A leader must touch the heart of the nation and a great leader never fails to do so.
Dear Senator Thompson:
Having written in this space some months back that your candidacy for president would be a good thing for the Republic, I regret to inform you, respectfully, that you are blowing it – or at least in danger of blowing it.
Look, you’re a genuine guy and I think your high poll numbers, given your late entry into the race, demonstrate that people respect and like you. In fact, you remind me of another great man from Tennessee, Senator Howard Baker.
I was a big fan of Baker back in 1980 when he made his presidential run. But Baker, like many candidates from the Senate, suffered from an acute case of the details. You are suffering from it as well. You seem to think that we elect a policy wonk when we vote for president, that we are going to be impressed by a president who has command of the problems facing our country. But you would be only partly right.
We don’t need you to give us the problems, the facts, the solutions, or even the spin. We need you to give us a vision. And having watched several of your recent performances, I came away impressed by your honesty and genuine character but uninspired by an overarching vision.
What is your vision of America? What are the hopes and dreams that you want the children in America to realize a generation or two from now? What is the spirit of America and how can we bring that spirit to bear on the problems we face as a nation?
That might not win points among the policy wonks in Washington, but it will resonate across the heartland of the Republic. And that’s where it counts, Senator, on election day.
Might I recommend to you the recent speech by the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, who gets America better than most of our folks in DC these days. Sarkozy spoke of an America that was a land of freedom and opportunity, a beacon to oppressed peoples, a nation built not upon ethnicity or religious affiliation, but on an idea – that we are united, under the rule of law, and bound together by the great dream that each person has value and worth.
Remarkably, Sarkozy’s speech, while noted on the Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity radio shows, got minimal coverage on the network and cable news. There were big stories to cover, of course, like the O.J. Simpson trial or the fate of some bounty hunter guy who couldn’t keep his mouth shut.
But Senator, if you want to climb in the polls, you must have more than a litany of problems to recite. You have the intellect and the personality. But you need to inspire people. You need to talk of America as a land of dreams and hopes, a people who will embrace responsibility and strive for wisdom. Give us the vision thing, and the rest will take care of itself .
Sure, you can beat the immigration issue to a pulp, but you can also talk about why immigrants come to this great land, and how you will build a great system that will enable American to rightly remain the magnet of people from around the world who want a better life.
You can lament our social security issue, but how about telling us why this country needs to rally around the elderly in order to realize that they are a treasure, not a burden, and deserving of our care and compassion.
You can talk about the challenges of war, but also tell us why the freedom-loving people of the world will not be denied their God-given rights and liberties by fascists, whatever the variety or faith.
Such a message, Senator Thompson, when combined with your natural advantages, would put you on sure footing and demonstrate to American voters that you have the will and the way to win and lead.
Think it over Senator. I know you were a happy man playing parts, but this part is gigantic and it requires that you – like Reagan – rise above the usual script. A leader must touch the heart of the nation and a great leader never fails to do so.
shadroui@yahoo.com
Read more articles by George Shadroui
I must confess I fear that you are right.
I say that I fear because the idealist in me wants to resist the urge to put style over substance. Style, it seems, is what gets us very personable but politically awful candidates (I'm thinking Bush and Huckabee).
Comment by cbryancan | November 20, 2007
Very well said. I can only hope he heeds the call. I've sent my last $ to him and if he doesn't show the vision you so eloquently wrote about I'll be forced to vote for Huckabee. You see the vast majority of us that thought Fred was our hope have had our dreams smashed by his true lack of vision. In my estimation, this explains the recent rise in Huckabees poll numbers. Get your head out of your rear and speak to us not at us.
Comment by The Roanoker | November 20, 2007
Fred just got no buzz, because he waited too long. I also thought Fred would be good, but people had already bought into the other guys. I don't know how to change it. He is going to have to do something dynamic, and noteworthy to get noticed, the press is bored with him, so he gets no coverage. He either needs in infusion of money, or an infusion of enthusiasm.
Comment by soldbyjohnny | November 20, 2007
The major news organizations are scared to death of Fred. That is why he gets no coverage, or they maximize the negative news. I like your idea of vision speech. He of course had to set the stage with detail of his positions. This is something the others have already done. As time goes by the major faults of the other GOP candidates will surface and they will drop off. At least I hope so.
Comment by fbaginski | November 20, 2007
When Fred reads your insightful assessment he will realize that he needs to inspire American patriots from all walks of life, who "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." So pure and simple… just connect the dots of style with the substance and he will win! I am already totally in tune with Fred and inspired by his powerfully low-key style, but there is no question about the fact that he has got to be more of a salesman to successfully sell his candidacy; shame though it may be that elections have become so much more focused on the "sizzle" than on the steak itself.
Comment by compugor | November 20, 2007
Fred is a hell of a speaker when he's prepared. I'm reminded of a small speech he filmed in his car about Hillay's newest health care ideas, and how insightful it was…on why Hillary's plan was such a disaster.
But so far, during the debates, he has not shown that fire or the wit. If he wants to win, he needs to show that wit on the stage. It's not enough to have the right answer when you have half a day to write a speech, you must have it on the trail when someone throws out a question…and the speechwriters aren't around.
Comment by WolvenBear | November 20, 2007
Yes, without a doubt Fred will need to enunciate his vision for America. I am confident that he will. After all, we have already been told that Fred has no substance, Fred lacks detail, Fred is policy Fred, and now is Firey Fred. Seems Fred is evolving his candidacy. Each appearance is stronger, and the Pajamas Media interview he just did gives a short glimpse of what is there. I'll add the link below.
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/2007/11/fred_thompson_war_on_terror_co.php
One note, on speechwriters. Fred is known for his off the cuff speaking habits. He is probably one of, if not the least-, scripted candidate out there. He has so far only done one teleprompted speech, which was delivered in front of cadets at The Citadel.
Comment by redneck hippie | November 20, 2007
Bring back Peggy Noonan. She can write a speech. Personally, Fred lacks a reason to vote for him. He is just another candidate awaiting the outcome of the primaries. Unless Fred is willing to come up with something that resonates with the voters he is history. What I would recommend for Fred is what I would recommend for any candidate, republican or democrat, who wants to win. The American people vote with their pocketbook. People don't mind taxing someone else but if they think that they can lessen their own taxes and get more money then there would be an avalanche of biblical proportions for that candidate. Push the Fair Tax Act. Tell the American people 3 things, 1) you get to keep your paycheck, 2) family of 4 gets a check from the government for $480 each month, & 3) you don't have to file a tax return. People will vote for this. Incidentally, it was designed as revenue neutral, but it actually brings in more income for the government's coffers. I could name 15-20 advantages but I assume that anyone reading this would read the Fair Tax Act by John Linder (R). If you want a Readers Digest version just reply to this, be happy to give it to you.
Comment by hvance | November 20, 2007
It's disappointing to hear certain "intellectual conservatives" premising their views about Fred on the wrong faulty logic. An earlier commenter said he is now "forced" to vote for Huckabee - based on what? Huckabee''s glibness? His "vision thing" is a more statist version of big government liberalism- does that vision really enamor you?
As to the "Vision Thing" and Fred- he's articulated a "vision" time and again, and it's summed up nicely in his campaign slogan- Security, Unity, Prosperity. In fact, his "vision thing", which I understand to mean the country''s standing in the long term as distinct from narrow campaign objectives- the cumulative stances of Fred 's policies on entitlement reform, immigration, taxation, and military spending amounts to a far bolder "vision" than any of the other candidates that have formally articulated a so-called "vision" for the country.
It's substance, not style, that counts. If we lose sight of that, we will continue the march on the road to serfdom.
Comment by yankeegator | November 20, 2007
The GOP needs to change its early primaries to different states. Maybe we could do a national online vote at three different dates and reduce the candidates that way. I don't see why we are saddled with this old style junk. In the electronic age this makes no sense. We could also force the voters to take a test before they could vote in the primary. If they don't know the issues then they can't vote. Are we the party of knowledge based voters or not. Maybe this would force people to pay more attention to the race. What do you guys think?
Comment by fbaginski | November 20, 2007