The American Mind

With Fred Thompson almost-sort-of in the Presidential race it’s time to ask some questions that go way beyond his effect on the horse race. The vibe I’m getting from Fred supporters makes him the Republican Obama. He’s the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan (he does look as old as Reagan in office) and the conservative savior who rises above the midgets and “wannabe” conservative candidates. Consider this pouring a little cold water onto Fred!, but realize I mean well.

ABC News reports on some issues where Thompson might have trouble with conservatives.

First, on abortion Thompson has issued multiple messages:

Though Thompson describes himself as “pro-life” and has called for Roe vs. Wade to be overturned, questions have been raised about whether he has always held that view.

While running for the Senate in 1994, he was referred to in several media reports as “pro-choice” and told an interviewer from a libertarian newsletter that abortion decisions “must be made by the woman. Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own.”

In addition, in a 1994 survey filled out for Project Vote Smart, Thompson checked a box saying, “Abortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy.”

Thompson associates say that was an error made by a staff member. “Pro-life” groups judged Thompson to have a perfect record on abortion issues while in the Senate.

Will Fred Thompson get the same scrutiny as Mitt Romney on abortion? In the past he has said many things that sound pro-abortion, just like Romney. His record in office has been pro-life, just like Romney. Does Thompson get at least a few charges of flip-flopping? Or does he get a pass because he has a booming voice along with great face recognition?

Second, Thompson voted for McCain-Feingold, the first amendment restriction law. Sen. McCain lost many voters permanently solely on that issue. Does Thompson get a pass? Or does the home spun charge make him immune?

What about taxes? Does he support opening more parts of the U.S. to oil and gas exploration? Does he support subsidizing ethanol and other biofuels? What does he think about the mess that is the TSA and Department of Homeland Security?

How would he deal with China? Does he want more free trade deals? What’s his view on the falling dollar?

Does he think the Patriot Act has gone too far or not far enough?

What’s his philosophy for nominating federal judges?

Finally, on the most hot button issue of the moment, immigration, Thompson told Fox News

that he would support “a deal where [undocumented immigrants] can have some aspirations of citizenship” — a position that some conservatives are likely to compare to “amnesty.”

That statement is very vague so that might allow Thompson to avoid the charge he is for open borders. Immigration hardliners are so afraid of getting burned they’re willing to go nuclear on the GOP. Does Thompson’s vagueness assuage them?

So far Fred Thompson has been a phenomenon. He’s done some original things to get attention and turn himself into a Republican rock star. However, conservatives must not avoid asking the tough questions. Primaries are where candidates get tested. We get to see if they’re Presidential material.

No candidate will be perfect. Thompson may turn out to line up very well with most conservative issues. The only way to know is to ask questions and scrutinize him as much as the other Republican candidates. That’s what the Democrats are doing at this moment.

“Thompson Hunts for a Red November”

UPDATE: Top Iowa political reporter David Yepsen reduces his credibility by posting this on the effect of Thompson entering the race (emphasis mine):

But Romney’s also been plagued by talk he’s a flip-flopper on conservative issues, while Thompson’s conservative credentials are solid. And Thompson also seems like an electable candidate to many Republicans who have been dissatisfied with the 2008 field. So, GOPers looking for good, electable conservative may well move from Romney to Thompson.

Thompson’s record hasn’t been thoroughly examined yet. He’s just been the dream candidate of those who aren’t pleased with the current line up. He hasn’t garnered much skepticism yet.

Jim Geraghty wants something bold from Fred:

What I would like to see from FDT is… something a little innovative in the policy arena. Right now he’s running as the Conventional Conservative who has no beefs with anyone in the GOP. Fine. Great. But I don’t think that’s what it will take to win in 2008. It feels a little too “safe.” I thought David Frum had some great advice for the Big Three GOP candidates.

So what would I like to see from FDT? Something in the vein of (I know this is lame) “Rebooting for Results.” Newt talks about this a lot - the Bush administration has been stumbling since early on because large portions of our federal bureaucracy don’t get the results they promise.

Such vision would allow conservatives to look past any possible weaknesses in Thompson’s conservative armor. Bold ideas would also prevent Newt Gingrich from entering the race.