How would you compare Thompson’s resume to Edwards, or 0bama ?

I asked for a reason to vote for Thompson and you respond by asking me about his resume.

And the fact is, Rudy, his main contender, doesn’t excite me for his authoritarian yet surprisingly socially liberal views… it’s a strange combination, however tough and competent he is, which I grant.

Mitt seems to be quite a good campaigner and a self-disciplined achiever and accomplished businessman par excellence, who even has some mediocre governing experience, but he just isn’t electable due to many people, including my, discomfort with his religion.

Oh, if I had the franchise, I could vote for him; I might campaign for him. But I STILL if I were in a private discussion with him where religion came up would criticize his religion and its founder relentlessly.

And many people do not separate the man from his religion as well as I can, which is middle of the road.

McCain is a decent bloke who deserves the chance, in a sense, but has the wrong temperament. He tends toward angry outbursts and then stubbornness, which is in large measure he’s lost the base.

That and he sucks up too much to Kennedy and the like when most conservatives hate the man for his shrill rhetoric and indeed his piss-poor morals ála Mary Joe Kopechne.

To someone like myself, not a Christian, but a believe of good over evil, leaving a woman to asphyxiate and and later drown in an air pocket in the bottom of a pond in your car where you put her while you sober up to avoid consequences for yourself is just not acceptable.

Such a man — fake nake brace and all — will always be someone I despise barring a serious repentance for this specific action, which has never happened.

So fairly or not, sucking up to Kennedy is going to diminish my support. But mostly it’s his temper.

Fred Thompson has a much better temperament, but hasn’t accomplished as much with legislation as has McCain (thank God!).

I’m okay with a President not writing a bunch of new laws. Again, if I had the franchise, he could get my support by campaigning on removing some.

Yet… his farting around instead of declaring and running seriously is hurting him with his former supporters (and fundraising). If he actually announces or attempts to upstage the other the other candidates during the debate rather than being onstage with them debating, that’s going to look awful, especially for those of us who would like to respect him, but won’t be able to because he hasn’t thrown his hat into the ring.

“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

– Theodore Roosevelt
“Citizenship in a Republic,”
Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910

He’s not exactly living up to that high standard.

You mean you have a reason to vote for Thompson other than his acting ability? Well quit holding back and give us the reason!

Comment by Thomas Jackson

Maybe he believes an accused person has a right to a lawyer considering the state has massive resources and knowledge of the court system at its disposable.

Your ad hominem attack proves nothing other than your unwillingness or inability to debate substance.

Good think you’re not a lawyer. You actually have to think and speak.

You volunteered to defend these scum. So you pretty much answered your own question.

I don’t really get your point about the button but I suspect there is something masquerading as a point constructed within a logical fallacy in your post and I really don’t feel like deconstructing it.

Fine, you defended people you were certain were guilty, that’s okay, someone’s gotta do it, but it should disqualify you as a Republican presidential candidate. I’m still waiting for an instance of a leftist ACLU type lawyer who lobbied for pro-life groups because it was part of his job.