George Will lowers the boom on Fred
posted at 12:01 pm on June 11, 2007 by Allahpundit
Has the backlash begun? The is-he-or-isn’t-he candidate kabuki, the uncanny sense that he’s playing “the Fred Thompson role” here like he does in his movies, the anxiety that his stature might be little more than some displaced longing for Reagan among conservatives, like a man who loses the woman he loves and then gravitates towards women who look like her — it’s all starting to pile up.
Plus, it’s nice to know I’m not the only one who doesn’t consider a southern accent metaphysical proof of strength, intelligence, and authenticity.
One does not want to be unfair to Thompson, who may have hidden depths. But ask yourself this: If he did not look like a basset hound who had just read a sad story—say, “Old Yeller”—and if he did not talk like central casting’s idea of the god Sincerity, would anyone think he ought to be entrusted with the nation’s nuclear arsenal? He is an actor, and, as a Hollywood axiom says, the key to acting is sincerity—if you can fake that, you’ve got it made…
Reagan greatly communicated ideas and agendas. What Thompson enthusiasts are smitten by, so far, is his manner. His deep-fried Southernness bears a strong resemblance to the Southwesternness of, say, Midland, Texas, and the country may have had its fill of that flavor. Thompson, a longtime lawyer-lobbyist who will run as a Washington “outsider,” lives inside the Beltway, but outside Washington, in McLean, Va.
In their haste to anoint Thompson as another Reagan, the anointers are on the verge of endorsing what Reagan’s disdainers have long argued—that Reagan was 99 percent charm and 1 percent substance. In 1968, when Reagan was 57, one of his disparagers, Norman Mailer, wrote that Reagan radiated a “very young, boyish, maybe thirteen or fourteen, freckles, cowlick, I-tripped-on-my-sneaker-lace aw shucks variety of confusion.” This style of dismissal was common then, before Reagan spent another 14 successful years in demanding executive offices and before the publication of his letters and pre-presidential broadcasts. Since then, Reagan has undergone what Alistair Cooke, speaking of someone else, called “the four stages of the highbrow treatment: first, he was derided, then ignored, then accepted, then discovered.” So far, Thompson is 99 percent charm.
Emphasis on “so far,” I guess. Exit question: Why on earth would Fred consider entering the Iowa straw poll when Rudy and McCain have already dropped out? If he holds to his plan of not entering the race until July, that’ll leave him with only one month to cut into Mitt’s lead. Anything short of a very strong second place will be spun as a disappointment and used as evidence of the Thompson bubble bursting, particularly vis-a-vis Romney, whom he’s supposed to supplant as the social conservative candidate. And what an incentive now for Mitt to really pour it on and drive a stake through the Thompson campaign’s heart by winning big in Ames.
If he does jump in, we’re essentially looking at a social-con primary in August. Awesome.
Update: Mitt really needs to drive that stake.
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 Next »
George Will . . . a man after csdeven’s heart. :)
The Ritz on June 11, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Actually, I like the idea of him showing in Iowa. Sure, it’s manadatory to finish a strong second, but what if we were to overtake Mitt? That would surely change the dynamic of everything. Granted, there is a huge risk, but there is also an incredible upside.
Oh, and csdeven showing up to bash Fred in 3, 2, 1…
wccawa on June 11, 2007 at 12:05 PM
“manadatory” = “mandatory”
“we” = “he”
Sheesh. Need coffee.
wccawa on June 11, 2007 at 12:09 PM
If Fred beats Mitt in Iowa, Mitt’s done.
Allahpundit on June 11, 2007 at 12:12 PM
By the way, that Will article is nothing but tripe. I just re-read it, and my God, the man is full of himself and nothing else. It’s like he dashed it off while sitting on the can.
wccawa on June 11, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Mitt will make a good VP, that’s about as far as he goes. To much baggage.
right2bright on June 11, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Geroge Will is a handsome man.
Sincerely,
Kramer
Metro on June 11, 2007 at 12:16 PM
You’re not. I’ve been saying this for a while. If Fred spoke with a Jersey accent he would be a non-factor.
JackStraw on June 11, 2007 at 12:17 PM
True Allah, Mitt may have made a big mistake if Fred jumps in and wins.
Bad Candy on June 11, 2007 at 12:18 PM
What baggage?
JackStraw on June 11, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Sorry, but I think you’re waaaay off base here, and I’ve been saying it all along. The accent doesn’t matter. It never did.
Bad Candy on June 11, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Channeling my best Clark Gable as Rhett Butler, “Them Sir are fighting words! I will not sit idly by and let you besmirch the good character of such a fine southern gentleman.”
besides that is the first time I have seen someone link intelligence to a southern accent. Normally IQ points are deducted for a southern accent.
LakeRuins on June 11, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Sorry, George.
FRed is NO LBJ!
normsrevenge on June 11, 2007 at 12:22 PM
George Will was not a huge Ronald Reagan fan either. Thought he was rather “dim” and not much a “hard worker”.
Google it.
As far as I’m concerned, y’all can keep George Will. I’m happy to be on the other side of a conservative dust-up as that bespectled and bow-tied “sophisticate”.
I think Ramesh over at NRO already took a bit of a claw hammer to this George Will piece.
Fred on June 11, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Really? Then can you give me a read out on all of Fred’s accomplishments and legislative tour de forces cause I’m not seeing it. I’m not talking about podcast from NRO, I mean real stuff.
JackStraw on June 11, 2007 at 12:23 PM
The NRO candidate. The defense rests.
JackStraw on June 11, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Fred owes George Will a thank you note for that column.
Slublog on June 11, 2007 at 12:24 PM
AP, I think you and George Will are the only two who feel that way- We all now southerners are authentic because we are blessed with such a heavenly accent. :)
Trooper on June 11, 2007 at 12:26 PM
I believe either Mitt Romney or Giuliani will end up with the nomination, Giuliani if he promises to place pro-lifers as judges.
Thompson is too Hollywoodish and too much like President Bush. Also, he, like Bush, cannot speak well off the cuff. Constrast that with Gingrich, who at CPAC did an excellent 20 minute speech without once looking at his notes.
Thompson would not be able to communicate conservative ideas, just as President Bush cannot. Let’s not nominate another person because he is “charming.”
januarius on June 11, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Allah – that first paragraph is SOOO astute.
Oh how I love being ahead of the curve..
Halley on June 11, 2007 at 12:27 PM
This ‘accent’ phobia is getting funny. What the hell are we after for 08? I don’t care if a candidate sounds like Arnold and spells like me, I want who is out front with the best conservative plan and can win.
Mitt, Rudy, McCain, Huckabee, Hunter….all out there stumping away. Whatever Fred!s timing plan is it is starting to wear on me a lot more then the corn-pone. I want to give him a shot but my frustration level is getting up there.
Limerick on June 11, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Rudy 2008. Not sure what else to say.
Dash on June 11, 2007 at 12:30 PM
This whole race reeks of 1980. Not because of Reagan’s win in the general, but the state of the GOP pre-primary. Does anyone remember those dark days besides me? (Not surprisingly, you may substitute Shrub for Jimmy here, as well.)
Seems to me the faithful are begging for a noticeable, tangible tilt to the right, and my gut tells me Fred is the guy to pull it off. Mitt, Rudy and that other guy are fine fellows, I’m sure, but they just do not have the potential rallying power of a Fred.
Make no mistake, I’ll support any candidate but McCain. But I DO think Fred has the potential to really take the GOP back to where it should be.
wccawa on June 11, 2007 at 12:31 PM
At this point in time the less association with have with being a legislator on the national level is a plus in my book. I want to get rid of all these AARP members dinosaurs who have homesteaded on Capitol Hill for all of my life. They don’t want to reform anything whether it be the tax code, SS, or immigration policy, they just want self generating issues to campaign on with the promise of doing something and then not delivering. I am tired of the lies and false promises and just general flip off attitude I get from the federal goverments’ union called congress.
LakeRuins on June 11, 2007 at 12:34 PM
I generally like Fred, but for some reason I’ve never bought into this bizarre Fred! mania. Nobody really knows where he is on the issues, except for taxes and Cuba, even though he writes pieces every week. I’d rather stick to the other candidates for now, even though he’s cool in my book.
Baphomet on June 11, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Honestly folks….what are our chances right now with any of the candidates, including Fred!? 20% 40%…..I’m afraid of 1984 in reverse unless we get this army on the move. The media and the dems are doing everything to keep the stink on us.
Limerick on June 11, 2007 at 12:36 PM
I am currently polling 0.0% in Iowa, with the totality of responders saying “Who?” when my name is mentioned. But, as Kucinich would say, “Hey, you can only go up from 0%!”
Nethicus on June 11, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Right now? 0%… because the election isn’t for another 17 months yet.
Hollowpoint on June 11, 2007 at 12:50 PM
George F Will. Ya know, I’m tired of these guys stealing my material! /sarc off
WOW!
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 12:51 PM
If you do not know where he stands then you aren’t paying attention.
Theworldisnotenough on June 11, 2007 at 12:54 PM
The fred? groupies start trashing George Will in 5…4…3…2…
Lighten up guys, it’s just a Presidential primary.
Peace and cheers!
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Like, oh…. immigration?
“No matter how much lipstick Washington tries to slap onto this legislative pig, it’s not going to win any beauty contests. We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders — or at least made great headway.”
Happy to oblige.
wccawa on June 11, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Except that this country will not elect Hillary. I feel it in my bones.
Conservatives have an excellent opportunity to nominate a bonafied conservative with requisite leadership experience. Then, through an intelligent campaign, the general public will get an opportunity to learn about him. I think we would see a close race, but with a support kick from disciplined conservatives, we could see just about anybody quickly overtake Hillary in the General election.
So, my take is we should focus less on finding a winner out of the gate and instead put our energy into a conservative candidate we can enthusiastically support and build into a champion.
Is this our “Rocky Balboa” moment…?
CliffHanger on June 11, 2007 at 12:59 PM
My fascination with Fred! is simple: The other candidates are soft and boring. Fred! makes everyone else look like card board.
natesnake on June 11, 2007 at 1:00 PM
You should have heard Bill Bennett interview Fred on his radio show. Fred is strongly for Border Security and pardoning Scooter Libby. It was an awesome interview.
RushBaby on June 11, 2007 at 1:00 PM
JackStraw on June 11, 2007 at 12:23 PM
Do you really what them or is this just a rhetorical question?
doriangrey on June 11, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Everyone seems to forget that he is not Ron Reagan. Fred! became an actor well after political involvement. Not vise versa.
natesnake on June 11, 2007 at 1:03 PM
What a horrible, elitist article. He honestly thinks we’re drawn to Fred! because of his acting career and his accent?!?
Could it be that the dozens of articles, radio appearences, speeches and blog postings might just have a thing to do with it? The otherwise weak candidate field right now?
People like George Will have spent WAY too much time on the East Coast dinner party circuit.
Hollowpoint on June 11, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Call me charmed. It isn’t hard to look up where he stands.
Rudy isn’t conservative. Too much closet liberalism in him.
Mitt, in my humble opinion, is not electable because he is a poser politician-Clintonesque in how he plays to the polls.
McCain? Please. He doesn’t know if he’s coming or going.
Thompson seems to be the conservative out of the group to me, and therefore, he will get my support, money, and vote.
doginblack on June 11, 2007 at 1:04 PM
Which I’ll take over the 99% regurgitated horses**t being dosed out by the Dems.
yo on June 11, 2007 at 1:04 PM
Yeah, that’s been my rap on him since day one. Especially when I found out that he was an actor on some TV show. After that I started reading up on his stuff and found him the least qualified non-candidate as a CinC. I read lots of defenses for the guy, but it’s usually explanations as to why he votes for McCain/Feingold and leaves abortion choice up to the woman. All his speeches etc are just empty rhetoric he steals from the real candidates who have experience. And Will points out his total lack of grasp on foreign issues. So, he is running off to Israel to convince some that he will automatically be qualified to be CinC.
Where freddie boy stands is where ever others tell him they need him to stand. He’s a non-candidate looking to fill a role instead of a candidate looking to lead the American people.
I doubt he’ll be able to hold up, but we’ll wait and see. He’s gonna have to answer every single point I just brought up, including a ton more from others.
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Actually, I can’t imagine screechy Hillary or B. Hussein Obama (who looks and acts like he is 18 years old) even coming close to beating Romney, Giuliani, or Thompson. It is definitely ours to lose, even with a liberal media.
januarius on June 11, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Have any more assmaking assumptions to make, there, Will? I grew up around southern accents. They don’t awe me. I’m listening to the man’s words and so far liking what I’m hearing. Simple as that.
Anwyn on June 11, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Nope. I really would like to see what gets everyone so goggle eyed over Fred. It can’t be his leadership on McCain-Feingold or his almost indistinguishable position from Rudy on abortion. It can’t be his strong executive record because he doesn’t have one. It can’t be his position on border security which is the same as most of the Republcian front runners not named John.
So what exactly generates the excitment?
JackStraw on June 11, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Apparently Mr. Will was absent during the Watergate hearings, because Fred! made some pretty big waves in those days.
Or the time he helped take down the corrupt Ray Blanton.
Or the way in which he helped Roberts get nominated, or helping with Scooters defense, or how he’s a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Visiting Fellow with the American Enterprise Institute (conservative think tanks I know, but yet more examples of the lazy journalism displayed by Will in this article).
You can see how he votes on the issues here-so I don’t think one can use that as an excuse.
What the hell is everyone so afraid of? Tell me you wouldn’t pay good money to watch Fred! eviscerate either silky, glacier or the messiah in a televised debate? It wouldn’t even be close.
I don’t understand what the hold up is with conservatives coming out for Fred!. He’s the only guy who stands a chance against whatever comes out of the Dems side.
Tman on June 11, 2007 at 1:09 PM
First, I thought his comment about Fred’s looks were funny. Though I think I remember hearing them somewhere before, so he was probably quoting someone without giving them credit. Anyways, as someone else pointed out, I don’t think that the Southern accent promotes a sound of intelligence. I live in Texas, and I know that I would scared if my doctor spoke with a southern drawl. Though, I do agree that there’s a certain amount of honesty that you tend to sense from a person with Fred’s accent. I honestly don’t understand what people are complaining about in regards to his inability to speak without notes. That doesn’t put him on the same level as Bush’s speaking abilities. He’s at least above them by quite a bit, cause he doesn’t say the wrong thing, or mis-pronounce words. Also, I don’t know who the people are that are considering Fred to be Reagan’s second coming. I am not one of them. We will never have another Reagan. All we can hope for is someone that sticks by the conservative ideas. This is exactly what Fred has been doing. I have yet to hear anything said by him that I’m disgusted by.
He believes in our countries sovereignty. This, in and of itself, is a huge issue right now, and will probably help him a lot in an election. What was the percentage of people in the US that were against the Amnesty bill? 60%? I’m just saying.
He’s a fiscal conservative. This is something we’ve been missing out on for the last 6 years. I’m not talking about war spending of course, but when you don’t veto a spending bill until it’s the Dems trying to pass a bill to micro-manage the war, that’s a problem.
Those are just two issues that I can think of off the top of my head. I really think that he has a better chance overall than Rudy and Mitt if he gets nominated. Not to say that Republicans have much of chance in ’08 considering the “not them” mentality that seems to be going around right now.
j_ehman on June 11, 2007 at 1:16 PM
I’ll admit that there is a shred of truth in what George Will is saying. But fortunately it is just a shred.
What has impressed me about Fred! isn’t just how he speaks but WHAT he is saying. His comments on immigration in particular, along with his views on national defense, taxation policy, and the role of the federal government, all sound like music to my ears.
SUBSTANTIVE music to my ears. Even if he had a voice and manner like Dennis Kucinich, I’d still be impressed.
And somebody tell Mr. Will that there’s nothing wrong with charm and charisma. In fact, in an executive, they can be absolutely vital. Many if not most of the great leaders throughout history have had the same charisma.
It is an invaluable and unteachable asset. Especially for a country at war. I don’t know why people think that Fred’s charm – or Reagan’s charm – are somehow negatives.
Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Also, Fred! was awesome when they were hunting that rogue Russian submarine.
Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 1:19 PM
His indecision: I might run. I might not. Look, I’m about to run. Nope, I’m not. Hey, everyone, I’m going to announce in July. Maybe I won’t! I’m a candidate. Nope, just kidding, I’m not. I was for abortion. Now I’m not.
We’re afraid of his superficial, Hollywoodesque behavior. He comes across as an oily, used car salesman of a politician. I find his flirtatious behavior without any substance repulsive.
Actually, he is known for being extremely ackward if he is not speaking from a prepared speech. He is much more likely to be clobbered by a Hillary in a debate than Romney or Giuliani. Just what we need: another candidate that the media can call “dumb.”
Give us Romney or Giuliani any day over Thompson.
januarius on June 11, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Smart can get you far, but charm can carry you the rest of the way.
Let’s look at the other contenders:
Romney – no national political office, governor of one of the most liberal states in the union
Guiliani – no national political office, no state political office, mayor of one of the most liberal cities in the nation
McCain – 20 years in Senate, thought all GOP would support amnesty, charm level of a horned toad
Hillary – 6 years in Senate, liberal as a hemp necklace
Obama – 2 years in Senate, liberal as a coke straw
Then we have:
Fred! – 9 years in Senate, hung like a brammer bull
Anyone saying Fred! doesn’t have the experience is intellectually dishonest. Only McCain has more experience. Just because Hillary was married to a president doesn’t make her presidential. One time I screwed a neuro-surgeon; doesn’t make me qualified to open up a brain.
natesnake on June 11, 2007 at 1:26 PM
That the many reflections Fred! has offered on the political and social stories of the day fit comfortably with mine is charming. The bases for them also fit comfortably with principles I hold dear.
Is it coincidence? Well, I’ll find out when he stops shrewdly inserting them at timely intervals to grab the spotlight and starts shrewdly inserting more direct policy philsophy and then shrewdly sprinkling in policy detail to grab the spotlight.
Hollywood still teaches charm and timing but it long ago ditched sincerity, replacing it with fawning compliment, egotism and the cynical tolerance of it. Fred’s got the first two and hasn’t shown any aspect of the last three as far as I can see.
To tell you the truth, Will’s “basset hound” and “deep-dried Southernness” remarks brings to the fore the wine glass clinking closeted-ness of the elite talking-heads who look down on anyone they think should be thrown from their bus for not matching their virtual image of a presidential candidate.
What’s most annoying, though, is Will’s clutching of the opposition’s argument “that Reagan was 99 percent charm and 1 percent substance” as his own. Should we really care about Will’s concern of the disdainers argument when it didn’t carry the day in either ’80 or ’84, unless Will thinks it’s an apt description of what Reagan was? Really, I ask you, who the f cares what Norman Mailer has to say except erudite sycophants like Will who can’t live without syndication and political talkshow spots.
Dusty on June 11, 2007 at 1:28 PM
There’s a certain amount of kindness in a southern accent. Personally, I’d much rather listen to a southern (specifically Texan) accent than that screechy Boston/New Jersey accent that makes one sound like a mobster.
And, yes, our President should be charming. After all, don’t we have to make sure the world likes us? sarcasm/
pullingmyhairout on June 11, 2007 at 1:35 PM
What PB said. He’s not only shown conservative ideas, but also an ability to get them across. That has been one of Bush’s failings, I’m afraid–bedsides a few shining, historic moments of clarity in the first term, and some good work by Tony Snow in the second, he hasn’t gotten across what he believes. Fred has shown he wants to get up there and talk about this stuff–in that crowd-pleasin’ Cohiba-conditioned rumble, no less–and that he can do it.
PS George Will criticizing someone for being a DC insider is like Rudy criticizing someone for being too New York. I grew up reading George Will when he was one of about five conservative columnists I had access too, but now he just sounds like the voice of the slightly right-tinged Beltway. Now when Will talks, I just hear Jeffrey Hart.
see-dubya on June 11, 2007 at 1:35 PM
I hold you personally responsible for the coffee I just spewed all over my keyboard and monitor.
wccawa on June 11, 2007 at 1:36 PM
It’s another calculated risk that without Rudy and McCain there votes will have to go somewhere and depending on the groupie factor, he stands a good chance of picking up quite a few.
He’s already cutting into those who support Mitt!, but like fred? better. It’s a good move, albeit reveals his confidence in his stand alone credentials as vacuous.
Yep.
Well, Mitt! must beat him in the Ames poll, but he reeeeealllly wants to get freddie boy on a debate stage where fred? will have to think on his feet and answer for his flip-flops and fakery.
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Um, what? Are you serious? Have you listened to him at all?
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree but I think you’re way off base with that analysis. Fred! definitely has the speaking skills to carry him, and he answered the questions about his first 100 days on the H&C interview after the dabtes last week with ease.
So what? No matter what the repubs put forth, the media is going to crucify them. Fred! is the only one that I think has the skin to deal with it. You are making the same mistake as Will is by ignoring his resume completely.
Tman on June 11, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Vote Fred Thompson! Fred is the man.
msipes on June 11, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Amen. In the modern television age, a leader must truly be able to … you know, lead. To communicate. To share visions and ideas.
Bush did it brilliantly in 2002-2003. Brilliantly. He both had the vision and was able to communicate it. Then … well, you know. Whatever.
No, it’s not enough to be an empty, charming suit. But frankly, its also not enough to have the right ideas, if you can’t communicate them, and can’t get people to get behind your ideas.
Reagan is now a legend because he did both. Can Fred! do it? I don’t know. We’ll see.
But he’s got potential. I like his ideas so far. If he sticks to those clearly articulated principles … and continues to show an ability to share his vision … he’ll get my vote.
I honestly don’t know how somebody like George Will – allegedly a student of history – can belittle that ability to charm and communicate. From Pericles and Leonidas to Roosevelt and Kennedy and Reagan, that magical quality of leadership is what has always made the difference.
That and great pecs. I’m assuming Mrs. Fred! will be taking that role.
Looking down your nose at “charm” is just a way to do a little elitist posturing. How gauche.
Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Yeah, I’m not sure why we should care about that. Dubya went to Harvard and Yale, was demonstrably superior in both his (still mediocre) grades and his test scores than Kerry … but the media still pretended Kerry was the “smart” one.
I’m pretty sure that the Republican could nominate Stephen Hawking, and he’d suddenly be labeled “dumb.”
And don’t underestimate the Southern thing. Just ask Clinton, Carter, and LBJ. The Democrats, ironically, can’t even win the White House without a Southern accent.
Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Possibly because they are firmly entrenched in their support for someone else who doesn’t have the same level of charm?
thirteen28 on June 11, 2007 at 1:49 PM
Oh, c’mon! Wouldn’t you want a solidly conservative president who promised to personally break Osama’s kneecaps with a sledgehammer and make ‘em sleep with the fishes, and actually did it? That would rule! They’d do presidential addresses over a giant plate of pasta and a silenced pistol sitting on the table.
Heh, it’d be great when he started shaking Lindsay Graham around and telling him to start acting like a man.
Bad Candy on June 11, 2007 at 1:49 PM
I don’t see how anyone can call Fred! nothing but charm.
Do you people have eyes in yer heads? Do you have ears?
I have listened to him and read what he’s written since before he even entertained the idea of running for Prez.
Anyone catch what Fred! said on the Mark Levin show while Libby was getting rail-roaded? He speaks what I want my leader to speak, pure and simple. The “aw shucks” that comes with is just icing on the cake.
unamused on June 11, 2007 at 1:50 PM
*takes a wide Victorian bow*
natesnake on June 11, 2007 at 1:50 PM
About Will’s column, Ramesh Ponnuru wrote
I think that applies to Will beyond this column.
see-dubya on June 11, 2007 at 1:50 PM
George Will makes me miss William Safire.
Slublog on June 11, 2007 at 1:51 PM
BC–I see your point. It’s like Lileks said about Rudy a few months back, people know “he’ll nuke ‘em if he has to.”
Why they haven’t put that on a T-shirt yet, I don’t know. Look what he’s competing against.
see-dubya on June 11, 2007 at 1:54 PM
What was it Fred told Sean Hannity last Tuesday night? Something along the lines of “It’s an honor to be insulted by some of these bozos.” So now he has one more trophy on the shelf.
bdfaith on June 11, 2007 at 1:58 PM
Oh, I like Fred, SeeDub. I’m just saying I think it silly to prefer a candidate for accent reasons. I just turned someones ‘annoying NY/NJ candidate voice’ into cool mafia badass voice. Its about style, which Fred has.
Bad Candy on June 11, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Du’ers are peeing in their pants over the thoughts that Fred will win the GOP nomination. That alone is enough for me to vote for the guy.
.
GT on June 11, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Also consider this:
Let’s say we nominate someone who’s well-known and who polls favorably against Hillary today, then what? Where does this candidate go from here? How much political capital do you expend to keep the candidate’s poll numbers from slowly eroding?
VS –
You have a candidate who’s comparitively unknown to the general public. The Dems come out of the gate hammering him as the Devil-incarnate but yet the general public remains skeptical and wants to learn more about Hillary’s opponent. I much prefer this scenario to one where our candidate’s numbers need to be protected for several reasons:
1) You can run a positive-focused campaign on your candidate that helps Americans “get to know” him. When you run an already-known candidate, you have to spend more resources on opponent-bashing and in the case of Hillary, folks are already aware of her shortcomings. Anything more from our candidate’s camp would be viewed as “piling on”.
2) As our positive message plays out and as Americans become better acquainted with our candidate, the race will naturally tighten as Hillary’s “soft” support begins to erode.
3) The Battle in Iraq – The Dems will paint any conservative as a Bush Iraq policy supporter yet we all know Hillary supported the initial call to support military action in Iraq. She and her supporters will continue to paint her recent divestment in the war effort as justified criticism of Bush’s handling of the effort. Also, she will not dare link Iraq to the GWOT. Our candidate will share his criticsm of Bush’s handling or Iraq and while outlining the mistakes that have been made, will place greater emphasis on how we adjust our tactics and strategy to achieve our objectives. Our candidate will also clearly articulate, and cite compelling examples of the links between success in Iraq and success in the GWOT. A candidate with solid leadership experience in military matters is key to his credibility.
4) Conservative platform. This is a must-have to win the Presidency. This is not the time (nor is it ever the time, honestly) for the federal government to look for more ways to take care of us. It is the time to look for ways to provide tax relief to ALL Americans while looking for ways to stop the growth of government. Who was it who said, “a government that governs less, governs best”? Law and order (no pun intended) is a conservative principle and with the immigration debate and national security at the forefront, this is an opportune time to take a tough stance on border enforcement to the extent that we will see a huge demographic voter shift away from the tepid support conservatives typically get from Hispanics, to stronger support from native and naturalized citizens of other stripes. This is perhaps the scariest scenario for the current Republican leadership right now. Regarding social issues, the Dems will play this up for all it’s worth, touting themselves as the live-and-let-live Party. Without focusing a whole lot on social issues, we’ll just add a little nuance to the discussion and outline who libs wish to protect and who they don’t give a flip about. Our candidate will protect the innocent, will bring criminals and our enemies to justice, and will appoint strict constructionist judges.
CliffHanger on June 11, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Has it occured to anyone but me that Fred’s an accomplished enough actor that he could lose the accent in a New York minute if he decided to? That wouldn’t be honest, but when did “That wouldn’t be honest” ever stop any other politician. btw, did Mitt ever find those missing hunting licenses?
bdfaith on June 11, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Find me that guy and he has my vote. If we’re talking Rudy here, frankly, as long as he takes your approach on global terrorism and immigration and taxation – and at least has a hope of appointing conservative justices – I’ll vote for him, regardless of his liberalism on some issues.
Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Blather, I wasn’t talking Rudy, see my 1:59.
Bad Candy on June 11, 2007 at 2:27 PM
The majority of Fred! supporters don’t know and don’t care who George Will is. Tim Russert, George Will and their ilk are waaaaay overrated.
I spent a week in Tennessee, Mississippi and Georgia recently. I live in California. It doesn’t get more different. The movement for Fred is real, in both places. Whether he makes it or not is up to him. However, it will not be determined by elitists.
This country is sick and tired of slick hypocritical elitist double talkers, from both sides of the political isles. It is in dire need of a ‘daddy’. Not an irrational freaky ideological preacher. No. Not. At. All. It needs a calm, polite, steady and honest one, who believes in leading from strength.
We’re so done being fooled (by both parties) and we don’t need anyone to talk down to us for another 8 years and show us how stupid and inadequate we are. Also, we need to be assured of security and stability for this country first, and then for all others.
Fred is not Ronald Reagan and we need to assess his own strengths and weaknesses. The comparison and wishing it are absurd.
It is strange how such an ‘intelligent’ George Will does the 99/1% on RR, failing to explain how silly that was all along. I guess the 1% of Reagan was the most effective. Ever. Must all have been that “magic” of his.
Slublog, you nailed it.
How silly of George Will, who has no charm, to harp on someone who’s blessed with some. Inventory on things against Fred, so far:
- has intelligent and beuatiful young wife
- is charming
- is from the South
- has Southern accent
- has been acting, weeel after he’d studied (sheesh, he’s from the South, has an accent, yet became a laywer…miracle)
- is not obsessed with getting up at 5a.m. to exercise and then work maniacally on screwing the lambs in the country
- is not obsessed with staying in the Senate forever
- his life wouldn’t end if he would never be in politics again
- doesn’t preach at us
- is not that slick
- wasn’t a mega “executive” of some sort
- doesn’t kiss ars of the media well
- doesn’t respond to M. Moore requests for debate
- smokes, possibly Cuban cigars
- has a form a latent cancer
- csdeven doesn’t like him (because he’s probably living in Utah and wants Mitt, and who knows why else…but will reluctantly vote for him anyway)
- he’s a populist, who can also reach the “rich dogs” for donations
- was a lobbyist (a first for any former Congress member)
Yep, I’m really worried. But not for Fred.
Entelechy on June 11, 2007 at 2:29 PM
So far, Will is 99% pompous ass.
forged rite on June 11, 2007 at 2:34 PM
And such a guy could give the dhimmicrats an offer they can’t refuse.
pullingmyhairout on June 11, 2007 at 2:35 PM
Oh please. You knew someone would go after some imaginary chink in the guy’s armor sooner or later, wouldn’t you?
In the first place, I don’t remember Thompson ever bragging about being an “outsider.” George has him mixed up with Elizabeth Dole, who served five presidents, has a place at the Watergate, and still tried that schtick. On the other hand, Fred! is just being himself, and if he can play himself on TV and in the movies, the worst you can say is that he’s comfortable in his own skin. As to substance, Fred! does a podcast on ABC Radio every damn day, which is enough opportunity to find out where he stands. He’s media savvy, and not afraid to use it to get the message out.
Since when does that put style ahead of substance?
manwithblackhat on June 11, 2007 at 2:39 PM
Sorry, I meant to say “Elizabeth Dole, bless her heart.”
manwithblackhat on June 11, 2007 at 2:39 PM
That’s Will, showing us that he’s stuck at the first stage. Maybe he should try to understand what he’s parroted here. there may be something for him to learn there.
taznar on June 11, 2007 at 2:41 PM
What he said!
manwithblackhat on June 11, 2007 at 2:42 PM
“Fred, did you read the non-complimentary article George Will wrote about you recently?”
“Naah, but I heard about that little snooty twit before. He’s good at writing about sports, though”.
Entelechy on June 11, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Newt is still # 1 in my book. However, I would take Fred over any of the other guys, Republican or Dhimmicrat.
4shoes on June 11, 2007 at 2:45 PM
I don’t know- as far as I can remember he’s played pretty much the same character with the same accent in all his roles. It’s been said that he just plays himself for the most part.
He might consider toning it down a bit if campaigning on the coasts, but as a Minnesotan I’ll take a southern accent over a grating east coast accent any day.
Hollowpoint on June 11, 2007 at 2:49 PM
National Review Online has something to say about Will who took Fred!’s context on immigration out of context.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGMxN2NiMmE3MmU3NzJiNWRiYTg2NzE3OGEyYTgzOTg=
Kokonut on June 11, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Bad Candy, not only style but of substance, too.
Kokonut on June 11, 2007 at 2:55 PM
He may not end up being great Mr. Will, but why shoot him in the foot before we get a chance to find out. You trippin’ dog.
tomas on June 11, 2007 at 3:07 PM
I do have one question on that: is his wife an asset or a problem?
Can a guy with a hot wife like that win the Presidency? Or does she cost him a lot of votes?
I really don’t know. Thoughts?
Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 3:23 PM
PB: I say it helps; my mom and my wife disagree.
see-dubya on June 11, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Interesting… Nice link TMan, where’d you find a link from an alternate Universe where Fred had a previous political job? He’s just an Actor… it’s not like he was a Senator, has a past in Politics and has an 86 lifetime rating from the ACU. He’s all hype you see…
George Will and Allahpundit both wouldn’t lie to me, so Fred Thompson couldn’t have been a Senator with prior Political experience, a researchable track record, and known political leanings… He’s “just an actor”… or so I’m told.
At least there aren’t any other Senators who think that job gives them any experience or credibility in a Presidential race… so picking on Fred doesn’t have any backlash.
gekkobear on June 11, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Professor, honora lectured us on focusing too much on looks when it comes to Hillary. The left (thus most media), based on their superiority on topic, could never hold this against him. The right, once whoever is nominated on their side, will vote for Hillary?
The men will see it as a positive. The strong women, ditto. The bleeding feminists will vote for the Glacier, regardless. When it comes to glamour there was Jackie and Mrs. Reagan. I think this lady wants to be herself and we don’t know enough about her, yet.
I don’t know how all this adds up mathematically. I only know that he would never have considered entering this race, if she wouldn’t have supported the decision 100%.
To sum it up – it will not matter who the first lady will be.
p.s. Entelechy, how do you speel ‘beautiful’?
Entelechy on June 11, 2007 at 3:36 PM
According to “On the Issues” freddie boy is a moderate that ranks in the exact same spot as Mitt!. For contrast Reagan and Newt are true conservatives.
fred? has some serious problems because he has zero experience in an executive role, foreign policy, or any real leadership abilities. Mitt! is rated in the exact same spot, but has all those experiences and a track record of success in leading and more importantly, getting other leaders to follow him.
fred? is like a press secretary. He studies what others tell him to think and say, and then he just regurgitates those talking points to others.
I don’t see how anyone can seriously think this guy has one iota of any qualifications to be the most powerful executive on the face of the planet. fred?, and the entire United States of America, would be better off if fred? the faker loaded up his fake red pickup truck and moved to South Carolina to run against that sissy Graham for his senate seat. Then he would be in a position that is consummate with his bloviating skills. In the senate, you can used prepared speeches and you don’t have to answer tough questions. Perfect for freddie boy. Kinda like acting.
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 3:43 PM
Ok, Congressional experience isn’t an executive role, and doesn’t promote leadership abilites… fair enough. So Fred is in the same boat as Hillary, John Edwards, Obama, McCain, Ron Paul, and others in his limitations… or, in other words, his qualifications match most of the field.
Do you really think Guiliani, Bloomberg, and Richardson are the only valid candidates? Aren’t all the rest of both party’s candidates running on solely Congressperson credentials?
gekkobear on June 11, 2007 at 3:49 PM
Dearest csdeven, do you play your record on a gramophone? It’s a little screechy and it tends to repeat the tune.
We don’t like your boy either but we don’t consume so much energy and hate on him. And, we’ll vote for him if he gets nominated. Regards,
Entelechy on June 11, 2007 at 3:49 PM
[Professor Blather on June 11, 2007 at 3:23 PM]
As a First Lady, Thompson will be swimming against the rather cardboard cut out societal view of hot women that has taken hold after Kennedy and it will be additionally difficult since she would represent a Republican Admin.
I don’t like to say it but one has to take reality as it is. First impressions count and I’d guess the first six months will determine the answer to you question.
Dusty on June 11, 2007 at 3:54 PM
csdeven, go read Ed’s post responding to Will. Your sneering about Fred’s stint in Hollywood representing his credentials falls on deaf ears here.
Dusty on June 11, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Who cares what George Will writes and says?
Phil Byler on June 11, 2007 at 4:01 PM
I add Mitt! in with them. I honestly know nothing about Bloomberg. I thought Richardson would be the one bright spot on the dem side that I could live with if our guy lost, but after hearing him in the debates, the guy has no credibility at all.
That leaves Rudy and Mitt!. Between Rudy and Mitt! I like Mitt! best because he has had much success in business, leadership, executive experience, and is articulate and sharp. He is the only candidate that is communicating a comprehensive approach to his leadership of the country. He isn’t resting on one or two issues. He has a three legged stool approach to governance. Newt is the only guy I prefer over Mitt!, but he has more baggage than Mitt!, so I don’t see him getting the nomination if he runs.
freds? negatives have become so obvious that the fred?heads are now trying to give him credibility by using his wifes positives. THAT is epitome desperation.
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 4:24 PM
I read Ed’s comments on fred? and he is trying to compare apples to oranges. Reagan was an old school actor. fred? is a genuine faker. There is much more but the most glaring mistake in comparing a talking head like fred? to Ronald Reagan is that Ronny had experience. fred? has none. He cannot speak from experience. All he can do is stand on the shoulders of Ron and try to sound like him. freds? problem is that when he is asked to stand on his own, he is going to have to climb down off of Ronnie’s shoulders and stand on his own. In a speech in orange county, he took credit for some comments that Ron made in a speech years ago. I have ask the fred?heads several times if they could quantify his remark, but I have heard nothing yet. If it is true that fred? cannot prove that discussion with Ron ever happened, he is revealed as a pandering liar. And again, just like his pickup truck fakery, he is faking out his supporters. This is inexcusable.
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I don’t hate fred?. I just don’t trust him. He lies to his supporters and in my eyes, that is just unconscionable. He has to start doing rather than talking.
csdeven on June 11, 2007 at 4:36 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »