Transcript: Fred’s speech to the Council for National Policy
posted at 6:19 pm on May 14, 2007 by Allahpundit
The CNP is a secretive roster of conservative (especially socially conservative) illuminati so it’s significant that they’ve summoned Fred! to come and be heard now. Sounds like a benediction for his candidacy, although if you believe Hotline, the overture came off a little flat:
1. Thompson got a standing ovation when we entered. 2. His speech started on judges and pivoted to Scooter Libby. No one understood why he was talking about Libby. 3. People seemed to like him because they felt like they had to. However, Thompson’s presence empowered people to bad-talk Romney, McCain, and others, in a way that they hadn’t done in previous CNP meetings. 4. People also recognized that he is not perfect for them. They recogized that it is awkward, even in context.
NRO has the transcript. It’s a nice cut of red meat, starting with the requisite reminder per Thomas Jefferson that you can thank the Creator for those inalienable rights of yours. I see the point made by Hotline’s tipster, though — the Libby and Roberts stuff is fine, but seems a bit “small potatoes” for a conservative coronation, which is what this could have been. I’m starting to wonder if people aren’t more in love with the idea of Fred! than the real thing. Maybe that’s why he’s biding his time, to give the myth time to build so that when he does come in the nomination is a foregone conclusion. Better be careful, though: the more it builds, the greater the risk of disappointment.
The president of NBC Entertainment told reporters today not to expect Fred back on “Law & Order” next season. Make of it what you will.
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
It never ends.
SuperManGreenLantern on May 14, 2007 at 6:25 PM
He was an actual prosecutor for real once upon a time, so I am not surprised that Libby and Roberts had his interest. But have to agree, it does seem an odd combo to sort of focus on at such a potentially big speech.
dustoffmom on May 14, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Sounds like Fred needs some good Campaigners beside him. Unlike most other candidates he doesnt have a current staff and they need to get him focused on what the issue is at hand.
In fairness to Fred hes coming off years of being out of poltics. Its not like Hilary who has been a political creature her entire life.
William Amos on May 14, 2007 at 6:29 PM
I’m not opposed to voting for Fred, but I wish he’d just announce. The first awkward debate is over.
amerpundit on May 14, 2007 at 6:33 PM
May the best man win. If he gets up on the stump and falls off then it is on to the next guy. I agree with William Amos…….he can still ride the bicycle but he needs some practice. Will he master it? We will all soon find out.
Limerick on May 14, 2007 at 6:34 PM
The meat’s so red, I still see the blood spurting out. Mmmmmm, red meat.
Now that I’ve made you lose dinner, allow me to apologize by reporting on the Wisconsin GOP Convention straw poll, which had 306 “respondents”:
Fred Thompson – 95
Tommy (The Other) Thompson – 84 (note; he was 1 of 2 candidates who bothered to show up)
Mitt Romney – 41
Rudy Giuliani – 35 (my, how the mighty have fallen in the eyes of the GOP faithful)
Sam Brownback – 14 (probably would’ve cracked 20 if he didn’t call Peyton Manning the best QB in the history of the NFL at the convention – OOPS!)
Newt Gingrich – 12
John McCain – 10 (really, a McShameful performance)
Tom Tancredo – 8
Duncan Hunter – 3
No Response – 2
Ron Paul – 1 (probably the guy who encouraged Ed Thompson to run for governor in 2002)
Write-in – 1 (odds are even that it was Congressman Paul Ryan or Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker)
No votes for Jim Gilmore, Chuck Hagel (cut-and-run doesn’t play here) or Mike Huckabee.
steveegg on May 14, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Fred may come off as a tad “rusty” when honing the speech to a particular audience, but that still beats the shit out of hearing memorized talking points and rehearsed lines that they think we want to hear.
It doesn’t bother me if he holds off announcing for a while, it’s early and a lot of these horses are gonna stumble.
commonsensehoosier on May 14, 2007 at 7:44 PM
I feel sure Fred will announce as soon as his contractual agreement with his TV show is over. Are Libby and Roberts “small potatoes” or are they symbolic that Fred views SCOTUS as the main battleground for his administration and isn’t going to allow his people to be sniped off and made to be scapegoats via cheap shots by the other party? There are certainly those that view those topics as anything but small.
Buzzy on May 14, 2007 at 7:48 PM
FREDDDDD. PLEASE RUN!
Vote for Fred Thompson people!
msipes on May 14, 2007 at 8:15 PM
The speech that we had on here last week (from the lincoln center) was a little flat too, so if it’s twice now – in front of friendly crowds – that he’s coming in a little flat and uninspiring. It’s not really a good sign, is it?
lorien1973 on May 14, 2007 at 8:27 PM
Social Conservatives, especially evangelical Christians, need to get over themselves\ourselves. We are not voting for Chief Priest…we are voting for President. If these folks were waiting for some earth shattering rendering of scripture I fear they are going to the wrong well with Fred!.
This guy seems to be a traditional Conservative Republican(as opposed to a Republican who happens to be Conservative) from the South. He speaks his mind and is fishing around to see who agrees with him…not fishing around to find folks who he can agree with.
From where I’m sitting…that’s the most genuine presentation among the “major” Republican candidates. Rudy McRomney should take a note here before Newt joins the fray and they all find themselves in 3rd place and fading.
Pilgrim on May 14, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Just because somebody has to say. Why Neal Boortz doesn’t get invited to give commencement addresses.
LakeRuins on May 14, 2007 at 8:32 PM
I honestly believe that Fred should do exactly what he is doing, nothing. He can save his money for when he is ready, and let everyone around him get jumpy and nervous and he can get in whenever he is ready. He does not need to be in a debate that is 17 months before the election.
NEMETI IN SYRACUSE on May 14, 2007 at 8:49 PM
Why would Fred need to loose a barn burner on a closed group of loyalists and policy wonks? That stuff comes later. This is the time for him to establish his credentials and positions.
TBinSTL on May 14, 2007 at 9:10 PM
I am not sure he will disappoint. He is leaving a paper trail of what he stands for and believes and what he would do as President. This is a good thing. He can do it without the restrictions of McCain-Feingold too.
CrimsonFisted on May 14, 2007 at 9:12 PM
if he doesn’t wow the loyalists and policy wonks; there won’t be a later. they are the money people who donate.
lorien1973 on May 14, 2007 at 9:12 PM
A Fred! thread? Wait… where is csdeven?
It’s been 14 replies to this thread already and csdeven hasn’t swooped in to remind us all that fred? is nothing but a Babylon-5 nerd wasting his time discussing Paris Hilton on World of Warcraft message boards instead of nutting up and announcing his candidacy. Also, he’s probably a communist whose private jet runs on the sweet tears of orphans.
Lehosh on May 14, 2007 at 9:16 PM
IMHO, a lot of ppl are expecting RWR II. There will never be another RWR. As a public speaker and as a leader, he even pwned Clinus. Fred! is rusty. Give him some time. The more he is known and has spoken to the American ppl , he shall have gravitas(I had to pull it out!).
I truly believe he could sway some normal dem voters ( as in the married 2.5 kids with a house voter that watches ABC/NBC/CBS for their national news ) if he gets a chance to connect with them.
Then again, the only reason that RWR was elected in the first place was that the public was completely frustrated, as they seem to be now.
PS – It is dayum hard to write a post while watching 24
lsutiger on May 14, 2007 at 9:16 PM
Lorien-
I guess you have forgotten that our party traditionally raises a much higher proportion of funds from individuals and us down in the grass roots. Why are the Republicans so far behind in fund raising? Our “money people” are not the ones that were in that room and we are sitting on our checkbooks. Your math and memory are flawed on this.
TBinSTL on May 14, 2007 at 9:18 PM
I realize that republicans get money from smaller donors; but in the early part of the game – when you and I are sitting on our checkbooks – the money people are the ones putting the cash in and betting on a horse. If he doesn’t perform well, his horse won’t be there to give money to later on.
Don’t get me wrong, I want Fred to get in and win the nomination; but there “tepid” performances we hear about all the time worry me right now.
lorien1973 on May 14, 2007 at 10:02 PM
Has the legend of Fred? out shined the real man?
He seems to be just stating a bunch of rhetoric. I’ve heard that from everyone before (McCain, Rudy, Romney, etc.).
I want to hear your plans for our country, not merely your perspective. You can find perspectives at LGF and Daily Kos. Even Hillary and Obama have a plan for our nation. I expect no less from Fred?.
C’mon Fred?, is this all you got? I actually started thinking he would be a serious contender in the GOP 08 festival. Now I feel–”underwhelmed.”
He sounds very flat–like an instrument that hasn’t been played in forever.
He better get tuned up fast, as he is playing for the worlds greatest audience, not a one man show.
Darnell Clayton on May 14, 2007 at 10:54 PM
Buzzy on May 14, 2007 at 7:48 PM
Yes Buzzy, I agree. The strong arm tactics being used by the democrats are unprecidented and belittleing the Executive branch. I also think the brewhaha made over the Attorney Generals firing of the eight lawyers is outragous. Who knows mabey they were preparing a case to impeach the President, but with the left over Clintonistas I don’t think the case would be credible. Not to mention the fact that All but one lawyer was fired by Reno at the beggining of the Clintons Term. Where was the MSM on this. This allowed all the past wrong doings of the Clintons to be swept under the carpet, not to mention the trail of dead bodies they left. These goings on are the type of tactics used by Communist Dictators to seize power from the people. This Congress disrespect of Presidential authority given to him BY the congress is another example. The NSA wire taping was explained in detail before it was enacted. Bush has had to bob and weave his way around many of the obsticals placed by democrats just to protect the country. For one all the leaks of information. We are at war, the passing of information is illegal even to the newspapers. I think that is one reason why the President does not get the warrants for fear of leaking information. The enemy combatants being held in Cuba are just that enemy combatants and do not have the rights of prisoners of war. All these things are built in checks and balances and default modes that the Dems are attempting to over ride through any means to gain the POWER and MONEY they crave.
sonnyspats1 on May 14, 2007 at 11:24 PM
So…what’s not to like? Sounds like a breath of fresh air to me.
Speakup on May 14, 2007 at 11:26 PM
fred? is a fad. A gimmick. A talking point. The guy talks more than the entire cast of “The View” does.
When he decides to grow a pair and ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING, I’ll give him a serious look. But he is gonna have to answer for his pickup truck fakery, his pro-choice stance in 1994 and other things.
csdeven on May 15, 2007 at 12:01 AM
“No one understood why he was talking about Libby. ”
It’s pretty clear if you ask me.
digitalintrigue on May 15, 2007 at 12:07 AM
It’s Fredapalooza here at HA. I’ve been hearing more of Guiliani lately. He’s strong. I’m expecting some real meat in the Republican field.
On the Dhem side it’s just a coronation of her highness so no big deal.
Mojave Mark on May 15, 2007 at 1:28 AM
csdeven on May 15, 2007 at 12:01 AM
Darn it…you just HAD to answer. I was actually gonna take lehosh to task for baiting you.
Now, how do you really feel about Fred again…I forget?
:)
tickleddragon on May 15, 2007 at 1:40 AM
I think what most don’t realize is that Fred can’t give a campaign speech without screwing over the people who gave him a job and the other actors who he works with right now. He has to keep it personal and low key with no “if elected I’ll…..” stuff.
Buzzy on May 15, 2007 at 3:54 AM
csdeven, you may be judging him too harshly, there are some contractual obligations he has had to finagle past due to partially albeit our great mccain who sponsored mccain feingold. He’s a man of his word and his contractual obligations so he doesn’t have near the freedom some others do.
I’m looking forward to him running. Time will tell of course.
Highrise on May 15, 2007 at 5:20 AM
I’ve heard Giuliani talk about nominating constructionist judges but I haven’t heard of any other candidates actually using the Constitution for a guide.
That’s a significant start. Whether Fred is “the one” I don’t know but acknowledging our founding documents as important principles to live by is encouraging.
Speakup on May 15, 2007 at 9:59 AM
I know. fred? is my pet issue lately and although I do trash him pretty hard, it’s all tounge in cheek for the most part. I don’t see any issues with him that the candidates have. My big beef is his lack of action, but I am thoroughly ammused at the giddiness of his groupies. The guy isn’t even a candidate, hasn’t answered any questions in a hostile enviroment, and all his speeches are prepared before hand, yet some conservatives are gaa gaa over him. they even write his name as “Fred!”. So, I write his name as “fred?” as a friendly jab.
Yes, IF he gets in, we will see.
csdeven on May 15, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Sorry duder, but no one believes you. Given the mindless hostility you’ve displayed towards Fred for reasons you’ve been unable or unwilling to enunciate clearly, it’s pretty obvious that you’re frustrated due to your man Mitt losing out to him before he even announced. Are we really supposed to believe you’ll give him an honest consideration simply by his formally announcing? Please, troll.
Hollowpoint on May 15, 2007 at 1:54 PM