Thompson Calls bin Laden “Symbolic”; Draws GOP Fire
EmailABC News’ Bret Hovell and Jennifer Parker report: Former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., has only been an official Republican presidential candidate for a day. But his comments are already drawing fire from his GOP rivals.
"Bin Laden is more symbolism than anything else," Thompson said while campaign in Iowa Friday. "I think it demonstrates to people once again that we’re in a global war."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., publicly disagreed with Thompson, arguing the al-Qaeda leader poses a significant threat to Americans.
"He’s more than a symbol," McCain told ABC News when asked about Thompson’s comments. "He’s motivating and recruiting using the internet as we speak. He’s a threat. He’s a threat."
McCain said bin Laden poses an enormous threat to Americans because of his ability to communicate, motivate and recruit people who are dedicated to the destruction of the U.S.
"It’s very important that we get him. I’ll get him," McCain said.
Another Thompson rival, former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., suggested the al-Qaeda leader is a real threat.
"Osama Bin Laden is the face of evil," Romney said in a statement reacting to the bin Laden tape. "His stated goal is conversion by compulsion, the surrender of liberty to terror and the abandonment of the foundations of a free society."
Earlier in the day Thompson attempted to frame bin Laden and the war in Iraq as part of the larger so-called war on terror.
"Bin Laden and people like him are heading up and we need to catch him and we surely need to deal with him, but if he disappeared tomorrow we still have this problem. If Iraq disappeared tomorrow, we’d still have this problem," Thompson said.
The former Tennessee Republican Senator said the U.S. is "finally on the right track in Iraq and we’re making progress."
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
“so-called war on terror.”
So-called war on terror? Are you kidding me? You think terror doesn’t exist? 9-11 never happened in your universe?
Posted by: jdawg | September 7, 2007, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
Thompson didn’t say “so-called war on terror”. The Reporter did. Thompson said Global War.
Posted by: Tena | September 7, 2007, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
Anything Thompson says right now is going to be fodder for the others, I’m still voting Fred……….
Posted by: A Kelley | September 7, 2007, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
Anyone who doesn’t understand the following statement is simply not paying attention.
“Bin Laden and people like him are heading up and we need to catch him and we surely need to deal with him, but if he disappeared tomorrow we still have this problem. If Iraq disappeared tomorrow, we’d still have this problem,” Thompson said.
Thompson was exactly right. Get ride of bin Laden and Jihad will still exist. McCain attempting to suggest otherwise is simply more evidence of his dishonesty.
Posted by: Gregor | September 7, 2007, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm
So Thompson says Osama is mostly a symbol. McCain criticizes him for it and then says that Osama is… a recruiting and propaganda symbol.
Genius there Senator McCain.
Posted by: Chaos | September 7, 2007, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm
Why does OBL sound so much like a drunk James Dobson?
Posted by: SplendidOne | September 7, 2007, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm
McCain, Romney Think Bin Laden More Than “Symbolic”
Thompson Calls bin Laden Symbolic; Draws GOP Fire from ABC News reports that former Senator Fred Thompson’s reference to Osama bin Laden as a symbol has drawn flack from several of his GOP presidential candidate rivals. Bin Laden is more
Posted by: PAXALLES | September 7, 2007, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
Well, not only is Bin Laden not a symbolic something, he’s the one that planned and carried out 9/11. when are the neo-cons ever going to figure this out anyway?
Posted by: kishor | September 8, 2007, 12:01 am 12:01 am
Fred Thompson is the ideal candidate for these times. No one else has a better grasp of the issues that challenge our nation now, in the year of our Lord, 1968!
Posted by: Steve Campitelli | September 8, 2007, 12:06 am 12:06 am
Mountain meet mole hill.
Posted by: Captain America | September 8, 2007, 12:12 am 12:12 am
Which script will Thompson read from next?If some think he is a ‘candidate for the times’, heaven help us. So far, he hasn’t said anything about how he would do anything. Get real
Posted by: Edie | September 8, 2007, 12:20 am 12:20 am
What’s funny about Old Uncle Freddie’s remark is that some liberals have said the same thing and they got roasted by the wingnuts.
Posted by: Steve J. | September 8, 2007, 12:39 am 12:39 am
People will jump at anything fred will say.I’am voting for Fred, because I think he is the man for 08.
Posted by: allen | September 8, 2007, 4:57 am 4:57 am
Hereøs the bone of contention bt McCain and Thompson.
1.McCain campaign is in such a bad shape now that he wants to contradict anyone exp Thompson to get traction.
2.Thompson’s (a friend of McCain) entry into the race spell doom for McCain so he must go an extra mile to stop him
3.This war and the surge are to a large extend McCains handwork so any blurring of its raison d’être is seen by McCain as an affront on him which much be opposes vehemently
4.Recall the recent debate.McCain apparently scolded at Mit Roomney for saying “the surge is apparently” by saying it is working not apparently working.
Posted by: EE | September 8, 2007, 5:12 am 5:12 am
I think McCain’s proclamation that “I will get him” is even more glaring than Thompson’s remark. How does Senator McCain propose to do this? Do tell John.
Posted by: adjudicate | September 8, 2007, 6:35 am 6:35 am
Fred Thompson! What a joke. Give me a break. He, like all Republicans, is a backward looking dinosaur looking to don the tired-old=dead-horse mantle of Ronald Reagan, as if Reagan were some great man. Reagan was nothing more than a typical Herbert-Hoover-stomp-the-poor-political hack and doesn’t deserve the veneration lavished on his memory. And Fred Thompson, John McCain and all the other losers are Bushnicks with NO new ideas and an agenda that has already brought America just about to its knees in SO many ways. What a JOKE, Fred Thompson, GIVE me a break!!
Posted by: allen_osuno | September 8, 2007, 7:49 am 7:49 am
osama, an object. for use in political nature, wielded by the bush government.
end the lies.
Posted by: jess | September 8, 2007, 8:59 am 8:59 am
So far there was not 1 person running for President that I would have voted for. They ALL say what they will do but when it comes down to it…it never happens. Thompson’s right about Bin Laden & Iraq….we have a lot of enemies and if they did fall off the face of the earth, there is someone & another country to take their place. To think otherwise is ignorant and arrogant.
I’m voting for Fred!
Posted by: Jennifer Trowbridge | September 8, 2007, 9:35 am 9:35 am
When you Republicans get it wrong you just keep on with the Group Think and never listen to anyone who would disagree with you.
Osama Bin Laden, per the briefing you received from President William Clinton was the most important adversary to watch. When will you stop and smell the coffee? He has avoided capture for six years now. My question is, “How long are you going to keep him on the payroll?”
Bush was a dunsel President when along came his savior Osama Bin Laden. The first inaugural address was a direct taunt to the Middle East to start to draw us into a war. Continued talks and mediation between the major Middle Eastern factions was a necessity to promote safety measures here on our own shores. While Bin Laden’s crew did do some damage in New York during Clinton’s 8 years in the forefront, Bush did more to incite the ire of the Middle East by stating it was not important to the USA what happened on the MIddle Eastern homelands. LOOK what that attitude did September 11, 2001. It gave Bush something to do. Poor baby was so ineffective to that point that he had to start his own war to become important. He was not satisfied with subterfuge to steal the Presidency from the rightful winner; he had to hide the evidence by having the evidence, stored next to the twin towers, destroyed. If it was not Bush directly, we cannot state he was unaware of the necessity to remove the evidence that proved that we did not elect him. History will show, evidence will surface, that will clarify once and for all how connected to the Twin Tower disaster the Bush family really is. The Bin Ladens are good friends with the Bush clan.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 8, 2007, 10:18 am 10:18 am
“Bin Laden and people like him are heading up and we need to catch him and we surely need to deal with him, but if he disappeared tomorrow we still have this problem. If Iraq disappeared tomorrow, we’d still have this problem,” Thompson said.
I don’t get it. If bin Laden disappeared tomorrow, we’d still have the same problem. So why do we need to catch him and deal with him. What does “heading up” mean? And how could we still have this problem if Iraq disappeared tomorrow? What problem?
Posted by: Robert Maxwell | September 8, 2007, 10:45 am 10:45 am
Fred doesn’t have the big picture yet.
Posted by: gc | September 8, 2007, 11:06 am 11:06 am
A bunch of loonies talking that they can catch OBL. The elite force got him cornered before but Bush shifted his priorities to his oil business in Iraq. Now every time these candidates talk, it’s terror from Bin Ladin.
Close the borders first and deal with that first and elite forces and tract every terrorist suspected in the US and abroad. This is the kind of game these people know. We should do the same. Hunt them.
Posted by: marc | September 8, 2007, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm
“Thompson draws GOP ire for telling the truth.” Now would that be more accurate?
Posted by: geddesman | September 8, 2007, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm
just read the transcript of Usama’s speech. I then looked at the Democratic Party website. Looks like Bin Laden just cut’n'pasted the whole thing!
Posted by: inspector9 | September 8, 2007, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm
Fred Thompson: Smoking Ban Caused Freedom-Loving al-Qaeda Members To Support U.S.?
No. Im SERIOUS. I couldnt make this one up if I tried
From The New York Daily News:
Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S.
BY RICHARD SISK
SIOUX CITY, Iowa – Freshly minted GOP White House hopeful Fred Thomps…
Posted by: The Gun Toting Liberal™ | September 8, 2007, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
“Thompson draws GOP ire for telling the truth.” Now would that be more accurate?
Apparently, it doesn’t matter. Ron Paul has been telling the truth throughout his campaign and folks think he’s a loon. Why? Because he has this really novel idea that the US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. I know of millions of people who would readily put their livelihoods at stake for Ron Paul because they know if he’s going to war, it’s gonna be legit. I know I would.
None of the other candidates, like Thompson, say, specifically, what they would do. That’s why they speak only in rhetorical terms. Because if they said what they’d really do, they know well they wouldn’t be elected.
Another thing, isn’t it strange that Ron Paul is the only candidate that isn’t a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) which stands for One World Government? WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Ray | September 8, 2007, 11:51 pm 11:51 pm
Fred Thompson should respond: ‘John McCain, while you are out there concerned with words and phrasing, I am concerned with the Iraq War and hard-pressing issues.’
Posted by: Fred-Head | September 9, 2007, 3:08 am 3:08 am
Fred Thompson? President?” Aw, come on. Let me start with some conventional wisdom I would like to offer to all conservatives out there. . Basically it’s this: Fred Thompson is a joke. He is a guy whose political record in the Senate was a big zero; whose only real claim to fame is being a character actor on TV and in films; who has done nothing to distinguish himself this year except deliver a few vaguely Reaganesque pastiches in a nice baritone; who is apparently not Christian enough for James Dobson’s taste; who has no known issues that he really cares deeply about; and whose most famous quality is his laziness. It’s nothing more than a measure of GOP desperation that Fred Thompson is considered ANYTHING but a joke. Who in their right mind could actually see Fred as a viable candidate? Seriously. Who would? I know a dozen college kids right now who know more about this nation than Fred Thompson knows. These kids may not possess the acting abilities Thompson has, but they most certainly are MORE INTELLIGENT than he is by a LONG SHOT. Come on, folks! When are we going to begin to take the well being of this nation seriously? When are we going to STOP electing dumbed-down ignoramuses who seem to be offered up in the spirit of some kind of high school popularity contest? Just look at what GW has done to this nation and the world, then ask yourself, “Fred Thompson? President?” Aw, come on…this guy needs a coonskin cap and a huntin’ dawg to complete his wardrobe. Just because he plays a prosecutor on television, the conservatives actually confuse his television persona with reality and take him for someone seriously worthy of consideration. Come on…what a joke!! But, I suppose, after Bush and all his crony closet cohorts have melted down the Republican Party and destroyed everything our country has traditionally held near and dear, nobody should be surprised that a candidate as ridiculous as Fred Thompson would emerge among conservatives as their ‘conservative champion’ (snicker)….Talk about sticking your head in the fire to light up… The last thing this country needs is a bad boring old good ole boy actor…enough already. The Republican Party is busted and its sorry die hard adherents can’t even see that Fred Thompson is acting once again. Maybe this guy believes some of the tired old platitudes he says, but I don’t see in him a record such that he could or would get anything worthy of note DONE Fred would be an absolute disaster (as would most GOP candidates I have listened to so far).
Like Giuliani, Romney, McCain and the lot, what a joke the Republican candidates are.
Give me a BREAK… Fred Thompson… (guffaw)…..Frankly, though, I worry, given how stupid the American public is, that someone like Thompson could actually have a chance. After all, GW got elected to a second term, didn’t he? That’s enough cause for concern given the poor intellectual and mental health of our electorate. Anyone with a brain at all ought to be able to see that Fred Thompson is just the latest charade in the dismal recent history of this sorry Republican political party with its dinosauric, backward looking, empty-suited hacks who have nothing but tired, dead horses to offer as new ideas.
Posted by: survivor | September 9, 2007, 6:30 am 6:30 am
tumbleweedin’ – Dennis Kucinich is by far the most truthful candidate, so why are you not mentioning him if honesty and integrity is the issue?
Also, with Mr. Paul what is he going to put in replace the IRS, Dept. of Education, Federal Reserve, Foreign Aid, Medicare, Homeland Security,etc all of which he wants to abolish as President. He says he wants to get rid of all of these institutions but doesn’t offer any solutions.
Not everyone is a millionaire doctor and congressman.
Posted by: geddesman | September 9, 2007, 11:37 am 11:37 am
Aren’t we fortunate, ol’ Bullwinkle (name fits for so many reasons) has finally thrown his hat into the GOP ring. George Will had it right when he said of Fred Thompson this am on “This Week”, that it seems Thompson feels “he is making a gift of himself to the country”. Thompson did not display leadership as a senator and does not have a clue about policy. The comments about Bin Laden show a shallow somewhat simplistic understanding of the problem. Let’s hope he will not be the Republican candidate.
Posted by: Emm-Ell | September 9, 2007, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm
Fred Thompson will win continue and stay the coures in the war on Terror.
Posted by: Fred Thompson | September 10, 2007, 6:26 am 6:26 am
The stumbling fumbling bumbling repubs are up against a hard place in the closet. Bin Laden looks tan and the beard is colored black while the repubs find another octogenarian to lead their charge.
Posted by: daddy | September 10, 2007, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm
If Romney finds Osama such a threat to our country why doesn`t he counsel his children to do their part militarily? If threats to America concern him, why did he, like his mentor Bush, fail to serve in Viet Nam? The answer is simple. These rich guys want others to make America safe for them to make money.
Posted by: A Viet Nam Vet | September 10, 2007, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm