Audio: Fred Thompson on the Glenn Beck Show
posted at 5:52 pm on December 11, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Earlier today, AP and others asked a reasonable question: Where in the world is Fred Thompson? Well, Fred appeared on the Glenn Beck radio show for a 15-minute stint this morning. Here’s part 1.
And here’s part 2.
GLENN: When you get up in the morning, you look at the newspaper, you look at America, what are the top two things that you say we must fix now? What are they?
SENATOR THOMPSON: You’ve hit them. They are the nation’s security and the nation’s future prosperity. Those are the two things, and the things that go into security is primarily understanding the nature of the world that we live in. What you talk about just then is exemplified by what’s going on in Iran. I mean, these folks are sitting around waiting for the twelfth Imam. I mean, that’s their goal. The mullahs want that to happen. They talk in terms of millions of people perhaps getting killed at the time. It’s perfectly okay with them. They look at things from the standpoint of religious fanatics, they consider us to be the great evil. Israel, of course, is the little evil and they’ve been killing us for a long, long time through Hezbollah and Hamas and others. They simply look at the world differently. They’re undoubtedly intent upon nuclear weapons. I don’t care what this latest NIE says. That’s foolishness that represents our own inability to get a handle on it more than anything else. They’ve got a missile that will already travel 1200 miles. I mean, people are always saying that folks are Chicken Little, you know, for emphasizing these things, but we have such a short memory since September 11th. I mean, that was a low-tech attack compared to what’s out there, and every intelligence community that we have access to tells us that they are trying to get their hands on the worst kinds of weapons possible, and we’re going to have to do more. And we’re talking about spending less in terms of our military and in terms of our intelligence capabilities. We’ve had to rebuild almost from scratch. I was on the intelligence committee. I’ve watched it.
On the prosperity side, that has to do with fiscal policies and taxing and spending, and we spent all of our time talking about the pork barrel spending which is bad, you know. People ought to be defeated and in some cases prosecuted for some of it. It’s bad enough, it’s ridiculous, it’s given congress an even blacker eye than they so richly deserve. But the real money is on the entitlement side, and nobody wants to talk about that.
Every economist in the country that takes a look at it, left and right, says that our path is unsustainable. We are bankrupting our social programs that we say that we love so much and we’re leaving our kids and our grandkids with an insurmountable debt. We have a $9 trillion debt now. A lot of that’s held by the Chinese and others. And we’re a graying society, we’re an older society because of medical advances, but we’re turning that blessing into a curse for the next generation. Everybody wants to kick that can down the road and not talk about it. We could make some moderate changes now that I propose that will save Social Security, for example, let people contribute a little more during their working years for their own retirement with the help of the government and it would wind up being beneficial to the government, being beneficial to the individual and save about $4 trillion in our entitlement programs. That’s where the real money is. It’s a little more difficult to talk about, a little more complicated.
GLENN: But you’re —
SENATOR THOMPSON: That’s what I think about. That’s why I decided to run, those two primary things. And the third one would be the fact that we’re becoming less united on fundamental things that we traditionally have been united together with regard — and that’s going to require credibility from the President, somebody who will look the American people in the eye with credibility and tell them the truth and say, here’s where we need to go, here’s where we need to do, let’s get together and get it done.
On the flat (not the “fair”) tax:
GLENN: You talk about Social Security, but you know and I know that it’s Medicare or Medicaid that’s really going to — it’s going to kill us. I mean, it will eviscerate us here by 2012. And everybody, damn near everybody, is talking about raising taxes and that pain has to be felt. You’re talking about a flat tax. Thank God somebody is finally talking about a flat tax. All the communist countries have already gone there. I don’t know why we can’t. How do you propose to take the IRS and abolish it and put a flat tax in?
SENATOR THOMPSON: Well, it’s not a matter to me of abolishing the IRS as richly as it deserves to be. You’ve got to have some mechanism and it’s just the mechanism is a symbol in which we can focus on, but it’s not really the heart of the problem. The heart of the problem is that we’ve got the most inefficient complicated tax system in the world and it’s costing us billions in compliance costs and billions that go uncollected to make everybody else’s taxes higher.
GLENN: So what is the flat tax? What is the proposal?
SENATOR THOMPSON: What I’ve suggested is this. First of all, keep the ‘01 and ‘03 tax cuts in place. I mean, that’s growth. That’s not just lost revenue to the government. That brings about economic growth which underlines everything else. We ought to get rid of the death tax, we ought to lower the corporate tax, which is the second highest tax in the industrialized world we have. We’re very uncompetitive there. It’s costing us jobs.
Then on the individual side you say this. A person has the option. You can fill all your taxes out the same old way you want to, using the same old rules, or you can go to a much flatter approach. If you have individual income of $50,000, family income of $100,000, you file on a 10% rate. If you are above that, you file on a 25% rate. You have one standard deduction and that’s it. Your choice. I feel like people will gravitate to that, people will start using it, it will lay the groundwork for even more fundamental reform and greater simplification, which we greatly need for economic growth in this country.
Solid, serious stuff. We need to hear from you more often, Senator.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Fred who?
davenp35 on December 11, 2007 at 5:52 PM
I was very impressed with Thompson from the start, but his absence from the headlines has my enthusiasm waning. Unless he has a rabbit to pull out of the hat–and with Huckabee leading I hope he does–he had better get cracking.
thejackal on December 11, 2007 at 5:56 PM
The guy’s positions are just seriously solid. I just have to hope that he somehow turns this campaign around and takes the bull by the horns.
peski on December 11, 2007 at 5:56 PM
He’s an actor or something…
amerpundit on December 11, 2007 at 5:56 PM
I really, really like Fred. He says the things I wish all our candidates were saying. His priorities are my priorities, too.
Aaargh! It’s so frustrating to watch him founder like this. Until (if) Fred kicks it up about 10 notches, I have to continue defaulting to Rudy.
I do think Fred’s the only hope we have of stopping the runaway Huckabee so-con train, and it’s a slim hope at that.
aero on December 11, 2007 at 5:57 PM
fred/paul 08 ?
offroadaz on December 11, 2007 at 5:57 PM
“If I’d have known you were looking for me I’d have overruled everybody.”
Seriously Fred, that’s bush-league. If you don’t know what is going on in your own freaking campaign vis-a-vis getting your name out there, you are not fit to be President. Period.
BKennedy on December 11, 2007 at 6:01 PM
Quit teasing me Bryan.
conservnut on December 11, 2007 at 6:02 PM
Oh yeah, I can see the Fredheads going for that one…
amerpundit on December 11, 2007 at 6:03 PM
Fred…..keep it up and make it louder. You are the most solid conservative on the campaign trail and we need to hear you more often. That kind of talk will get me to dust off my checkbook again.
Limerick on December 11, 2007 at 6:05 PM
As long as he’s in it he’ll have my vote. Admittedly one could say it’s still early compared to… oh… 40, 50 years ago. Of course, they didn’t start the caucuses in Janurary back then.
Griz on December 11, 2007 at 6:06 PM
why not? Freds good on foreign policy and Pauls good on domestic issues. Plus both of them are pro-life, for smaller government, for secure borders and support the 2nd ammendment…
offroadaz on December 11, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Just right on Ramos and Compean. Likely commutation.
see-dubya on December 11, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Oh, there you are, you rascal! We’ve been looking for you! Where’ve you been hiding?
Frozen Tex on December 11, 2007 at 6:11 PM
Fred/Paul?
Makes as much sense as a blimp in space near the sun.
.
GT on December 11, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Bingo. He said the nation’s security comes first. Wish the pipsqueaks at Nat’l Review had made mention of that.
JiangxiDad on December 11, 2007 at 6:24 PM
I like the guy, but that ain’t exactly a “flat tax”
sweeper on December 11, 2007 at 6:30 PM
Nope. There isn’t a single candidate, on the Rep side, who I wouldn’t vote for if they were on the ticket….except Paul. If Paul were on the ticket then I would…period…vote for Hillary.
Limerick on December 11, 2007 at 6:36 PM
Fred’s talkin the talk, he’s gotta walk the hand lines.
Iblis on December 11, 2007 at 6:37 PM
None of the feasible “flat tax” proposals have been truely “flat”.
Hollowpoint on December 11, 2007 at 6:39 PM
At least youd vote
offroadaz on December 11, 2007 at 6:40 PM
It doesn’t work that way. We all wish we could be Dr. Frankenstein and construct the perfect political being out of parts but it’s not possible.
aengus on December 11, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Fred had better figure out a way to keep Huck from winning the nomination because If Huck goes on to win the general one of the first things he’s likely to do is take Fred’s cigars away from him.
FloatingRock on December 11, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Everytime! I still miss Nixon.
Limerick on December 11, 2007 at 6:42 PM
dang i wish i was in a state that mattered . . . I’ve been a Fred Thompson-ite since the rumors of his candidacy festered for months on end. I’d much rather support him than anyone in the field.
tizzidale on December 11, 2007 at 6:56 PM
Yep…..I’m in Texas….it’ll be long over before the vote here.
Limerick on December 11, 2007 at 6:59 PM
Agreed.
bigbeas on December 11, 2007 at 7:03 PM
I’m not giving up hope yet. I think Huck is starting to deflate.
see-dubya on December 11, 2007 at 7:05 PM
Fred’s the one. Solid Conservative, no flakes.
tarpon on December 11, 2007 at 7:06 PM
In other words, you let the media choose your candidates for you?
I don’t see how Mitt at 14% Rasmussen is inevitable, but Fred at 12% Rasmussen is irrelevant and doomed.
someone on December 11, 2007 at 7:08 PM
It seems we have a real tendency to want everything right frickin’ now and. while I realize it’s important to “get your name out” and campaign, there is a lot of time left for front runners to crash & burn. I’ve said this before, I don’t need a cheerleader, a panderer, or a slick suit with a good haircut. I need a thoughtful, deliberate, no nonsense guy that makes common sense not promises.
Everybody is in a yank to count him out, but he’s the only one that’s got any real freakin’ plans AND national name recognition, so don’t count him out yet just because he’s not doing jumping jacks with Chuck Norris.
commonsensehoosier on December 11, 2007 at 7:16 PM
I am in a state that matters (NH), and I will be voting for Fred! along with the other 4% of the state republicans ……sigh.
rslancer14 on December 11, 2007 at 7:36 PM
That would actually raise my taxes, since with itemized deductions I now pay 7.7-8.0% in Fed taxes. But I still think it’s a good idea.
Query: would everyone pay that amount? Even poor people? That isn’t going to be popular, though it would be fair. Or is this covered by the “standardized deduction”?
JackOfClubs on December 11, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Don’t stay home rs…….Beer and BBQ on it’s way to you FedEx.
Limerick on December 11, 2007 at 7:49 PM
i like him more than any candidate thus far. however, i did not actually hear the words “border fence” in the interview. those words, with conviction and plan, will get my vote.
palefaced on December 11, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Palefaced–how’s this?
see-dubya on December 11, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Go to Freds site he has his border plan there, a fence is a MAJOR part of it.
Gatordoug on December 11, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Because Mitt was first in Iowa(now Second) and the man to beat in New Hampshire, and going strong in South Carolina, whereas Fred hasn’t a chance in hell at winning Iowa or New Hampshire and he’s basically praying for SC.
National numbers are meaningless compared to primary standings, and Fred is stinking up the primary scene with his mediocrity.
BKennedy on December 11, 2007 at 8:46 PM
The guy’s solid and what he says is right on.
Romney-Thompson?
Tzetzes on December 11, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Here ya go some POSITIVE news about Thompson that never seems to be mentioned.
http://video1.washingtontimes.com/dinan/2007/12/numbersusas_naughty_and_nice_l.html
Gatordoug on December 11, 2007 at 9:09 PM
Tzetzes on December 11, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Fred won’t go for VP. With his young kids it’d only be worth all the trouble for POTUS.
VolMagic on December 11, 2007 at 9:09 PM
And, for all you haters out there, Fred is inevitable.
VolMagic on December 11, 2007 at 9:10 PM
For the life of me I cannot grasp this infatiation some fine folks have with deciding winners BEFORE a vote is cast.
Gatordoug on December 11, 2007 at 9:33 PM
Gatordoug on December 11, 2007 at 9:33 PM
I can see into the future. VolMagic
VolMagic on December 11, 2007 at 9:41 PM
Thanks, that is some good news for a change.
commonsensehoosier on December 11, 2007 at 9:51 PM
Every time I listen to him I am convinced he is The Best candidate. But then he goes AWOL for a week or 2 in the midst of the primaries…
He’s like a 19 year old Perfect Ten flirt!
AlexB on December 11, 2007 at 9:55 PM
Very good attribute!
Gatordoug on December 11, 2007 at 10:38 PM
.
.
News2Use on December 11, 2007 at 10:43 PM
Connie on December 11, 2007 at 10:59 PM
A little OT - I haven’t heard the radio timbre on this recording since my mother used to listen to Jean Shepherd late at night on the skip from New York.
eeyore on December 11, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Fred is the one.
samuelrylander on December 11, 2007 at 11:57 PM
and it’s my birthday.
samuelrylander on December 11, 2007 at 11:57 PM
I like Freddles
TheSitRep on December 12, 2007 at 12:44 AM
Personally, I’d prefer a Thompson-Romney ticket for 8 years and a Romney-Newt (or whoever) ticket the following 8. Mitt seems to be up to it and could become one of the best POTUS we’ve seen yet. I can’t see Fred as the VP and I’d sure like to see him in the office, ignoring the ignorant, lambasting the Lefties, and confusing the commies among us.
Rugged Individual on December 12, 2007 at 1:19 AM
I still want a Fred/Newt ticket, but I think a Fred/Huck ticket would be unstoppable.
- The Cat
MirCat on December 12, 2007 at 1:31 AM
If Fred can appear in THIS many flicks with most people not knowing him, he’s probably got a rabbit or two to pull out of his hat. Considering the 20-point margins of his two senate campaigns, he knows what to do. I like the fact that the ‘MSM’ doesn’t have stuff to report on him. It would only be negative anyway. Small miracles should be appreciated.
Rugged Individual on December 12, 2007 at 1:42 AM
What? You mean his absence from the MSM? Since when do they get to pick our nominee? Oh yeah, they already have.
Bill C on December 12, 2007 at 2:32 AM
20 point margins in red-leaning states against unimpressive Dem candidates is hardly indicative of a race where Fred has been consistently pushed aside by Republican candidates who are either are as conservative as he is and made themselves more visible, percieved to be more conservative because of their ads, just attract a particular constituency of conservatives, or any combination of the above.
BKennedy on December 12, 2007 at 5:29 AM
I wish I was back home in Iowa so I could do more to help him out. I really hope he gets some steam built up here soon and gets into the thick of things.
Afterimage on December 12, 2007 at 2:33 PM