by Mark Silva
People ask Fred Thompson, the former senator from Tennessee and television and film actor, what he would do during his first 100 days in office, should he be elected president.
“I really don’t know what I would do in my first 100 days,’’ Thompson candidly and conversationally told an audience today. “It would depend on the circumstances.
“But I know what I would do in the first hour,’’ Thompson told an assembly of religious right voters assessing the Republican field of presidential candidates today. “I would go into the Oval Office and close the door and pray for the wisdom to know what is right’’ – and with that, people stood and applauded the drawling, homespun candidate.
“I would pray for the strength to do what is right,’’ the candidate said. “May God give us all the strength and wisdom to do what is right for our country.’’
In a soft-spoken, almost rambling manner, standing at a podium with his head often lowered and sometimes peering up at the audience of two thousand or more assembled in a Washington hotel ballroom for the Values Voter Summit sponsored by the Family Research Council, Thompson also made a point here of noting what this audience particularly wanted to hear:
He has stood against abortion and for the sanctity of marriage throughout his political career – something, as he did not have to mention with his own words, that two of the party’s leading candidates appearing here later this evening and tomorrow -- Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani -- cannot say.
Thompson also rallied the audience with his statement that “we know in this country that our basic rights come from God and not from any government.’’
“I’m proud to say that, over eight years, on national issues, I was a consistent conservative, cutting taxes, balancing the budget… fighting for good conservative judges with a 100-percent pro-life voting record, and I’m proud of that record,’’ Thompson said. “That’s who I was then, that’s who I am today, and that’s the kind of president I will be.’’
His position on stem-cell research is simple, he said: “You don’t create life in order to destroy it.’’
And, if his “head’’ always understood what’s wrong with abortion, he said, it took the birth of his four-year-old daughter in a second marriage to make his heart understand as well.
“I must say itt took life’s experiences for me to absorb the real importance of it all,’’ he said, recalling seeing a sonogram of his daughter in the womb. “I will never feel exactly the same again… Because my heart now is fully engaged with my head.
“As president of the United States,’’ he promised, “no legislation will pass my desk that funds or supports this procedure without my veto.’’
He didn’t stop at what this crowd wanted to hear about abortion. He spoke of a commitment to marriage.
Judges are interfering with “the recognition that marriage is between a man and a woman,’’ he said. “When I was in the Senate, we fought for the Defense of Marriage Act… passed that act.
“This is a totally judicially created problem,’’ he said. “I propose a constitutional amendment… which will stop this… in its tracks.’’
Noting that President Bush had called on him to usher Chief Justice John Roberts through his confirmation by the Senate, he said: “I believe he will go down as one of the great chief justices. We just need more of them.’’
He devoted a little time to government, and the need for reform of Social Security. The system is in trouble, needs fixing, and he will find a way to do it, he promised.
“We have to blow the whistle.. That’s what I intend to do,’’ he said. “They say it’s the third rail of politics,’’ he said, but he has “a modest proposal’’ to start fixing it.
“If you can’t tell the truth,’’ Thompson said, “you shouldn’t be running for president of the United States.’’
• 
• 
• 
Comments
“This is a totally judicially created problem,’’ he said. “I propose a constitutional amendment… which will stop this… in its tracks."
A constitutional Amendment to deny a right to a group of citizens rather than to affirm a right.
The Founders would be ashamed.
Posted by: AJF | October 19, 2007 11:54 AM
His folksiness is appreciated, but with all that's going on in the world, I think voters want someone who at least has a few ideas about his first 100 days. Every candidate, republican or democrat, is going to ask for guidance. Only the republicans are planning to make a spectacle of it.
Posted by: Tom | October 19, 2007 12:04 PM
“I really don’t know what I would do in my first 100 days,’’ Thompson candidly and conversationally told an audience today.
Sounds like he doesn't know a whole lot of anything including the issues.
Posted by: Marko | October 19, 2007 12:10 PM
Why is this man even running? Does he understand the role of the presidency?
Posted by: Janstress | October 19, 2007 12:11 PM
This is the guy Nixon thought was "stupid but friendly."
Does this country really need another stupid Republican President?
Posted by: nisleib | October 19, 2007 12:42 PM
Scary man.
Totally unqualified for the job. Scary thing is some people might vote for him just because of his stand on right to life.
I would not place the "button" in this man's hands.
Posted by: San Miguel | October 19, 2007 12:44 PM
He'd start praying in the Oval Office? This man has zero qualifications for being a president. I'm not agianst prayer being religious myself, but to use religion, or "I'll pray in the Oval Office", as a vote getter is disgusting.
Posted by: RomanB | October 19, 2007 1:00 PM
ZZzzzzzzzzzz
Posted by: John E | October 19, 2007 1:01 PM
I thought Bush always prays to God to do the right thing. God apparently doesn't listen or is terrible in regards to advising on Domestic and Foreign policy!
Posted by: Tim | October 19, 2007 1:06 PM
He sounds like a likeable person. But he doesn't even belong in the Senate, much less the Presidency. We need an intelligent, non-partisan for President to help heal this Country. I am fed up with extremists on both sides.
Posted by: DCB | October 19, 2007 1:09 PM
I'm all for praying and seeking strength, but I'd like our President to be a person who is ready to go and has the confidence in his own ability to move this country forward. If he's saying its all God's will or something in the end, then that's either simple pandering to christain conservatives or the mark of man who doesn't have a clue.
Posted by: kb | October 19, 2007 1:10 PM
I can understand why the leftys in this blog are critical of Thompson- he has a moral compass- unlike the two leading DEM candidates who change who they are with the latest poll.
Not yet sure if I would vote for him, but I am leaning that way purely in respect of his humility.
Posted by: heartburn | October 19, 2007 1:14 PM
Seems like all you have to do for this bunch of neanderthals is say:
1) You are against abortion
2) You are against gay rights
3) Any of the other decisions you have to make, you pray to God to tell you what to do.
Easy.
Posted by: BobinATL | October 19, 2007 1:28 PM
Heartburn:
He already has as many marriages as the two top Democratic candidates combined.
If Richard Nixon thought he was stupid, then why is he even still around??
Posted by: BobinATL | October 19, 2007 1:35 PM
I'm ashamed of The Swamp for publishing the comment by 'tbone' that uses the word "faggot." I'm all for free debate, but I'm also positive you would never publish a comment with other extremely derogatory terms for entire groups of people (n**ger, for example).
Please help spread thought, not simplistic hate speech that does nothing to further the conversation.
Posted by: Nevus | October 19, 2007 1:39 PM
I suspect that with the next administration, "the first 100 days" will be largely irrelevant – there will be no honeymoon period for whomever is elected.
Posted by: JB | October 19, 2007 1:52 PM
Heartburn:
He already has as many marriages as the two top Democratic candidates combined.
If Richard Nixon thought he was stupid, then why is he even still around??
Posted by: BobinATL | October 19, 2007 1:35 PM
What a confusing post..
So how long has a 40 year old Richard Nixon opinion of somebody meant anything today?
And
Not sure what you are meaning by referring to his divorces?? I will assume you are saying someone that gets divorced either has no moral compass or no humility..? Which is it for you?
What are you talking about?
Posted by: heartburn | October 19, 2007 1:57 PM
Thimpson obviously is not qualified to be president and it is disgusting that he is willing to pander to the religious right to run for a job that he is not qualified for,
Posted by: Alan Schwartz | October 19, 2007 1:59 PM
Bobin,
Ignore heartburn, he only want's someone to pay attention to him, he's got nothing to say.
Posted by: John E | October 19, 2007 2:07 PM
Heartburn:
You know - the sanctity of marriage, etc?? The thing that is so big with these people that they are against gay marriage?? If he was such a great, Christian man, wouldn't he still be married to his first wife?
And because this guy was the snitch who went behind the Watergate Committee's back to tell Nixon what was going on.
Posted by: BobinATL | October 19, 2007 2:08 PM
Sorry, John E. - you're right. I should have saved my ammo for Paulo, Jerry White and Johnny D - the real whack jobs.
Take a look at my response to Johnny on the McCain thread.
Posted by: BobinATL | October 19, 2007 2:21 PM
As to pandering, how about (and I paraphrase) our basic rights come from God and not from any government. I always thought our basic rights were enshrined in our Constitution which applies w/out exception to any branch or level of government. We have lost too many soldiers in the Middle East trying to establish secular government to fall prey to this line of thought.
Posted by: FER | October 19, 2007 2:22 PM
Here's the GOP in a nutshell:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktl7yWvXo3I
.....and this is why the Repulican Party has lost the last two generations of voters and continues to make themselves irrelevant.
Posted by: John E | October 19, 2007 2:23 PM
Prayers, anti-abortion comments, tax cutting, and even defending marriage from the gays...Thompson still has no trouble delivering his lines, although his character is now a humble presidential candidate instead of the big city prosecutor. I can see why heartburn is smitten.
Still, I have a hard time taking him or any of these "family values" politicians seriously. Just how many divorces, extra-marital affairs, or tapdances in the airport men's room do we have to hear about before these guys are disqualified as defenders of marriage?
Posted by: Tom O | October 19, 2007 2:27 PM
Tom O - don't forget the solicitations of prostitutes and the molestation of underage male pages. Just more Republican family values!
Posted by: Paul | October 19, 2007 3:03 PM
This is why Thomson will win. He speaks out on what really matters to the health of the country and doesn't just blow smoke like Hillary and Rudy. He doesn't need to pander to the Christians as he is a man of faith with the morals and ideals that go with it. He is honest enough to say that he cannot predict what the atmosphere of the nation and world will be like in his first 100 days so he isn't going to lie about what he will do.
Thompson continues to establish himself as the sole conservative and federalist candidate. He sounds more and more like Reagan and will likely win in a landslide as Reagan did, contrary to what the polsters and politicos predicted.
As to his Divorce? He was at least man enough to divoce and not commit adultery as Rudy, Hillary and Bill did in the past.
HEY HILLARY! WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO VINCE FOSTER?
Posted by: Gus Burk | October 19, 2007 3:51 PM
What a pathetic admission of empty ambition by Fred Thompson.
He sounds like a fruitcake.
Haven't people who pray for advice gotten us into enough trouble?
After all, the German armies that pitched Europe into horror all had on their belt buckles "Gott Mit Un."
Doesn't it strike people as the least bit odd, too, that God would withhold his wisdom until the last moment?
The old traditional Christians used to take the view that God helps those who help themselves. If you've got to be superstitious, that's not a bad slogan.
But America's fundamentalist Christians today are a pathetic lot when they have to be appealed to in this way.
Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | October 19, 2007 4:57 PM
Wow, what a profound statement.
Posted by: Alberto | October 19, 2007 6:50 PM
"TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH OR HALF THE TRUTH"
HAS GOD TOUCHED YOU? IF HE HASN'T PLEASE SEND FIVE DOLLARS AGAIN $5.00 TO THE GOP PRESIDENTIAL PARTY AND THE GOP WILL SEND YOU A COPY OF HIS HAND.
SO YOU CAN TOUCH YOURSELF, BECAUSE IF WE DO, IT'S TAP TAP, TAP TAP, TAP TAP!
IF YOU CAN'T CAN YOU SPARE THE GOP A DIME! DOW DOWN 363 POINTS. THAT MEANS WE SHOOK A LOT OF AMERICANS FROM THE TREE. HEDGEFUNDS ARE UP.
HAS GOD TOUCHED YOU?
Posted by: Roger Morris | October 19, 2007 6:59 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: FER | October 19, 2007 2:22 PM
Here's a trick question for you FER. How many of the rights enshrined in the Constitution were "created" by, or came from, the Constitution itself?
Go ahead and give it a try. I'll give you a clue. If you say 1 - you would be wrong.
The correct answer will be posted when you respond.
Posted by: John W. | October 20, 2007 1:06 AM
Any candidate that says they know exactly what they will do their first one hundred days in office is feeding you political B.S. They have no way of knowing the situation in the world a year and a half from now. The stock market could crash, a nuclear bomb could go off in the U.S. (follow your imagination) I am sure that a president's priorites must shift accordingly. Anything a candidate tells you now is pure fluff. Thompson's point is... you must elect someone based on caracter so that when the unexpected comes up you know what the president measures things by.
Posted by: rebecca antrobius | October 22, 2007 10:42 PM