Fred Thompson, greeting supporters at the airport in Des Moines, Iowa, during the state fair in August. He will return to Iowa today as a candidate for president. Photo by Eric Thayer/ Agence France Presse/Getty Images.
by Jill Zuckman
Former Sen. Fred Thompson began the ritual of introducing himself to the voters this morning as he kicked off his campaign for president, presenting himself as a “common sense conservative” who can win the presidency and secure the nation’s borders.
Thompson spoke directly through a video on his Web-site, www.Fred08.com, which began airing at 12:01 a.m. as part of an elaborate rollout of the Tennessee Republican’s candidacy. He appeared on NBC’s The Tonight Show Wednesday, and this afternoon he will make his first campaign appearance before voters in Des Moines.
In an indirect way, Thompson, a 65-year-old film and television star, addressed criticisms that he is lazy, as well as rich, according to excerpts provided by his campaign.
“I’m going to give this campaign all that I have to give, and I hope you will join me,’’ said Thompson, who said he would “do my level best” to address the serious challenges facing the nation.
He portrayed himself as someone of modest means and modest goals who grew up to become “a very lucky person.” He said he was a teenage husband and father who earned the minimum wage and worked the graveyard shift in a bicycle factory before going on to earn “more than I ever thought I would make.”
Thompson began flirting with a race for the presidency months ago, as voters seemed to express increasing unhappiness with the Republican field. During his exploration period, he has repeatedly reshuffled staff, drawn criticism for having little to say on the stump, and failed to earn the type of cash that his aides set as a goal. In addition, news reports disclosed that Thompson once worked as a lobbyist for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, which advocates for abortion rights.
Nevertheless, national and state polls have placed Thompson in the top of the field, despite laying little groundwork.
But running for president has not always been at the top of Thompson’s to-do list.
“Why would one want to run for president - that’s the real question,’’ he said when mentioned as a potential candidate in 2000. “Not, why does one not run for president.”
In his Webcast, Thompson described himself as a Federalist who believes that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution “are not outdated documents that have outlived their usefulness.”
“Essentially, it’s about freedom,’’ he explained. “A government that is big enough to do everything for us is powerful enough to do anything to us.”
Thompson stressed the importance of not abandoning efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan to confront the threat from radical Islamic terrorism. And he hit hard against a “bureaucratized government” unable to perform its basic function, particularly when it comes to the borders.
“A nation that can’t protect its border will no longer be a sovereign nation,” he said.
Thompson first came to the public’s attention during the Watergate hearings, beginning in 1973. He was the senior counsel to then-Sen. Howard H. Baker Jr. (R-Tenn.), the Watergate committee’s vice chairman, and he could be seen questioning witnesses during the televised proceedings.
During Thompson’s eight years in the Senate, the American Conservative Union generally ranked him in the mid-80s for supporting their agenda. According to Congressional Quarterly’s party unity studies, Thompson voted with his fellow Republicans most of the time.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Well, OK Thompson's a celebrity of sorts, but he's not a big one.
And he's neither young nor physically attractive.
And most importantly, he has not been endorsed by Oprah.
So Obama is a couple of notches above him.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2007 7:12 AM
Finally, a plain-speaking "meat & potatoes" candidate that the voter can identify with. Let the race begin!
Posted by: Rich | September 6, 2007 7:40 AM
The dynamics of the Republican race are going to get interesting.
The existing 8 candidates and their staffs are used to interacting with each other for some time now, and now comes Freddie & his possee.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 6, 2007 8:15 AM
Got to admit. He looks and sounds like
a president. And thank goodness for a new face in what has become a stupefying bore on both sides. Now we'll see how he handles the issues and make up our minds when we know more.
Posted by: E. Taylor | September 6, 2007 8:22 AM
He is like Reagan in that he is probably a better actor than he has gotten credit for. Presidential-nah.
Posted by: Catherine | September 6, 2007 8:43 AM
I welcome Fred Thompson into the race. At this point in time, I have not completely decided on who I prefer. I've been leaning heavily to Guiliani. Thompson probably follows. McCain actually came out of last night's debate pretty good, but he'll be 72 next year. Huckabee is intriguing, but another Arkansas governor? Romney could be good, but too slick in many ways for me and there is some flip-flopping in his past. It really does come down to Guiliani or Thompson. But any of them is better than any of the Dems, including Ron Paul!
Posted by: John D | September 6, 2007 9:16 AM
Finally, a plain-speaking "meat & potatoes" candidate that the voter can identify with. Let the race begin!
Posted by: Rich | September 6, 2007 7:40 AM
What would you call Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo? They've been running all along since day one and have "meat & potatoes" conservative credentials. What they don't have is star power. Pretty soon Thompson's star power will fade and independents and moderates will realize he clings to tired and stale ideas just like Hunter and Tancredo, which is why they cannot gain any traction. Freddie Thompson is NOT RONALD REAGAN, he is Freddie Thompson, a notoriously LAZY former Senator.
Posted by: jethro | September 6, 2007 9:30 AM
I liked him in "Hunt for Red October."
That alone is more reason to vote for him than someone like Hillary.
Posted by: Mike | September 6, 2007 9:36 AM
It would be refreshing to have a President that makes more sense himself than all the other candidates on both sides together. I'm not ready to vote for him, but what I have heard from him is much more believable than the others.
Posted by: Rob S | September 6, 2007 9:37 AM
Just another Hollywood elite the Republicans are famous for running. Let's see, they hate hollywood yet run this guy, Arnold and Reagan. They hate homosexuals and...well you know the rest. They also claim to hate terrorists, should we be worried??
Posted by: Paul | September 6, 2007 9:55 AM
I don't know much about Fred, but he seems more likeable than the rest of the GOP field.
Huckabee seems to be a nice, genuine guy too.
McCain still has his thing going, did you see him calling that heckler a "little jerk?" Classic McCain.
The more I learn about Guiliani the less I like him. He wants to run on 9/11 but the people in New York seem to think he didn't do such a good job and if he'd done his job as mayor a lot less people would have died. (I'm referring to putting the emergency response center in the twin towers and not having the proper radios.)
Romney is a fake. He and Hillary are the worst of the lot. That is just my opinion though.
All in all, if I had to vote for a Republican (which I may have to do, if Hillary wins the Dem Primary) I would vote for Huckabee.
Posted by: nisleib | September 6, 2007 9:56 AM
Fred, a couple of comments; Why did you lobby on behalf of Arisitde the dictator or Haiti, how much did you pull in? If you become CIC which is doubtful and you need to be in a Cabinet meeting will you instead appear on Dr. Phil? You should have been in the debate sir not on the Tonight Show!
Posted by: castra regina | September 6, 2007 10:22 AM
So, Fred, what about 9/11?
Posted by: Tom | September 6, 2007 11:28 AM
Paul, cut the Republicans and conservatives hate gays crap, unless you want to continue coming across as a blithering moron.
Please tell me what the liberals and Democrats have done so much for in regard to gays or any minority for that matter? Keep them in slums? keep them on the government dime? Provide bad schools? Enact special laws that really don't do anything to help anyone, except make them think they feel better?
Posted by: John D | September 6, 2007 11:38 AM
Paul, cut the Republicans and conservatives hate gays crap, unless you want to continue coming across as a blithering moron.
Posted by: John D | September 6, 2007 11:38 AM
John D, hating and demonizing gays was almost the entire Republican platform or didn't you notice?
Posted by: Catherine | September 6, 2007 11:53 AM