rush Limbaugh has a long-standing tradition of not backing candidates, and nor will he ever be so dumb as to do such.

1) He loses credibility and becomes associated with a loser if that candidate tanks.

2) Far more important, he loses the label of impartiality with the conservative base. Those who don't like his endorsement will begin calling him a shill.

3) It limits his programming. He has not donate time to his candidate. Can't play up another candidate. Can't speak negative as readily about things relating to his endorsement.

4) He gets second-guessed. "How does this relate to the Thompson campaign??"

Besides, Limbaugh has the best of both worlds now. He can speak fondly of Romney and Thompson and attack McCain and Huckabee without having an official position.

Rush's endorsement of Thompson is wasted if Thompson tanks in South Carolina. By sitting on the sideline, Limbaugh gets to comment however he so chooses.

"Don't ever be afraid to see what you see." ~Ronald Reagan

This was the major endorsement. Nice, but not a game changer for Fred.

for Fred coming today. My guess is Rush.

hopefully that will be fixed in Redstate 3.0!

But I think Rush would be foolish to endorse right now, and I don't think he's a fool. If he endorses now he trades in some of his influence for one shot at trying to change this primary. It's ery short-term oriented and I don't see him doing it.

HTML Help for Red Staters

posts to prevent idiots like me from clicking twice. Might be something to consider for the new version.

I would be dissapointed if Human Events was the "major endorsement", but I guess it is. Nothing wrong with it ane I love HE, but I consider a major endorsement to be one that's going to get you a significant number of votes.

And is completely against Huckabee and McCain.

Fred got the endorsement from Human Events.

commenting on the very thread that announced it.
Do you know of another one coming?
Rush will not specifically endorse Fred, but he has been a strident supporter of him and his principles.
That goes a long way for many but YMMV.

"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." ~Professor Dumbledore

"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." ~Professor Dumbledore

Cited today on Drudge: Link

This poll took place Wed. night. I found it somewhat unsettling. Some highlights:

McCain was considered strongest leader and most honest, Huckabee and Romney the truest conservatives.

I wonder if Fred's performance last night will change that?

About a third said it was important a candidate share their religious beliefs.

Oh no, not Iowa again. *sigh*

Four in 10 said they may change who they will support.

Maybe there is hope after all. They interviewed 500 likely voters on one evening. The article admits that such a poll is prone to errors:

John McCain, 25 percent

Mike Huckabee, 18 percent
Mitt Romney, 17 percent
Fred Thompson, 9 percent
Rudy Giuliani, 5 percent
Ron Paul, 5 percent

Let's hope the voters in SC saw last night's debate.
Click here to donate to the Fred Thompson campaign.

I hope the voters of South Carolina saw the debate, as well, Scott. And as for the 1/3 of voters saying religion is important to them, well, expect Huckabee to play that up for all it's worth. I actually just spoke to a friend of mine in Charleston who told me that she received a call asking her if she knew that Fred Thompson didn't attend church services. Gee, wonder whose campaign was behind that?

Don't know if you've seen this, but take a look:

Note #5: Huckster supporters are advised to show up in church parking lots and hand out flyers without asking permission first (because they'd likely be refused if they asked). So instead of respecting the church's wishes to use its parking lot as it sees fit and to respect church leadership, Huckabee is advocating legalism over ethics.

Everything as a means to an end. I want this turkey dispensed of. As a Romney supporter (but more importantly a conservative), all I have to say is "GO FRED!"

"Don't ever be afraid to see what you see." ~Ronald Reagan

because my church is the smallest of the three in town, (though one of them is a cult), but if they show up, I'll be ready.

Jeremiah 17:9.

but I'd like to see high profile conservative people endorsing. I can't think of any conservative Hollywood types (Willis, Miller, Silver, maybe Heaton) who would since AFAIK they tend toward Giuliani and are socially liberal. I'm assuming orgs like Heritage and AEI do not endorse? Otherwise you're looking for high profile folks connected to Reagan or W, or pundits/authors. He needs endorsements from folks who can truly impact people's decisions. Maybe religious leaders.

You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.

This is a high profile endorsement. Go check out the contributors and editors.

Tommy Oliver

and therefore cannot legally endorse candidates.

I don't think you'll see many more high profile endorsements anywhere. Because of the early primary season, the endorsers made their commitments early, and backing away now would look disloyal, even if they would prefer a different candidate now that Iowa and NH are over. The rest of the high profile people aren't saying anything because that would put their programming, speaking, etc. in jeopardy because of the stupidity of campaign finance laws. Like it or not, right now an endorsement from W would be like an endorsement from Howard Dean last year in the Democratic primary.

While I subscribe to NR and not HE (only so much time in a week) I think HE got this one right and NR got it wrong. But having the two major conservative publications splitting the way they did pretty much mirrors my first and second choices, as Mitt is now my second choice to Fred.

I hope that when this election cycle is done, we evaluate the effect the early primaries and front loading have on the election process. I don't like the way it is evolving. I would much prefer a system with two small states that reflect well on the voting preferences of the rest of the country having early events so small candidates have a chance against money candidates, and then 1 to 5 events every three or four days until all the voting areas have had their say. Big (delegate count) States like California and Texas shouldn't be eligible in the first 20-25% of the random selection dates, but shouldn't be forced to always be the last voters either. Big States should always have stand alone primaries also, although I wouldn't necessarily object to something like California, Ohio, and Texas having only 2 days between each primary. We need the time to evaluate the candidates as they perform, and the front loaded system doesn't give us that. Lincoln did say you CAN fool ALL of the people SOME of the time, so we need more time to avoid being fooled.

Eliminate the IRS and all payroll taxes!

I thought his favorite rag was the Washington Times...

NRA. I guess I already knew that Human Events was supporting Fred (I get to listen to Jed Babbin once a week on radio, and I know he wants Fred).

I though the NRA was the last major conservative endorsement that was possible out there--and they would prefer to wait until the general election.

Human Events is marginally conservative. They gave "man of the year" to pseudo conservative Rush Limbaugh who is in the bag for Mitt Zombie. I think that perhaps in Reagan's day Human Events when it wasn't run by placebo conservatives like Jed "Blabbin" Babbin may have awarded it to General Patraeus.

Human Events is bleeding readers and is about as "conservative" as NRO.

All of you newbies who object to your somewhat harsh treatment when you come to RS and post something and we jump all over you...this is the reason you are greeted with a certain amount of distrust.

This is what is known, in mbecker-land as AN IDIOT!

"idiot" would be a rather subtle understatement.

The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther

....of those counts if there was any indication that it would do any good.

...while you're still here? Since you don't seem to appreciate the fine work at Human Events, I bet you'll find the fare at The New Republic MUCH more to your liking.

So shuffle along....

Stare decisis is fo' suckas -- Feddie

I hope this helps Fred continue to tear Huckabee apart. If Fred wins SC that should take care of Huck for good...of course, he is the teflon man. His supporters have even managed to spin last nights debate as a win???

I'm still strongly for Romney but I want a very, very, very, strong Fred so that we can eliminate Huckabee and get a much better alternative to McCain or Guiliani if Romney stumbles.

"I guess the lesson learned here is that it doesn't matter where everyone is from as long as we're all the same religion." - Peter Griffin (Family Guy)

Human Events for Fred and National Review for Romney

These are real Reganesque Conservatives.

Take a look at crooks running for president, especially Republicans.

Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)

©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service