Fred’s campaign website launches; Update: H&C interview added; Update: Coulter unloads on Fred for impeachment vote; Update: Fred second nationally in internal poll
posted at 9:21 pm on June 5, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
We’ve got video of his H&C interview coming. In the meantime, explore Fred!
Update: All right, here you go. The campaign, Iraq, Iran, and his first 100 days. Straight talk — to borrow a phrase.
Update: “[I]t’s his accent that tells conservatives he’s one of their own.” I guess we’re a regional party now.
Update: Oh my. Fred versus Annie C? Whatever will our Coulter-bot readers do?
Update: Fred’s own internal poll confirms the Rasmussen result from earlier today. Looks like he’s already in second for real.
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
Comment pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »
So hows about we dispense with this “Fred!” crap and just start calling him by his real name: “44″
bdfaith on June 5, 2007 at 11:36 PM
Amerpundit,
Oh brother, before you interpret my last comment as calling you a crybaby let me assure you I only meant the word ‘baby’ in the dismissively familiar sense.
The Ritz on June 5, 2007 at 11:37 PM
My issue with Mitt is that he just seems too slick, and I worry he’ll screw us the first chance he gets, and on top of that he outright supports a Spooky Weapons Ban, which could send 2nd Amendment people packing.
I just don’t get that “I’ll use the rubes till I’m in the White House” vibe from Fred that I do from Mitt.
Rudy I think would be less likely to be using people and be conflicted with what he thought was best, and would probably cave to his liberal impulses when bills that went against the base were thrown on his desk, which is what makes me nervous.
Again, I don’t get that from Fred either, maybe in the past he was like that with some of the issues brought up in Hannity’s interview, but I don’t sense that now at least. We’ll see.
Bad Candy on June 5, 2007 at 11:38 PM
A ticket like that will bring some old stoned hippies out of the forests–who haven’t voted since McGovern–they’ll shake the ganga seeds out of the cuffs of their overalls (in case they have a brush with the heat), put a new set of points in the microbus, and come in to town and pull that lever for Hunter-Thompson, then head over to the bar for cold one or two. Then a couple of hours later you’ll hear a scream you’ll never forgot coming out of that bar, as they finally realize the enormity of what they’ve done. Hey, it’s a nice thought.
smellthecoffee on June 5, 2007 at 11:38 PM
Saint Ann nails fred, and it appears the former Bushbots have switched to fred-Cool Aid by their reaction. And sending him your money? Jeez, ‘coulda had a beer.
Man, just when this useless Presidential race looked to get old…
RUN ANN RUN !!!
Thomas vs Alexander on June 5, 2007 at 11:38 PM
The Ritz on June 5, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Oh dont be no kitty-kat..(wont call you the p word) if your going to call him a baby be a man about it……
doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 11:39 PM
Me too. I’ve seen Ann dismantle her opposite and have yet to see fred? take on anyone. Not even Colmsey.
csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 11:40 PM
Hows about we try “real actual candidate” first?
csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 11:42 PM
I like that!
RushBaby on June 5, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Bad Candy on June 5, 2007 at 11:38 PM
Not much chance of that, he’s a Mormon. (Disclaimer, my folks were Mormons) Mormons are almost as good with fiscal policy as Jew’s, which is to say they are pretty damn good with money, and pretty damned opposed to double crosses and skullduggery.
What do you want in life…….
1. A Jewish/Mormon accountant
2. A chinese cook
3. A French Mistress…….
O.K. so I played guitar for a living for half of my life…so sue me……
doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 11:45 PM
All that polish is so glitzy that it’s blinding people, even those of us who’d ultimately vote for him, if he were standing in Nov. ‘08. In addition, that ad he has running at the moment - horrible - he comes across like a polished dictator (sorry csdeven - it just is a very bad ad, and very fake on what all he would do, and others couldn’t/wouldn’t).
Heh, I can see csdeven and Annie C. pulling that trigger in Nov. ‘08…for the big man.
Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 11:46 PM
I love how Ann ignored Colmes on this segment. He didn’t word one out as long as she was talking. It’s amazing that man can get dressed in the morning, he’s so dim.
smellthecoffee on June 5, 2007 at 11:47 PM
csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 11:42 PM
How about we pretend you’re not a liar who hates Fred for about two seconds……..opp’s times up please feel free to return to your regularly scheduled lie…….
doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 11:48 PM
I just realized that Rudy/Mitt were lumped together in the “polish” characterization. My commentary was aout Mitt.
Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 11:49 PM
From the post,
Bullsh!t, I’m a Yankee (and proud of it), and Fred is my favorite at this point. And it has nothing to do with the drawl, if anything, he could stand to go a bit lighter with it. I support Fred because of his stances on issues, not because of where he’s from. I’d LOVE to see a strong conservative Northeastern candidate like you wouldn’t believe.
Bad Candy on June 5, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Last jury duty call I had was for a gang-banging case with a innocent dead man in the crossfire. I believe what got me axed from the jury pool was my response to a voir dire question in which I said the prosecution had to prove their case. Did I want to sit on the jury and convict the SOB? You bet I did. But would I throw out my feelings and decide on the facts. You bet I would. Out of 125 in the pool it came down to three of us to fill out the jury. The defense accepted me, and prosecution declined. No different for Fred! on the impeachment. He voted the way the he saw how the facts fit the charges and not what was popular.
Limerick on June 5, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Coulter is usually an all-or-nothing sorta person. She makes her living by being very definitive (and often acerbic). She did give some dirt on Fred! but she also gave him a weak endorsement. That’s good news for Fred! At least he won’t be fighting the ultra-Right.
There are no saints in the running (and we don’t elect people based on their sanctity). Everyone will have something to defend. It’s how well they defend it that will determine their electability.
cmay on June 5, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Limerick on June 5, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Oh hell yes, at the time I was so mad at Clinton ( for gods sake a mea culpa would have ended the whole damn thing) I would have voted for impeachment, but in retrospect I believe Fred did the right thing. (and BTW I am still pretty pissed off at Bill)…..
doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 11:56 PM
One candidate has more and more wet panties lately, for good reasons. The “we’re just not/or anti Bush” and “we’re Bush, but light” are dead. The real race and real debates about this country can now begin in earnest. May the one who’s best for this wonderful country win.
Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 11:57 PM
cmay on June 5, 2007 at 11:50 PM
And that my brother is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth……So help somebody God……
doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Oh dont be no kitty-kat..(wont call you the p word) if your going to call him a baby be a man about it……
doriangrey on June 5, 2007 at 11:39 PM
No reason to slap-fight a guy who’s almost a Fred! convert!
Besides, it’s gettin’ late and it sounds like you guys are gettin’ cranky
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Can’t we all just get along and dig up Nixon and get this election over with? (hey don’t laugh…I voted for the man, still would too)
Limerick on June 6, 2007 at 12:03 AM
No reason to slap-fight a guy who’s almost a Fred! convert!
Besides, it’s gettin’ late and it sounds like you guys are gettin’ cranky
(sorry, missed the quote button!)
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:03 AM
The GOP overreached when they tried to remove Bill from office. Fred was right to vote against it.
packsoldier on June 6, 2007 at 12:04 AM
Entelechy on June 5, 2007 at 11:57 PM
For gods sake I hope you are right. While right now I am solidly in fred’s camp, if another Ronald Reagan showed up tomorrow I’d dump fred so fast his head would be doing imitations of Regan from the Exorsist…..
doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 12:04 AM
Ann is goddess!
SouthernGent on June 6, 2007 at 12:05 AM
Well, all that’s on is freds? disgustingly pathetic “interview” with Sean. The gall of this faker is sickening.
L8R
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 12:08 AM
nevermind….Allah would ban me to Mordor.
Limerick on June 6, 2007 at 12:08 AM
Speaking of the Exorsist (sic) . . .
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Did Ann just get out of rehab? The last time I saw her she embarassed the whole Republican party at a nationally televised function with her faggot remark. If she is trying to make a comeback by attacking Thompson she is delusional. Ann needs to check her bar room mentality at the door. I latched onto a couple statements of Thompson’s that were extraodinary. he stated…. “that the country is in danger of going bankrupt.” also….. if the soldiers in Iraq were full of hope and optimism then he would be full of hope and optimism. I read this to expose some profound characteristics. First answer…..displays honesty, realism and leadership traits. Second answer…..displays in touch with the rank and file, able to delegate authority and leadership traits. Ann femininity google it!
sonnyspats1 on June 6, 2007 at 12:09 AM
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Nobodies getting cranky were just getting excited that this might actually turn into a genuine race for the white house. For awhile it was looking like it was a done deal for Shillary, now it looks like it could be a real race. Even if fred isn’t the second coming of RR, at the very minimum it looks like he just might be the 109+ octane boost need to make this a real election.
doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 12:10 AM
And the madness returns . . .
CS, for a minute I thought therapy was working. Alas!
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:11 AM
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 12:08 AM
Thats better……..
doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 12:11 AM
I’m with Fred! and if that is the worst that Ann can come up with then it looks like smooth sailing from here on.
I continue to hope that Newt gets in the race. I believe he really would elevate the discussion.
DannoJyd on June 6, 2007 at 12:13 AM
I’m hurt. I tried that joke on a thread a couple weeks ago and got no play at all :-(
mikeyboss on June 6, 2007 at 12:15 AM
doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 12:10 AM
Second to the fact that Fred! appears to be the only genuine conservative, his viability with the base and among potential independent voters is precisely why I think he’s got to be the GOP pick.
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Ann is a goddess. And correct in calling out Fred! A lot of crap is being shovelled right now by a lot of people. Action is what counts.
thegreatbeast on June 6, 2007 at 12:16 AM
I can’t believe Coulter chose to pull that virtual prehistoric nugget out of her a-hole.
She’s really reaching on this one.
The Ugly American on June 6, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Hi Danno. It’s getting exciting! I hope that Newt will join Fred soon in a very high advisory capacity. Much more effective and would give the media something to harp about incessantly, without any teeth whatever.
Friends, especially those who mean well for the country and for Fred, or anyone who’ll make it to the top - there will be no RR second coming, as we’re all unique. He was great, with flaws too, in a time when he was most needed. Now, we must allow each of these men to be/grow into their own.
Entelechy on June 6, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Old-Ass Clinton Perjury Vote vs. Current Immigration and National Security Problems.
Hmmmmmm….however, shall I vote?
The Ugly American on June 6, 2007 at 12:20 AM
Umm, wait a second. . . Fred!=former senator. Ann=crap shoveler. I believe you’re bass ackwards Mr. Beast.
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 12:22 AM
Well put Entelechy….as usual. You gotta teach me to spell sometime.
Limerick on June 6, 2007 at 12:22 AM
Good insight that many would do well to keep in mind.
Bradky on June 6, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I think I’m having a dejavu moment here. People are attacking CSDeven for not jumping on the Fred love train. CSDeven responds by attacking back. Allah stands by, quietly, most likely nodding his head. People are willing to change stances, so as to line up with Fred’s. People start to believe Shillary will be nervous…
Oh, wait. This happened in the last Fred thread. Can we go to bed, now?
amerpundit on June 6, 2007 at 12:35 AM
nodding=shaking
amerpundit on June 6, 2007 at 12:36 AM
Dear Limerick, you have no idea how many hairs I wished to pull for transposing letters, leaving some out, inserting extra ones, in the excitement of the moment. I’m even tired of posting corrections any more. Why I don’t read the comments first I only partly know - I wish to get into the frey sometimes, especially when the debate is ‘hot’.
I adore your comments, you and family. The other day I was at a clinic and they were having a drive to sign bags and t-shirts to be sent to our Soldiers. I wrote “You are all superior to all of us. Gratefully, Xxxxxxx”
Entelechy on June 6, 2007 at 12:39 AM
There are some Kurdish families that would love to have a word with you. Or is betrayal something that plays prominently on your platform?
wccawa on June 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM
So Fred’s in. It’s time to hear what he offers. For now I’ll donate what I usually would have given to the RNC. If Fred continues to strike a chord with me there will be more money and my time and effort. All I know is that whoever gets my vote needs to convince me a lot that he isn’t going to treat the conservative base like the Bush camp has. After that my vote and trust is going to be a lot harder to win.
Buzzy on June 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM
Yup. I officially have Coulter-lash. Coulter fatigue. A bad case of the oozing, pus-filled Coulters.
I used to really like her. Now - even though I still agree with most of her points substantively - every time I hear her, she seems less intelligent, less original, and less someone with whom I want to be associated.
I guess it always happens. Like a rock band that starts out cutting edge … and then becomes mainstream … then imitiated … then mocked … then ultimately a parody of themselves.
I used to dig Loverboy in 1984. Ann’s sort of the same. But without the tight red leather pants. Nevermind - she probably has those, too.
Her one-note schtick is now officially tired, trite, and tedious. And some other “t” words, too. Time for a new act with some new material, and a little less desperate me-me-me-ism.
She bores me now. And she’s convinced me that she’d put her own book sales ahead of the good of the country and her ideology. Not a real swell combo.
Her and Rosie O ‘Donnell are like peas in a dysfunctional pod. They’ll probably have a series on Showtime together this fall.
Professor Blather on June 6, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Too kind E……too kind indeed.
Ok….I’ll get back on track….
The obvious reason Fred! has his ‘groupies’ is because the we want to make sure that whoever gets this nomination has the machine behind him/her to WIN! It is going to be infighting between now and Jan. 06 was a wake up call. Between now and January I call it a friendly bar fight. After that it is a free fire zone.
Limerick on June 6, 2007 at 12:51 AM
The carping by Ann was pretty lame. She was going at him with a dull knife, and I’m not quite sure of her motivation for it.
frankj on June 6, 2007 at 12:52 AM
Between now and January I call it a friendly bar fight. After that it is a free fire zone.
Limerick on June 6, 2007 at 12:51 AM
Yeehaa now your talkin.
sonnyspats1 on June 6, 2007 at 1:03 AM
Frankj, she wrote a giant book making a case against ol’ Slick Willie. The fact that she devoted that much to taking him down has to be plenty reason in itself, there’s something there in the Impeachment that just sends her into a rage.
But you are right that it makes no sense from a rational standpoint, she has to know how hollow those attacks sounded. So why do it?
Bad Candy on June 6, 2007 at 1:20 AM
I think all the talk about Ann Coulter’s *ss is off topic. It distracts from the substance of the debate. Besides, someone said she had to reach too far to grab the quote from her a-hole.
Why is that? Are you saying she has a fat *ss?
Christoph on June 6, 2007 at 1:37 AM
Ann gave Colmes exactly what he deserved, Clinton(s) as sociopaths is right on the button.
No candidate has earned my vote yet, there’s a long way to go and a lot of proof that’s needed before any one of them gains my support.
Ann is also correct about candidates telling us what we want to hear before the election and then going on about their personal agenda after the election.
Take a look at the current immigration debacle and think back about the stories we were told in the last two Presidential elections and the point Ann is making about not being fooled again makes a lot of sense.
Speakup on June 6, 2007 at 1:44 AM
I wanna have Ron Paul’s children.
He is soooo hot.
mylegsareswollen on June 6, 2007 at 2:20 AM
I will be donating on Friday.
Warner Todd Huston on June 6, 2007 at 2:26 AM
Hunter/Thompson
good on guns
Big S on June 6, 2007 at 3:04 AM
McCain, I think it’s time to stop this dance. We don’t want you, we never will, and we also don’t want you as VP. Support Gitmo and drop the global warming BS and we can talk about a VP slot, but still unlikely.
RightWinged on June 6, 2007 at 3:35 AM
It took me a second,but LMAO at that one. Excellent.
———————————————————-
Signed up and sent Fred! a pittance.
Also sent him an email saying that the donation was just a token to show my basic support, but not to expect another cent until he declares OFICIALLY.
I like Thompson/Hunter… (Hunter would actually be my main guy NOW if I thought he had a ’snowballs chance’)
Also like Thompson/Steele a lot, and it is probably a better strategic choice as far as electability.
Heck, I could go with Fred!/ ‘anyone but McCain’
But don’t expect FT to accept the second spot to anyone. The only one I can see FT maybe accepting a back-seat to would be a resurrected and repaired Ronald Reagan. (Not sure of the Constitutionality of a third election if the candidate has been resurrected, though ;-) ).
How about a Thompson/MALKIN team though?
Oh, man, I’d sell everything own and give them the money, just to see that!
LegendHasIt on June 6, 2007 at 5:04 AM
More Hunter Thompson
Big S on June 6, 2007 at 6:47 AM
Allahpundit: “Whatever will our Coulter-bot readers do?”
Ignore you.
Hey, if you want to act like the nutroots with your purity tests and run Coulter out of the Republican Party the way moveon/Kos ran Lieberman out of the Democrat, because you didn’t like some of her comments w.r.t. Edwards, nobody can stop you.
Be advised though, Reagan himself cited the 11th Commandment and that advice is still good today. The difference between Republicans and Democrats (outside of the fact that the Democrats have a poisonous, America-hating, ideology) is that the Democrats PRIDE themselves on their “moral purity” and sanctimoniousness.
As P. J. O’Rourke noted:
“The principle feature of American liberalism is sanctimoniousness. By loudly denouncing all bad things-war and hunger and date rape-liberals testify to their own terrific goodness. More important, they promote themselves to membership in a self-selecting elite of those who care deeply about such things. It’s a kind of natural aristocracy, and the wonderful thing about this aristocracy is that you don’t have to be brave, smart, strong or even lucky to join it, you just have to be liberal.”
P. J. O’Rourke (Give War a Chance, Introduction (1992)).
The Republicans have prided themselves for decades on having a “big tent.” Democrats pride themselves on their sanctimoniousness, that’s why they always try to shout down anybody who doesn’t agree with them.
Some people here don’t like Coulter and got offended at her swipe at Edwards. That’s fine. But be advised of this: The Democrats POSITIVELY HATE HER. Why? Because few people gore their ox better than she does. She devastates the left and the Democrats with every article and book she writes.
For example:
“…we finally have it from the horse’s own mouth. The [New York] Times openly admits that the “conservative” position is to take America’s side against the terrorists. Why do they get so snippy when I say that?” [Ann Coulter, "Great Gray Lady in spat with saloon hussy," 11/20/2002, worldnetdaily.com]
“While consistently rooting against America, liberals have used a fictional event forged of their own hysteria - “McCarthyism” — to prevent Americans from ever asking the simple question: Do liberals love their country?”
[Ann Coulter, "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism," Crown, 2003, Chapter 1]
More excerpts from Treason:
“While Reagan called Nicaragua a ‘totalitarian dungeon,’ the Democrats saw Ortega as an indigenous reformer. Democrat Senators Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and John Kerry Mass.) flew to Managua to meet with Ortega and returned claiming that he was ‘a misunderstood democrat rather than a Marxist autocrat.’ In the end, the Democrat-controlled House voted down even humanitarian aid for the Contras in a vote of 248 to 180.”
“Jimmy Carter couldn’t land a helicopter in a desert, but he seemed to imagine the public was hungry for his counsel in the war on terrorism. Carter is so often maligned for his stupidity, it tends to be forgotten that he is also self-righteous, vengeful, sneaky, and backstabbing.”
“Liberals dispute that Reagan won the Cold War on the basis of their capacity to put mocking quotation marks around the word, “won.” That’s pretty much the full argument: Restate a factual proposition with sneering quote marks.”
“Liberals have a preternatural gift for always striking a position on the side of treason. Everyone says liberals love America, too. No, they don’t.”
On Clinton:
“The left’s shameful refusal to admit collaboration with one of the great totalitarian regimes of the last century – like their defense of Bill Clinton – quickly transformed into a vicious slander campaign against those who bore witness against them. Caught absolutely red-handed, liberals started in with their typical bellicose counterattacks. Half a century ago, Louis Budenz, an ex-communist informant, warned investigators that if they dared go after the Communist Party, they would be subjected to savage attacks, never “honest rebuttal.” Unless the American people understood that, he said, all was lost.”
[Ann Coulter, "Liberal alternative patriotism," 7/2/2003, worldnetdaily.com]
“If there is a parable of how liberals support the enemy, this is it. Adm. Kelso, whose men carried out the dauntless EgyptAir interception, was cashiered out of the Navy because of “Tailhook.” Feminists don’t care about Saddam Hussein and his rape rooms. But they were hopping mad at Adm. Kelso for walking through the Tailhook convention to say hello to his boys – boys who captured Leon Klinghoffer’s murderers.”
[Ann Coulter, "At least Saddam wasn't at Tailhook," 4/16/2003, worldnetdaily.com]
“Liberals have been wrong about everything in the last half century.” [Ann Coulter, "Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right," p 197]
Ann Coulter writes that liberals are “savagely cruel bigots who hate ordinary Americans and lie for sport.” [Slander]
After you and some on the right castigated Coulter over her remarks about Edwards, John Edwards prostituted himself out to the anti-war movement, culminating in his exhortations for massive anti-war protests on Memorial Day.
Now, if you wish to chastise me for my defense of Coulter, just remember this: MY purity test is whether one supports liberals and Democrats and their agenda. Or not.
georgej on June 6, 2007 at 7:31 AM
I don’t get all the rage towards Ann because she doesn’t fawn over some non-candidate. She was mostly complimentary and really only had a criticism over a mistaken vote. The conservative movement needs her to balance the spectrum and shift the perceived center to the right. She’s the ideological opposite to Rosie, but unlike Rosie’s insipid stupidity, Ann is actually very, very, smart.
You don’t have to worry about that anymore.
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 8:00 AM
Get used to it. The right is so busy throwing one another under the bus because of singular issues the path for Democrats will be decidedly easier. Of the couple million or so right wingers who blog they have decided it is better to throw stones at one another. Probably has more to do with money and readership but it is there.
Extreme behavior doesn’t always add up to being right or smart.
Bradky on June 6, 2007 at 8:00 AM
This is the first time I’ve ever disagreed with Coulter. I think she is strictly going for Romney (who I like very much and would not hesitate to vote for if he is the chosen one). However, Fred would take one look at Shrillery at a debate and that ugly old skank will pee her pants. Therefore, Fred is my man!
lynnv on June 6, 2007 at 8:01 AM
I for one take a deep breath of relief whenever georgej shows up in a thread.
I think I am going to buy some more Ann Coulter books today!
RushBaby on June 6, 2007 at 8:11 AM
Guys, I’m not as worried about the heat in these threads as you seem to be. After 6+ years of feckless leaders (across the board) the GOP is struggling to find its soul and direction again. That’s really what’s behind the passion of our discussions. We’re just arguing about the right path to take.
If we identify someone among us who truly leads, it won’t be long before the base cowboys up and gets the job done, because contrary to Dems our base is salt-of-the-earth that works to “git-r-done” every day.
The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 8:23 AM
What this Coulter-bot did was to say to himself, Annie, love you but right now the country is in too deep doo-doo to fuss about old times with Streamboat Willie.
dhimwit on June 6, 2007 at 8:39 AM
Fred Thompson and John Bolton for 08 :)
mike46nzl on June 6, 2007 at 8:40 AM
Following her advice, you would have to choose between blue state abominations like Rudy Romney.
If Fred is able to handle the liberal power structure like Reagan did, and not show an affinity towards assimilation like every other Republican does, he gets my vote and probably Ann’s.
Fred’s response to Sicko Moore was what we need more of.
Valiant on June 6, 2007 at 8:40 AM
Ann just wants to be Fred’s VP.
eforhan on June 6, 2007 at 8:56 AM
Even as a Fred supporter I really didn’t see any problem with Anne’s comment. It was an honest opinion on her part and if Fred (or any other candidate) can’t answer for past votes, beliefs or actions we need to know about it. I want to see Fred, Mitt, Rudy etal. field the hard questions and nailed down to honest answers on their positions.
Buzzy on June 6, 2007 at 8:58 AM
Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not saying you go out and attack people, usually it starts with a post about Fred, or something related, and someone starts with the “Where’s CS? I’m sure…” .
amerpundit on June 6, 2007 at 9:04 AM
I hope I didn’t misunderstand. I don’t help the situation when I respond to their personal attacks because I feel the need to defend myself. So in the future, I’ll TRY to do my part by not responding to the insults.
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 9:10 AM
As always, Fearless Ann is right on.
Halley on June 6, 2007 at 9:18 AM
As a Fred supporter, I personally accept and agree with Ann’s criticism. Ok.
I loved Fred’s money quote about the Jihadi’s having a 100 year plan, while we have a plan to get us to the next election. Ball. Going. Going. Gone.
Anyone her Fred on Bill Bennett this morning? He was great.
Schweggie on June 6, 2007 at 9:28 AM
I wasn’t so much upset by Ann’s criticism of Fred but her inability to let the Clinton era go. I read everything she writes and regularly drool over her pictures but seriously can we move on with the Clinton stuff? Not to mention her logic about the red state conservatives seemed awfully weak. I have a real hard time imagining her in support of any of the front runners at this point.
As far as Fred goes, give him a chance to actually have his campaign going. Yes the Hannity thing was a softball interview, he was announcing his website not giving a hard hitting interview. It was a promo spot not really an interview. Lets see his first debate and how he holds up.
I personally like him for the same reason I like Dick Cheney. He has an ability to disagree with you in a very civil manner but still manages to make you feel like an absolute dumb ass at the same time and it drives liberals NUTS. The entertainment possibility of him vs. Hillary in the general election is just too much to pass up.
bj1126 on June 6, 2007 at 9:37 AM
Move on with a Clinton running for president? I’m sure Hillary would like Ann and others to move on.
januarius on June 6, 2007 at 9:43 AM
Ditto. I also think once he gets in and starts getting the tough questions, gets in the thick of debates, and all that is presidential politics, I think he will be more than ok. If he’s impressive while not in the fire, I contest that once the adrenalin kicks in, he’s going to be a beast.
Schweggie on June 6, 2007 at 9:46 AM
Fred… meh. He’s ok, still not doing it for me. I think he’d be a better VP paired up with Rudy or Mitt. Although, I did recruit a democrat to our ranks by letting him know Fred was running. “The guy from Die Hard 2? I’ll vote for him” :D
Dash on June 6, 2007 at 9:48 AM
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 9:10 AM
It would go a long way towards helping if instead of attacking Fred you made your criticisms factual logical and rational. Instead of calling those excited about Fred’s entry into the race groupies recognize the fact that conservatives are starting to get excited about this election.
We can have a civil debate on Fred’s qualifications, provided you do not stoop to character assignation. Yes the man has short comings, that’s part of being human. So far your criticisms have been slanderous mischaracterizations such as calling him pro-choice when his voting record clearly proves otherwise.
You accuse him of failing to get Clinton in Chinagate, when it wasn’t Fred who failed to get Clinton it was Janet Reno who refused to prosecute and nearly all the witnesses who plead the fifth or fled the country. The commission Fred led did manage to get 22 felony convictions in spite of Reno’s refusal to cooperate and Clinton’s stooges refusing to testify or fleeing the country.
What the hell does his wife’s physical appearance have to do with anything, not a damn thing that’s what. She isn’t the one running for office.
So now its up to you to prove the veracity of your assertions, provide valid rational factual criticisms that are not twisted out of shape like a pretzel and we will have a basis for a genuine civil dialog regarding Fred’s viability as a candidate. If you revert back to your old ways of slanderous mischaracterizations and Ad Hominem attacks don’t act surprised when you yourself are attacked.
doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 9:49 AM
I was referring more to the impeachment stuff. If you can find fault with Fred over actual Clinton policy and politics then fair game. With Hillary running it would be a mistake to fall into the same trap the Dems are now. They are making their campaign about Bush and we can’t make the campaign against Hillary (she’s likely to get the nomination) about Bill and especially his oval office antics.
bj1126 on June 6, 2007 at 9:54 AM
I like Fred, but he is not my first choice.
Ann brought up a point about Fred being just another politician and backed up that point pretty solidly.
I would respond to the dripping Ann Hate that a few Nutroots channeling posters flung here, but
Already made that point eloquantly.
Ann herself has explained in one of her books why AP and the other Ann Haters will keep carrying the Libs water.
AP wants to be a “MAVERICK”. Some conservatives relish that “good doggie” response from the MSM and Left wing blogs that they get for attacking passionate conservatives.
JayHaw Phrenzie on June 6, 2007 at 10:00 AM
What a likeable guy!
I used to like Coulter too, but she’s just downright bitchy, and I’m losing any sort of appreciation for her. She’s as bitchy as Rosie.
ballz2wallz on June 6, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Your analysis on “mavericks” is funny because it is so accurate. That is exactly the way they are and why they hate Ann Coulter so much.
Fred is okay, but he does seem just like any other politician: I might run. I might not. I might announce on July 4. I might not. I was for abortion. Now I’m not. I’m getting ready to run. I really am. Maybe I’m not.
Can you imagine this guy making decisions on the War on Terror?
januarius on June 6, 2007 at 10:20 AM
Well, with many feeling that MITT! won the debate and fred? the coward hiding behind shills it’s clear that his facade is slowly being striped away, revealing his as a talking head with no real plan other than what he has been stealing from real candidates. His former staffers reveal that he cannot speak off the cuff and is only impressive with a scripted speech.
It’s painfully obvious that as of today, freddie boy is only qualified to be MITTS! press secretary. And even that is a stretch.
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Sure. He’d just call a real leader and ask them what they would do. Three days later he would announce his decision to the screaming and hair renting of his groupies.
Thankfully, he’ll eventually have to become a real candidate and debate without out scripts and in hostile environments, before he will be able to be in a position to make those types of decisions.
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 10:41 AM
I’ll let you guys in on a little secret. He’s not announcing until July because of campaign finance laws. The quarter ends then. Legally he’s sort of limited right now in what he can say and do until he officially declares and once that happens all the weird rules kick in which is why he is waiting.
Just wait until the end of July to pass final judgment. I mean for God’s sake we have 6 months until the first primary. Plenty of time to make up or change your mind. You don’t have to know tomorrow everything about every candidate and who you are going to vote for.
bj1126 on June 6, 2007 at 10:48 AM
This is the problem. First he was just being clever. Then when it was pointed out that his cleverness was viewed as lazy, he was waiting because of an obligation to some TV show he was on. Now apparently that isn’t an issue, so it now becomes financing laws.
Even if all that were true, it doesn’t stop him from making an actual commitment to run, so all the excuses, IMO, are just that. Excuses. And untenable at that.
csdeven on June 6, 2007 at 11:16 AM
So now its up to you to prove the veracity of your
Well so much for any hope of a honest rational civil dialog…….
doriangrey on June 6, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Comment pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »