Conservative “hunger” for Fred dooms LA Times abortion takedown
posted at 8:51 pm on July 15, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Dude is bulletproof, reports an exasperated Politico.
The sound of silence tells an interesting tale when it comes to Fred Thompson. A week after reports emerged suggesting that the former Tennessee senator once lobbied for an abortion rights group, few leaders of the GOP’s conservative wing have expressed concern.
In fact, the fallout in conservative circles has largely been confined to defending Thompson and attacking the Los Angeles Times, which broke the story. And this comes, as reported by Politico.com’s Mike Allen, as Thompson has dropped his flat denial of the charge and now instead says he can’t remember.
The muted reaction illuminates a larger point: just how hungry many on the right are for a Thompson candidacy and their inclination to overlook evidence that the soon-to-be candidate may be something less than a true believer…
Asked if he was concerned about the Times report, Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council and somebody who has extolled Thompson, said, “No, I’m really not.”
“This is becoming so old,” Perkins scoffed. “They find somebody who has staked out a pro-life position, and the first thing they say is that he’s supported a pro-abortion group.”
What’s more, Perkins said, there has been no “indication that it’s getting traction.”
“People are considering the source.”
[Gary] Bauer said much the same thing, pointing out that he had received no phone calls or e-mails of concern. “The leak came from a pro-abortion group,” Bauer noted. “The intention is to torpedo his campaign.”
Follow the link and scroll down for an amusing panicky reaction from the Romney campaign, which really shouldn’t be so eager for the race to boil down to a test of anti-abortion bona fides.
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
It’s not so much about ignoring something which may be true simply because the info. comes from a lib paper. It’s about the MSM’s increasing inability to determine what is news. The jig is up. Hallelujah
JiangxiDad on July 16, 2007 at 8:55 AM
For us, and those who have seen the MSM bias with their own eyes, yes it is.
But the people who reject a story because of it’s source is not the same issue.
csdeven on July 16, 2007 at 9:12 AM
LAT, is this the paper who is solidly behind Bishop Mahoney? The Bishop who has defended and hidden child rapists? The Bishop who has made the Catholic Church in L.A. the sanctuary for illegal aliens. Why? More children to abuse? LAT, liberal, pro Democrat, what bias would they have? LAT would benefit if a pro-abortion conservative was selected. Why would they try to sink Freds ship? Oh, because they are such an honest and reliable source of information.
This is why you have to wait, and watch for others to support one of their stories (not news, but stories).
BTW, doesn’t the Right to Life consider Fred a pro-life, and the Abortion lobby consider Fred a threat?
Seems they may have more polical knowledge than a few on this page. Certainly with those two opposing groups there is consensus. Maybe a little more credibility than a LAT bias…I don’t know, two opposing groups coming up with the same opinion, vs. LAT…just askin.
As I have said, the liberals will pick them off with “leaks” one at a time, ask Fong, or a few other conservatives that were leading in the polls, until LAT ran there hit pieces, especially their hit pieces the weekend before the election so there is no response…and you guys fall for it every time.
They pull your strings and you dance.
right2bright on July 16, 2007 at 9:13 AM
How do you know that? For all you know, that is EXACTLY why people are rejecting the source.
Esthier on July 16, 2007 at 9:15 AM
Reagan slept during cabinet meetings. Your point?
Kowboy on July 16, 2007 at 9:29 AM
As freds? changing positions have confirmed, the story was true.
csdeven on July 16, 2007 at 9:33 AM
Here cs. This should make you happy. hehehe
Kowboy on July 16, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Kowboy on July 16, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Damn link won’t take. Copy and paste. lol
http://www.imao.us/archives/cat_fred_thompson_facts.html
Kowboy on July 16, 2007 at 9:53 AM
Long night at work. Does it show? lol
Kowboy on July 16, 2007 at 10:09 AM
I really haven’t made up my mind about Thompson’s candidacy one way or the other. However, the fact that the LA Times has been trying desparately to figure out a way to “get” him is certainly a point in his favor…
morganfrost on July 16, 2007 at 10:20 AM
I beg to differ, but you’re changing the topic anyway.
The point is that the Times very well could be completely accurate here, and yet at this point, they’re the boy who cried wolf.
Esthier on July 16, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Fred!-Rudy ticket is my choice. Rudy could stay in the shadows at home with one of his future wifes.
saved on July 16, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Heh Heh Southern Fried Reagan ?
sonnyspats1 on July 16, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Fred Thompson goes on record about the Times effort to discredit him.
sonnyspats1 on July 16, 2007 at 10:54 AM
If I recall correctly, he was right when it counted.
Big S on July 16, 2007 at 11:35 AM
The media finally gave up on trying to demonize Reagan a few years ago. They pay him lip service, but they try to marginalize everything he did as being impossible in this “more enlightened” day and age. Twenty years from now, the liberals will be trying to claim Reagan as one of their own — “…What kind of car would Reagan drive?”
The left sees the similarities between Thompson and Reagan, and that’s where all this premature rage is coming from. The media are doing more damage to themselves now than they are to whoever the Republican candidate will be a year and a half from now. But it’s worth it to them. The media picked our “front runners” for us a year ago, and there was a REASON for that. Hillary has a plan to overcome her maximum 45% support among the electorate – and when Republicans try to deviate from that plan, the media pull out all the stops.
logis on July 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Which is bound to happen if you’re always crying wolf.
The entire point of the story though is that your veracity will be called into question when you consistently lie, so much so that even your honesty will not be believed to your own peril.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day, but if it’s always telling you that its 12 o’clock, then you’re a fool to trust it even when it is 12.
Esthier on July 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Hear, hear, deepdiver! You stated my concerns exactly. If we are all killed by islamofascists or deprived of our country by the illegal invaders, abortion will be the least of our concerns. Thompson/Hunter or Tancredo.
IMO, Tanc would be a superb Homeland Security Secretary. We need to lose Skeletor Chertoff NOW!
Ignorant Mensan on July 16, 2007 at 11:58 AM
I agree with that assessment, but I’m also optimistic enough to believe that whoever becomes the next president will have time for things people here consider “minor.”
I’m just not so pessimistic as to believe that the next president will be doing nothing but fighting jihadi extremists, in which case, I’d like the next person to also favor the things I favor.
Esthier on July 16, 2007 at 12:15 PM
That’s some funny stuff right there, thanks for the laugh.
Err… you were joking, right? Sometimes I can’t tell.
Hollowpoint on July 16, 2007 at 1:53 PM
Sorry, I only read as far as the “http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion” part.
Hollowpoint on July 16, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Thompson/Steele. Yeah, that’s the ticket!
Barry Kearns on July 16, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Denial is not healthy.
Bradky on July 17, 2007 at 12:36 AM
Well if that’s a disease, then I sure as heck don’t want the cure.
logis on July 17, 2007 at 2:17 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2