I have been leaning toward supporting Fred Thompson for President ever since he publicly declared his interest in running. I determined to wait a couple of months before the primaries before I made up my mind. I have always considered Thompson is the best bet to unify the conservative base around his candidacy and that he can be trusted to appoint conservative, pro-life judges to the Supreme Court. Time was needed to analyze his positions. Also, I wanted to see how he would perform in debates. Lastly, if there was anything in his background that indicated he could not be trusted as a true conservative, or if there was some character flaw that disqualified him from high office, I figure it would have come out by now. Time has now past, and with one year to go before the election, and just a couple of months before early primaries may decide the nominees in both parties, this blog announces that it officially endorses Fred Thompson for the Republican nomination for President.
Why? First and foremost, his voting record has been 100% pro-life. He can be trusted to appoint conservative, pro-life judges to the Supreme Court. The issue of who will appoint the next two Supreme Court justices should be the most important issue of all to any conservative, whether pro-life issues matter to you the most or not. If economic issues, if issues of the power of states versus Washington, if immigration issues, national security issues, or moral issues top your agendas, the Supreme Court will be making major decisions on these issues in the future. A Democrat would appoint judges who would cement liberal orthodoxy into the fabric of our legal system. While I am not pleased with Thompson's entire voting record, he is trustworthy on the issue of judges. And he his most likely to unite the conservative base of the Republican party to win in November next year.
In searching for a winning candidate, one must never compromise one's principles. A vote for Giuliani, because he is perceived as a "winner", would be just such a compromise for evangelicals such as myself. He ran and governed as a liberal while mayor of New York City. His personality gravitates him toward big-government solutions. Neither he nor McCain could be trusted not to attempt to marginalize evangelical influence in the Republican party. If either were nominated, they could not unify the party behind them. Too much water has passed under the bridge for evangelicals to work for their election with enthusiasm. I would vote for Romney over either of these two, and I believe Romney would be a formidable candidate against that woman on the other side. Yet his change of opinion on issues that concern me makes me uneasy. Being a Mormon might not disqualify him from high office, however, his election could divide the Church about speaking truthfully about Mormonism. To maintain good relations with a Romney White House, evangelicals may be pressured not to condemn Mormonism as inconsistent with Christian orthodoxy. Huckabee comes off as a flake sometimes and he did not govern as an economic conservative as governor. (That name doesn't help either.) Not only is Thompson reliable, his personality would be the most positive contrast to that woman in the general election. He would also have less personal baggage that would weaken him as a candidate. And that would give Clinton Inc. an experience it has never dealt with before: an able, articulate, formidable opponent.
I supported Bush in the 2000 primaries. He was the best we could offer without compromising evangelical principles at the time. Yet I had no great enthusiasm about him because I feared his "compassionate conservatism" translated into big-government solutions. Unfortunately, he fulfilled those fears. However, I trusted him to appoint the right kind of judges, and he has lived up to my expectations on this front. And for that, I will never regret voting for him. Even on other conservative issues, like the reduction of Federal regulations,he has exceeded my expectations. I was expecting to be disappointed with Bush; I am expecting to be disappointed with Thompson should he be elected. While he is reliably Conservative, he can get too close to the Washington establishment at times. I am sure this will negatively affect his governance.
However, his rhetoric seems to reveal he has a vision of where he wants to take the country in addition to just having conservative principles and I feel comfortable where he would take us in the areas defense, the war, and Federalism. In the general election, the other side would probably underestimate him and then be unprepared for competing against him.
I am sure the blogging public has awaited my endorsement with baited breath. Here it is. Fred Thompson for the Republican nominee, and then, for President.