<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>Thompson Report</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/" />
   <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/atom.xml" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6</id>
   <updated>2007-10-10T18:54:37Z</updated>
   <subtitle>Poli Report.com Blog - Your Dashboard for the 2008 Presidential Race</subtitle>
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 3.34</generator>

<entry>
   <title>Romney, Guilliani spar; Thompson sets bar</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/10/romney_guilliani_spar_thompson.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.341</id>
   
   <published>2007-10-10T18:44:44Z</published>
   <updated>2007-10-10T18:54:37Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Several articles reviewing last night&apos;s debate definitely show Romney and Guilliani jabbing each other about who cut taxes more, etc. But these articles also tend to show Thompson as the bar-setter of the night. The Washington Times noted that the...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mike Soh (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[Several articles reviewing last night's debate definitely show Romney and Guilliani jabbing each other about who cut taxes more, etc.  But these articles also tend to show Thompson as the bar-setter of the night.

<a href="http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071010/NATION/110100081/1001">The Washington Times noted</a> that the timing was 'about right' for Thompson entering the race.  While there have been mixed reviews as to how his campaign is doing as a whole, almost everyone can agree that Thompson met expectations last night debating with the big-whigs of the republican party.

While Thompson is starting to lose steam, it's important to note that Thompson is bringing a completely different attitude to the race.  Have you noticed that Thompson has been pretty even-toned throughout his official (and official) campaign?  In fact, I haven't actually seen him attack any of his other candidates.

I'm curious to see how Thompson will do in the primaries.  He has been in the top three or four candidates for quite a while.  Granted he's usually the last guy within that list, but I expect him to gain tremendous ground as the primaries get closer.

With the evangelical Christians vowing not to back Guilliani, it will be interesting to see who they will vote for should Guilliani be nominated.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Thompsons, others, accused of not caring about the minorty vote</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/10/thompsons_others_accused_of_no.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.330</id>
   
   <published>2007-10-03T12:58:38Z</published>
   <updated>2007-10-03T13:09:28Z</updated>
   
   <summary>This past weekend, all the republican candidates were invited to a debate hosted by a historically black college Morgan State University. Four candidates could not make the debate. And, of course, it gave the candidates that were there plenty of...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mike Soh (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[This past weekend, all the republican candidates were invited to a debate hosted by a historically black college Morgan State University.  Four candidates could not make the debate.  And, of course, it gave the candidates that were there plenty of ammo to say how Thompson, Guiliani, McCann, and Romney don't care about the minority vote.

Even though these candidates expressed <b>well in advanced</b> that they had scheduling conflicts, they were all lampooned.

As the time-horizon closes to the primaries, each and every candidate must do his best to raise the support needed to win the election.  Being a minority myself, I can understand that Thompson, et al had scheduling conflicts that they couldn't change.  Fund raising is crucial during this time.

Every special interest will want to have a debate concerning their political agenda.  At this point, they simply cannot say yes to every invitation.  In fact, one must learn to say no.

Perhaps the ability to say "no" is a good indicator as to who can be president.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Dobson won&apos;t back Thompson</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/09/dobson_wont_back_thompson.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.326</id>
   
   <published>2007-09-27T12:23:29Z</published>
   <updated>2007-09-27T12:49:29Z</updated>
   
   <summary>In an e-mail last week, James Dobson, president of the influential Focus on the Family, said that he won&apos;t support Dobson. According to the Washington Post, Dobson wrote: Isn&apos;t Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mike Soh (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[In an e-mail last week, James Dobson, president of the influential Focus on the Family, said that he won't support Dobson.  According to the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091902603.html">Washington Post</a>, Dobson wrote:

<blockquote>Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?</blockquote>

I'm going to tackle two issues here: Defending Thompson as a great presidential candidate and why supporting a Christian candidate outright just because he's a Christian is a bad idea.]]>
      <![CDATA[While it is true that Thompson does not support a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, I think it's important to realize that this is a battle that is not going to be won anytime soon, especially not in the next four to eight years.  The real battle will be the opposite: a Constitutional amendment <b>abolishing the establishment of marriage</b>.  This is a law I see entering congress within the next ten years.

Yes, I believe a legally-backed marriage should only be defined between one man and one woman.  However, to discount Fred simply on this one issue is tantamount to throwing out the Bible simply because you disagree with one verse.  (Oh yeah, I went there!)

This leads me to my next point: evangelical Christians should be cautious backing a candidate simply because he is a Christian.  Unfortunately, Thompson has been remarkably silent concerning his faith.  Yes, I believe this is a very important part of a person.  I believe it's dangerous to simply get behind someone <i>even if he is a fully devoted Christian, goes to church every Sunday, volunteers at the soup kitchen, and tucks homeless children to bed.</i>

I would rather vote for a satanic devil worshiper who believes in building a strong national defense, lowering taxes, is pro-life <b>and</b> against abortion, family oriented, willing to secure the border, and appointing judges that will defend the constitution than a Christian who punches a Sunday-time card...and that's all we know about him.

I think it would be great if Thompson talked more openly about his faith.  I think it would only help him.  What I don't want Thompson to do is pay lip-service to Christians when he's really an atheist. I think the ladder would be far worse.]]>
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Meet Fred</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/09/meet_fred.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.314</id>
   
   <published>2007-09-13T16:13:44Z</published>
   <updated>2007-09-13T16:21:35Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Fred has announced that he will be in the DC area on September 26. If you&apos;ve got the time, you can visit him in McLean, VA. He&apos;ll be there at 6:00pm, giving a speech and shaking hands. If you want...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mike Soh (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[Fred has announced that he will be in the DC area on September 26.  If you've got the time, you can visit him in McLean, VA.  He'll be there at 6:00pm, giving a speech and shaking hands.

If you want to go, and got $1000 to drop, you can <a href="https://www.fred08.com/rsvp.aspx?City=McLean">purchase your ticket</a>.

For more information on the event, you can contact Sarah Newman at 571-730-1000 or snewman@fred08.com]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Thompson is offically IN!</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/09/thompson_is_offically_in.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.302</id>
   
   <published>2007-09-07T12:38:41Z</published>
   <updated>2007-09-07T12:53:55Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Fred Thompson announced his bid for presidency on the Tonight Show this past Tuesday, a la Arnold Schwarzenegger. (For those of you that don&apos;t remember, or don&apos;t care to remember, Arnold announced his bid for governator on the Tonight Show...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mike Soh (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[Fred Thompson announced his bid for presidency on the Tonight Show this past Tuesday, a la Arnold Schwarzenegger.  (For those of you that don't remember, or don't care to remember, Arnold announced his bid for governator on the Tonight Show as well.)  He has a 6-part announcement video on <a href="http://fred08.com/Index.aspx">his official website</a>.

While his announcement met with little fanfare (particularly because it's been long anticipated), Fred has managed to stir up the hornet's nest with the republicans, many of them chastising his "no-show" appearance in the debates.

Frankly, I'm not surprised, nor would I expect, Thompson to join in any of the debates until the last few before primaries.  I think Thompson has seen tremendous support simply by not being in the spotlight.  He's kind of been the midnight contender that everyone knows.  Thompson himself said that he is running a different kind of campaign.

I hope he can sustain and even pick-up steam.

<strong>Note: </strong>The DC Examiner has run a summarized list of <a href="http://www.examiner.com/a-920180~Thompson_on_the_Issues.html">Thomson on the Issues</a>.  You can also view of <a href="http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/08/17/king.thompson.values.interview.cnn">video of an interview</a> with Thompson and CNN.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>New Editor: Michael &quot;Linus&quot; Soh</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/08/new_editor_michael_linus_soh.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.286</id>
   
   <published>2007-08-27T13:40:16Z</published>
   <updated>2007-08-27T13:55:08Z</updated>
   
   <summary>I&apos;m the new contributer for the &quot;Thompson&quot; report. I guess it&apos;s appropriate to just use &quot;Thompson&quot; now since Tommy Thompson has dropped out of the primary running. I&apos;m a fairly new republican, having moved from the independent side. I&apos;m a...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mike Soh (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[I'm the new contributer for the "Thompson" report.  I guess it's appropriate to just use "Thompson" now since Tommy Thompson has dropped out of the primary running.  I'm a fairly new republican, having moved from the independent side.

I'm a supporter of Fred Thompson.  There are a lot of reasons why I am, but I won't address them here.  But I would like to bring up an article I read in today's <a href="http://www.examiner.com/a-901102~Huckabee_Expectations_High_for_Thompson.html">DC Examiner</a>.

Pretty much everyone and their pet dog is expecting Fred to join the race sometime in September.  His successful "campaign" has bought him a lot of publicity and a great deal of fanfare.  It's like the few minutes before the main act of the concert.  The audience waits in anticipation...and it is because they have to wait that make it worthwhile.

Huckabee criticized this by saying, "I think he's going to suck a lot of the oxygen out of the room when he first comes in. But I'm not sure I'd want to be in his position where the expectations are simply just sky-high for him to be able to perform."

While I would agree that there is a lot of hype over Thompson's entry, I'm not sure if I would go so far to say that he's going to fail under high expectations.  Yes, there are many people that can't wait what he'll do to the race; but the very <i><b>FACT</b></i> that he has waited shows that he is a patient man.  I think his supporters understand this.  I think he will be able to take these expectations in stride.

Fred has an air about him that is serious, but also nonchalant.  He knows he's popular, but he doesn't let it get to his head.  He uses his popularity to benefit his campaign, but restrains himself from being the center.

I hope to see Fred's official announcement soon.  But I think it's safe to say that his announcement to make an official announcement is proof enough that he's running.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Fred: Thank You For Smoking?</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/07/fred_thank_you_for_smoking.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.201</id>
   
   <published>2007-07-12T22:32:36Z</published>
   <updated>2007-07-12T23:01:38Z</updated>
   
   <summary>[I don&apos;t mean to be the bearer of all negative news for Fred, but ...] Today Powerline published an article by Fred Thompson regarding lawyers, lobby-ers (yes - I know), and the clients they represent. This comes concurrently as the...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Phil James (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[[I don't mean to be the bearer of all negative news for Fred, but ...]

Today Powerline published an <a href="http://powerlineblog.com/archives/018199.php"> <u>article</u></a> by Fred Thompson regarding lawyers, lobby-ers (yes - I know), and the clients they represent.  This comes concurrently as the Fred! campaign is backing off denials of lobbying for an abortion-rights firm (<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/4908.html"><u>link</u></a>).

The jist of the article is that a lawyer should not be associated with the cause of his client.  Why? Apparenlty b/c lawyers need to make a living. And b/c clients are entitled to representation in a court of law.  Fred recalls the examples of Adams and Lincoln.

Sorry, but I don't buy.  No one forced Fred to lobby or not lobby for any previous clients.  He is free to choose the companies or clients which he represents.  Lobbying is not the same as ensuring the constitutional right to a defense in court. Lobby-ers are salesmen to Congressman.  I'm glad to see that Dean Barnett <a href="http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/a3cd1b58-c04e-4a0c-a966-7bfaed634cd6"><u>agrees</u></a>.  Also - the John Adams analogy is not a parallel argument.  [note: I read this article very quickly, I may haved missed the finer points]

Anyhow - Fred is not impressing right now. I have high hopes for Fred. But those hopes rely on being up-front on the issues, not artfully dodging them.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Opus (comic) on Fred</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/07/opus_comic_on_fred.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.198</id>
   
   <published>2007-07-09T11:55:10Z</published>
   <updated>2007-07-09T12:13:35Z</updated>
   
   <summary>My mother brought to my attention that this weeks Opus takes a pretty hard shot at Fred Thompson. Ouch. I&apos;m not a regular reader of the funnies, but I thought I&apos;d post this for your information....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Phil James (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[My mother brought to my attention that this weeks <a href="http://wpcomics.washingtonpost.com/client/wpc/wpopu/2007/07/08/"><u>Opus</u></a> takes a pretty hard shot at Fred Thompson. Ouch. I'm not a regular reader of the funnies, but I thought I'd post this for your information.

<a href="http://wpcomics.washingtonpost.com/client/wpc/wpopu/2007/07/08/" >
<img align="center" src="http://www.polireport.com/mt-static/images/fred.gif"></a>
]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Fred Leaked Info to Nixon?</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/07/fred_leaked_info_to_nixon.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.194</id>
   
   <published>2007-07-05T13:27:51Z</published>
   <updated>2007-07-05T13:29:07Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The Boston Globe is reporting that: Thompson tipped off the White House that the committee knew about the taping system and would be making the information public. In his all-but-forgotten Watergate memoir, &quot;At That Point in Time,&quot; Thompson said he...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Phil James (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[The Boston Globe is <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/07/04/not_all_would_put_a_heroic_sheen_on_thompsons_watergate_role/">reporting</a> that:

<blockquote>Thompson tipped off the White House that the committee knew about the taping system and would be making the information public. In his all-but-forgotten Watergate memoir, "At That Point in Time," Thompson said he acted with "no authority" in divulging the committee's knowledge of the tapes, which provided the evidence that led to Nixon's resignation. It was one of many Thompson leaks to the Nixon team, according to a former investigator for Democrats on the committee, Scott Armstrong , who remains upset at Thompson's actions.</blockquote>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Fred on Commuting of Libby Sentence</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/07/fred_on_commute_of_libby_sente.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.189</id>
   
   <published>2007-07-03T12:43:38Z</published>
   <updated>2007-07-03T12:46:14Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Fred Thompson courtesy MSNBC on President Bush commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby: &quot;I am very happy for Scooter Libby. I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children. While for a long time I...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Phil James (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[Fred Thompson courtesy MSNBC on President Bush commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby:

<blockquote>"I am very happy for Scooter Libby. I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children. While for a long time I have urged a pardon for Scooter, I respect the President's decision. This will allow a good American, who has done a lot for his country, to resume his life."</blockquote>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Prediction: McCain Endorses Fred?</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/07/prediction_mccain_endorses_fre.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.187</id>
   
   <published>2007-07-02T12:29:18Z</published>
   <updated>2007-07-02T12:31:29Z</updated>
   
   <summary>A couple of months ago, I laid out a seemingly plausible conjecture to a good friend of mine: McCain withdraws from the race seeing he cannot win, endorses Fred Thompson, and Fred formally enters the race as a formidable candidate....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Phil James (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      A couple of months ago, I laid out a seemingly plausible conjecture to a good friend of mine:  McCain withdraws from the race seeing he cannot win, endorses Fred Thompson, and Fred formally enters the race as a formidable candidate.  Well- Fred has already semi-announced, but I still hold this prediction very likely - esp. as McCain and Fred are apparently good friends...
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>15 Min Video Interview w/ Fred</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/06/15_min_video_interview_w_fred.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.168</id>
   
   <published>2007-06-14T01:13:55Z</published>
   <updated>2007-06-14T01:16:07Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Peter Robinson (I believe the man who penned &apos;&apos;Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall&quot;) sits down for a 15 minute interview with Fred Thompson. Here...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Phil James (VA)</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[Peter Robinson (I believe the man who penned ''Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall") sits down for a  15 minute interview with Fred Thompson.

<a href="http://www.hoover.org/multimedia/dfv/7959792.html">Here</a>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Fox News </title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/06/fox_news.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.166</id>
   
   <published>2007-06-13T23:22:07Z</published>
   <updated>2007-06-14T15:55:30Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Fox News ran a segment at 6:20 pm EST on the 13th saying that Thompson is gathering donations at a rate of $10,000.00 an hour?? That&apos;s insane, I must have heard that wrong. They must mean he is doing very...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Deborah Corey Barnes</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      Fox News ran a segment at 6:20 pm EST on the 13th saying that Thompson is gathering donations at a rate of $10,000.00 an hour?? That&apos;s insane, I must have heard that wrong. They must mean he is doing very well at fundraising....despite his late-well late compared to the other runners-entrance into the race. Really he&apos;s come out at a more prudent time. 

This whole race has just started too early, I wonder if the American public will burn out and develop fatigue on the topic?  Newt Gingrich stated at the Heritage Foundation Resource Bank dinner in Apirl that this race has started too early is only for the benefit of the consultants and business owners who make their money from campaigns. Sad thought, but I would believe it...on the other hand, I am having an awful lot of fun with this blog! 


      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Fred Thompson will run </title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/05/fred_thompson_will_run.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.148</id>
   
   <published>2007-05-31T03:10:40Z</published>
   <updated>2007-05-31T03:16:53Z</updated>
   
   <summary>As of this week-end Fred Thompson has formed a committee to fundraise and explore his presidential plans. He has not formally announced his entrance to the race but this is basically it, the formal announcement is more for turning in...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Deborah Corey Barnes</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[As of this week-end Fred Thompson has formed a committee to fundraise and explore his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/30/us/politics/30cnd-thompson.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin">presidential plans</a>. He has not formally announced his entrance to the race but this is basically it, the formal announcement is more for turning in fiscal records and filing for the race. Once a person forms a committee there is no doubt they will run. 

And yes, he is such a strong contender that I am using the NY Times article on him as my first link. But for those of you who are offended by him, here is an <a href="http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21824560-1702,00.html">international</a> notice and a <a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/05/30/208923.aspx">MSNBC</a> article.

It makes things tough for me since I like him as well as some other candidates. What is a girl to do? In my case wait for more debates and see what comes up. ]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Thompson Responds to Michael Moore</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://thompson.polireport.com/2007/05/thompson_responds_to_michael_m.html" />
   <id>tag:thompson.polireport.com,2007://6.126</id>
   
   <published>2007-05-15T23:59:41Z</published>
   <updated>2007-05-16T17:37:34Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Yes, yes I know this was on Drudge, but I felt it got lost in the mish mash of Falwell&apos;s death and a million other things that were at the top of the page. I&apos;m not sure about Moore&apos;s accusations...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Deborah Corey Barnes</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://thompson.polireport.com/">
      <![CDATA[Yes, yes I know <a href="http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=611"><u>this</u></a> was on Drudge, but I felt it got lost in the mish mash of Falwell's death and a million other things that were at the top of the page. 

I'm not sure about Moore's accusations towards the former Senator but, I do know that I hate Michael Moore's policies. Well, I hate Michael Moore too. 

The amazing thing is that Thompson made this in a very short time, like less than a day, to reply to Moore's letter which I have posted below. You should definitely read the letter and check out the link above. 

Here is the letter:

<blockquote>**EXCLUSIVE: MICHAEL MOORE CHALLENGES FRED THOMPSON TO DEBATE
Tues May 15 2007 6:00:01 ET

LETTER:

May 15, 2007

Senator Fred Thompson
American Enterprise Institute
110 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Dear Senator Thompson,

Given that it has been publicly reported in The Weekly Standard, a leading neo-conservative publication, that you support Fidel Castro and the Cuban regime by being a purveyor of fine Cuban exports despite the trade embargo, I was surprised to see your recent op ed in a more traditional conservative outlet, The National Review, regarding my trip to Cuba (I suspect you choose The National Review in an effort to pander to an outlet that had criticized you for your opposition to medical malpractice legislation).

In your May 2, 2007 National Review article, "Paradise Island," you specifically raised concerns about whether my trip to Cuba with 9/11 heroes, who have suffered serious health problems as a result of their exposure to toxic substances at Ground Zero that have gone untreated was somehow going to support Castro ad the Cuban government:

"It always leaves me shaking my head when I read about some big-time actor or director going to Cuba and gushing all over Castro." [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWNhNzA2YmY3NTNjZjZhNjE1NmZjMDFkOTdjN2Q4ZmE=]

Putting aside the fact that you, like the Bush Administration, seem far more concerned about the trip to Cuba than the health care of these 9/11 heroes, I was struck by the fact that your concerns (including comments about CastroÕs reported financial worth) apparently do not extend to your own conduct, as reported in The Weekly Standard's April 23, 2007 story, "From the Courthouse to the White House Fred Thompson auditions for the leading role" (emphasis added):

"Thompson's work space looks just like what the home office of a successful politician or CEO should look like -- though a little messier: a large desk, dark wood, leather furniture, lots of books and magazines and newspapers, a flat-screen TV, and box upon box of cigars -- Montecristos from Havana." [http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13528&R=1136E33842]

In light of your comments regarding Cuba and Castro, do you think the "box upon box of cigars -- Montecristos from Havana" that you have in your office have contributed to CastroÕs reported wealth?

While I will leave it up to the conservatives to debate your hypocrisy and the Treasury Department to determine whether the "box upon box of cigars" violates the trade embargo, I hereby challenge you to a health care debate.

Survey after survey has indicated that health care is one of the top issues to the American voters. Today, more than 46 million people lack health are coverage, including 9 million children. We pay significantly more than any other country in the world -- and get less back. Americans life expectancy is lower than other Ground Zero 9/11 workers live in a society where the Bush Administration has shown more concern about their travel than about their health.

Our debate would provide you an opportunity to appeal to the right wing of the Republican Party by continuing to attack me; it would give me a chance to discuss health care and tell you exactly what happened in Cuba, given your apparent inters; and it would provide the American people an opportunity to see just how serious Hollywood can be, with a purported conservative and an avowed progressive Hollywood personality on stage.

Over the course of the debate, we could specifically address the following issues:

(1) Your work as a lobbyist in light of the fact that the health care and insurance industries have maintained the current health care system through their effective control of the political establishment.

(2) The fact that you raised hundred of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the health care and insurance industries.

(3) Discuss the fact, highlighted in yet another conservative outlet The New York Sun, that you inexplicably wanted to cut funding for AIDS research. [http://www.nysunpolitics.com/blog/2007/05/thompsons-1994-issue-positions.html]

(4) Your relationship with the Frist family and by extension HCA, one of the nation's largest for-profit hospital chains. It has been reported that former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (who was renowned for his over-the-television-screen Schiavo diagnosis) is serving as one of your confidantes on your potential presidential campaign. The Frist family has historically controlled HCA, which paid a record $1.7 billion in civil and criminal fines, including a $631 million penalty for Medicaid fraud -- in other words, ripping off the taxpayers.

(5) Discussing whether Arthur Branch, as the District Attorney of Manhattan, supports a woman's right to choose, gun safety reforms, gay marriage, the trans fat ban and anti-smoking laws (which would impact Cuban cigars, including your Montecristos).

Like American Idol, we could even have the country vote to determine which one of us wins the debate. Though in the spirit of full disclosure, I feel obligated to forewarn you that I was the winner of the 1971-72 Detroit Free Press Debate Award for the state of Michigan.

The winner of our health care debate could even light a Victory cigar with one of your Montecristos (though we may want to consider shopping them to the safe house where I have put a master copy of SiCKO in the event that the Bush Administration tries to seize the film).

Sincerely,


Michael Moore

Developing...
</blockquote>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>
