Boston Globe: Was Fred a mole for Nixon?
posted at 1:42 pm on July 5, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
As if he won’t have a hard enough time distancing himself from number two on the all-time list of presidential unfavorables, now he’s got to distance himself from number one as well.
We had to relive Vietnam in the last election, now we’ll get to relive Watergate in this one. Who’ll be eligible to run in 2012 that was associated with Iran-Contra?
“Thompson was a mole for the White House,” [Scott] Armstrong said in an interview. “Fred was working hammer and tong to defeat the investigation of finding out what happened to authorize Watergate and find out what the role of the president was.”…
On July 13, 1973, Armstrong, the Democratic staffer, asked Butterfield a series of questions during a private session that led up to the revelation. He then turned the questioning over to a Republican staffer, Don Sanders, who asked [Nixon aide Alexander] Butterfield the question that led to the mention of the taping system.
To the astonishment of everyone in the room, Butterfield admitted the taping system existed.
When Thompson learned of Butterfield’s admission, he leaked the revelation to Nixon’s counsel, J. Fred Buzhardt.
“Even though I had no authority to act for the committee, I decided to call Fred Buzhardt at home” to tell him that the committee had learned about the taping system, Thompson wrote [in his Watergate memoir, "At That Point In Time"]. “I wanted to be sure that the White House was fully aware of what was to be disclosed so that it could take appropriate action.”
Armstrong said he and other Democratic staffers had long been convinced that Thompson was leaking information about the investigation to the White House. The committee, for example, had obtained a memo written by Buzhardt that Democratic staffers believed was based on information leaked by Thompson.
Armstrong said he thought the leaks would lead to Thompson’s firing.
This could actually be fertile ground for a Democratic attack in the general if they flesh it out and try to tie it in to Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program. Not because the circumstances are similar in any material way, but because it would put Fred in a box with Bush and Nixon as shady, secretive, more-of-the-same Republicans. The problem is, how do they get around the fact that he did indeed ask Butterfield the famous question about listening devices and his general reputation for, er, law and order? And what Republican would dare pursue this line of attack in the primary?
Update: Given Fred’s vociferous support for pardoning Libby, they don’t really need this for a “more of the same” attack, do they?
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Hehe. Check it out: the “adult” just called me a “widdle biddy babeee!”
Yeah. Don’t worry about a thing there, Ace. I’ll be standing by patiently. I won’t promise you that I won’t say one word until some deluded twit deigns to give me his “permission” to do so.
logis on July 5, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Sorry, but I was pretty damn close. Schwarzenegger doesn’t belong in the same sentence with Goldwater anymore than RINO Rudy does. As far as I’m aware, only one candidate has personally named Barry Goldwater as an example, and that’s Fred.
As a Federalist, I’m pretty sure that Fred wouldn’t have been on board with the Schivo mess that the federal government shouldn’t have been involved with at all.
As far as the abortion issue, I’d be OK with Rudy’s stance if he came out of the gate with a Federalist stance (overturn Roe v Wade, turn it to the states), but instead the best he could muster was an unsure “It would be OK” when asked in the debates if he’d be in favor of Roe v Wade being overturned. Some libertarian.
Hollowpoint on July 5, 2007 at 7:09 PM
The Sinner on July 5, 2007 at 6:52 PM
Here in SoCal we call those democrats…..Apparently the exact same thing they call you on the east coast. You aint fooling anyone here but yourself.
doriangrey on July 5, 2007 at 7:24 PM
That’s an oxymoron if ever I’ve seen one.
jdawg on July 5, 2007 at 7:25 PM
I’m frankly amazed that someone speaking in public even knows what that word means, let alone has a coherent idea of how federalism is supposed to work.
There has been no Constitutional debate in America for more than fifty years now. It’s been nothing but a constant din about how many more “rights” the central government can impose upon the states.
And I’m even more amazed to hear so many people standing up and agreeing with all this “federalism” stuff. I think that a lot of people were, like me, just keeping our heads down because we assumed there might be a riot if someone publically discussed such an arcane subject as POLITICS here in America.
Of course the moonbats will go crazy…er. But what doesn’t cause that> And the liberaltarian nutjobs will conclude that any use of big words must be some sort of Trilateral Commission plot.
But every normal person I’ve ever discussed the topic of federalism with LOVES the idea. I was just always afraid there would be no critical mass of people out there who would do anything but call you a witch if you tried to raise the topic on a wider scale.
If somebody wants to believe that Rudy Giuliani is the Republican Party’s Only Hope, or that Mitt Romney is The God OF ALL Conservatism, hey, more power to them…
But this Frederal Express will never be any smaller than it is right now. And now that the cat is out of the bag, I for one am never going to shut up about it again.
logis on July 5, 2007 at 7:25 PM
The democrats have huge gumballs…even if they are empty. The fact they are even discussing someone leaking information is too funny for words.
SouthernGent on July 5, 2007 at 7:26 PM
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070610/NEWS0206/706100399/1001/NEWS
A copy of a survey reportedly filled out in 1996 (not 1994) is here in pdf format:
http://www.tennessean.com/assets/pdf/DN7599868.PDF
Interesting enough, there is no candidate name in the space provided.
Make of it what you will.
Record trumps rhetoric.
Where’s Mitt been? Can you say, all over the place???
jdawg on July 5, 2007 at 7:31 PM
Correction, his name does show up, I just overlooked it.
Still, record trumps rhetoric.
jdawg on July 5, 2007 at 7:38 PM
Quoted for truth. Do they even cover the Constitution and what it stands for in public schools anymore?
Hollowpoint on July 5, 2007 at 7:38 PM
OK, csdeven, I’ve provided sources and links. Where are yours? Hmmmm?
jdawg on July 5, 2007 at 7:39 PM
Hollowpoint on July 5, 2007 at 6:30 PM
Heh heh heh Conservative Constitutionalist here, we could probably start a new political party based on this…
doriangrey on July 5, 2007 at 7:41 PM
logis on July 5, 2007 at 7:25 PM
So welcome to that new third party everyone has been looking for, Consitutional Conservative/Conservative Constitutionalist eh, whatever needs a better name though……
doriangrey on July 5, 2007 at 7:43 PM
Splitter! Listen, The only people we Constitutional Conservatives hate more than the Democrats are the f’ing Conservative Constitutionalists.
/python
Hollowpoint on July 5, 2007 at 8:00 PM
When it all comes down to dust I think that we’ll have to admit that any Republican candidate will be better than any Democratic candidate so there isn’t much reason to get all frothy and tear down our own candidates.
Even I’ll admit that although I don’t trust Rudy’s socially liberal ways he would get my vote just to keep Hillary, Obama and Edwards out of the WH. If Rudy gets the nod then expect to see his sign in my front yard and I’ll even knock on doors on his behalf… it is that important.
IMHO this race started way too early. Fred and Newt (should he decide to join the race) are taking a different route and using the MSM to run instead of throwing money around. To me that’s smart.
The run for the White House is going to be interesting and our job is to decide which of these people will serve us best. I’m watching Fred closely and at this point he has my support so I’m talking him up with my friends. I think he has a chance from the standpoint that moderate and conservative Democrats are seeing in him an alternative to the p#ss poor offerings the Democrats have fielded. That’s exactly what is scaring Billary and Obama so much. They’re too far left and afraid of losing the moderate votes that make or break the election.
Buzzy on July 5, 2007 at 8:44 PM
There are actuly a LOT of us out here… its just that the 2 major political partys are controled by Politicians, who see more Federal Power as giving THEM more power.
We have not had a “voice” in the debate for a LONNNNGGGG time. We don’t control the money, and the Media hates Federalism…
Romeo13 on July 5, 2007 at 9:11 PM
Hyperbole. You keep using that word, but it appears that you don’t know what it means.
You point to my statement where I claim I can profile every fred? supporter.
If not, you are guilty of using hyperbole.
csdeven on July 5, 2007 at 9:20 PM
Wow, you can feel the love tonight between the Fred? groupies, the liberal known as Fragility and Mitt! cheer leader csdeven (who has yet to be countered I might add).
Anyways, just a random thought. I was talking about politics to a guy I met at a July 4th party, and he had no clue who Fred Thompson was.
He knew the other candidates (mainly because they have declared) but Thompson was a mystery.
If Freddie boy doesn’t declare soon, he may miss the nomination, not because he is unqualified, but because he is unknown.
Darnell Clayton on July 5, 2007 at 9:23 PM
That’s funny. fred? has no record when it comes to executive experience, foriegn affairs, etc. He also has a record of lobbying for some questionable clients. But surprisingly, some fredites claim his rhetoric trumps that record. Where do you stand? DOES record trump rhetoric, or does rhetoric trump record?
My issue is not a Mitt! v. fred? argument. Everything I have learned about fred? doesn’t even get him in the same room with Rudy or Mitt!. (fred? is like the AA ball player bragging that he has more home runs that a major leaguer)
freds? issues are his alone and until he starts showing me the respect I deserve as a potential supporter, I’m gonna rag his sorry a$$.
csdeven on July 5, 2007 at 9:47 PM
Oliver North ‘12!!!
- The Cat
MirCat on July 5, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Now, that’s hyperbole. :)
Tennman on July 5, 2007 at 10:39 PM
God these Fred! threads sound like Charlie Brown’s teacher these days.
Wawa, wa wawa wawaaaaa…
tickleddragon on July 5, 2007 at 10:44 PM
Yeah….
csdeven this…waaaaaaaaaa
csdevn that….waaaaaaaaaa
lol
csdeven on July 5, 2007 at 10:52 PM
As good a choice as any. If we limit ourselves to candidates who aren’t “tainted” by an association with any Republicans the TV has told us are evil, we may as well go ahead and let Hillary move in to the White House now.
logis on July 5, 2007 at 10:53 PM
Haven’t seen this magnitude of unbridled ego since the last Democrat primary.
P. James Moriarty on July 5, 2007 at 10:54 PM
From a Democrat operative’s mouth to the Boston Globe’s ear.
That’s right, Fred! If there had been anything wrong with Thompson’s actions 1) he wouldn’t have written a book about it, and 2) he would have been prosecuted.
AAAHHH, the real reason comes out now. It wasn’t about finding the truth, or righting a wrong. It was all about a Democrat Congress trying to bring down a Republican President.
This is a complete non-story. Whiney cry-baby Democrats. WHIFF.
jaime on July 5, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Or if we limit ourselves to the FredHeads’ wishes impeach Bush and get Fred in the White House now and cut out all those bothersome primaries and debates!
Bradky on July 5, 2007 at 11:11 PM
You don’t get out enough. This guy would be considered a wallflower over at the DU.
logis on July 5, 2007 at 11:16 PM
First try context…
“freds? issues are his alone and until he starts showing me the respect I deserve as a potential supporter,”
Second, well there is no second. I don’t play straw man games with people who have nothing to add to defend the indefensible freddie boy.
csdeven on July 5, 2007 at 11:19 PM
Primaries don’t start until next year there, Einstein. We’ll all get to test out your theories about Ron Paul’s “secret support” then.
In the meantime, just learn how to be patient. It’s all part of growing up.
logis on July 5, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Yeah, I’m sure Mitt Romney’s campaign couldn’t last a second without this guy
constantly oftensometimesrarely mentioning him.And, assuming CS actually upholds his promise and instantly falls in love with Fred the moment Fred shows CS the minimum esteem he would deem sufficient….
Seriously, even IF that somehow happened, does anybody here think for a second that CS won’t get too distracted by another rabid vendetta against somebody else to actually come through with all that “respectable support” he keeps promising to lavish on a lucky candidate someday?
logis on July 5, 2007 at 11:31 PM
As good a choice as any. If we limit ourselves to candidates who aren’t “tainted” by an association with any Republicans the TV has told us are evil, we may as well go ahead and let Hillary move in to the White House now.
logis on July 5, 2007 at 10:53 PM
Hillary is part of the problem. The Presidental election as become a popularity contest instead of an contest based on ideals. This is due in large part to TV. Would anyone have elected FDR if TV was 24/7/365 like it is today. Or how about Taft? Would have JFK been elected if not for TV? We have a chance with the internet to again make the election about core principles. Not who knows who or what so and so was wearing.
I think Fred gets that. He has been talking about nothing but core principles and how those principles shapes his view on issues.
unseen on July 5, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Yep. And the idiot does it every. Single. Time.
I’ve stoppd reading anything he posts, as it’s almost always the same lame crap completely devoid of any useful content.
In other words; don’t feed the troll.
techno_barbarian on July 5, 2007 at 11:55 PM
Oooo, I’m sooooo hurt at being insulted by such a towering intelect. I’ve participated in some, but watched all of the threads on this board concerning Fred!, and in every one of them all your points have been refuted and disproven many times over. You’ve insulted some of us directly and most of us indirectly and then deny it ever happened. IMHO, the vast majority of you postings on the Fred threads are a simple waste of bandwidth and not worthy of a reply.
Right now, even before he has officially declared, the Republican nomination is Freds! to lose and I think most are quickly coming to the same conclusion. I’ll make sure to bring an umbrella while you rain on everyones parade.
P. James Moriarty on July 6, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Agreed.
P. James Moriarty on July 6, 2007 at 12:08 AM
First, thanks for recognizing my vast intellectual powers. Second, Ron Paul and Bradky have not made an acquaintance. Third, already grown … just waiting for you to join me.
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:20 AM
csdeven on July 5, 2007 at 9:47 PM
See now thats the whole point dingle berry, YOU…DONT…DESERVE…ANY…RESPECT…
Respect is a thing you have to earn, and you have done every thing in your power to prove you have neither earned any respect or are deserving of any respect. God you are a narsictic self-centered little troll.
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 12:26 AM
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:20 AM,
Got a time machine in your pocket so he can back up a few decades eh…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 12:27 AM
Ah Dorien another poster in dire need of a sense of humor.
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:31 AM
How many non-incombent candidates in the past 100 years announced their candidacy six months before the FIRST PRIMARY – let alone a whole freaking year – and then went on to win the election? Has there even been one?
But all of a sudden this year the media, in their decidedly finite wisdom, are telling us it’s now “impossible” to win without doing that – that no candidate can even be considered “serious” if he doesn’t. For crying out loud, what kind of idiots out there are lapping up that kind of drivel?
The Democrats picked their candidate eight years ago. They aren’t having a primary at all; they’re staging a coronation. But the media know that they can’t get anyone to pay attention to 24/7 coverage of Hillary unless they pretend to make a horse race out of this farce.
And those idiotic tag-team “debates” that have been going on this year? The Ten Little Republicans are all prancing in whatever dog-and-pony shows the media set up for them. Then the ONLY thing the Democrats do when it’s their turn is use the ammunition the Republican “candidates” hand them to use against us.
Newsflash: anything the liberal media tells you is “conventional wisdom” is usually neither of those things.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 12:34 AM
Marsha Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Can a borrow yours sweety……
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 12:43 AM
Haha..you ENJOY all this, don’t you? I SO get you now!
Have a great evening!
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM
Anytime Cindy!
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:49 AM
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM,
Of course he does, its a desperate cry for attention kind of like the grotesque faces the retards on the short bus make…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Marsha Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:49 AM,
Oh Marsha, Marsha, Marsha, you’re simply the best…I’ve never had a sense of humor thats never been used before…I’ll try and return it without putting to many miles on it…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 12:52 AM
Speaking of lots of miles Alice told me I should look for a guy like you cause you “know things”.
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:54 AM
Just once I’d like to see a thread about Fred that doesn’t turn into a Romper Room argument. Every time Fred’s name is mentioned, certain people experience a dangerous rise in their blood pressure and habitually take it out on us….us being those who don’t have a stroke at the mere mention of Fred.
I’ve seen Fred’s interviews, I’ve read his statements. I’ve read the hit pieces about him. I’ve considered the negative comments on HotAir about him, and, to be honest, some people in here offend me.
Comments like this:
offend me. Just because someone does not agree with you, does not mean they are stupid. I don’t see those interviews as “gosh awful,” I see them as a man being himself without the $400 haircuts, back room handlers and flip-flopping pandering. So you don’t like the man. Just admit it and get off your soap box. But don’t divide the party with your hateful liberalesque techniques by insinuating that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid, uninformed or ignorant.
speed911 on July 6, 2007 at 12:55 AM
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 12:54 AM
Well gosh…You know Sheriff Taylor actually gave me a bullet for my gun the other day, want to go out and shoot something…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 12:58 AM
You’re awesome! Have a nice evening.
Peace and cheers!
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:00 AM
Oh stop you ol smoothie.
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 1:01 AM
“Yeah, sure you saw them. But you didn’t see them the way that I did. Don’t worry though, a few dozen insults and haranguing repetitions will fix you right up!”
The really bizarre thing is that – as incredibly idiotic as that worldview is – it’s the way that the minds of an awful lot of people actually operate. It’s what Ayn Rand called “subjectivism.” And believe it or not, in their own crazy-ass way, they honest-to-God think they’re doing all of us blind folk some weird kind of favor.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:06 AM
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 1:01 AM
I hear they got a real nice picture show house down in Charlotte…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:07 AM
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:06 AM,
Oh he knows he’s not doing anyone any favors, and he knows he isn’t going to change any minds. Thats why he uses the inflammatory rhetoric he uses, he’s just trolling because he hasn’t got any thing better to do and zero class.
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:11 AM
Great idea. I hear they are showing “all the presidents men” tonight. But Aunt Bee says I have to be chaperoned. She met some “friend” named Fred… so if it’s okay for them to go along with us….
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 1:13 AM
Bradky on July 6, 2007 at 1:13 AM
Hmmm, Let me ask Sheriff Taylor about that, I’ll get right back to ya…Promise…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:18 AM
Point out the person who called you stupid and I’ll point out to them that the ad hominem attack is the tool of those desperately void in credible arguments. It’s the tool of the weak mind and weaker intellect.
If you are convinced fred? is the real deal, then why let me or anyone else’s opinion enrage you? Be secure in your absolute surety that he is speaking the truth.
It’s just a blog and no one forces you to read anything. Those that choose to be enraged by opinions that differ from theirs WANT to be angry and insulting. Mature adults recognize that and don’t engage those types in their childish school yard mentality. Those are the people who are responsible for hijacking the fred? threads.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:18 AM
Very few moonbats are either gainfully employed or worthy of one iota of the respect they constantly scream for.
But make no mistake: they are utterly convinced of both the genius of whatever they happen to be jabbering about at any given moment, and of the infinite power of repetition to make the world agree with them.
It’s just that most of them happen to be really BAD at their sole calling in life. But that never, ever stops them. And inevitably, a very tiny percentage eventually percolate to the top (or bottom, depending on how you look at it) of the media food chain.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:22 AM
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:18 AM
Translation: I was looking in a mirror when I wrote that…Man do I love hijacking Fred threads…It makes me feel big and important and really really smart…….
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:25 AM
Yet, here you are “wasting” your time. It seems pretty clear that you have nothing left to defend fred? with.
He worked for a lobbying firm that worked against Americans getting the settlements due to them by unscrupulous companies.
He has flip-flopped on the abortion issue. AND lied about it.
He cannot speak extemporaneously.
He manufactures an image that is not really him. Red pickups for the masses and fancy cars, brandy, and ceegars behind closed doors.
He has no clue what is going on in the Cuban community.
He plays games with his “announcement” date.
And that’s just the beginning. Now, you can take your pick of those, or you can continue to fixate on me. Your choice.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:28 AM
Well, that’s an understatement. I believe you that fred? was being himself. I believe he was too. That is why the more I find out about him it’s clear the less qualified he is.
I don’t believe a guy who cannot speak to his beliefs without referring to his notes. THAT is not a committed person. That is who he is. This has been his rap for many years and it’s bearing out as the time goes on.
He lied on the video where he claims he has always been with the pro-life crowd. He has not been with them all along.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:36 AM
Hehe. I love this: We can EITHER keep endlessly responding to the same infinitely repeated list of DU talking points, OR he’ll generously allow us all to “fixate” upon him.
And here we all were, thinking he was an annoying, monomaniacal, egotistical little troll. I guess he really showed us, huh?
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:38 AM
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:38 AM
Had cs ever even once attempted to engage in a civil discussion of the merits and defects of the candidate Fred Thompson his absurd arrogant vapid rhetoric might almost be believable, but since he never has has earned all the creditability of a KoS kid.
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:45 AM
An awful lot of people in the world are just dumb. By itself, that’s no huge deal.
The bad thing is that he’s patently disingenuous. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure that he hates Fred Thompson – apparently a whole, whole lot; maybe even pathologically…
But I’m just not getting any vibe out of this guy that he likes any other Republican MORE than he does Fred Thompson. If you razz him long enough, he’ll eventually (grudgingly) say something “good” about another candidate. But even on those rare occasions, it’s purely as a foil – no discussion of why any of them is better than any other, but solely a means of exemplifying further how really, really, incredibly awful Fred Thompson is.
This is the Internet, so of course it is impossible to guess whether the guy may have once had some sort of Republican inclinations. But even in the unlikely event that was the case at some point in the past, there’s no trace of it now – anything that was there has apparently all been burned away.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 2:31 AM
Csdeven, you say the same thing over and over again, without actually saying anything at all. That makes you inconsequestial. Hate whoever you want, for whatever non-reasons you want. The rest of us will fight for change while you play with the status quo.
speed911 on July 6, 2007 at 2:43 AM
FTDSdevin is not a troll, he’s a Moby.
Accuracy in these little games is vital.
Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on July 6, 2007 at 4:11 AM
So, nothing to defend fred? with?
Good. It’s nice to know that my efforts are paying off.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 7:34 AM
Nah csd, I think about everyone’s stopped reading your posts. Sort of a shame actually.
Buzzy on July 6, 2007 at 7:57 AM
I think it’s a shame too, but I can’t really blame them. When a person cannot defeat an opposing argument and they choose to launch into personal attacks, it rancors their mind to the point where they just have to eliminate the source that bothers them so much. In this case it is the truth about fred? verses the perception that fred? has created.
It’s sad and I care, so I’ve been trying to help the most enraged of the lot. :-)
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 8:40 AM
OK, this is getting a little less funny now. At what point does this technically constitute an assassination threat?
logis on July 6, 2007 at 10:26 AM
logis on July 6, 2007 at 10:26 AM
The minute csdevens posts in any thread in which Fred Thompson is even passingly mentioned.
That he should post crap like this just further proves what you said…
Every single one of his accusations against Fred have been totally and completely refuted multiple time but various different individuals.
When challenged to engage in serious civil dialog he chose to hurl insult instead and then hide from people who held him accountable for his childish behavior.
Even people who consider him their friend or would otherwise support him could not get him to engage in anything even remotely resembling civil dialog regarding Fred.
On other subjects in other threads cs generally reacts quite rationally and posts in a manner consistent with mainstream conservative values. It’s just this one subject where he seems bound and determined to portray himself as a psychotic moby or troll.
So to quote Buzzy on July 6, 2007 at 7:57 AM
It really is a damn shame…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Unless of course you consider the last few weeks where he (CS) was a bulldog on the amnesty bill. But don’t let that stop you from painting with such a wide brush.
If Fred is solid, he’ll pan out and you’ll look smart. If Fred isn’t, well…
Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 11:31 AM
Good grief, is this thing still going on? Has csdeven’s head exploded yet from all the rage and Fred! hatred?
I agree with the following sentiment:
And this:
uh huh. Lets see; “empty headed” “groupies” who support “lazy”, “empty suit” “freddie-boy” isn’t a personal attack, it’s just a form of expression meant to stimulate intellectual discussion.
yeah, right.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 11:49 AM
No.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 11:50 AM
Apparently you never bothered to read the links I posted, nor have you bothered to post any of your own. Your posts are nothing but repetitions of hatred, sprinkled with lots of vitriol.
Hardly worth bothering with anymore, since we all know what you’re going to say.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 11:53 AM
If I’m the one with a “wide brush,” how come you equate liberaltarians with all of the non-psychotic members of our society?
The reason I don’t draw a distinction between Ron Paul supporters and the other moonbats who have absolutely no goal on earth except to destroy the Republican Party is because, for all practical purposes, there is no difference.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 12:38 PM
“So, nothing to defend fred? with?Good. It’s nice to know that my efforts are paying off.”
Apparently you never bothered to read the links I posted, nor have you bothered to post any of your own. Your posts are nothing but repetitions of hatred, sprinkled with lots of vitriol.
It’s called “circular logic.” The dullard is STILL citing that chopped-up clip as “proof” that Fred Thompson likes killing babies – no matter how many times somebody tries to explain to him how incredibly retarded that is – right along with the rest of the idiotic list of imagined grievances he keeps endlessly reposting.
And he ALWAYS will. If someone wants to hold a position, that’s fine. But a moonbat is someone who sees EVERY POINT in his favor – no matter what. And that will never change in a million years.
There are millions of people who don’t happen to like Fred Thompson. And more power to them. But that has nothing whatsoever to do with this conversation. Crazy is crazy, and a moonbat is a moonbat. And that is all everyone here is talking about – whether he realizes it or not.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Guys, on the subject of Fred!, I don’t agree with CS any more than the rest of you. But the problem here isn’t that CS jumps into the fray and states his opinions (that yes, sadly, we all know VERY well). The problem is that you guys continue to argue with him.
As stated time and time again, this guy is one of us in so many ways. He just doesn’t like or trust Fred!. He doesn’t have to. And unless you guys are the types that LIKE arguing pointlessly with walls for fun, just don’t engage. You’re not going to change his mind any more than he will change yours.
Do we really have to spend EVERY Fred newspiece as a launching platform for a tired rehashing of everyone’s opinions? Our much welcomed newbies can feel free, but those of us that have been around for a while…we all know the others’ opinions by now, right? I could name a load of you and who your supporting by now, as you all can me and who I prefer.
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 11:31 AM
You are sort of correct, nobody is going to look smart for picking Fred. However and this is where it becomes important, those who are supporting Fred not because he is Fred, but because he heralds a dramatic shift in the nature of American politics are going to come out looking like something akin to prophets.
Fred’s net-centric campaign represents a revolution in American politics which quite possible represents the first time in American democratic politics that the electorate truly gets representation.
Even in the days of the revolution itself those with power and money exercised an undue influence on American politics.
In those early days of the republic were we fortunate beyond belief, blessed I would dare say, to have statesmen like Benjamin Franklin wielding that power and influence.
Our greatest statesmen James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Daniel Webster, Benjamin Rush, were all men who earnestly believe that give the electorate a decent education and honest unbiased information on any issue and they would invariably do what was best for the republic.
Sadly this is not a ideology embraced by socialist/liberal elitist who currently control the vast majority of America’s media, and a frighteningly large portion of our elected officials.
The relevance of Fred’s campaign is that by being so net-centric Fred is shifting control via the information superhighway back into the hands of the electorate and away from the hands of socialist/liberal elitist in the media and academia, special interests and corrupt politicians.
Whether Fred wins or not this paradigm shift is taking place, a Fred win would accelerate that shift dramatically.
In a true democracy every citizen gets an equal say and bears an equal responsibility for the decisions made by that democracy.
In the United States we do not and never have had a true democracy, what our founding fathers envisioned and gave birth to is a representative democracy.
However since the rise of communism including its sanitized and disguised evil twin socialism there have been those in this great republic who have sought to exploit the inherent weaknesses of democracy.
Those who believed that the average citizen simply could not be trusted to do what was in the best interests of society, nor that the average citizen even had the ability to understand what the best interests of society were.
Most of us today have been brainwashed into believing that Joesph McCarthy was some kind of combination of Don Quixote attempting to slay imaginary dragons lurking in distant shadows and Benito Mussolini attempting to wrap an iron first around individual thought and expression.
The truth however is that in a significant sense he was right, communism in the disguise of socialism masquerading as liberal democracy did infect first academia then the legal profession, it then took over the media and is now corrupting the body politic.
It has such a tight grip on academia and the media that 3/4 of those believing themselves to be liberal democrats are in fact communist/socialists and have been brainwashed by communist/socialists/liberal academia and the media into believing that communism/socialism is liberal democracy.
The evidence of this is the deafening roar employed to silence any opposing view seen by groups such as Moveon.org, DU or dKoS.
By moving the candidate vetting process to the internet Fred is removing the cold dead hands of the communist/socialists/liberal academia and media from the throat of the electorate.
The power of the internet is that it makes irreverent the staggering sums of money those highly committed extremely dedicated elitists have been able to use to corrupt the political process. Because they no longer have that strangle hold on the information presented to the general public, they can no longer manipulate what the electorate thinks or does.
Fred’s campaign has proven this with startling clarity in that in spite of not spending a dime he has managed to become the front runner for the GOP and is challenging the democrat front runner at the same time.
Whether Fred wins or not as I said before is not as important as the shift in how politics are carried out from now on.
The communist/socialists/liberal academia and media are all to aware that this shift is taking place, but there is nothing they can do to stop it. Hence the rise of liberal nutroots site like Moveon.org, DU or dKoS. Sites like this are their attempt to gain control of the internet’s enormous political potential.
Personally I believe that our brilliant and beautiful host Michelle is equally aware of what is happening and that that extremely acute highly astute awareness is the driving force behind her not so much advocacy of Fred but what his campaign represents.
We saw that awareness displayed in all its magnificent glory in her relentless drive to stop the immigration reform bill being crammed down our throats by elitist who truly believed that they knew what was good for this country and “We The People” were to ignorant self absorbed and narcistic to know or care what was important for the future of this great republic.
O.K. so sorry for this long rant, just had to get it out, you can all go back to watching American Idol now…
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Are we gonna go through this again? Point to the specific post where I singled you out and called you an empty headed groupie. I dare you. Put up or shut up.
Nice try at the straw man argument and the re-write of the history of this thread. I am not doing your research. I did respond to your link and you said this….
So, here we are, right back where we started with you repeating the same rationalizations for freddie boys indefensible history that you eventually conceded and gave up on once already. THAT is the reason I don’t do your research for you. You don’t own the knowledge you are given. You dismiss them and pretend they didn’t happen and THEN you have the unmitigated gall to start down the same path of whining and demanding that will end with you giving up again.
It’s clear that you view fred? through a biased lens and have no concern for the facts surrounding his pathetic history as a lobbyist, pro-abortion supporter, senator, lobbyist again, and now a cowardly non-candidate for POTUS. You also seem to have a serious problem with separating you from fred?. He is not you and you are not him. Criticisms of fred? are not criticisms of you. I believe this is why you have failed to comprehend what is written. You get so offended that some one has the nerve to question freddie boy that you by extension, get defensive as if the remark was leveled at you. Then, you take upon yourself the mantle of “empty headed” and “groupie” (when no one called YOU that) and you try to re-write history to justify your erroneous perceptions.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:04 PM
I did that?
Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 1:07 PM
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:04 PM
Say goodnight, troll. I’m not going to engage you in this any further.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 1:08 PM
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:00 PM
I don’t have time to answer this right now, but if it is still on the front page later, I will.
Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 1:14 PM
Did you see the headline where fred? polls even against Hillary? 45/45 with 6% voting with someone else and 4% not sure. I know for the fred? supporters, that sounds really great, but I look at that and can imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth when he crashes and burns.
Another headline….Mitt! is too “creepy” (I think that was the word) to be POTUS. The article said each single weird thing about Mitt! (the dog issue, the family video, Mitt! washing the dishes with his sleeves rolled down, someone in his campaign impersonated a police officer etc) wont bring him down, but the cumulative effect may. It also mentioned the up coming hit piece movie call “September dawn” as the tipping point. If Mitt! can survive it, he might just get the nomination and not Rudy.
Also, be prepared for some real noise about freddie boy moving his announcement date AGAIN.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:15 PM
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Saw that poll yesterday.
Not really crazy about Mitt, myself. Something about him just puts me off. Kinda reminds me of a snake oil salesman.
As for headlines – well, the MSM isn’t going to give ANY republican any kind of a decent headline.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Awwwww. Are you taking your ball and going home without producing the post where you accused me of calling you “empty headed” and a “groupie”?
WOW dude/dudette, that’s pathetic.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:21 PM
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Already been down that road, troll, and that dawg ain’t gonna hunt.
Ain’t my fault you refuse to read what others post.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Yeah, it’s hard to believe that a guy can be that polished and not have some serious issues in a closet some where. I figure it has to do with his commitment to working toward perfection in all his endeavors. He is an accomplished businessman, father, and Governor, and I believe he would be an excellant executive and CinC.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Me thinks thou doest protesteth too much when you could just produce the post and have it done with.
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:26 PM
One key aspect of that is that WE picked HIM. It’s a bit bizarre that Thompson’s most irate detractor constantly brags that he knows absolutely nothing about Fred(?) Well, the rest of us are by now more familiar with Fred Thompson’s political philosophy than we are with just about any other public figure.
What some people see as Fred Thompson’s greatest weakness, I see as one of his (many) strengths. As Frank Herbert said: “All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible.”
It was pretty darned obvious who the Democrat Candidate (or candidette) was going to be eight years ago. Since the days of Adolf Hitler, I don’t know that the world has seen a politician with more fire in his (or her) eyes than Hillary Clinton has.
I’m not saying that Ron Paul would be a BAD candidate. Oh, wait, yeah I am… but anyway, we don’t need a lunatic of our own. We don’t need a plastic-haired manakin, and we don’t need to settle for a social relativist just because he’s (sort of) a 9/11 “war hero.”
Instead of waiting for someone so desperate for power that he (or she) is willing to devote every waking moment of his (or her) life to suffering every debasement imaginable to get it, we found somebody who has a set of balls but could happily take or leave the gig.
We’ve got Fred. And that’s good enough.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:28 PM
Yes, I saw the polls, and the article on Mitt. Been a bit busy with the broken leg, to really engage in any of it. (Which is why I’ve been on only once in a while). Don’t really pay attention to polls, but happy to see that match up.
As to Mitt being creepy. As I’ve stated before, I would vote for him if he were the nom…but I have to admit, I find him creepy, myself.
I’ve said it before…so sorry to everyone that’s seen this a number of times… But I don’t trust any politician that has drunk the water in Massachussetts. I’m not concerned with his Mormonism, or any silly stories about his history. I simply don’t trust Mass pols of any stripe.
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 1:31 PM
All of New England is RINO country.
In the South, even some of the Democrats are closet conservatives. In the Northeast, it’s the opposite way around.
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:39 PM
Indeed. I figure there is something very wrong with the water supply in Mass…simply because they keep putting murderers and liars in office.
So I don’t care about the R next to Mitt’s name, it doesn’t convince me of anything. I trust a Southern Dem a lot more than a Northern Rep. Sorry, but it’s just a fact.
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 1:41 PM
csdeven on July 6, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Ever heard the old saw about teaching pigs to sing? It wastes your time and annoys the pig. I’ve been down that path with you yesterday, showed you your quote, you chose to ignore it.
Besides, I’m not going to waste my time doing your research for you. Go look it up.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Why can’t we have a Zell Miller running??
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 1:45 PM
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 1:31 PM,
To tell the truth my heart bleeds for Mitt. My parents were Mormons so I have a pretty damn good perspective on Mormon psychology. Their dedication to family, their sense of civic responsibility and their adherence to traditional moral and ethical values are commendable traits that would definitely be a powerful bonus to any CiC.
However sadly we live in an age of deep and abiding cynicism in which Mitt’s squeaky clean image becomes his single greatest detracting point. We live in an age where our cynicism has become so ingrained that we just cannot imagine that anyone could really be that honest, ethical, moral or descent. Hence the creepy aurora that seems to permeate Mitt.
It’s not that he is creep, its that our cynicism has grown to such a degree that we simply cant accept that anyone in politics could really be that much of a boy scout.
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:49 PM
logis on July 6, 2007 at 1:28 PM
I don’t know if its good enough but quite honestly I am getting sick and damn tired of settling for the lessor of two evils. At this point Fred does indeed appear to embody a true conservative ideology combined with disciplined principals. Something that has been sorely lacking in American politics for quite some time now.
And you are right, Hillary’s lust for power and her communist/socialist core beliefs just plain scare the living crap out of me.
doriangrey on July 6, 2007 at 1:57 PM
Dorian, it is not his cleancut image I find creepy. There’s something oily about him that I can’t put my finger on. (aside from the Mass politician thing.)
I’ve known tons of Mormons in my life, and all have been decent and good people. None creepy. It has nothing to do with his religion. The only reason I’d care about a person’s religion would be if they were Muslim or Scientologist – since both are trying to take over the world, literally.
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 1:57 PM
I agree with this sentiment. I’m sick of just accepting a politician because my “party” picks him. I am happy to genuinely LIKE a candidate. It’s not happened in years…or ever for that matter.
And CS, please don’t try to tell me I’m foolish for liking him. I frankly just don’t give a damn whether we agree or not on this. :) (We can agree on other things.)
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Oily is my impression of him as well. I don’t have a problem with his Mormonism, but he seems just too slick.
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Yankee Clintonesque…that’s it. (Image wise, not in action, necessarily)
tickleddragon on July 6, 2007 at 2:01 PM
Something like that…
jdawg on July 6, 2007 at 2:03 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »