Video: Hatchet job on Fred; Update: Fred rips Dems over lobbyist attacks
posted at 5:40 pm on June 27, 2007 by Bryan
Here’s the video, which could have come from any number of sources (more on the possible source below), and attacks Fred Thompson as “pro-choice.”
The editing is extremely tight to the most damning phrases and words, which is a tell that the editor is up to something nefarious. If Fred is really so pro-choice, why not let him finish a sentence saying so? All we really get in the way of substance is Fred talking about federalism and Fred opposing “criminalizing” “young women” who seek abortions. If Fred is indeed pro-choice, this video does not make a good case that he is. It only makes a good case that the editor is being dishonest with his audience.
The video finishes with a stat that’s a bald-faced lie.
Let’s go to the NRLC site and see about this 33% record. Of the three votes cast, only one concerns abortion, and Fred voted with right-to-life on that. The other two concerned McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform, and Fred voted poorly on that. In fact, perusing the NRLC site, Fred’s voting record is right down the line on abortion, but also wrong down the line on CFR. If Fred’s opponents need a weakness to exploit with conservatives, there it is: McCain-Feingold, which is very unpopular with conservatives but evidently pretty popular with Fred.
But the editors didn’t exploit that weakness, did they? Instead, they chose a dishonest attack on Fred as “pro-choice” and left him alone on McCain-Feingold.
Which unmasks the man behind the video, doesn’t it.
And I’d have gotten away with it, if it hadn’t been for those meddling bloggers…
(h/t Conservathink on the NRLC links)
Update (AP): Might as well tuck this in here since we’ve got a Fred thread going. If the AP-assisted talking points memo issued by the Democrats the other day was a political Pearl Harbor, here’s the equivalent of a Doolittle Raid. Complaining about being attacked because he’s not in the race yet is weak, but he atones with his last line.
He’s not interested in skirmishing with the Dems yet anyway. For the moment, he’s after Rudy.
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 »
Nice catch.
see-dubya on June 27, 2007 at 5:48 PM
If we lose our country, all other choices are moot.
profitsbeard on June 27, 2007 at 5:49 PM
Fred’s position has been consistent as a “strict Constitutionalist,” which would be enough to tank Roe v Wade anyway. Most of the states would outlaw abortion, especially after the first trimester. Fred’s opponents know that. All in all, this smear ad is not convincing to those who know the history of Senator Thompson’s position.
Fear the Fred!
manwithblackhat on June 27, 2007 at 5:51 PM
Reminds me of the saying: “If you are busy talking (interrupting), then you can’t be listening.” Let the man speak.
It would be nice if whoever put that little hit piece together knew something about sound engineering. It helps your cause if you can actually understand what Fred! is saying. (unless it was just my computer.)
Mallard T. Drake on June 27, 2007 at 5:51 PM
nice catch indeed.
shooter on June 27, 2007 at 5:56 PM
The problem is not in your set.
manwithblackhat on June 27, 2007 at 5:58 PM
a) what a poor quality hack job. it really is terrible.
b) did they take that picture right after McCain bit off a constituent’s ear? “I’ll give you shamnesty! Rrrr!”
Mephistefales on June 27, 2007 at 5:58 PM
That picture scared me a little. Hey AP, explain to me why McCain-Feingold is so unpopular, other than the 2 names on the bill.
BadgerHawk on June 27, 2007 at 6:01 PM
I’m not going to vote for Fred if he’s only got 33% of the vote.
Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.
Nethicus on June 27, 2007 at 6:01 PM
You guys are in some pretty strong denial. Fred was no more or less pro-choice than Romney and any honest review of the record will demonstrate this as will the debates if and when Fred ever gets around to actually being a candidate. And this from a guy from Tenn., not exactly a blue state. Trying to pretend a divorced, trophy wife having DC insider is now Mr Family Values conservative is kinda stupid.
It’s a 3rd or 4th tier issue for me and won’t be a deciding issue on who I vote for. But you all should at least be honest to the facts and then argue the merits of the candidtates. Pretending Fred is what you want him to be other than what he is is not a strong debating position.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 6:01 PM
Abortion isn’t a big issue for me personally though judges who will overturn Roe are.
My question to people who do care deeply about this is, is any one on the pro-life side talking about arresting women who have abortions?
I’ve never heard that and doubt it’s a mainstream pro-life position. It does sound like a lefty scare tactic however.
Drew on June 27, 2007 at 6:02 PM
Rut Roah
heatherrc77 on June 27, 2007 at 6:04 PM
Re-read the post, JackStraw. I didn’t say and don’t contend that Fred was never pro-choice. I looked at the video and then looked at the votes it cited, then looked at related votes cited on the same site.
If you insist in searching for denial, try Egypt. You won’t find any here.
Bryan on June 27, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Ok come on, Bryan. This site has become a Fred cheerleading section. Any questioning of The Fred here has become apostasy.
Fred is not the great Reagan conservative everyone here claims him to be. In fact, he himself called himself a Barry Goldwater conservative which is fine by me.
You called the piece a hatchet job not me. It wasn’t. It was at worst a piece more accurate of his actual record than the puffery he gets around here. If Fred is so tender that he can’t get in the race and have his record probed like every other Republican candidate then he is not tough enough to take on any Dem in the actual election.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 6:16 PM
It is a hatchet job, based on the editing. That’s why I called it one.
Or do you think clipping sentences and then conflating votes on CFR with abortion is an honest, above board tactic?
Bryan on June 27, 2007 at 6:19 PM
Federalism works.
For social issues that no one will ever agree on, it should be left up to the States. In America today you will never have 100% or even 80% agreement on abortion. Let the States (i.e the people that live there) decide what type of morals they want.
I am 100% pro-life. I would vote in my local and state elections for pro-life canidates. In fact at a local level I would say 80% of the people would vote this way. NIMBY would work for us in this case. There would only be a couple pro-choice states in the USA, if this was kicked back to the states; and in those states only some cities. With the ease of transportation today it is not an issue.
unseen on June 27, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Thanks for the linkage, Bryan.
The increase in site traffic is much appreciated!
Damian G. on June 27, 2007 at 6:24 PM
This is the best they can do against him? If so he’s in good shape as far as I can tell.
Dash on June 27, 2007 at 6:25 PM
It’s not the issues we don’t want to debate, it’s the mischaracterization of Fred’s position to fit a really negative and skewed view. You’re entitled to have and hold that opinion, but don’t think that someone won’t challenge you on it.
I’m for Fred. He’s the only candidate I perceive with a chance to win it all from the GOP side. I respect that you don’t think that way. All I ask is that you respect that I and others like me do.
Tennman on June 27, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Bryan, I know what you meant. It was not the most artfully done piece.
But calling it a hatchet job implies that they are twisting Fred’s record and his views. They aren’t. In fact, one could make a pretty strong case that Fred himself is the one who is guilty of trying to hide or rewrite his record.
I guarantee you once Fred gets into the race and he is subjected to the same scrutiny every real candidate has been for months, lots of this stuff will come out. As I said, it’s not a deciding point on a candidate for me. But pretending you are want you aren’t and letting people defend you for a record you don’t have is deceptive.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Of course it will. And his votes on CFR, which I point out in this very post and haven’t seen discussed anywhere else, will be a big problem for him that he’ll have to explain in some way. That’s what campaigns are for.
But this video is a dishonest hatchet job.
Bryan on June 27, 2007 at 6:31 PM
Are you saying Fred wasn’t pro-choice? Your fight is with Fred, not me. He was.
And if and when Fred actually has to debate, it will be shown.
Yes, I know. I’m not against him. I just like people to stand behind their records and defend them not sit on the sidelines and have their record made for them.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 6:35 PM
nice crotch
jummy on June 27, 2007 at 6:37 PM
It’s hard to tell when the hand doing the cutting and pasting is undergoing such severe DTs, but it sounds like the clips may have been talking about a federal law criminalizing abortion. That’s almost (but not quite) as stupid an idea as Roe v. Wade.
As far as who’s behind it, McCain doesn’t make any sense. Thompson is the least of his problems. Giuliani supporters would be playing with fire by bringing up any other candidate’s abortion views. It’s still too early for the DNC to be getting this involved. So all that leaves are the people who are so batshit crazy they don’t need a reason to do anything – The One Man Who Can Save The Universe crowd.
In a way, though, it’s actually a relief to know that all those Ron Paul out there have suddenly become fanatic proponents of expanding the scope of the federal government. It always struck me as kind of disrespectful for people to wrap their joints in the Constitution.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 6:38 PM
If clever editing is a sign of a hatchet job, what’s the insinuation–without anything like sufficient proof–that McCain is behind the smear job?
rho on June 27, 2007 at 6:39 PM
I hope they do more of this, because if anything this makes Fred! more appealing to independents who were leaning democrat.
What Fred! has done during his tenure in Washington is vote on a strictly federalist line, even if it went against his personal feelings about the issue. He has stated so on many occasions.
We hashed this yesterday over at Jeff G’s place, and I brought up this article Fred! wrote in response to Ramesh Ponnuru’s first hit piece at Fred!.
“A Response to Ramesh Ponnuru”
Tman on June 27, 2007 at 6:40 PM
Unfortunately for the editor of this program actions do speak louder than words. I haven’t made up my mind on Fred yet as I just don’t know enough about him, but, he’s definitely on the list.
FireDrake on June 27, 2007 at 6:44 PM
“The McCain Mutiny”
JayHaw Phrenzie on June 27, 2007 at 6:45 PM
I don’t have to say it. His voting record speaks for itself. 100 percent pro life. His position is also 100 percent Federalist. He also said the worst decision on record by the SCOTUS is Roe v. Wade.
Those are the issues. Those are the facts. Your statement is a conclusion based upon a sentence captured in 1994. The fruit of the tree tells you of its essence.
So you haven’t read his position papers or heard is radio broadcasts. Your problem is with his timing. He’s not in the mud with all the other little piggies. Yet he’s ahead of them in the polls now. What a horrid strategy!
Tennman on June 27, 2007 at 6:46 PM
I prefer the term FREDeralism.
Actually, there’s no real disagreement in America on the issue of abortion.
If you ask the question: “Should abortion be allowed in the case of rape, incest or to save the live of the mother?” Over 80% of the people will say yes.
If you ask the question: “Should abortion be allowed as a form of birth control?” Over 80% of the people will say no.
If the Supreme Court quit making up its own Constitutional Amendments, by far the vast majority of the States would fall comfortably inside that zone. A few would end up nearer one side than the other…
But the millions of voters in the craziest state in the Union are certain to make decisions showing more common sense than nine old men in dresses have shown in the past 200 years.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 6:47 PM
So does Romneys. There are your statemtents and then the facts. If Romney is a flip flopper, so is Fred.
Oh please. My problem is that he sits on the sidelines and has people like you try to invent a record and a persona that he just doesn’t have. If he doesn’t have the balls to open himself up to the scrutiny that every other candidate has then I think less of him. I could give a rip what a guy who sits on the sidelines and sends in position papers or NRO crafted radio pieces says. Find one serious Republican candidate who doesn’t know say we need to fight jihadists, cut spending, yada, yada, be a conservative. It’s primary time.
I don’t want another artful politician. I want someone who is at least strong enough to stand up to the scrutiny of the America voters because I want him strong enough to stand up to our enemies. Get in the game, fight for what you do and have believed in or just go away. I’m sick of artful politicians.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 6:55 PM
I’m getting a little tired of people whining that they don’t know where Fred! stands on the issues. I mean he outlines his position on the issues ON A FARKING RADIO SHOW a few times a week. The only reasonable excuse people have for not knowing where he stands is they are deaf and blind.
Tman on June 27, 2007 at 6:55 PM
No, no. There are some very serious questions here. I saw this video that a meth addict spliced together, and I think it raises some very serious points that need to be addressed…
Ghahah. Sorry, I can’t even TYPE that with a straight face!
logis on June 27, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Please tell me when I ever said one negative thing about Romney. I do not have a problem with Mitt’s stand on abortion. I was once pro choice. I then saw firsthand what it did to people I know. I also examined my conscience and the facts and came to the conclusion that I am pro life. I’m not anti-mother or anti-this or anti-that. I just want the killing to stop.
Their respective records speak for themselves.
Tennman on June 27, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Frederalism! That’s a good one, logis.
JackStraw – If you’re sick of artful politicians than you better go with Ron Paul or someone like Tanc. You’re not gonna find anyone but artful politicians in the mainstream GOP today.
I’ve renounced the GOP and my 2 wasted votes for GWB, CEO of Shamnesty International. I’m going Constitution Party myself. I might vote for Fred, just because I’d like to see him chew up Pelosi and Co. for breakfast, but it has nothing to do with his Republican membership.
sleestak on June 27, 2007 at 7:04 PM
I think the line about “not even in the race yet” was more a dig on the other Repubs as to say, “I’m not even it yet and the Dems are more worried about me than you schmos.”
Jim-Rose on June 27, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Tman, you may have noticed a tendency for politicians to say one thing and do another? Fred has a very shallow voting record, and as an actor he’s quite capable of sounding authentic. Maybe that’s good enough for some.
rho on June 27, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Indeed. And its time Fred got in the race and actually defended his record as opposed to saying what he believes today and getting a pass on the past as he does here and many other places.
On social values, he is no more conservative than Rudy. It doesn’t matter to me. Those aren’t my voting issues for President. But I will say again, the video of Fred wasn’t a hit piece so much as it was a poorly done piece of his actual record. Regardless of what he claims today, he was pro-choice. It doesn’t matter to me, I can see it matters to many who pretend that wasn’t the case.
Odd.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 7:07 PM
I have, and that’s why I am so intrigued by Fred!. One thing that he was known for in Tennessee during his tenure was being a guy who would without fail do what he actually said he would do. He said he would serve two terms and leave. He did, despite people pleading for him to stay on. He said if elected he would vote on a strictly federalist line. His voting record speaks for itself.
He is the antithesis of what we’ve come to settle for in a politician. He has faults, and we will seem them once he gets in full bore, but this is not one of them.
Those looking for a weakness in Fred involving not doing what he says he would do are in for a major disappointment.
Tman on June 27, 2007 at 7:14 PM
Fred Speaks the truth in common sense… I’m a non-christian conservative, I think the abortion fight is over. let’s talk about more pressing issues…
they’re not hurting his credibility with me one bit, I didn’t hear anything in that video that said anything but, not putting little girls and their parents in jail. and I agree…
Kaptain Amerika on June 27, 2007 at 7:15 PM
Way ahead of you. I have been an independent for years although I almost always end up voting for Republicans under the lesser of two evils scenario. But I do agree that both parties suffer from a lack of candidness and honesty.
Truthfully, I blame the parties as much as I blame the candidates. The primaries on both sides represent a very small sliver of the American public and candidates either sit on the sidelines as long as possible (Fred, Gore) or twist themselves into people they aren’t to become acceptable to the very rigid and narrow demands of the primary voters. If you don’t agree, explain why Congress and the President now has the worst aproval rating in history. We demand frauds and thats what we get.
On balance, I give more credit to people who are at least willing to open themselves up to scrutiny than those who hide for political calculation. Fred is in the latter camp.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 7:21 PM
fred? is a flip-flopper. In 1994 he supported abortion, and now he’s pro-life. What a fake.
And it ain’t just the dems exposing his lies. Now freddie boy is whining about the dems attacking him like he’s a candidate when he’s been reaping the benefits of ignorant people who answer polls as if fred? is a candidate.
This guy is a real piece of work. C’mon freddie boy, get into the fray. Or do I has ta call yer momma and splain to her what a bad boy you been?
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 7:23 PM
CS,
Your link shows that he put an “x” next to all the general principles or specific proposals he supported concerning abortion. How is this pro-choice?
This guy is a real piece of work. C’mon freddie boy, get into the fray. Or do I has ta call yer momma and splain to her what a bad boy you been?
And you complain that people use ad hominem. Jesus man, do you even read what you type?
Tman on June 27, 2007 at 7:29 PM
He is not a troll though.
Sammy316 on June 27, 2007 at 7:45 PM
I’m a Christian conservative and I couldn’t agree with you more.
BadgerHawk on June 27, 2007 at 7:51 PM
I am conservative, religiously floating somewhere in the middle of you two, and I absolutely concur 100%.
Sammy316 on June 27, 2007 at 8:00 PM
LOL. Good sleuthing, Bryan.
frankj on June 27, 2007 at 8:00 PM
Excellent. Then religion and abortion will no longer be issues in the Republican primary. We will hear no more question of Rudy or Mitt on these topics.
Deal. Now when you can just get around to convincing the rest of your bretheren of this you will expand, not contract, the party again.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 8:01 PM
logis on June 27, 2007 at 6:47 PM
Yes some where in between That’s the point. This is not a one size fits all issue. The same could be said for healthcare, taxes, etc.
All of these things should be left to the States. The Federal gov can not even handle the responsibility it has now (immigration,passports, port security, inspection of forgien goods(China),) The only hope to save this country is to have less power in Washington. The more people involved in a subject the less likely you are to find agreement and the less likely you are to get anything done. This is why our government can not get anything finished. Give the power to the States and the People and let us live in peace and FREEDOM!
unseen on June 27, 2007 at 8:07 PM
I point out the attacks on people here. I don’t care what anybody says about a politician. fred? deserves to be skewered because he’s a lying coward, and I for one am not giving him a pass on it.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 8:08 PM
I think maybe Jack Straw and csdeven are either clones of each other or one person with two ID’s. Or, maybe they feed off each other, who knows.
The argument that Fred has to announce to get into the ‘fray’ with the rest of the candidates is moot since he’s the target of poorly thought out and edited hit pieces before any announcement is made. If and when he announces, what’s going to change? There will still be hit pieces, he will still use the internet to get his message out and those who honestly want to know what his message is will read what he writes. The continual bashing of the guy for not announcing is disingenuous and, to be honest, a little worn at this point.
Oh, how could I forget……by announcing his candidacy, he can then be included in the pointless cattle drive that’s passing as a ‘debate’ these days. *Yawn*
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 8:09 PM
Because he said all abortion should be legal in the first trimester.
Right from the horses a$$ mouth.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 8:12 PM
You can tell a lot about somebody based on how they’re criticized. Go Phred!
Mojave Mark on June 27, 2007 at 8:13 PM
I think you are full of balls. Thats the MM approved slur so we will go with that. But you know what I really mean.
Yes, you are very brave for agreeing with 99% of the HA crowd who thinks Fred is a god without knowing a thing about him other than his media approved radio addresses and ignoring his actual record. I have no idea who csdeven is and I don’t care. I have this funny habit of actually reading and listening to the candidates and following their records.
Don’t be a balls. If you want to debate me on a subject come with facts not stupid attacks designed to get the amen chorus to pat you on the back. I mean you could be a balls, who knows?
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 8:18 PM
fred is too scared to debate anyone because he is incapable of doing so. All you have to do is watch the Leno, Robinson, and the London Q&A, and you’ll see just how poorly fred? speaks off the cuff. As far as I’m concerned THAT is why he refuses to get in.
I don’t buy his pre-prepared speeches and softball interviews as an indication of what he can defend as a candidate in a real debate.
He doesn’t respect me and I sure as #ell am not going to give him one ounce of respect in return.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 8:22 PM
Bryan
Any information you can provide to us about Fred Thompson’s CFR votes/connections would be really appreciated. Your right, that is something that I can’t find anyone else talking about and it is the major obstacle that is keeping me from getting behind Senator Thompson at this time. We do not need another NAU driven president. When George P. Bush was in Fort Worth, Texas, earlier this month, he was quietly encouraging big donors in Texas to contribute to Senator Thompson. I am seeing “red flags” that bother me.
I know that the Bracewell & Guiliani law firm is a major player in pushing the Trans Texas Corridor here in Texas and has our pretty boy Rino governor in their corner. Our state legislature has been passing legislation using “U.S. Senate” tactics that we don’t know about until after the fact. It’s nasty down here right now. As you may be able to tell I’m not on Rudy Guliani’s bandwagon.
Do you know if Romney is part of this cabal?
maxine on June 27, 2007 at 8:26 PM
Yeah, freds? in good company. Carter, Pelosi, Kennedy, BUSH, etc….
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 8:27 PM
As far as fred? lobbying for Roberts…big deal. Bush went to a professional lobbyist. And lobbyists don’t care who their client is as long as they get paid. Just ask the folks who he lobbied for that wanted to screw the American people out of the money they were due.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Wow, seems that I pushed someone’s hot button.
Jack Straw, I have no idea what you’re talking about with all the ‘ball’ analogies. My apologies for not being current in my knowledge of the latest insults.
Cs, as we’ve discussed previously, I’m really not too concerned about how well Fred does in a cattle drive style debate. Intelligence, personal integrity and political honesty aren’t necessarily the goal of those who organize the debates. In my opinion, at this point at least, the debates are designed entirely to make every republican candidate look bad. Perhaps later in the campaign they will provide more substance.
That being said, I certainly don’t fault you for your strong opinion regarding Fred, I simply disagree with your tactics at times. I am the last person who will try to insist that my initial reaction to a politician is accurate, since I voted twice for George Bush only to find out I was effectively snookered.
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 8:30 PM
Based on that, it’s starting to look like Thompson is going to completely tank in the retarded third-grader demographic. For some reason, those guys seem to have it in for him something fierce!
As incredibly idiotic as it’s all been up to this point, only one of the claims has panned out so far: Thompson seems too good to be true. And as the “criticisms” mount, that seems to be a self-fulfilling prophesy.
On the bright side though, as flaws go, I guess that’s about the best one it’s possible to have.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 8:31 PM
Don’t feel too awfully bad about that. This guy does that a lot. He makes up his own bizarre definitions for words and then he tries to blame EVERYONE ELSE for not speaking his secret language.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 8:38 PM
Yea, I dislike dishonest poseurs who play to the audience with made up stuff. I’m funny that way.
No need to apologize for that. MM got bleeped on TV for using the word balls when she meant the person she was describing was gutless. Since MM thinks that word is ok and this is her blog, I was using that as a universal term. When you’re ready to apologize for calling me a sockpuppet or a troll, that will be even more interesting. Passive aggression is for tots.
I hope that clears things up. And when you get a chance to tell me why a guy who explicitly ran against Jerry Falwell, was pro-choice in his views, is more acceptable than Rudy or Mitt to the religious, anti-choice primary voters, I’ll be waiting.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 8:44 PM
I’m going to say this as simply as I know how, anymore.
I LIKE the man. I trust him more than ANYONE else out there right now. Don’t care about this supposed flip-flop. Abortion is FAR from our most important issue right now. And if he flipped to pro-life from pro-abortion, more’s the better… Better than the other way around. Hell, even MITT’s not solid on that issue.
I will not accept from ANYONE (even you, CS, love you tho I do) this ridiculous view of ANY Fred supporter as ignorant, easily swayed, blind…etc. It’s just simply not true, and having to re-iterate it 50 times is just plain stupid and pointless.
tickleddragon on June 27, 2007 at 8:45 PM
I’ll gladly apologize for calling you a sock puppet or a troll when I actually call you a sockpuppet or troll.
And please show me where I have EVER said or implied that Fred is more acceptable than Rudy or Mitt. I’ll be waiting.
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 8:48 PM
Well said……applause
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 8:53 PM
I do it a lot? Jesus, you guys prove my point everytime you open your mouth. I post here every now and then but I come out against Fred and I do “this” a lot. Maybe you would like to provide some proof of your claim that I speak a secret language? Or maybe you would like to just prove you’re full of balls and yet another Fred groupie.
You’re embarassing and another great example of why so many people have left the party.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 8:54 PM
Did you see the interview where he was asked the “softball” question: “As President, would you have pardoned Scooter Libby?”
I’m at least as big a FRED! fan as you are, but even I was sitting there thinking OK, here’s where the mealy-mouthing starts.
…But then Thompson stated in absolutely no uncertain terms that yes, of course he would have pardoned Libby. Unlike SOME leaders “pardons for dollars” programs, this is exactly the sort of political witch hunt the executive pardon was DESIGNED for.
Did he have anything to gain by standing up on this issue? Hell no; no one on earth can do anything about this besides George Bush, and he’s sitting on his thumbs. Thompson said it because it was RIGHT – period.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 8:55 PM
Now you have three choices, apologize, admit you’re a liar or just say you have no idea what a sockpuppet is. I could care less. In any case, the Mets are playing and I am bored with arguing with people who have no facts.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Enjoy the game.
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 9:02 PM
Yeah, we KNOW: Ron Paul is a juggernaut and we all have to change our ways or he won’t save the Party for us…
Give it a rest already. We’ve heard the same exact thing a trillion times now. Sorry, but I see absolutely no reason to try and play along with this silly fiction that any two liberaltarians are seperate individuals. There’s simply no point to it.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 9:04 PM
CS and Straw,
I’m want to try and determine what your specific issues are with Fred. And I value any opinion that remains logically and factually based upon a reasonable premise. I personally don’t know you from Adam, and I’m not interested in your “feelings” about him.
From what I can tell JS is saying that Fred is too vague and is cowardly for not declaring himself a candidate. Does this mean that once he does you will drop that argument? And if you answered “yes” to that, is there a specific issue you are wanting to know about once he does?
csdeven appears to believe Fred is a flipper (and a liar, as well as cowardly for not declaring). My argument against this would be that Fred has consistently voted in favor of states rights regardless of the issue. You can say he’s not pro-life 100%, nor pro-choice 100%, but his voting record shows that he respects the will of the Tenneseans he represented, and never voted against what he said he would do when we elected him.
Then you say he’s a liar. I would ask you what he specifically lied about, and request that it contain a link to the specific lie in question. The survey you linked too shows that he never lied. Fred above all stated that Congress should leave this issue to be decided by the individual states, which is essentially on par with the pro-life position, and voted against any federal funding or regulation concerning abortion.
Do you have something else besides abortion that he lied about?
Tman on June 27, 2007 at 9:05 PM
No, he evolved. What’s the difference? A common thread. Both the 1994 statements (in full context as opposed to what Bryan rightly calls a hatchet job), and his interviews from this year, have one thing in common. That’s the idea that the Founding Fathers had certain things in mind when framing the Constitution, that need to be preserved, that whatever that document does not assign to the Federal government, should rightly be assigned to the several States. It was that provision that has carried the man from Tennessee, from an essentially laissez-faire position on abortion, to one that recognizes Roe v Wade as “bad law.”
Such a transformation is a far cry from “flip-flopping,” which implies no underlying principle at all.
manwithblackhat on June 27, 2007 at 9:15 PM
It’s gonna sound like BS, and of course, I don’t much care, but I never doubted that he’d say yes.
tickleddragon on June 27, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Abortion is a second or third tier issue for me, but conservative judges (who might incidently overturn Roe) is at the top.
petefrt on June 27, 2007 at 9:37 PM
Well, good for you. And I’ll know better next time myself.
BTW, that doesn’t sound like BS at all. We’re all learning. It’s just that some of us learn a bit faster than others.
…And then of course there are those who learn much, much more slowly.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 9:42 PM
I don’t think the discussion here is so much about abortion, per sey, as it is about honesty and the conception people have of the candidates (or potential candidates). Three people can review the same voting record and come up with three completely different evaluations based on their own personal agenda and opinions. A lot of it is not done consciously, although some take a perception and run with it. People are going to see what they want to see and no amount of discussion is going to change that. I think the problem starts when those who disagree choose to belittle, name call and accuse. That’s totally pointless and does nothing but divide the conservatives who need to stay united in their ideals right now. We don’t all have to vote for the same person, but a little respect for each other would be nice.
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 9:43 PM
Fred does it for me. Totally.
The only negative thing I consistently see in these threads about Fred is that he is too scared to enter the race becasue he can’t stand up to scruntiny. I don’t know how old most of the posters who say this are… but I would like to point out that today is the 27th of June 2007.
This is a ludicrously early time for a run in ’08.
If you don’t think that 15 months is enough time to fully vet a presidential nominee, then I would suggest you turn off the T.V., unplug the radio (but not the computer… HA needs daily support after all), and enjoy a beautiful summer.
VolMagic on June 27, 2007 at 9:50 PM
As I said earler, I don’t think Fred should be criticized for missing the cattle call style debates designed to make every republican candidate look bad. For example, during the last debate, the candidates were asked if they believe in Evolution. WHAT???? What kind of question is that for a presidential debate? The longer Fred holds off on his announcement, the longer he can avoid the travesty being passed off as political debate.
speed911 on June 27, 2007 at 9:56 PM
Damn rain delays.
I’m not sure how I could be more clear or you could misstate would I said more. Fred isn’t being cowardly for not declaring and being a candidate, he is being a typical politician and you and most of HA are eating it up and asking for seconds. His current statements are not in sync with what he has said in the past and he knows it. He is doing his best to stay below the radar as long as he can so he can get elected. Is that what you want? Do you know what he has run on in the past? Do you care? Are you willing to assume that he has “evolved” but every other candidate is a liar or a flip flopper?
The burden isn’t on me to tell you why I don’t support him now or won’t in the future. It’s on you to tell me why his past statements and the positions he ran on, in the heart of the bible belt, mean nothing while the candidates who get called flip floppers do. What exactly in his past record excites you?
Can you tell me about his executive experience? When was the last time a Senator was elected President? What specific piece of legislation that Fred sponsored in the Senate is your favorite?
The simple fact is almost none of the people who sit around here typing ! have a clue who he is or what he has done but he talks in a folksy manner and now says what you want to hear. Somehow that makes him good enough for you to lead the free world in one of the most difficult times in our history. It doesn’t for me. I want to know exactly who he is, why he has changed on certain issues, how he will learn to be an executive for the first time in his life, etc, etc. and ducking the process does not give me a whole lot of confidence in his toughness. I read bitching and moaning here every day about politicians who lead us who care more about power and their image than they do about confronting the evil that is obviously facing us and yet you are rallying around a guy who is waiting to get into the fight until he can position himself in the best possible light, for himself.
Why is that a hard concept to get?
Oh and logis, I put Ron Paul slghtly below you on the evolutionary scale. Take heart, I have heard Paul speak more, you still have a chance to go lower.
JackStraw on June 27, 2007 at 9:57 PM
Actually, this thread is about a spliced video. One (or two) trolls simply MADE it – for the dozenth thread in a row – all about how incredibly foolish Fred Thompsons’ supporters are.
Go back and watch the video again.
There. Now, what were you saying about honesty, and about the people whose opinions you “respect” so incredibly much…?
logis on June 27, 2007 at 9:58 PM
The media has been frantic about this bizarre new “pre-primary primary” process that they made up this year. In their eyes, anyone who didn’t start running twelve months before the first primary election is effectively a traitor to the entire concept of free elections.
And some people just soak that kind of stuff in without any conscious thought whatsoever. As near as I can tell, not everyone seems to have a filter between the TV and their brains – just a straight coaxial connection into their skulls.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 10:06 PM
tman and manwithblackhat,
fred? on his video with his wife and kid, he said that he has been with the pro-life folks from the beginning.
That is a lie.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 10:19 PM
Fred Thompson is the whirlwind that has the progressives peeing in their pants, and RINO’s shaking in their boots. That will do for now, but I’ll have to learn a lot more before I make up my mind to support any candidate.
DannoJyd on June 27, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Everybody here saw the video, Einstein. You know nothing that my cat doesn’t know.
BTW, does anybody here wonder why this guy avoids Mitt Romney threads like the plague?
Me neither.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 10:25 PM
As always, it is the fred? groupies that start the name calling. You just used it again by using the word troll. You continue to apply the criticisms of fred? as an insult to you. Well, pardner, that’s yer problem. I never personally called you anything.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 10:25 PM
See, you did it again. More name calling because you cannot defend the facts about fred?.
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 10:27 PM
I about as far to the right as I can be and a bible totin’ Christian to boot. I’m very VERY much Pro-life. However, I don’t think anything coming out of SCOTUS, Congress, or any state legislature is going to do anything to fix that particular problem.
Rudy is a good guy. I would consider him if he wasn’t getting so much attention from the Republican establishment. He seems to be the golden boy among that crowd and that makes me wonder about him. Romney is too plastic for me. Something about him that I can’t quite put my finger on. As my father and grandfather used to say, “His eyes are too close together”. I don’t care that they are both pro-choice…or were…or might be again. They are unacceptable to me, at the moment, for the reasons given.
Fred! has been saying all the “wrong” things in all the “wrong” ways according to the establishment crowd. He has been forceful and even witty in some of his responses. THAT is how you have to communicate with the peons in Congress, wannabe POTUS people, and the legacy media. I think we are ready for someone who says what they think. If Fred! is waffling on the Abortion issue I’m okay with that. As long he is for fighting the GWOT…and I mean FIGHTING…then I’m good. THAT is the central issue for me right now. If we lose or quit that fight then nothing else really matters.
Pilgrim on June 27, 2007 at 10:44 PM
OK, I’m officially tired of this crap.
When is the last time anyone here actually MET a conservative who was this much of a self-absorbed, whining panty-waist?
The jagoff claims that he’s rabidly excited about absolutely nothing on God’s green earth except making sure that Republicans pick the absolute bestest candidate ever. Well, when’s the last time anyone saw him actually say anything CONSTRUCTIVE about anything or anyone?
Let’s quit playing with the ‘tard: he’s either a liberal or a liberaltarian, and for all practical purposes, there is no difference.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 10:46 PM
I’ve followed the csdeven/Fred!?! drama unfold here on HotAir.
csdeven is not a troll nor is he stupid. He doesn’t like Fred. OK.
My personal theory is csdeven was about to propose to Jeri when Fred! swooped in and took the plum little lass.
Nothing like losing the girl of your dreams to start a little ol’ grudge. :)
VolMagic on June 27, 2007 at 10:49 PM
Actually I was gonna propose to fred? when that little home wrecker stole him from me. ;-)
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 10:56 PM
No, no. You’re not supposed to think that way. You’re supposed to be an absolutely inflexible, mono-maniacal “litmus tester” who’ll turn on Fred! at the slightest hint that he might have once said something impure!
Liberals: “C’mon; the video splice says he’s evil. Why can’t you religious nutjobs all just do what you’re SUPPOSED to and burn the heretic!?!?”
They don’t get it. And they never will, and that will eat them up inside. It’s 1980 all over again.
logis on June 27, 2007 at 10:57 PM
You’re a female?
Tennman on June 27, 2007 at 11:05 PM
csdeven, my apologies.
That’s just the chauvenist in me assuming everyone’s a man.
Thankfully they aren’t :)
VolMagic on June 27, 2007 at 11:17 PM
No you guys. I am a dude! See, I had a man crush on fred? years before any of you all. ;-)
csdeven on June 27, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Fred doesn’t want to criminalize abortion on a FEDERAL level, and neither do I. Do you Fred-haters honestly want a federal law against abortion doctors so that the FBI can go around arresting them, prosecuting the doctors in Federal court via the U.S. Attorneys, and then sentencing them to do hard time in Federal prison, unconstitutionally expanding the powers of the Federal Government once again? Are you honestly advocating that???
Fred is clear and consistent about his opposition to Roe v. Wade, which makes him more pro-life than most Republicans. The policy question I want Fred to answer is whether he will support STATE laws criminalizing abortion once Roe v. Wade is overturned. Does anyone have any indicators on this?
bigbeas on June 27, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Ok, I got stuck on the phone and missed the debate for the past two hours, now my electricity is going to go off for the night, but I’d just like to respond to a couple of things before the darkness descends……
Logis, I watched the video before I posted anything and I’m aware that certain people consistently hijack any discussion of Fred with the same tired accusations. The tone of your message sounds like you might have been a little miffed with me, which I certainly hope isn’t the case because we’re on the same side here. There might be a misunderstanding which I hope we can clear up when I have have more time.
CS, you and I have discussed this before and we both know where we stand. We have (so far) been able to discuss the issue with respect toward one another. Don’t forget, you even gave me an award!
Jack Straw, you, on the other hand, seem to be determined to argue rather than discuss the Fred issue. Sorry, I’m not interested. If I want an argument, I’ll call my ex. If I want a lecture, I’ll call my mom.
logis…IMO, you are exactly right about the pre-primary primary and the debates designed by the liberals are pathetic and a waste of everyone’s time. Fred’s decision to stay out of the fray has been a good one.
Thanks for the debate and goodnight. The electric company is set to pull the switch any minute.
speed911 on June 28, 2007 at 12:10 AM
I don’t think this is too far off topic because it relates to video and Fred Thompson.
The video of Reid Bashing Thompson in the news clips was surreal. I must have stared at the screen for more than a minute, thinking I didn’t get the joke or the jab or whatever the heck that was.
Oh. My. God.
Tennman on June 28, 2007 at 12:29 AM
After they shot that video Reid went back to his office, locked the door, and brought out his secret box of Go-Bots and played with them while muttering “I’m a big boy now mommy“.
Sammy316 on June 28, 2007 at 12:48 AM
This is the opposite of personal. I’m not the one who’s a retard here; of course I couldn’t give less of a rat’s ass whether someone wants to insult me or not. You were vague about who you were talking about – and THAT is the part I have a problem with.
All that stuff you were saying about “respecting” everyone’s opinions sounded way too touchy-feely. Anyone who tries to claim that EVERYONE deserves respect, deserves none himself.
You got something to say to me – say it to me. You got something to say to the retard – say it to him/her/it. But if all you have to say is “Why can’t we all just get along?” then there’s really no reason to bother saying anything at all.
logis on June 28, 2007 at 1:03 AM
No, that would be Mitt who thinks he’s a god.
Mojave Mark on June 28, 2007 at 1:03 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »