Video: “The pre-season is over — let’s get on with it”; Update: Fred’s chief spokesman resigns

posted at 4:21 pm on September 6, 2007 by Allahpundit

A few minutes from his first campaign speech for the Fredheads. In case you’re keeping score, the six-month “pre-season” between the time Fred first started talking publicly about running and his announcement this morning is longer than the actual “season” that’s starting for him now and ending, one way or another, on Super Mega Ultra Tuesday on February 5.

Jim Mills, whose dismissal from the campaign caused such waves yesterday, joked today that “I am currently checking in with my Catholic friends to see if they can recommend any local priests who still perform exorcisms.” Meanwhile, keep an eye out for Fred mentioning his kids here as one of his motivations in running. He told Leno last night, too, that they were backstage waiting to fly with him to Iowa, and ABC reports today that the campaign bus is outfitted for playtime. I’m guessing he’s trying to drive home the point that his relationship with Jeri is about family, not anything lurid, before the trophy-wife nastiness starts up again in earnest.

Update: “Thompson received hearty applause and some cries of, ‘Go, Fred, Go!’ when he came on stage, holding the hand of his three-year old daughter, Hayden. His wife, Jeri, held their baby son, Samuel.”

Update: Geraghty floated the rumor yesterday and now Bloomberg confirms — original Fredhead and chief Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo is out.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

In fact, I’ll go one further and say that Fred’s M/F support is similar to Bush’s NCLB program:

They both see a problem and come up with a remedy without reference to the constitutionality of it. No worries!

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 5:58 PM

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 5:56 PM

Why do we bother? It’s like teaching a pig to sing – it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 5:59 PM

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 5:58 PM

M/f is the one of the things that gives me pause with Fred but the 2nd amendment is needed to keep the 1st. If not for gunsin the peoples hands you have no freedoms. rudy is weak on the 2nd, Mitt is unknown, John is off the ranch on everything IMO. So that leaves Fred.

unseen on September 6, 2007 at 6:01 PM

What binary thinking? Your posts are so predictable they barely deserve response. Same with csdevan most of the time. We all know you both hate Fred. The hatred drips from every word you write.

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 5:58 PM

Obviously you fear the BKennedy as your “hateful” allegations show.

BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 6:03 PM

$300K since midnight fromthe website.

AZCON on September 6, 2007 at 6:04 PM

…but the 2nd amendment is needed to keep the 1st.
unseen on September 6, 2007 at 6:01 PM

Sure, the 2nd secures the first. But France should never have given up the Rhineland resting on the assurance of the Maginot line. Especially since the officers had instructions to withdraw if they met any resistance.

I’m don’t wink at giving up the 1st resting on the assurance of the 2nd.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:04 PM

BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 6:03 PM

The only fear any of us have of you is that you will sacrifice the future of this great republic in an attempt to cut your nose off to spite the party in general.

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:05 PM

unseen on September 6, 2007 at 6:01 PM

Let me also ask you this question, in an unleading manner:
With the current power of the NRA, which do you think more vulnerable? The 1st or 2nd?

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:06 PM

Fred/Rudy statistical tie for first place nationwide/Rasmussen.

AZCON on September 6, 2007 at 6:07 PM

I’m don’t wink at giving up the 1st resting on the assurance of the 2nd.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:04 PM

OK either I am drinking to much or you are loosing the continuity of what you are saying, want to be kind and help out your impaired fellow conservative here?

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:07 PM

Love these bumper stickers.

http://www.imao.us/archives/008622.html

That should be good for some real Fred Derangement Syndrome from our resident haters of all things Fred…

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 6:08 PM

Do you know how stupid “Fear the Fred!” sounds?
BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 5:53 PM

I agree,
How about “Fondle the Fred”?
No, I say let’s just get behind a good man and support the heck out of him.

I like Fred.
He is a uniter.

TheSitRep on September 6, 2007 at 6:09 PM

Obviously you fear the BKennedy as your “hateful” allegations show.

BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Nah, I’ve just come to realize you’re nothing but a hateful jerk.

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 6:09 PM

The only fear any of us have of you is that you will sacrifice the future of this great republic in an attempt to cut your nose off to spite the party in general.

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:05 PM

By voting for Fred Thompson should he win the nomination, a thought I’ve expressed many times before and already once in this thread? If you say so, but I thought you guys wanted Fred to win.

BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 6:10 PM

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:06 PM

with the globalists/liberals in government I think both are in danger. At least with the 2nd I can get the 1st back. Without the 2nd I will never get the 1st back. they are both needed that’s why they are both in the document. All of the bill of rights are important and all was placed there for a reason.

unseen on September 6, 2007 at 6:11 PM

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:07 PM

I mean simply the point of the 2nd, in it’s root, is not about hunting or whatever else junk explanation the left throws up, it’s about the assurance that the citizenry can protect itself from enemies both foreign and domestic. (And the government in representative republic form is an extension of that).

So while the 2nd secures the liberty and allows the environment for the manifestation of all the others, no encroachment on any of the others should be allow either by complacency or rationalization just because the citizenry is armed.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:13 PM

BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 6:10 PM

You just don’t get it. What we want is what is best for the nation we love. It isnt Fred, its isnt Rudy and it isnt Mitt. Its what is best for America. At this stage in the game Fred looks like he is the candidate who can deliver the goods. When the primaries get here if Fred fails as you and the other Fred haters are praying then we, the Fred Heads will go with whom ever has the greatest chance of winning and preserving this great republic that we love so much.

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:15 PM

I mean simply the point of the 2nd, in it’s root, is not about hunting or whatever else junk explanation the left throws up, it’s about the assurance that the citizenry can protect itself from enemies both foreign and domestic. (And the government in representative republic form is an extension of that).

So while the 2nd secures the liberty and allows the environment for the manifestation of all the others, no encroachment on any of the others should be allow either by complacency or rationalization just because the citizenry is armed.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:13 PM

OK gotcha, man I love it when you talk all constitutional like that….

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:17 PM

All of the bill of rights are important and all was placed there for a reason.

unseen on September 6, 2007 at 6:11 PM

I agree. And I wish Fred was thinking that when he was pounding on the podium for M/F. And it troubles me. But we’ve had this discussion before and we both look at it slightly differently, but in good faith.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 6:17 PM

Fred 08 – Even Allah Can’t Save You Now

I got a kick out of that bumper sticker idea.

http://www.imao.us/archives/008622.html/#comments

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 6:20 PM

Obviously you fear the BKennedy as your “hateful” allegations show.

BKennedy on September 6, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Bwahahahahaha!!!

Me thinks they projecteth too much.

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 6:44 PM

Well, now at least we can see what he’s got to offer to the GOP in future debates and such. I’m worried about his illegal immigration and 2nd Amendment voting history while a Senator but otherwise I like him most of all the GOP candidates.

Yakko77 on September 6, 2007 at 6:49 PM

With the advancement of weapons systems and technology, the firearms available to the regular Joe will be woefully inadequate if our government turns on us. So, even if free speech is the basis for all other rights, those rights are built upon about the weakest ground they could exist on.

An armed citizenry can protect itself until the police arrive and that’s about it. The value that will stop the government from turning on us is the citizen military. Our troops are not going to be involved in killing the citizens of this country.

So free speech IS the basis of our society and you single issue 2nd amendment types need to get some perspective.

And what do you know, Fred was involved in a blatant attack on free speech with his involvement in M/F. He needs to answer for it so we can see exactly what he really is instead of the scripted rhetoric he wants us to believe he stands for.

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 6:55 PM

Like I said above, if you are comfortable with what you know and you’ve decided your vote with that in hand, more power to you. 2nd amendment more important than 1st to you? Fine.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 5:31 PM

I’m aware of only one of the Republican candidates- John McCain- advancing a anti-1st Amendment stance.

I’m also aware of at least one- Mitt Romney- who’s advocating and anti-2nd Amendment stance.

Neither get my support.

Yes, I know- Fred supported McCain-Feingold… because it gets brought up at least a dozen times in every thread his name is mentioned. He has addressed the free speech restrictions as a unanticipated mistake he vowed to correct if elected. Want to call that a flip-flop? Fine, go ahead.

Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 6:56 PM

Fred Heads will go with whom ever has the greatest chance of winning and preserving this great republic that we love so much.

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 6:15 PM

Not true. Hollowpoint has already made it clear he will stay home or vote 3rd party. Maybe you should just speak for yourself?

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 6:57 PM

Fine, go ahead.

Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 6:56 PM

Looks like the supporters of anti-free speech Fred have the same views. Now we have to have the Fred supporters permission to speak.

get over yourself, many have been and will continue to and I doubt they require your permission to do so.

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 7:00 PM

Want to call that a flip-flop? Fine, go ahead.

I did not say that. And I think you would be hard pressed to find any such commentary from me on any of the candidates.

But I have my enthusiasm tempered because it’s inaccurate to say Fred did what he did with the founding principles in mind. So to exalt him for them requires mental gymnastics that I’m am not limber enough for.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 7:04 PM

So, here we have Fred, who said he was waiting for the right time to get in, starts his first day with staff shake ups. Sorry Fred, this country doesn’t have time for you to learn on the job the most basic of skills required of a chief executive.

And didn’t someone point out that Fred is violating the spirit of the law again in respect to campaign finance? The point is to make everything open and honest, but Fred has positioned himself to keep everything secret. If this is what he is doing, this is a disturbing trend. First he funnels campaign contributions to his son and now this? That’s another red flag.

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 7:04 PM

Fred’s habitual ticks are distracting at best. The throat clearing and the head bobbing specifically. As I have pointed out, Fred is trying to be the Washington outsider candidate. I wonder how that is going to square with his history, and continued behavior as a Washington insider?

Not too good me thinks.

Fred thinks the pre-season is over, but the race has been going for 3 months and he’s many laps behind. AND his crew chief just left!

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 7:16 PM

And AP wonders why traffic is going down.

Buzzy on September 6, 2007 at 7:18 PM

amerpundit on September 6, 2007 at 4:56 PM

Dude, why are we talking about Obama? He’s down 23 points or more to Cankles. It’s Hillary v GOP, so those are the only polls that matter.

Jaibones on September 6, 2007 at 7:23 PM

I did not say that. And I think you would be hard pressed to find any such commentary from me on any of the candidates.

But I have my enthusiasm tempered because it’s inaccurate to say Fred did what he did with the founding principles in mind. So to exalt him for them requires mental gymnastics that I’m am not limber enough for.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 7:04 PM

Didn’t say you did, but as we’re constantly reminded Fred did support McCain-Feingold. He more recently addressed it saying the free speech provisions should be reversed. Some might call that a flip-flop, others wouldn’t. Not a point worth arguing as far as I’m concerned.

If you remember the time when McCain-Feingold was passed, campaign finance was a hot topic. Few argued that there shouldn’t be some kind of regulation to help prevent the kind of pseudo-bribery that went on then and now. However most of us agree that the provisions intended to prevent contributors from buying a candidate air time in lieu of money for air time went too far in restricting free speech.

Fred’s support of McCain-Feingold is definitely a blemish on his record, but given his vow to reverse the most ominous provisions and an overall Federalist stance backed up by a conservative voting record, I don’t find it to be an unforgiveable sin.

McCain still stands by the bill, including he free speech provisions; Fred supported the recent court ruling that weakened those provisions, McCain forcefully disagreed with the court decision and thus deserves any criticism he gets on the matter.

Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 7:23 PM

And AP wonders why traffic is going down.

Buzzy on September 6, 2007 at 7:18 PM

If that’s the case then I am not surprised. I was a pretty big fan of this site a few months back but my opinion of it has soured recently and I find myself going to alternatives. AP is pushing his agenda and that’s fine – but I don’t have to read these stories through someone else’s prism.

Weber48IDA on September 6, 2007 at 7:30 PM

Not true. Hollowpoint has already made it clear he will stay home or vote 3rd party. Maybe you should just speak for yourself?

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 6:57 PM

Maybe you shouldn’t speak for me, dishonest and hateful troll. I’ve said I’ll stay home or vote third party if RINO Rudy, FlipFlop Mitt or Maverick McCain get the nomination, but Fred isn’t the only Republican candidate I’d be comfortable voting for.

Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 7:32 PM

Fred’s support of McCain-Feingold is definitely a blemish on his record, but given his vow to reverse the most ominous provisions and an overall Federalist stance backed up by a conservative voting record, I don’t find it to be an unforgiveable sin.

Okay. I hope he is everything you hope he is. I say that earnestly.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 7:33 PM

Club for Growth views of Mitt vs. Fred:

On Mitt:

From: http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/mitt_romneys_record_on_economi.php

“Governor Romney’s economic record contains a mixture of pro-growth accomplishments and some troublesome positions that beg to be explained,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “While his record on taxes, spending, and entitlement reform is flawed, it is, on balance, encouraging, especially given the liberal Massachusetts Legislature. His record on trade, school choice, regulations and tort reform all indicate a strong respect for the power of market solutions. At the same time, Governor Romney’s history is marked by statements at odds with his gubernatorial record and his campaign rhetoric.”

On Fred:

From: http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/09/fred_thompsons_record_on_econo.php

“Fred Thompson’s eight-year record is generally pro-growth with an excellent record on entitlement reform and school choice and a very good record on taxes, regulation, and trade,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “His belief in a limited federal government is demonstrated by his numerous votes against government intrusion in the private sector and increased federal spending. His fondness for Tennessee pork aside, Thompson consistently voted against increased spending and new government projects, at times, one of only a handful of senators to do so.”

The report also said of Fred:

“Given his recent doubts about McCain-Feingold, Senator Thompson will have to clarify his current position on political speech,” Mr. Toomey continued, “and explain how he would deal with our expensive tort system given his philosophical opposition to comprehensive tort reform. That said, Fred Thompson’s overall record contains the hallmarks of a pro-growth economic conservative.”

Sounds like good, honest appraisals of both candidates. Nothing they’ve said about either one really surprises me.

I’m sure the Fred-haters will dismiss it, tho…

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 7:53 PM

Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 7:32 PM

Bwahahahahaha!!!

Sure, Hunter has a chance.

You single issue 2nd amendment types are priceless!

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 8:19 PM

Okay. I hope he is everything you hope he is. I say that earnestly.

Spirit of 1776 on September 6, 2007 at 7:33 PM

Thanks. So do I.

Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 8:56 PM

Love him or not this thread has 137 posting as of this one.
I think Fred is gonna really get allot o’ folks excited.
I think you all will be amazed at how strong he’ll be, from moderate dems to conservative republicans. He has a chance at making history.

TheSitRep on September 6, 2007 at 9:29 PM

I think Fred is gonna really get allot o’ folks excited.
TheSitRep on September 6, 2007 at 9:29 PM

Considering he’s had 6 months to get his message honed to a knifes edge and his scripted speech in Iowa and his semi-softball interview with Sean tonight were lack luster and uninspiring at best.

As far as making history goes, unless he does a 180 degree switch in his extemporaneous events, that history will be the antithesis of what you are hoping for.

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 9:50 PM

Cripes, you Fred-Heads get nasty quick.

Slublog on September 6, 2007 at 4:57 PM
Oh bull pucky, I have been nasty for a long time…especially if left alone around your sister…20+ year old daughter or wife…(opp’s wait, thats just the old rock and roll musician in me speaking)…Lock your women up boy…doriangrey is a coming to town…

doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Dorian, dude! Flies, honey, vinegar, and all that jazz, ya know?

Slublog’s good people, as are many you’re quick to be harsh with.

And Slublog, for the record, I’m a would-be Fred! supporter and the apparent unrest and turmoil lately does cause me some concern. But I’m willing to wait patiently and see how it all shakes out.

I haven’t picked a locked-down favorite yet. There’s no reason to until it’s time to vote in the primaries. I’m looking and listening to everybody.

Well, except for ron paul. Yikes.

techno_barbarian on September 6, 2007 at 10:01 PM

With the advancement of weapons systems and technology, the firearms available to the regular Joe will be woefully inadequate if our government turns on us. So, even if free speech is the basis for all other rights, those rights are built upon about the weakest ground they could exist on.

An armed citizenry can protect itself until the police arrive and that’s about it. The value that will stop the government from turning on us is the citizen military. Our troops are not going to be involved in killing the citizens of this country.

So free speech IS the basis of our society and you single issue 2nd amendment types need to get some perspective.

And what do you know, Fred was involved in a blatant attack on free speech with his involvement in M/F. He needs to answer for it so we can see exactly what he really is instead of the scripted rhetoric he wants us to believe he stands for.

csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 6:55 PM

I really don’t know where to begin on the above post. It is so wrong.

unseen on September 6, 2007 at 10:15 PM

At least not the way the Fred! haters here have attacked Fred or his supporters. I have pointed out huge glaring inconsistencies with Mitt? (”pro-life”, but endorse RU-486) supporters. That isn’t hate, that’s just debate. What these people do is engage in HuffPo/dKos-like behavior.

jdawg on September 6, 2007 at 5:47 PM

Yep. If you dare voice support for Fred!, you’re labeled ‘groupie’. That is, when you’re not being labeled a ‘hair rending groupie’, ‘mindless groupie’, or worse.

You don’t hear that label for any other candidate’s supporters. Well, except for ron paul, but his are more like evil little minions. ;)

Hell, I’m just willing to give Fred! a fair hearing, but the FDS-infected want to tamp down even that. Snuff that spark before it catches fire.

Bullies attempting to paint with much too broad a brush, in my opinion.

techno_barbarian on September 6, 2007 at 10:26 PM

And AP wonders why traffic is going down.

Buzzy on September 6, 2007 at 7:18 PM
If that’s the case then I am not surprised. I was a pretty big fan of this site a few months back but my opinion of it has soured recently and I find myself going to alternatives. AP is pushing his agenda and that’s fine – but I don’t have to read these stories through someone else’s prism.

Weber48IDA on September 6, 2007 at 7:30 PM

Yep. I’ve cut my time here way back, until just recently.

Too much endlessly repetitive poisonous vitriol and unchecked ego on display. Got better things to do, most of the time.

techno_barbarian on September 6, 2007 at 10:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2