Uh oh: Fred’s fundraising down “markedly,” says NBC; Update: Fred’s research director resigns — after a week and a half
posted at 1:35 pm on July 25, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
They’d hoped for $5 million in June. They’ll end up with $3 million for June and July, due in part to voters’ passions cooling as Fred drags his feet on getting in. NBC claims the formal announcement is set tentatively for September 4th in Nashville but can they really wait that long if donations are already down? Probably: it seems the social cons are in love, Mitt’s prodigious fundraising notwithstanding.
That’s not the only scoop from NBC:
Some sources describe the role of the presumed candidate’s wife, Jeri, as vast and powerful. Sources say “she’s integrally involved in every decision” and that Fred Thompson has “set it up so everything goes through her.” Critically, that was cast as “running it like a congressional campaign” and from the “kitchen table.”…
At present, those close to the planning say Jeri is involved in hiring, salaries, schedule, office assignments at the two headquarters, and small details like the color of bumper stickers. Some sources defend her, adding that “it’s easy to say she’s controlling things.” Sources describe that she, like many in Washington, knows many people in politics. They acknowledge Jeri meets with and interviews senior staff candidates and is clearly a key adviser.
I’m not sure how that shakes out vis-a-vis her bogus image as a trophy wife. If they don’t want people knowing how big a role she plays then the trophy wife nonsense is a welcome smokescreen. But … why wouldn’t they want people to know? Does it hurt his image as large and in charge if it looks like his wife is stage-managing him?
Take that as your exit question. Then scroll down to the end of this Carl Cameron piece and see for yourself just how much influence she allegedly has.
Update: “You are not a real conservative, sir!”
Update: See-Dubya attributes the cash falloff to the slowdown in Fred’s radio commentaries, which haven’t had a new entry since July 3rd.
Update: Hmmm.
The day after his would-be campaign manager was replaced, Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson has another senior staff position to refill.
J.T. Mastranadi was hired just a week and a half ago to be the campaign’s director of research. He resigned this morning, a friend of his said. The friend said that Mastranadi was “fed up” with the “lack of structure” and was unclear about his role in the coming campaign.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
As far as the mainstream media is concerned (and NBC particularly) I have to follow an old adage of my father’s… “believe half of what you see and nothing of what you hear”. The media’s disinformation campaign on Fred Thompson is growing by the hour…
Jonas Parker on July 25, 2007 at 1:38 PM
You mean like their disinformation claim about the abortion lobbying work that he actually did?
Allahpundit on July 25, 2007 at 1:39 PM
Maybe Jeri should run…
Bad Candy on July 25, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Yeah I’m kind of tired of his non-candidate nonsense. He’s about run out of time for me.
bj1126 on July 25, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Gosh, this IS surprising considering Fred’s long list of substantive legislative accomplishments and vast intellect. Not to mention that Southern accent.
Enrique on July 25, 2007 at 1:41 PM
ok…fine…I’ll get it started…
csdevin chiming in with “I told ya so”s in 3…2…1…
Pilgrim on July 25, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Nobody likes a flirt.
Slublog on July 25, 2007 at 1:43 PM
I was wondering what today’s hit piece will be. Now we know. Can we skip all the usual garbage and just copy-and-paste all of csd’s posts from other Fred threads and just get it over with, already?
jdawg on July 25, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Heh. I think atheists just have an antipathy to the Bible belt.
Allahpundit on July 25, 2007 at 1:45 PM
Mitt is damn good at pulling in money, but having the ability to throw tons of money at something doesn’t always work (look at public schools). I hope Fred gets things together, or else this is just gonna end up being a huge f*cking distraction that we don’t need right now. Maybe people are just holding back on donating till he campaigns, in order to see if he’s the real deal. Seems to be the way a lot of people are doing it.
Bad Candy on July 25, 2007 at 1:45 PM
If NBC is reporting it, I will go with what Fred raising plenty of money and his campaign in great shape! Watch, that will come out in the next week or so. NBC is staffed by Nit-Wits…
sabbott on July 25, 2007 at 1:46 PM
I suspected this would happen. He entered the scene with so much hype that his potential voters are going to be disappointed easily. My greatest concern about him is people would vote for him because of who they hoped he would be. He would get the nomination. He would then become a very unsuccessful candidate once his actions failed to live up to his rhetoric. I think the lack of $ here is a reflexion of voters begining to notice signs of his failure to live up to his hype.
Zetterson on July 25, 2007 at 1:46 PM
There are over 400 days until the election. A lot of decisions still to be made. Any panic caused by the bias of the MSM is a waste of time. If you know yourself, they cannot take that away from you.
volsense on July 25, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Bigtime, and I say that as a guy from Pennsylvania.
Bad Candy on July 25, 2007 at 1:47 PM
(snerk)
This feels strangely familiar.
Professor Blather on July 25, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Hype, indeed. You can see less and less people are going to his website compared to other candidates’ websites:
Kokonut on July 25, 2007 at 1:48 PM
When Fred! jumps in (better be within next 2-3 weeks) he’ll get LOADS of dough.
Until then, many, like myself, will wait for Fred! to (finally) make the first move.
omnipotent on July 25, 2007 at 1:48 PM
You know what changed? Fred’s last ABC radio commentary is July 3rd–and that’s a repeat.
When he is out there hammering conservative principles, the money rolls in. When he’s doing whatever he’s been doing for this month, well, he kind of disappears.
see-dubya on July 25, 2007 at 1:49 PM
I appreciate any candidate’s effort to stay out of the race as long as possible. Unfortunately for Fred, he seems to have overstayed his welcome. Not that he is doomed…not by any means is that the case, but the trigger must be pulled soon.
I’m reminded of Howard Dean at this point. He skyrocketed up the polls without nary a thing truly known about him outside of his home state. He climbed to the top and before he could establish a national reputation, he was knocked out for the count.
This is what Fred is letting happen. Get out in front, Fred. If you want us to consider you to be a leader…lead, or get out of the way. You enticed us with your no-nonsense style and go get ‘em attitude, but sadly, these tactics you are using are the opposite. You’re simply playing the game that we’re so sick and tired of, and it’s now showing in your fundraising receipts. And these convoluted tactics seem to only be causing disruption in your campaign organization.
It’s time to lead or get out of the way, Fred.
EduardoOTI on July 25, 2007 at 1:49 PM
Yup.
Although I’m starting to get Fred!-lash. Already.
I’d rather hear about Newt.
Professor Blather on July 25, 2007 at 1:50 PM
I switched from a Fred!? to a
Fred?yesterday, based on the news about Spencer Abraham, an open borders supporter, being his new CM. I’ll consider Fred again once I hear the unambiguous details of his position on national sovereignty and after he appears in a debate. Until then, I’m through with Fred.Newt/Hunter!?
FloatingRock on July 25, 2007 at 1:51 PM
That’s a good point. When he’s putting something out there for the legacy media to chew on, they keep him in the news if only a little. That drives the regular folks to read his stuff and see that he’s talking the right game. If he’s silent, or repeating himself, then the alphabet soup media isn’t going to cover him.
Pilgrim on July 25, 2007 at 1:51 PM
I have a feeling that the opposition (ie the MSM and Hillary camp) has yet to even bring out the long knives. They will come out shortly after he announces I’m guessing. Just hope its not too late for us by that time.
Zetterson on July 25, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Newt/Tancredo?!
Pilgrim on July 25, 2007 at 1:52 PM
How funny (read: sad) is it that in the modern political climate, not jumping in a full 16 months before the election is considered “staying out of the race as soon as possible.” Once upon a time, nobody cared much at this point.
In 20 years, are Presidential candidates going to be declaring right after the last inauguration?
When exactly did this phenomenon start?
Is 24-hour cable – and the blogosphere – to blame?
I can’t even believe its July the year BEFORE the election year.
Professor Blather on July 25, 2007 at 1:55 PM
If the source of this is MSNBC then I would suspect that just the opposite condition exists. MSNBC is a blatant left wing propaganda machine.
rplat on July 25, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Yes, I agree. Our white haired friend is looking better and better each day.
Exit Question: Am I getting a case of “election goggles”?
omnipotent on July 25, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Professor Blather on July 25, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Yeah…I’m really surprised all these people (candidates) are wasting their time and energy right now. All they are doing is giving ammunition to the oppo researchers to be used in the last two months of the campaign. All the September and October Surprises will be directly related to something stupid that was done or said in some of these incredibly early debates, pressers, and skin rubbin’ sessions.
Pilgrim on July 25, 2007 at 1:58 PM
True, that is a rough sign given that he says he is planning a more net focused campaign. On the flipside, that chart fluctuates wildly for all the candidates, so I think it has limited reliability as an indicator.
Bad Candy on July 25, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Bauer/Walker Texas Ranger ‘08.
Not the actors, but the characters themselves! We’ll put every scientist to work in this country to create a quantum mirror allowing us access to other dimensions where every point in ours has a counter-point there. Thus there are infinite numbers of dimensions we can pluck Bauer and Walker from. No one would miss kiefer, but Chuck we would have to freeze (and possible store in a blank dimension) so dimensional rifts won’t take place.
Choose your next words wisely, PERSIANS.
TheEJS on July 25, 2007 at 2:01 PM
Well,
Fundraising down
numbers in the polls are up
Is it magic
or sheer dumb luck
EricPWJohnson on July 25, 2007 at 2:02 PM
It’s really 53 million, as he was so kind to tell he already saved 50 million. If it’s true, which there is no real reason to doubt, in fact his behavior supports it, then I think it does open a real window for Newt. Rudy is probably happy to hear this news too.
Spirit of 1776 on July 25, 2007 at 2:02 PM
Heh.
PRCalDude on July 25, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Wait…
This post has been up for half an hour and no response from csdeven??? *boggle*
csd? What gives? You’re slipping. Ya gotta step it up and Troll it hardcore like we’re used to! What is the world coming to when you can’t even count on internet trolls? Honestly!
Ok, in all seriousness, Fred really does need to step up. As I noted WAY back in June, if Fred doesn’t announce by Independence Day, he’s gonna start losing support. Looks like I wasn’t wrong.
wearyman on July 25, 2007 at 2:11 PM
Agreed that it’s ’sad’ that candidates are starting this early. I’m glad Newt and Fred have tried to force the question that it isn’t necessary.
The problem is, when you’re the only legit potential candidate out there that hasn’t fully jumped in the shark infested waters of the campaign, youre the one that is going to be chomped on when you finally do jump in.
While he isn’t spending money, he isn’t defining himself before the media/other candidates can. He also is heightening expectations to the top of the pyramid. The problem with standing at the top of the pyramid is that when you have no weight behind you, you can easily be knocked to the bottom.
Well, maybe not Tommy Thompson levels….but still, you get the point. :-)
EduardoOTI on July 25, 2007 at 2:15 PM
When he started fundraising I gave him a few bucks. (Same amount as I have given Hunter and Tancredo so far). But with the money, sent a note that he wouldn’t get another penny until he declared officially.
I rather imagine that most of his other potential supporters are thinking the same way; A token donation to show our interest, but Fred has to show that he is a serious candidate before he gets any serious donations.
LegendHasIt on July 25, 2007 at 2:19 PM
So, because it talks about something that may, in someway, be perceived as bad news for Fred, it’s a hit piece?
Except NBC isn’t the first to report similar details about Jeri.
So, Fred and the campaign manager are doing….what? Showing up?
amerpundit on July 25, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Yawn.
Stttrrreeeetch.
thirteen28 on July 25, 2007 at 2:21 PM
And Hillary’s going to be out with the media to bring him down.
amerpundit on July 25, 2007 at 2:23 PM
amerpundit on July 25, 2007 at 2:21 PM
If he was a real candidate, I’d worry. Till then, it’s just the MSM trying to tell us who to NOT vote for. I’ll wait till he becomes a candidate before making my mind up. Till then, I’ll just watch the daily hit pieces come and go, and the 6000 or so angry anti-Fred! rants.
jdawg on July 25, 2007 at 2:26 PM
Anyone want to take bets on whether the heckler was a nutty Ron Paul cultist?
Seems to me Fred is going to have a tough time raising significant amounts of money without having announced; a Sept announcement only leaves a couple months for him to raise the money needed to campaign before the primaries start.
Also, he’s going to have to counter the MSM attacks with some national appearances or something to regain momentum or voter apathy is going to set in.
Though he’d make a good President, I just don’t see Newt entering the race unless Fred completely falls flat in the next couple months. It’s unfortunate, but it just seems unlikely he could win given the undeserved negative perception the general public has of him.
Hollowpoint on July 25, 2007 at 2:29 PM
From: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/07/25/289752.aspx
Heh, go figure.
jdawg on July 25, 2007 at 2:31 PM
Yawn.
Stttrrreeeetch.
thirteen28 on July 25, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Ditto
sonnyspats1 on July 25, 2007 at 2:32 PM
AP, I think that some caution on your part is in order, when describing previous stories about Fred and abortion. You used two words to encapsulate the actions of Fred in the past, “abortion lobbying.” I think that the use of those words only, is a truncation of the actual events, which in turn lead to the possibility of poor conclusions. I think it is important to keep in mind that the MSM knows that abortion is an issue that will drive away the cons. base from a candidate. They have done it with both Rudy and Mitt. They are now trying to do the same with Fred; but it is important to see if Fred’s relationship to the abortion debate is even comparable to Rudy’s or Mitt’s. It will then be easier to determine if Fred’s distancing is really a flip-flop or not. I have not signed on to Fred yet, but I think that there have been some serious false comparisons made in trying to show that he is as much of a hypocrite on the abortion issue as others have been.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 2:32 PM
What is more troubling to me is that the quick responses of Fred in the past, utilizing the internet, seems to have gone away! I want him to get out and get out quickly to give his explanation on these stories. Where are you Fred!
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Rudy has never changed his position on abortion, personally pro-life but a pro-choice politician.
Both Romney and Fred ran as personally pro-life but pro-choice politicians. They both governed, in wildly different circumstances, as pro-life. Both now claim to be both personally and professionally pro-life.
Only Fred lobbyied for an abortion rights group.
Just thoughts some facts would be helpful.
JackStraw on July 25, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Campaigning. His use of the Internet and radio worked well to gain initial support, but no candidate is likely to win without going out on the usual hand-shaking, baby-kissing tours. Still, it’s going to be hard for him to generate excitement for his campaign without some kind of event or announcement.
It bears repeating: Super Tuesday is over 6 months away yet. In normal times the election cycle would be in it’s earliest stages instead of half way through primary cycle. It’ll be another 3 months before the campaigns really begin in earnest- people have short attention spans, and the stories of today will be ancient history by then.
Hollowpoint on July 25, 2007 at 2:44 PM
I saw that too. That’s funny – both protesters left in a car with a Ron Paul bumper sticker. I wonder if there’s video out there?
nailinmyeye on July 25, 2007 at 2:47 PM
Count me in that group. I am all for Fred!, but I am not donating to a “maybe” candidate. Announce Fred! and you’ll get my check.
In the meantime, I will trust that he (and Jeri) know what then are doing.
If Jeri is as described in the pull-quote above (strong, intelligent, and able), she may draw more women voters to her than drive them away, as the Dims and the MSM are hoping.
Mallard T. Drake on July 25, 2007 at 2:48 PM
What does that even mean?
Clark1 on July 25, 2007 at 2:50 PM
If you would re-read my post you will see that I never accused Rudy of changing his position. In fact I admire him for not doing that. Also, please explain how Fred ran as a personally pro-life but was a pro-choice politician. Because your next sentence says that he governed as a pro-lifer. If he governed as a pro-lifer in what capacity did he run as a pro-choice politician. Im not saying that Fred’s involvement isn’t troubling, but I’m trying to determine if his involvement in his past, along with his senetorial stint, rises to the same level of hypocracy as others, that’s all.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Not necessarily. I love the south, and southerners. Atheists are just more doubtful, and require more proof about things, inherently — so we need everything a little more gin-you-wine.
Tanya on July 25, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Good points, all.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Personally pro-life but pro-choice Republican means that
while he may not believe in abortion for his own family, he believes it’s the right of other Americans to make up their own minds for themselves.
I’m willing to meet him halfway. While I’m against a nationwide ban on the practice, I do believe Roe v. Wade must be struck down so state’s can make up their own minds.
EduardoOTI on July 25, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Uh-oh. This is gonna turn into an abortion debate, isn’t it? Ugh.
EduardoOTI on July 25, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Believers are more shallow, more superficial thinkers?
Spirit of 1776 on July 25, 2007 at 2:57 PM
I personally like that Jeri’s so into this (I like her, in general), but I wonder if it’ll come back to bite him. That article from yesterday said his first wide pushed him into going to Vandy, and then pushed him into joining her father’s law office.
Now Jeri’s pushing him into the presidency. He might want to distance himself from the idea of all these women making his decisions for him.
Tanya on July 25, 2007 at 2:59 PM
Heh.
frankj on July 25, 2007 at 3:00 PM
You sayin’ ol’ Fred is wussy-pipped?
Allahpundit on July 25, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Yes, that’s exactly what I was saying. Jeez. Insecure much?
Tanya on July 25, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Also, please explain how Fred ran as a personally pro-life but was a pro-choice politician. Because your next sentence says that he governed as a pro-lifer. If he governed as a pro-lifer in what capacity did he run as a pro-choice politician
Glady.
Or you can listen to Fred say it himself.
Personally, I think this is a dumb reason for us to be deciding on a Republican nominee. No President is going to overturn Roe. But as long as it matters to some people, Fred is not pure.
JackStraw on July 25, 2007 at 3:00 PM
His own billing records proved it. 3.3 hours per the NYT article.
Allahpundit on July 25, 2007 at 3:01 PM
Just saying it might look like it. It is a little ooky.
Tanya on July 25, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Thompson’s choice of campaign managers is unlikely to help matters.
“Thompson Campaign Hires Open Borders Icon”
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2007/07/24/thompson-campaign-hires-open-borders-icon/
Yes, the very same Spencer Abraham who is the owner of fairly abject immigration voting record-
http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=MI&VIPID=401
who conservatives have long criticized for his ardent support of open borders policies-
“National Review: Open admissions – Sen. Spencer Abraham rebuffs immigration reform”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n2_v49/ai_19100529
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2003/08/by_debbie_schlu.html
Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, Abraham’s counterpart in the House, called Abraham’s legislation “a welcome mat to every terrorist and drug smuggler who is looking for an easy way into the United States.”
http://www.americanpatrol.com/POLITICS/ABRAHAMBORDER042398.html
“Michigan Republican senator tirelessly fights reductions in immigration; opposes many efforts against illegal immigration”
http://www.betterimmigration.com/abefights.html
and who was awarded 1997’s “Defender of the Melting Pot” award from the National Council of La Raza
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/krikorian200508190822.asp
“Republican Relishes Role as Champion Of Legal Immigration” (San Francisco Chronicle)
http://americanpatrol.com/POLITICS/SPENCERABRAHAMPOST070897.html
So, just for the record, it’s been proved that Thompson lobbied for a pro-abortion group and he has now hand-picked a La Raza award winner to run his campaign.
Any thoughts?
tad on July 25, 2007 at 3:03 PM
You bring up a really neat point, namely the desire to strengthen the concept of state rights. This is what I am wanting Fred to explain further. For, there have been a few times in various interviews where he says something that hearalds a really strong Federalist principle within him. For instance, he explained his oposition to tort reform at the federal level along these lines. Yet, he isn’t really playing that hand currently; I don’t know if he is keeping it close to his chest, or if he just uses it to get himself out of a jam.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:03 PM
As many have already said, get in the game, Fred, and we’ll start the support. Until then, my money is in my pocket. I want to get what I pay for.
doncow on July 25, 2007 at 3:05 PM
Personally pro-life but pro-choice Republican means that
while he may not believe in abortion for his own family, he believes it’s the right of other Americans to make up their own minds for themselves.
I agree. But it’s absurd for one Republican to be branded as pro-choice flip flopper and another to be called a staunch pro-lifer for having the exact same opinions.
What agravates me and a lot of other people about Fred is that he is getting the messiah treatment from so many people who know nothing about his record or do know and say it doesn’t matter because he is the only man who can take on Hillary. Absurd.
I want the strongest Republican candidate, not the one who tries his damnedest to fly below the radar and not have to answer questions about his past positions and record and explain why he is the best leader for what we want. I don’t care about the primary, I want to win the Presidency.
JackStraw on July 25, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Once again you’re being as dishonest as Romney’s claim of being a “lifelong hunter”.
Fred campaigned as pro-life and governed as such. Romney campaigned as a self-identified pro-choice candidate, and didn’t govern in a way that contradicted that.
His past and recent statements suggest that Fred’s abortion position isn’t a hardcore, absolutist one- there are differing opinions within the pro-life crowd. However he didn’t go from “I’m pro-choice because my sister died from an illegal abortion” to doing a complete 180 when he decided to run for President as did Romney, giving a strained, phony stem cell research excuse.
I know you’re eager to cover for your beloved home town boy by projecting his flaws on Fred, but no reasonable person is going to buy it.
Hollowpoint on July 25, 2007 at 3:07 PM
Agreed, and it precisely the inclusion of that very info that needs to be kept in mind when using the phrase “abortion lobbyist”; that way one can determine if that amount crosses that threshold of what one would think of when they think of a lobbyist for various interest groups.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:08 PM
While I agree that 3.3 isn’t 0.0 hours, anyone who bills by the hour knows that 3.3 hours ain’t shite.
omnipotent on July 25, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Allahpundit on July 25, 2007 at 3:01 PM
yup, over a 14 month period, thats some pretty damning evidence you got there AP…Pretty damning indeed…
doriangrey on July 25, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Thanks for those links!
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Heh. I’m not insecure. Why is that any question is always projected on the questioner. I just wanted to verify your meaning. I hate to put words in people’s mouths.
It just struck me as a very myopic statement. If believers weren’t filled with doubt, there would be no resistant to any scientific theories, from evolution to global warming. Tomorrow someone will say believers are too filled with doubt.
The original statement is incorrect, but I’ll yield the floor to your more inquisitive and deeper intellect.
Spirit of 1776 on July 25, 2007 at 3:10 PM
I define a “lobbyist for various interest groups” as someone who has actually spent any amount of time lobbying on behalf of those various interest groups and getting compensated for that work.
Slublog on July 25, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Patience, people, patience.
He’ll announce soon. And when he does, he’ll be subject to all the laws governing presidential campaigns. AP, I think it’s a little unfair of you to espouse the position that he engaged in a disinformation campaign when there was clearly a lack of communication involved. With all the research you do and having seen both sides, I don’t fault you for reaching whatever conclusion you do, but it hardly seems a fair starting point to the conversation.
He’s not your candidate (yet) or an officially announced candidate. But we all need to stop trying to eat our own here. It’s either going to be Rudy, Mitt or Fred with the nomination, unless something really weird happens. We all had better get a grip on the positives and go into defense mode about our presidential candidates, or we’re going to be doomed to defeat in November 2008.
And President Hillary Clinton is a truly frightening thought.
Tennman on July 25, 2007 at 3:12 PM
While I’ll agree that 3.3 isn’t 0.0 hours, anyone who bills by the hour knows that 3.3 hours ain’t sh*t (especially over months of time).
omnipotent on July 25, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Prove it. Or like you always do, say something you have no idea about.
JackStraw on July 25, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Tank you, that actually answered my question.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:14 PM
Well, since that’s the meme from the leading Dem candidate’s CV, it pretty well seals the deal on the idea floated on the first “trophy wife” thread – that Jeri will run for Prez after the Prez following Fred?!’s term(s).
eeyore on July 25, 2007 at 3:16 PM
That is perfectly reasonable. Now, let me ask: is there a threshold of time spent in lobbying above which you would identify that candidate with that interest group? This isn’t a trick question by the way, I really want to know. If there is a min amount what is it?
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:17 PM
And yet you didn’t hesitate for an instant.
Funnily, I didn’t say anything about believers at all. But let’s make this all about you.
Tanya on July 25, 2007 at 3:19 PM
In other words, Slubug, if Kerry were to have lobbied for the NRA in the same capacity as Fred has for the abortion group, would you consider Kerry pro-gun?
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:19 PM
YES.
Jeri is smart, capable, attractive and if she is now to be seen as some sort of Dragon Lady, running the campaign, scaring off campaign staff, and stage managing her hubby’s career move, he then looks like some sort of pliable old man caught in the throes of puppy love and easily manipulated.
And yes, if you conclude that I am less than enamored with Fred and his whole non-campaign, you are right.
Always Right on July 25, 2007 at 3:19 PM
No problemo.
Thompson is apparently determined to shoot his campaign in the foot, rather than to give it a shot it the arm, before he bothers even to announce.
tad on July 25, 2007 at 3:20 PM
The ‘threshold’ is not the time spent, but the money that changed hands. He took money from an abortion group – I don’t like that, but it won’t keep me from voting for him if he’s the nominee.
What really bothers me about it is that through his spokesman, he adamantly denied that he had ever taken money to lobby for abortionists.
Slublog on July 25, 2007 at 3:21 PM
Damn and he looked so adept at managing a district attorney’s office.
Dusty on July 25, 2007 at 3:22 PM
No, and that’s not what I said. I’m not trying to claim that Thompson is “pro-abortion.” What I did say is that when he took their money, he became a lobbyist on their behalf. No amount of parsing will change that part of his past.
Slublog on July 25, 2007 at 3:23 PM
awesome
jambus59 on July 25, 2007 at 3:24 PM
N
Use of a little Spanish lingo, and parallelism around the idea of “shoot,” literarily speaking, well done
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Newt is smart in not getting in now, with all of those pygmies. And the Republicans are smart in not thowing their money around, wait, patience, and watch the burn out on all of the other candidates (dems and Republicans).
Wouldn’t be suprised to see Newt step in.
right2bright on July 25, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Fair enough.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:26 PM
Slubug,
my responses seem to be one step behind yours and for some reason my page is reloading without certain comments, only to put them in later. Forgive me if it seemed as though I was talking past you. I’ll blame it on my computer.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:28 PM
No worries from this end.
Slublog on July 25, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Yeah, you didn’t say believers, I just thought that would be opposite of atheists. If you have a better word, I’d be glad to use it instead
? I asked a question.
Again, ?. I’ve posted one comment I think on all of HA that’s about ‘me’ and that was re: Immigration. I merely challenged your assertion, after requesting clarification of your meaning, that atheists are more inquisitive and deeper thinkers.
Different people have doubts in different intellectual pursuits and they voice them differently. Faith is merely one of the areas, and to project that one area to all is erroneous. You don’t have to agree with me, but seems pretty obvious to me if you step back and look at it.
Spirit of 1776 on July 25, 2007 at 3:34 PM
Ya think?
But yeah, if it were me, though I’m not convinced I’ll donate to anyone, I wouldn’t donate to someone who hasn’t even announced yet.
It’s not likely he’s changing his mind, but what if it turns out he’s not running?
Esthier on July 25, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Fantastic! You are the first person I know of who has used the adverbial form of the word ‘funny.”\’ It is weird to say, but ‘funnily’ is correct.
Weight of Glory on July 25, 2007 at 3:37 PM
And so the edifice that is the Fred Thompson non-campaign collapses some more.
Its tough to run a campaign committee when you haven’t announced a campaign yet, Fred.
Fred is too scared of the water to do anything more than put on his wading shoes. But he’ll take on the big boys for sure, say the Fredheads.
Fred Thompson. Because cowardice is strength, in a certain kind of way.
BKennedy on July 25, 2007 at 3:38 PM
You mean like Einstein?
Guardian on July 25, 2007 at 3:40 PM
Check your sources, please, dear. Don’t put other people’s words in my mouth.
Tanya on July 25, 2007 at 3:42 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »