Yep. Saw a show with him on it....he's bad to the bone!

Flintstone or Mertz?

No, seriously - you couldn't be more right. We desperately need Fred Thompson.

You had better HOPE that he isn't too far behind in the fundraising department.

Mayor McOrwell and John "Where am I?" McCain wouldn't exactly do your party any good.

Does Thompson even have a platform yet, or is he just Shinola compared to the shit?

I could get stoned enough and vote for a Hunter/Thompson ticket, forgetting the Doc offed himself for a minute...

Yeah, I don't think he is behind in the fundraising department at all. As a matter of fact, I believe he can spend half the money that these other guys are doing, enter the race later, and still win hands down. Fred Dalton Thompson for President, HELL YEAH! If you can't figure out how this can be, then go ahead, light another stogie and by all means, think about it. Maybe it will come to ya.

Um, if you think having a total of $0.00 in your campaign fund is not "behind" in fundraising...I digress...

...what is it about him, anyway? He has no platform, yet. You can point to his record, and say he's pro-life, pro-immigration reform, and generally conservative... but you can literally say the exact same thing about McCain, Hunter, Romney, and Gingrich.

This is actual curiosity- what separates him from the rest?

Personally, I think it's because he hasn't had a chance to screw up. McCain, over a long enough timeline, will change his stance on everything. Guiliani's got skeletons. Gingrich puts his foot in his mouth. Romney is... well... Mormon. Thompson hasn't been in the spotlight long enough to do something dumb or have some bad thing in his past dug up.

So what is it about his that makes right wingers cream themselves? I really want to know. That he came, seemingly, from nowhere to the tips of everyone's lips is fascinating. Can anyone explain it to me? I'm all out of stogies.

(Try "blunts" or "fatties" next time. Stogies are what George Burns smokes.)

So, you are saying that there is no way a person can win the presidency with no campaign funding?

I think that's BRILLIANT right there. He's sending a message that he isn't about how much money people can give him. You can pretty much be sure he isn't bought, that his opinions are his own.

My opinion was formed by listening to a news show..go figure...and hearing him answer some really hard questions. And address the issue of campaign funding.

Which prompted me to take a look at his voting record.

And, now I am convinced. Why don't you try doing the same.

So, you are saying that there is no way a person can win the presidency with no campaign funding?

Yes. It's a very, very large problem for anyone to be tens of millions behind in fundraising.

...and I'm not pro-life, and economincally liberal. Me and Freddy wouldn't get along.

His voting record is almost no different than Gingrich's, or McCain's. I'm not being rhetorical; I really want to knoe why he's so attractive. His policy choices are no different than others that are running- Or for that matter, from a hundred other Senators and House members I could list.

Is it some rock star persona, like Obama- does he simply have charisma? Are the other choices pale in comparison? Does he have the "outsider" factor, since he hasn't been in the political spotlight recently?

This is all just curiosity. I'm not trying to dissuade you from supporting him- I just want to know why. I want to know what seperates Thompson from the other Republican choices.