For those of us who came of age politically in the midst of the world’s last great standoff with evil incarnate — The Cold War — the symbolism of Senator Thompson seeking the anointing of the last remaining titan of that era, the majestic Lady Thatcher, is not lost:
Fred Thompson, the actor and former Tennessee senator who is expected to announce next month he is running for president, flew to London on Monday to meet Margaret Thatcher and deliver a foreign policy speech, his advisers tell The Politico.
Thompson’s advisers aim to use the London events to bolster his foreign policy credentials and elevate him above the increasingly contentious fray of the GOP race.
On Wednesday, he will pose for photos with Thatcher, which his advisers hope will enhance his support among devotees of former President Ronald Reagan.
Thompson will deliver the foreign policy speech, “Strengthening the Transatlantic Alliance,” on Tuesday at the Policy Exchange, a conservative think tank based in London.
It will stress the importance of American alliances abroad, his advisers said.
“The speech is mostly about the unique and special relationship between the U.S. and the U.K,” an adviser said on condition of anonymity, because the prospective campaign has not publicly announced details of the address. “It is about how we have a responsibility to stand together and lead the Western democracies, protect our civilization and stand together for freedom.”
Of all the 4 GOP presidential heavyweights, Thompson can be said to be most in need of brandishing his foreign policy accreditations.? That said, only Mayor Giuliani is Thompson’s equal in the ability to articulate the stakes of failure against the Islamist threat.? This trip to the United Kingdom, matched with a scheduled trip to Israel later this summer, is an essential step in the Thompson candidacy.?
Lady Thatcher is said to be frustrated with the Tories’ ideological drift over the last decade.? As a Reagan devotee, she may be interested in insuring a similar slide does not happen with America’s conservative party.?
June 19th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Good article, GMG.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:51 am
Oops, typo… GMM
June 19th, 2007 at 7:51 am
[...] post by Gary Matthew Miller and software by Elliott [...]
June 19th, 2007 at 8:26 am
I have long felt that there is enormous potential to forge new international alliances among conservative movements and candidates. I endorse what FDT is trying to do and appreciate the symbolism. I would like to see greater cooperation and support between Republicans and Tories and an increased exchange of ideas and support for each other’s candidates. I believe that Margaret Thatcher may be an apt model for the GOP today many of the lessons she taught us from the War in the Falkland Islands can be directly applied to today’s conflicts in Iraq and our impending war in Iran. Thatcher taught us to stay strong, project strength and stay on offense. Fred Thomson is running a very smart pre-campaign, it would be great to see Thatcher come to the States and stump with Fred on the campaign trail.
June 19th, 2007 at 8:34 am
There is an international organization dedicated to helping out Conservative parties across
the globe. The International Democratic Union (IDU). They support the GOP the Tories
Sarkozy’s UMP and Howard’s “Liberal Party” in Australia to name a few
June 19th, 2007 at 10:49 am
“our impending war in Iran”
Very good, JA Pruce, that’s the way to be conservative, let’s start a war there and drive the Iranians into the arms of the fundamentalists!
This Thompson is truly Bush III.
June 19th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Gary,
How do you come to the conclusion that “only Mayor Giuliani is Thompson’s equal in the ability to articulate the stakes of failure against the Islamist threat”?
June 19th, 2007 at 11:14 am
Meeting with Lady Thatcher is an honor, but Instead of going for the symbolism and photo-ops, I believe that ALL of the candidates would be better off if they actually sat down and read “The Road to Serfdom” by Hayek [which Thatcher often said was her most influential book] rather than trying to identify with Reagan (and Thatcher) in some superficial way. Who knows, some of them might be as influenced by it as were Reagan and Thatcher, and we might get better policy as a result!
June 19th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Yeah, instead it’s just going to be: “I went to Israel and the UK…BOOM! I have foreign policy experience!”
June 19th, 2007 at 11:26 am
Murphy,
They said more or less the same thing on MSNBC’s site earlier today.
From NBC’s Chuck Todd
“To date, he seems to be the best of the GOPers in making the “stay in Iraq” case while also sounding like a change agent. The Republican who can best make the case for staying engaged in the Mideast but also sound like a change agent will be the nominee.”
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/06/19/229589.aspx
June 19th, 2007 at 11:36 am
Rudy is much more like Thatcher than Fred is. Rudy’s tough-talking, govt-slashing, hawkishishness is very reminiscent of Thatcher.
I think it may strike some as incongruous that Fred is meeting with Thatcher. A sleepy ex-Senator?
I’m not just being anti-non-Rudy here, as I’ve posted here for two months forecasting this Fred boom and put a lot of money on Fred in Intrade, and he’s my 2nd choice. A distant 2nd.
June 19th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
[...] at Race 4 2008 I contemplate the implications of Senator Thompson’s meeting with Lady [...]
June 19th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Tommy,
Thanks for the link, but that snippet doesn’t do much for my question in #7.
June 19th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
murphy, perhaps in part it’s because Mormons have been arguing with me on this thread that moral issues pertain only to family issues inside one’s four walls, and, yesterday, that “war is not a moral issue,” an outrageous statement to which no one took exception.
June 19th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
DavidB, looks like the mormon boogeyman is after you again. Way to go off-topic.
June 19th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
“anti-non-Rudy”
Isn’t that a double negative?
David B,
I’m suprised that you’d have as a 2nd choice a slow-talking socially conservative Southerner..
It is easy to side with the frontrunners
June 19th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
cwpete: Fred was my 2nd choice when people thought he wouldn’t get in.
Yes, it may be a surprise, but he doesn’t wear his SoCon on his sleeve and is a limited govt federalist at heart. And he’s a real hawk.
murphy: It was quite on topic. Romney will never exude the moral clarity on the war, in the same way Rudy will never exude Leave it to Beaver like Romney can. Seeing the war in moral terms seemingly not easy for Mormons.
June 19th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
murphy: You just proved my point in the thread below, arguing war is not truly a moral issue. Keep sinking your candidate.
June 19th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
David B,
Murphy was saying is that everything can be viewed in moral terms. Which proves nothing – including your point.
Also since FDT is a SoCon, how do you reconcile FDT’s gay-marriage stance so as to rank him as high as #2 on your list?
Just curious…
June 19th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
DavidB,
I’d like to know what makes someone think that Rudy and Fred stand alone in their ability to communicate the GWOT, and why McCain and Romney are somehow unable to do this.
I’m really not interested in discussing a different thread, or in your constant Mormon harping either. But it seems that this is increasingly all you do around here.
June 19th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
THE TRUTH David B dont you know that most of the Romney supporters on here ARE Mormons, and that most of the supporters of anybody on here are Romney supporters?? They will attack anyone with anything bad to say about either (Mormon or Romney) and will attack anything anyone says good about another candidate… this is their chance for the spotlight (Mormons) and they wont let anything stand in their way.
June 19th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
cwpete, It’s a matter of emphasis. Fred de-emphasizes the SoCon issues, while Romney and his supporters emphasize them by wearing them on their sleeves and telling us how they are going to change our families. Add to that the Mormon cult and their brownshirts and it’ll scare middle America far away. Fred’s emphasis is small gov’t, while the Morg (Mormon collective) emphasizes big gov’t nanny statism.
murphy, I believe McCain is able to communicate it well, too. But as well as Fred and McCain are able to communicate it, I don’t think they have an emotional connection to the middle like Rudy does, which will make them LISTEN and be open when he educates the American public about Iraq and the larger war. Why do I keep bringing up Mormonism? Because YOU keep bringing it up, without realizing it. By making statements about the family or morality that are totally out of line with mainstream thinking. It shows how cut off the Mormon cult is from the reality of American life, underscoring how dangerous it is to hand power over to the Morg.
June 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
cwpete, also, regarding your first point, I had already answered it on the other thread, when I said: “If it’s a matter of distinguishing defense from economics from social/cultural issues, then call them social or cultural issues. But to say the others are NOT moral issues is to express to the electorate you haven’t a clue about what morality and human life are all about.”
June 19th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
DavidB: Why do I keep bringing up Mormonism? Because YOU keep bringing it up, without realizing it. By making statements about the family or morality that are totally out of line with mainstream thinking.
You’re empty rhetoric, David…with healthy doses of denial, projection, and anti-religious sentiment to boot. If I only had a nickle for every time you pulled the “mormon card” when you needed a quick dodge…
June 19th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
David B.
Seriously, you an atheist living an alternative lifestyle, right? Yet you rip Mormons for their encouragement of the traditional family? You are entitled to your opinions just like myself and any other, but I can’t imagine such a person dictating to me or this board what is moral and what is not, or even the definition of morality.
Morals are no longer absolute, they are now relative it seems.. One can twist away in the gray area to justify anything for nearly any reason. I see that being done all the time now.
June 19th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
cwpete: I’m not telling you how to live– that’s the difference. My philosophy allows for your lifestyle. Yours does not allow for mine.
June 19th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
Also re #16, on siding with frontrunners, it’s entirely a new experience for me. In 1980 I was only 11. In the contested GOP primaries since then, 1988, 1996 and 2000, I supported Du Pont, Forbes, Forbes.
June 19th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
David B (#11), I was not aware that Thatcher slamed lawsuits left and right like Rudy!
June 19th, 2007 at 10:47 pm
David B, thought I would help you seeing what “family/social issues” are out there that may requires some respond from governments at various levels:
High School Drop-outs:
http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000004856.cfm
Sex Trafficing:
http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000004841.cfm
Funding Oversea Abortions:
http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000004843.cfm
City Council forbidding christian group from using library rooms:
http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000004805.cfm
These are only from the past couple of weeks. I am not saying how they should be approached. I am just saying that there are quite a few issues that involves social and family issues. Do not forget the famous one — ACLU vs Boy Scouts everywhere!
June 20th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
Wow… anyways, back to the main thread.. I’m not sure why it’s seen that Thompson is “standing out” by visiting Thatcher, or that she’s playing Kingmaker (and has somehow anointed Thompson). Romney did much the same thing around 5 months ago. I’m sure McCain and Rudy have at some point in the past as well.