Video: “The Hunt for Red November”
posted at 1:12 pm on September 11, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
I asked for it the other day and now it’s online so I’m obliged to post. A serviceable campaign bio, the cheesy country-boy guitar soundtrack notwithstanding. Don’t look now but according to Survey USA he’s cut Rudy’s lead in California from 39-19 on August 6 to 28-26 on September 10 and, per CBS, from 38-18 nationwide to 27-22. (McCain’s also gotten a giant bounce from Iraq, up from six points to 18.) He picked up another two points on Rudy in the Rasmussen overnight poll, too. Grok this from CBS’s story:
Also troubling for Giuliani may be how knowledgeable his own supporters are of his tenure as mayor, aside from 9/11. A majority of Giuliani supporters were unable to say whether crime went up or down during his administration, despite his frequent mentions of making New York safer. And more than 70 percent of Giuliani supporters didn’t know whether race relations got better or worse under Giuliani – several well-publicized incidents involving New York police are credited with exacerbating racial tensions in the city while Giuliani was mayor.
There even appears to be some ignorance among Giuliani’s supporters on the issue that most separates him from the rest of the GOP field: his support for abortion rights. While 41 percent say Giuliani favors legal abortions, 31 percent believe, incorrectly, that he opposes them.
However, even if more Republicans become aware of his position on abortion, Giuliani may still win the nomination. By a 2-to-1 margin, Republican primary voters said they could vote for a less conservative candidate if they believed that candidate would win in a general election…
As for that “Phoney Fred” site that Mitt’s campaign denies having had anything to do with, Team Thompson unloaded yesterday:
“There is no room in our party for this kind of smut. As the top executive of his own campaign, Governor Romney should take full responsibility for this type of high-tech gutter politics and issue an immediate apology. If this is true, Governor Romney should exercise some of his much-touted executive acumen and immediately terminate anyone related to this outrage.”
The site’s offline now but you can see a bit of it here. WaPo and the Times both say the domain name trail leads back (via a Romney donor, according to Politico) to a top Romney advisor in South Carolina, where Mitt’s desperate to torpedo Fred to prove that he can’t win even in the south. Exit question: Was it really unconnected to Mitt or was it “unconnected” in the sense that MoveOn’s Petraeus ad was “unconnected” to the Democrats? Quote:
“No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,” noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. “The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.”
Click the image to play.
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
Like I said think Dole in 96 with Thompson. As for the general election what states do you think he will take to get the 270?
As tempting as it is to be mischevious and pour lighter fluid on the fire brewing between the Mitt/Fred camps I’ll stick to discussion electoral politics this time.
Bradky on September 11, 2007 at 10:17 PM
Fred did NOTHING as a senator and very little as a DA. Fred is selling his acting career. Otherwise why use the “Hunt for red november” shtick? His use of that shows that he is selling, not who he really is BUT, what he played on TV. This doesn’t bother the groupies. They think it’s kewl! What Fred did as an actor has no bearing on his actual stance as a conservative. But, here he is, running on his acting career and not on his record.
Clear thinking conservatives like myself can see that the reason why Fred is not running on his record is that he has no record that he can tout. As a matter of fact, he needs to run away from the things he has actually done over the years. For reference, see my list of facts above. All Fred has is his acting and his rhetoric. Both are void and vacuous of reality.
csdeven on September 11, 2007 at 10:24 PM
WASHINGTON (Map, News) – Hillary Clinton’s links to illegal fundraising by Asian-Americans in 1996 should have made her wary of accepting $850,000 from a fugitive Asian-American this year, a rival presidential campaign said Tuesday.
The criticism came from an adviser to former Republican Sen. Fred Thompson, who chaired a Senate investigation into illegal contributions by Asian-Americans to Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign and the couple’s legal defense fund in the 1996 election cycle.
Thompson adviser Rich Galen said Clinton’s 2008 campaign has become “the sequel” to her husband’s scandal-plagued 1996 campaign.
Late Monday, Clinton announced she was returning $850,000 raised by fugitive Norman Hsu, who jumped bail in 1992 after being convicted of defrauding investors of $1 million.
sonnyspats1 on September 11, 2007 at 10:28 PM
So, by “casual supporter” you mean Warren Tompkins, Romney’s lead consultant in South Carolina. So “casual”, in fact, that you said this:
Your argument skills are so refined, csdeven, that I’m begging you to continue using them to support Romney.
Unless, of course, you want to stand by your word and support a different candidate because:
jaime on September 11, 2007 at 10:34 PM
RomneyCare at Work – Monday, July 02, 2007 @ 11:16:56 AM
Yesterday, the NY Times wrote about the Massachusetts health care program, as the individual madate takes effect. It is hard to imagine anything representing a greater affront to conservative principles than using government to coerce private citizens into purchasing healthcare. It is shocking that Mitt Romney could institute such a mandate and just months later run for president claiming to be a “conservative” in the tradition of Ronald Reagan, and be taken seriously. It is especially surprising given that one of the main gripes conservatives have had with President Bush has been the Medicare prescription drug plan–RomneyCare is far worse.
Even if you are more sympathetic to Romney than I am, I challenge you to read this and ask yourself whether you believe it is consistent with limited government principles:
In 2008, the penalty for those not insured will be a loss of state tax exemption, worth about $219; later the penalty will be up to half of a monthly insurance premium for each month a person is uninsured. Also, while any insurance is acceptable at first, by January 2009, everyone must have drug coverage.
There is one bright spot in the plan–residents who don’t like it can move:
Linda Impemba, 58, a marketing company employee in Wakefield, said she would remain uninsured, pay penalties, and, as soon as her ailing mother dies, will leave Massachusetts. “There’s no way in heaven I can possibly survive in this state,” Ms. Impemba said. “Now not only is my cost going to go up, everything’s going to be raised so I can pay for the other people” to be insured.
We won’t be so fortunate if such a plan gets created at the federal level. And as we have seen under President Bush, it is a lot easier for a big government Republican to to pursue expansionist domestic policies than it is for a Democrat. Practically speaking, a President Romney could put us on the pathway to socialized medicine faster than President Hillary. While Romney may be trying to distance himself from the plan as he tries to sell himself to conservatives, given his record of doing whatever is most politically expedient, there’s no reason for conservatives to believe that he would rule out a similar nationwide plan as president. And yes, this is why a record of brazen flip-flopping matters.
Posted By: Philip Klein
Written by Philip Klein from thr ultra conservative American Spectator Blog
All this and it outlaws private medical practice. So if I go to Mass. to get a boil on my a$$ lanced the doctor can get in trouble if he accepts a cash payment.
sonnyspats1 on September 11, 2007 at 10:44 PM
You have no proven connection to Mitt’s campaign. It’s all conjecture and innuendo.
Whereas Fred is clearly proud to have an open borders advocate on his staff. Ya know how much access the STAFF has to the platform of the candidate?
csdeven on September 11, 2007 at 10:45 PM
To quote from you:
Tennman on September 11, 2007 at 10:47 PM
Major derangement. Solipsism in its pure form.
Tennman on September 11, 2007 at 10:49 PM
This Fred ad is really well done, with the exception of the unintentionally funny “son of a used car salesman” line.
doriangrey on September 11, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Maybe you wouldn’t find it funny if it said his father was a snake oil salesman either. I can just hear you whining indignantly that we are trying to smear the common man.
Buy Danish on September 11, 2007 at 10:57 PM
sonnyspats1 on September 11, 2007 at 10:44 PM
WTF are you talking about?
Buy Danish on September 11, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Well said, and seconded!
techno_barbarian on September 11, 2007 at 11:04 PM
Fatal’s the real deal, right2bright. Straight up good people.
techno_barbarian on September 11, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Fred: The Lobbyist that wanted to be the chief lobbyist of the US of A!!! Hail to the lobbyist!!!!
csdeven on September 11, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Typical Fred groupie response. Ignore the facts about your “savior”. Tell the group, do you mimic the behavior of the Paulites, or are they mimicking you?
csdeven on September 11, 2007 at 11:14 PM
ROTF!!! Prance, saucy antelope.
jaime on September 11, 2007 at 11:25 PM
’scuse me. There’s nothing typical about me. ;)
On the other hand, typically for the world that’s all unto you, it’s all about trying to find some event, put on the worst possible spin, make an erroneous conclusion, and call it fact.
Oh, and nice job quoting the article above. You pick some of the strangest sources for your “proof.” A Clinton insider, no less. How credible. About the same as the rest of your disingenuous argument.
To quote from a young friend of mine, “Poof. Toodles.”
Tennman on September 11, 2007 at 11:28 PM
Thank God! I thought you were going to claim Fred had committed an offense against your person.
jaime on September 11, 2007 at 11:31 PM
techno_barbarian on September 11, 2007 at 11:04 PM
I agree in principle that we should not be fighting amongst ourselves so much and need to look at the larger goal of defeating Hillary/Obama/MoveOn.org, but the problem with SonnyPat’s little speech is that he habitually makes one blatantly false statement after another and is clearly incapable of parsing his own “research”.
I for one cannot just let his errors pass without responding, and if he thinks that is “persecution” or a sign that I am “intoxicated” then so be it.
Tennman on September 11, 2007 at 11:28 PM
Dick Morris is a Clinton “insider”, and he is also a Fred “insider”. He has worked for the Clinton’s and Fred (and many other political figures) at different times in his career.
Now perhaps you would like to dispute Morris’ arguments on their merits instead of just shooting the messenger.
Goodnight all.
Buy Danish on September 11, 2007 at 11:41 PM
You can show the proof if you like. I actually followed the links all the way.
You clearly have not or else you would realize that there is no proof of a direct connection to the Romney campaign. The person who initiated the site is UNKNOWN.
This is what UTPL does.
Here are a few of their clients.
They (UTPL) launch websites for others and as of yet, there is NO PROOF at all that they launched this website for Mitt Romney.
csdeven on September 11, 2007 at 11:43 PM
It doesn’t surprise me that you refuse to deal with each of those issues. You can run, and you can keep your head in the sand, but Fred will not be able to hide. He will fail to get the nomination because of the items on that list. And, he will then take the money you gave his campaign and funnel it to his family.
csdeven on September 11, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Friend Buy Danish, I could be wrong, but I don’t think sonnyspats1 had you in mind for the ‘intoxicated’ remark.
I for one am growing very weary of the poor quality of debate and rhetoric on display lately here on HotAir. That’s not in any way aimed at you. Lately the discourse here is closer to kos, huffpo, or du. I’d prefer to see things much more civil and respectful.
The endless slurs childish name-calling lowers the quality of an otherwise outstanding source of news and information.
techno_barbarian on September 11, 2007 at 11:59 PM
Why should I? They are not important, nor are they a true representation of reality. To give them attention and time at this point gives you legitimacy. And you know darn well we’ve had this conversation many times before on each and every point you’ve made.
So, no, I’m not playing with you on this one. Besides, I have to get a project out tonight still and don’t have the time.
Later, Gator
Tennman on September 11, 2007 at 11:59 PM
Seriously, you’re starting to sound like a troofer.
jaime on September 12, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Bwahahahahaha!!!
“Run away! Run away!!!!”
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Follow the reporters links and prove your claim. I already have and I know you cannot. But you wont, will you? You already know that in the WTC fire, fire can’t melt steel.
Bwahahahahahahaa!!!!!!!
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Oh, good grief. Maybe I should have said a Clinton Adviser during the Clinton administration. If he advised FTD on anything during this presidential run, I’d be surprised.
Secondly, most all of that is 15 plus years old.
Third, Papa Bear (Bill O’Reilly) laughed right in his face when he tried to make the connection last time he was on the Factor.
Fourth, being a lawyer and a lobbyist is neither illegal nor unethical. One represents clients, not adopts their positions. Representation ensures due process.
Fifth, lobbying is part and parcel of how our government workds. There is no way in the world for any congressman to have a large enough staff to enable him or her to understand each of the very complex issues that come up regarding medicine, transportation, education, insurance, insurance reform, the judiciary, on and on and on. Lobbyists ensure that information from the private sector, where there are acknowledged experts, flows from the experts to the Congress.
If Congress stopped lobbying altogether, maybe it wouldn’t be a bad thing, and maybe they’d stop making so many laws. But as long as they feel they must make new legislation all the dang time, I, for one, feel better knowing that they have some inkling what they’re either proposing or voting upon.
Dick Morris is just slinging effluvia onto the stage in hopes that it will get him noticed. It won’t stick because it’s nonsense. A lawyer should never be held accountable for his client’s point of view. Only ensuring that his client’s point of view is heard in a fair manner.
O/T What’s “Buy Danish” mean? Just curious. I always have wondered whether it means products from Denmark or pastry. Personally, I prefer the pastry. :)
Tennman on September 12, 2007 at 12:19 AM
More like, casually saunter. Running suggests fear; sauntering suggests boredom.
Tennman on September 12, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Major Romney Fundraiser Indicted for Fraud
Alan Fabian, a corporate executive from Cockeysville, Maryland, is one of Mitt Romney’s most important bundlers – a former George W. Bush “Ranger” (meaning he collected over $200,000 for Dubya’s campaign), now helping to gather contributions for the Romney campaign. Chris Cillizza calls these top-level bundlers “whales,” and if you scroll down, you’ll see Fabian’s name listed.
He’s also, according to Federal prosecutors in Maryland, a big-time fraudster:
A federal grand jury indicted a corporate executive who allegedly ran a scheme to make $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment, spending the money instead on beach real estate and private jet travel, prosecutors said Thursday.
Alan B. Fabian, 43, of Cockeysville, is charged in a 23-count indictment with mail fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice. The grand jury handed up the indictment Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Baltimore and it was unsealed Thursday.
sonnyspats1 on September 12, 2007 at 12:42 AM
Yeah, blame Dick Morris for Fred’s sorted history. Defending lobbyists who chose scum for clients is the issue.
A dictator.
Against asbestos victims.
In favor of abortion rights group.
In favor of a failed big government power plant.
None are conservative issues. Fred chose money over principle. All those he lobbied for had more money than those he lobbied against. Those he lobbied against were basically victims of his clients.
So yeah, keep defending Fred’s lobbying. It’ll be easier to open your eyes when you watch the country reject Fred for his scumbag ways.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 12:44 AM
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 12:44 AM
I wonder if you are actually going to be shocked when you get banned from HotAir.
doriangrey on September 12, 2007 at 1:32 AM
First of all, FTD only has a sordid history in your mind. If you find scum there, it’s not his fault.
Secondly, read again my 12:19 a.m. post. The issue is lobbying and representation. I think I did a fair job of clarifying the issue and explaining the function of lobbyists in government, and the lawyer’s ethical obligation to fairly represent his clients.
If you cannot or will not understand that, then it’s, again, your fault. Not FDT’s.
Nighty-night. My project is finished and I’m off to la-la land.
Tennman on September 12, 2007 at 1:53 AM
Fred! and Hunter are the only candidates left.
Rudiani? Abortion mill’s best friend, needs to shave legs if he’s going to wear that dress, America’s sanctuary city mayor, melt down handguns candidate. Fact: no GOP candidate can beat Hill in New York. Forget it. Check out the polls. Don’t let Rudiani’s clones tell you he can beat Hill in New York.
Mitt? Closet socialist, liked abortion before running for president, perfect family with no errors, ever. Mitt says he can win in Michigan. But, Michigan can’t beat Appalachian State.
Ron Paul? Driving his flying saucer over area 51 so he’s too busy to deal with terrorism.
Tancredo? Good on border but with Ron Paul on Iraq. Sorry, no more room in the flying saucer.
Hucklebee? He’s kinda funny except when he sets rapists free to go to Missouri to kill people.
saved on September 12, 2007 at 5:58 AM
I think I’ve been around here long enough that if I was getting close to some line, AP would let me know. If you’d like to quote chapter and verse from the rules of conduct and then point out how I am the only one guilty of transgressions, then please, go right ahead.
If I were you, I’d worry about my own behavior.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 7:48 AM
First, Fred’s sorted (American Heritage Dictionary 5) A way of acting or behaving) history was laid out very clearly by BM.
I did read your post and just because YOU are willing to turn the presidency over to someone who justifies his defense of scumbags by hiding behind rhetoric, doesn’t mean he’s the best man for the job. You are going to find out very soon that Americans do not want a professional lobbyist as the most powerful person on the face of the earth. Especially a lobbyist that RARELY lobbied for worthwhile conservative causes. Fred almost ALWAYS went for the clients with the big bucks and left the victims to fend for themselves. You hair renting Fred groupies refuse to accept the fact that Fred could have chosen to lobby for THE VICTIMS. That is a way of behaving that is disgusting to regular folks.
I’m going to watching you Fred supporters very carefully for complaints about Hillary and others involvement with lobbyists. And believe you me, you going get a full on broadside when I see it. As a matter of fact, I expect you lobbyist supporters to come out in defense of ANY candidate, regardless of party affiliation, who is attacked for their connections to lobbyists.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 8:00 AM
Oh, I have no doubt you’ll continue your sordid ways regardless of what happens with Hillary, Obama, etc. Normal people who support normal people will not pay much attention to your specious caterwauling.
Hi ho, hi ho, it’s off to work I go.
Tennman on September 12, 2007 at 8:15 AM
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 8:00 AM
Sordid not sorted. Sheesh.
techno_barbarian on September 11, 2007 at 11:59 PM
I said, “I for one…” I was speaking in general terms and I didn’t mean to imply that SonnyPats had me in mind.
Tennman on September 12, 2007 at 12:19 AM
What does the fact that Morris is a former “advisor” to the Clintons have to do with what he has to say about Fred? Are you saying that just the fact that he worked for them at one point means that he has no credibility?
If so, how is it that it’s okay to be a lobbyist or lawyer but not a political consultant?
By the way, the only lobbying that really bothers me on Fred’s part was his “lobbying” for Aristide.
Thompson served in the Senate from 1994 – 2003. Please advise the cut off date for items that are too “old”.
As for the rest of your comments about lobbying, very good! You are actually beginning to deal with the issue here.
Oh – my name goes back to the Danish cartoon riots, and my disgust with cowardly Dhimmis in the media who cower at the thought of “offending” perpetually outraged muslims and refuse to print the most benign cartoons (to name just one example of their disgraceful cowardice), empowering Islamofascism in the process.
sonnyspats1 on September 12, 2007 at 12:42 AM
Was Alan Fabian a “bundler” when he was named a Bush Ranger, or did he give his own money? Since McCain-Feingold had not taken the money out of politics at that time*, I could be wrong, but I don’t think these donations needed to be bundled (unless there was money laundering involved like with the Chicoms and the Clintons) because the laws were different at that time.
I think you are (once again) jumping to conclusions that are not in the story, but it’s hard to say since you don’t provide a link.
*/sarc.
Buy Danish on September 12, 2007 at 8:32 AM
You aren’t getting it….
I know what I meant. You use “sorted” to generalize behavior without attaching specific judgment as to it being good or bad.
You can see it is bad behavior and therefore assume I meant “sordid”. It’s kinda like calling out the groupies and only those who are groupies get offended.
Thank you for revealing your true understanding of Fred’s behavior. Now, why can’t you just call a spade a spade and leave the spin to the groupies?
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 9:05 AM
Why aren’t you bothered by Fred’s other lobbing?
He lobbied to deny asbestos victims the right to be represented individually by attorneys. It effectively limited the liability of the companies who carelessly used asbestos and exposed their employees to it.
He is supposedly a federalist, and my understanding is that he lobbied to have the government involved in a private sector endeavor.
I admit the lobbying for the pro-choice group was minor. It’s was the lying and the continued attempt at cover that is the real problem.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 9:10 AM
Yeah, that’s why Massachusetts became a socialist utopia during Mitt’s reign.
If Mitt were really a socialist, he could have easily sold it to the socialists here in Massachusetts. But guess what, Mitt isn’t a socialist, closet or otherwise. In fact, if Mitt were a socialist then he’d probably be the worst socialist ever considering he spent his life making enterprises successful through good old fashioned capitalism.
And don’t pull out that health care crap again. Mitt is the only candidate who has ever even TRIED to address it in a meaningful way, and guess who he consulted: The Heritage Foundation!
You’ll excuse me if I find your viewpoint at odds with reality.
BKennedy on September 12, 2007 at 9:15 AM
I’m glad you dealt with that. I was trying to find a different way to explain that because normal rational hasn’t worked with some of these people. And the Heritage Foundation angle on this was the very first thing I thought of.
Here’s the problem with their view of Mitt’s efforts.
If Mass was a conservative haven and Mitt did this, it could be viewed as a step away from conservatism. Mass is a liberal stronghold, so the move away from a total socialist society towards conservatism is a move in the right direction..
Right now, ALL universal health care plans are socialist in nature, so I’d argue that ANY health care plan that moves away from those socialist plans is a move in the right direction and is completely consistent with conservative principles. Especially when we are trying to take back a position that the liberals have dominated in.
We cannot swing the pendulum from the left to right without going through the middle.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 9:37 AM
Just one of the many other reasons I’m pulling for Mitt is because of health care. Yes, I know the plan is flawed and certainly imperfect. However, health care is a major problem in America. Here are some brief facts:
1: The current health care situation sucks.
2: HillaryCare, if implemented, will suck even more.
Given those facts, I support Mitt because he actually went out on a limb and did something about it. Was his plan perfect? Certainly not, but with Mitt you know he’s actually going to put something forward instead of just mouthing everyone else with “Health Care Sucks! Socialized Medicine Sucks!” Mitt came up with a plan and tried to implement it, instead of giving a talking points list of what health care should be.
BKennedy on September 12, 2007 at 9:55 AM
That is the definition of leadership isn’t it? Rudy and Mitt have it. Fred and Hillary do not.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2