Ya Gotta Save It

(First published December 7, 2007)Before the event is utterly lost and (thankfully) forgotten, some comment just cries out to be made, in the Republican Presidential nomination race, about the U-Tube debate on CNN last Wednesday November 28. Its already been dubbed “Boob Tube” by the world of the talk shows- which pretty much makes it official.

To begin, the Republicans in general continue to astound me by their infernal continued willingness to trust CNN (not known for nothing as the CLINTON NEWS NETWORK) to conduct a fair, above-board program which virtually everyone insists to my utter befuddlement on calling a debate (it doesn’t even bear resemblance to the high school variety- I guess some people will do almost anything to enhance the tattered image of public schooling in our time). This particular “debate” format has long been compromised through ill usage in elections past- an old story. What only makes the process worse (than usual) is partly the number of candidates participating. Overall voter opinions are beginning to suggest a setting in concrete of voter attitudes. Reportedly, a mere 20 percent remain undecided which sounds about right. The upshot ends up being frustration as people only want to hear from their special favorite- a hard feat to achieve with the sound-bite format still being used.

Some conclusions: From the standpoint of this observer, and contrariwise to the majority of apparent pundit opinion, former Senator Fred Thompson stole the show, from almost the get-go, for a couple of reasons.

1) For the third time, he easily appeared to be the only adult in the room in the midst of a pack of squabbling children- an effect not missed by the voters I bet. Fred refuses to lower himself to slopping it up in an unseemly panderthon. If that is lazy and too unexciting for Fred Barnes and Carl Cameron then so be it. Because he has a real job (to return to), Fred Thompson fully intends to conduct his campaign on his terms. His method of operation reveals an attitude that (seems to be) he won’t fall to pieces should he not win this particular political race- not an especially bad attitude that (for the country especially). Take him or leave him, Fred intends to campaign in conformance with his values. Seems awfully Presidential. I don’t know if the “cool southern style,” that has become Thompson’s trademark, will win in the end. I suspect he trusts the good sense of the voters too greatly. Thompson appears the most natural candidate; he seems unscripted, unharried by “advisers”, and seems to say pretty much what he thinks- which happens to be his reputation. He has already developed the reputation of being an awfully genuine article- a rarity in the political world. In a caucus state, this impression is not easily lost or forgotten; and it could signal the coming of some surprises on 3 January. This growing phenomenom of “ unnatural “ candidates (think Al Gore, John Kerry) who are one way in private, a more remote way in public, has not gone unnoticed by more canny observers of the past several elections.

2) Thompson’s use of an “attack” campaign ad was just gutsy. Firstly, it stood out from all of the other candidates’ also-ran style of gauzy, feel-good ads ( a style encouraged by CNN and the overall format). Fred simply refused to “go along”. Good for him. Notice how little the topic has come up since the “debate”? I sure have. Bet I’m not alone. Basically, the ad replayed the words (used in the past) by the only other two guys ahead of him in Iowa- Huckabee (on taxes) and Romney (on abortion). I think (or hope) that the point got across that public officials must run on their record in office. It always has been the best single predictor of the kinds of policies they will pursue as President. Arguably, either Romney or Huckabee (possibly also Giuliani) would be a disaster at the national level. There appears to be positively no limit on the things they would get the federal government involved with- which (incidently) pretty much describes the problem we have been growing in America for the past better-than-a-century.

Anyhow, I admire Thompson for his boldness in running this ad. Fred did let me down in one respect. Picture the moment (in case you missed it): the presentation ended, the lights came on, and there stood the master-of-ceremonies (Anderson Cooper) looking pie-eyed. He stammered to Thompson as to what this ad was all about. Thompson should have anticipated this reaction (you really could hear a pin drop- except for the very few audible gasps from the audience- what a moment!), and should have immediately launched into a forceful response to the effect that the words just played in this ad show where his opponents stand as opposed to their more dubious claims to be conservative. It would have been his Ronald Reagan Microphone Moment. One for the ages.

Fred needs to be careful. He is presently in danger of permanently damaging his reputation as the New Communicator similar to the way President Bush has damaged his own reputation as a competent administrator. Nor do I intend to conceal my admiration for the message (of fiscal responsibility) that Thompson has made the centerpiece of his campaign. He is virtually alone in this. This message has been tried in a (small) number of mostly congressional races throughout the USA over the years- most of them in the House of Representatives (Cong. Ron Paul happens to be one such example). The only time I am aware that it has been attempted at the Presidential level was the Goldwater defeat in 1964 versus LBJ. The stakes are very high. There are powerful interests that have been riding high-wide- and- handsome, living off your taxes, for a number of decades now. You can expect them to pull out whatever stops are necessary to defeat a Thompson candidacy. They perceive him to be a threat –and rightly so. A poor Iowa showing would strangle this insurgence in the cradle.These interests coalesce around the D.C.-based bureaucracy (the “fourth branch”). Their span of control includes huge swatches of both the welfare and warfare state. What they all have in common is total dependency on the runnaway federal spending process (such as it is), and their continuing financial aggrandizement is totally at variance with the financial interests (and solvency) of you and me. I have known a number of these people over the years; this is not a game to them, and they play for keeps. They can, and will, trample anyone who gets in their way- whatever it takes. They have already mobilized their media allies in a desperate attempt to ignore and/or ridicule Thompson’s candidacy. Outside of the actual audiences he has reached, Thompson’s message has not gotten a wide ambit ( the conventional wisdom says it is not selling- also because “Fred is lazy”). The truth is that what you are seeing is a cynical and sophisticated attempt at message suppression, similar to voter suppression attempts in election-years 2000 and 2004. Same interests, same manipulators, same goals. Only the American people end up losing in the end.

To summarize: America still needs a vocal exponent of real conservative ideas. It has been a long time since we have had one. Reagan had great ideas, not as much followup in the area of actions. His chief role was to set a course for the future. Bush I wasn’t conservative at all. Bush II has only been eloquent when he had to be (9/11, Iraq). His appellation as a “compassionate” conservative was a fraud and an insult. Verbally he has been hazy and rambling when we needed clear- especially operating in the poisonous air provided by total media hostility. Conservatism has been wandering in the wilderness for too long (arguably since Lincoln). It never recovered from prematurely losing Ohio Senator Robert Taft in the 1950s. We now have a candidate who can be his own best spokesman.

This country needs to initiate a re- building process. Other than a mass lack of self -esteem, we suffer from a deficit of what author Charles Murray once called “little battalions”- the intermediary institutions that arise out of the culture (Neighborhood councils, associations, churches, unions) that used to do the great majority of the world’s work. These have atrophied, or been crowded out, by the explosion of government at all levels. We, as a people, are simply less adequate than we once were. America is a unique nation of boundless opportunity; this is as true now as it ever was. Our greatest lack is that of belief in ourselves. We always have had all that we need. We are far from being as helpless as we have been (too often) led to believe. Fred Thompson will provide the inspiration America needs to get back on a path that is true to its heritage. We don’t need smart, engaging guys with perfect resumes and a policy program for every ill. It doesn’t require more government; in fact, it mandates a need for less. To fail to understand this is to place the future of America in dire peril. We cannot continue as we have. This is the real challenge of our times. Its time for a change; in fact, an attitude shift. In any case, its up to the voters now. It always has been. Its still your future……your choice.

THIS IS YOUR TIME

FRED THOMPSON FOR PRESIDENT

For The Nonce——–PV