One of the big knocks on Fred Thompson so far in his nascent presidential campaign, aside from the fact that he is an opportunistic lobbyist who was a Nixon administration mole during the Senate's Watergate investigations, has been that he hasn't really taken any positions on the pressing issues of the day, instead just positing rather ambiguous rhetoric. A new report by CBN's David Brody won't do much to dispel that notion.

First off, it appears Thompson wasn't a big fan of the GOP having any sort of platform back in 1996. In April of 1996, this is what The Memphis Commercial Appeal wrote: Thompson wants to change the way the 1996 Republican National Convention is conducted. For starters, he wants to abolish the party platform - just toss the archaic thing away. 'It's the most useless device I've ever heard of,' Thompson said during a recent visit to Memphis."

Thompson also said this in a separate article from April of 1996:
Thompson: "Does Anyone Remember What Was In The Last , Except Abortion? ... If We Get Caught Up In Having A Platform Debate And Stuff Like That, We Deserve To Lose."

In August of that same year, Thompson called abortion a "distracting issue." Read below from an Associated Press article:
U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson says he seldom hears about abortion in campaign travels throughout Tennessee and hopes the issue is downplayed at the Republican National Convention. The Tennessee Republican, a pro-choice defender in a party with an anti-abortion tilt, is preparing for next week's convention in San Diego. He said the party must avoid distracting issues and focus on electing Bob Dole as president. 'We need to concentrate on what brings us together and not what divides us,' Thompson said in an interview with The Tennessean published Tuesday.

Later in that same 1996 AP article came this part:
In 1996, Thompson Said Republican Ideals Don't Need To Be Written Down Into Platform. "Thompson said he opposes making early-term abortions a crime, as some Republicans would like to do with a constitutional amendment. 'But I don't think you should bolt on one issue. I'm still not convinced platforms are a good idea. We know what we believe in and I don't think we need to write it all down in a document,' Thompson said. [emphasis original]

These revelations are doubly problematic for Thompson. As alluded to above, the last thing a candidate who appears to stand for nothing needs is the news that in his past he wanted to get rid of his party's platform altogether, preferring his party to instead stand for nothing -- or at least not admit to the American public that it stood for something. Brody suggests the possibility that Thompson was among those who simply believed a fight over a party platform was a waste of time, that a party's platform does not actually have any real impact. But the fact remains that party's develop platforms for a reason: Political parties are not solely means for one group or another to gain power in this country -- they are at least in part about advancing a vision for this country, and a set of policies to achieve that vision.

And as damaging as the fact that Thompson in effect argued that the Republican Party shouldn't admit to standing for anything in particular might be to his campaign this cycle, only slightly less problematic are the reports that he was pro-choice and that he wanted the issue of abortion to be effectively excised from the GOP. Coming on the heels of the revelation that Thompson lobbied on behalf of a pro-choice group, this news from Brody cannot assuage the concerns of those on the right unhappy with the fact that they can't find a candidate who is sufficiently with them on the issue of abortion.

No doubt Thompson's candidacy is not dead before it has even begun. That said, Thompson is simply not the savior for the Republican Party that many on the right hope he is -- and he's certainly not the panacea for all of their woes, from George Bush to Iraq to Alberto Gonzales to Jack Abramoff to...