Fred knocks ‘em dead at big social con conference?
posted at 1:05 pm on October 19, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Not quite dead, says Geraghty, but he definitely impressed, in particular with his emotional moment recounting the first time he saw a sonogram of his daughter. Both Geraghty and Marc Ambinder were sufficiently struck by it to post on it. His line at the end about what he’d do in the first hour of his administration also seems to have gone over like gangbusters. I e-mailed Jon Henke to see if the campaign has video; I suspect they will in an hour or two, so check back for updates. In the meantime, though, with the conclave of Christian conservatives set to meet tomorrow to try to pick a candidate, I can’t help wondering if he didn’t change a few minds today.
On the other hand, Rudy might be one phone call away from being back in evangelicals’ good graces. Check out this startling passage from the story at the link. Is Rudy a nonbeliever?
“When I spent two solid hours in a private meeting with Rudy Giuliani, I shared Christ with him so much that at the end of that two hours I said, ‘Rudy, I’m not going to leave this place unless I give you an opportunity to pray with me to receive Jesus as your savior. Would you do that with me Rudy?’” Page recounted.
“He said, ‘No, Frank, I’m not ready to do that. My daddy knows Jesus like that, but I’m not ready for that.’”
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
I think you may be right. Maybe I smacked Tommy a bit too hard?
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 6:21 PM
So, someone doesn’t agree with that lying fake Fred and they’re a liberal? Do us a favor will ya? Don’t admit you’re a conservative. We don’t need the bad press.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 6:22 PM
Save your breath. We’ve gotta ignore these trolls from the Hillary and RINO campaigns.
I feel sorry for anyone with tommyBoy as their lawyer.
He couldn’t argue his way out of a paper bag.
And we all know csd is REALLY Dick Morris….
omnipotent on October 19, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Thanks, you are right. We have an election to win.
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 6:25 PM
It’s Al Bundy!
How’s Peg and the kids?
Still working at the shoe store?
Vinnie on October 19, 2007 at 6:30 PM
So what the heck does that have to do with why were got involved? You are trying morph this into an argument that is not what you originally asserted. The claim was that the US has shed more blood for OTHERS freedoms than nay other country in history. (by the way, “others” was a word YOU used. I have no idea if Fred meant that. If you bother to go back and read it again, you’ll where I said exactly that)
Now listen up child, if you want an honest debate then debate honest. Otherwise excuse yourself from the adult table until you’re ready to grow up.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 6:33 PM
I’m not angry, tommylotto.
I don’t think the word “overanalyze” was intended to mean “idiot.” Gatordoug can certainly speak for himself, but my interpretation of “overanalyze” is that it usually means people are trying to beat a message to the point of finding a meaning unintended by the speaker.
Some scholars say that all communication is an effort to persuade to some degree. I don’t happen to believe that, but the idea that we argue with people for more than entertainment value has merit.
DrMagnolias on October 19, 2007 at 6:33 PM
That was EXACTLY what I meant by overanalyze. Tommy knows that. I think he is trying to cover his inability to debate here. I think maybe Tommy is an educated man, educated beyond his hat size perhaps.
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 6:41 PM
csdeven and tommylotto: FACTS REASON REALITY CONTEXT
Fredheads: FEAR THE FRAUD! FRAUD! THOMPSON ‘08!
BKennedy on October 19, 2007 at 6:42 PM
He was describing people who “hear” Fred. Well, Fred is lying and they don’t bother to analyze him enough to figure that out. I wouldn’t use the word stupid, but it was gator that was describing stupid behavior.
Perhaps he should say what he means and mean what he says?
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 6:49 PM
There was nothing confusing in what I posted, nothing at all.
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 6:59 PM
Sorry, you have been excused from the adult table. You know what you have to do to earn your way back to be with we adults. Don’t bother me again until you are ready to grow up.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 7:07 PM
You seem like a relatively rational individual. Look at the quote again:
His definition of “average Conservative” is someone who does not think critically. The “average Conservative” will listen to the soundbites and buzzwords and will be more interested in how he talks than what he really means. I think in that quote there is also a subtext of regionalism. The Southerners will believe him, not because of any inherent trustworthiness, but because he is from the South too. Thus, the “average Conservative” will not be interested to learn that Fred is the only Republican candidate that has less experience than Hillary, that Fred has no accomplishment of note recommending him for the job of POTUS, that Fred has no executive experience, that Fred’s only accomplishments as a Senator were CFR, botching the investigation of Clinton’s campaign finance crimes, and voting to not to remove Clinton from office — basically condoning illegal activity by a sitting President. The “average Conservative” is not concerned by Fred’s long history of lobbying for unsavory dictators, abortion groups, and against the interests of asbestos victims. They are not concerned that he voluntarily associated himself with and actually assisted the defense team fighting to prevent the Lybian terrorists responsible for killing 270 innocent civilians from being tried in any court outside of Lybia — the terrorist state also responsible for the bombing. They are not bothered that he has surrounded himself with a campaign manager who is committed to open borders and who refuses to denounce terrorist groups. All they are interested in are his vague platitudes that are meaningless but are told with a slow rambling southern drawl. I guess I was just using “idiot” as caustic humorous short hand for someone like that, but I don’t think that is too far off base.
tommylotto on October 19, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Am I the only one who pictures Lionel Hutz everytime I read a tommyBoy post?
omnipotent on October 19, 2007 at 7:16 PM
Funny you should say that. My son was diagnosed with hydrocephalus because his head was growing way too fast. We made the appointment with the brain surgeon to learn about the procedure to drain the fluid. He took one look at me, measured my head and pronounced my boy fine. Apparently freakishly large heads run in the family.
tommylotto on October 19, 2007 at 7:18 PM
Why is Fred only getting the “I wont vote for him” remarks from the evangelicals?
This is a little off topic, but Mitt Romney picked up another evangelical endorsement in addition to the endorsement from Bob Jones.
Also Mitt makes a move in Florida.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 7:22 PM
Bwahahahahaha!!!! That’ll send that “average conservative” to the dictionary!
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 7:26 PM
Mitt hovers in the low teens……..OOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
omnipotent on October 19, 2007 at 7:28 PM
Do not put words in my mouth. It is very clear what I mean here. I find it very interesting that you debate, if you can call it that, like a Liberal. You distort things, you muddy the waters, you try to change the subject, and if that fails you lie. It may help you to buy a dictionary and look up “overanalyze”. It has zip to do with critical thinking. Conservatives are bright folks, they do not need the media to spin things for them, or to overanalyze a speech to find hidden meanings. We have common sense, which is why we are Conservatives.
Unlike you, we are not obssessed with regionaslism, or accents, or finding hidden mesages. We listen, and if we believe a candidate to be sincerely Conservative, well there ya go.
This will be the last post directed to you on this thread. I have proven my points, and continuing the dialogue is, frankly a waste of time. It is very clear that you are out of your league. If not, you would not be twisting my words.
I will go back to more important things and you can go back to bashing Southerners and pretending to be an intellectual.
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 7:29 PM
No, I can’t…………..it’s just too facile.
omnipotent on October 19, 2007 at 7:29 PM
Do you get the impression Tommy is a bit liberal? He seems to be slipping up here and there. Blowing his cover maybe? Or perhaps it is that “freakishly large head”?
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 7:32 PM
Ego
omnipotent on October 19, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Since you have such a hard on for polls, why don’t you explain to the group where “What’s a dollar?” is at in Iowa, NH, MI, California, Florida etc? If you could magically change our presidential elections into ones of a national nature, your slavish reliance on national polls might mean something. All it means right now is that “What’s a dollar?” has name recognition, but in statewide polls, people prefer someone else.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 7:38 PM
I did and actually, it’s not a word. It’s two — over analyze.
The South shall rise again, NOT.
Look, you cannot accept everyone at face value — particularly politicians. If “average Conservatives” were as critical in their thinking on Fred as they are with Rudy, Fred would not be a candidate. There is no there there.
Anytime you guys want to stop attacking me as an ambulance chasing closet liberal with a freakishly large head and actually address the serious problems about Fred’s candidacy, feel free.
tommylotto on October 19, 2007 at 7:56 PM
I posted this in the Mitt denounces UN topic, but I am wondering where “What’s a Dollar?” came from.
I personally prefer Fraud! Thompson because it takes the sainted pre-candidacy label of the Fredheads and alters it to reflect reality.
BKennedy on October 19, 2007 at 7:58 PM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Overanalyze
Main Entry: overanalyze
Part of Speech: v
Definition: to analyze a situation to an excessive degree; to devote an exorbitant amount of time to researching a situation or thing
Webster’s New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7)
Copyright © 2003-2007 Lexico Publishing Group, LLC
Gatordoug on October 19, 2007 at 8:02 PM
LOL I do that as an exercise in me amusing myself.
During the last debate, Fred was asked about the devaluing of the dollar. He got this blank expression on his face and repeated the question….”Devaluing the dollar?”.
It reminded me of Ralphie in “Christmas Story” when he sat on Santa’s lap and blanked on what he wanted. Santa asked him if he wanted a football. Ralphie said to himself….”Football? Football? What’s a football?”.
“Dollar? Dollar? What’s a dollar?”
Bwahahahahaha
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 8:23 PM
Rudy’s got big brass ones to break this out:
MITT & HILLARY SINGING FROM THE SAME SONG SHEET
tommylotto on October 19, 2007 at 8:29 PM
WHOA!!! That did take some balls! Doesn’t Rudy have a lot of the same positions? I think he’s making a mistake thinking that the flip flop issue is gonna hurt Mitt. He’s already getting lots of evangelical support and even Jeb is providing substantial support in Florida.
He’s gonna have to take as much as he gives on this. The problem is that “What’s a dollar?” will be the benefactor. And having that scumbag lobbyist/terrorist supporter as the nominee will guarantee a Hillary win.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 8:46 PM
Fred is SO the man. 100% pro life record, what other candidate sports that?
Rudy’s a gooner on abortion and Mitt’s flip flopped more times than an unborn baby. Huckabee and Hunter are okay on abortion so give Hunter the VP slot.
Boom, here comes the boom, here comes the boom, here come the boys from the South!
Mojave Mark on October 19, 2007 at 9:00 PM
That is misguided claptrap. Fred is a pro-choice federalist. Has been since he lobbied for abortions and in 1994 when he insisted that all, not some, ALL abortions should be legal in the first trimester.
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 9:04 PM
FDT the next POTUS! Yeah baby.
Ex-tex on October 19, 2007 at 9:34 PM
Worst Hot Air comment thread. Ever.
You suck!
Oh yeah, well you suck!
Well, Fredheads are hicks and they suck!
Rudy fans are RINO liberal shills and they suck!
I hate you!
You’re a troll!
I know you are but what am I?
Mom…!!!
I can’t believe this, but the comments at Rusty’s are highbrow compared to this thread. In a Ragnar thread, no less!
Moving right along…
bamapachyderm on October 19, 2007 at 9:40 PM
No, dear csdeven, it won’t guarantee a Hillary win, but it will guarantee a drink – it’s just a matter of who’ll pay for it :)
Entelechy on October 19, 2007 at 9:40 PM
HA! You got me!
csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 11:16 PM
HOW the man votes is WHO the man is.
Mojave Mark on October 19, 2007 at 11:24 PM
Dead on perfect. The romper room self-appointed ‘elite’ throwing their usual pathetic tantrums. The very worst HotAir has to offer.
techno_barbarian on October 19, 2007 at 11:51 PM
Yup!
Bradky on October 19, 2007 at 11:55 PM
Everything has it’s beauty, but not everyone sees it.
- Confucius
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:57 PM
If you have to attack Southerners and “average Americans” by calling them dumb hicks and idiots, or saying they only like someone because of their accent to sit at the adult table, count me out. That’s as childish as it comes.
Gianni on October 20, 2007 at 12:00 AM
It sounds like you have a personal problem. I never wrote any such thing.
He has been excused from the adult table because he made a claim that I asked him to back up. He could not and chose to fixate on others comments. He is a child and doesn’t deserve my attention.
csdeven on October 20, 2007 at 12:12 AM
-
阿呆!
-
Keep it up and your lobes will get all stretched. But don’t worry, PETA is looking out for you.
Herikutsu on October 20, 2007 at 12:15 AM
Big, indeed, from so many perspectives
Entelechy on October 20, 2007 at 2:06 AM
Oooooooo… picking a fight this early in a thead?
Had to laugh. They make it so easy.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 7:47 AM
Disgusting is the name-calling.
Get a grip, and raise the intelligence level.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:02 AM
You must have read Mark Steyn’s “America Alone.” I did, and it scared the heck out of me also. Too much muslim immigration… too little American procreation.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:12 AM
I’m a relative newcomer here, and I haven’t seen you post before. Very nice comment. And if you are new to here also, welcome aboard to the discussions.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:21 AM
“I’m a LAWYER, what did you expect?”
Line from Rustler’s Rapsody.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:26 AM
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:29 AM
Bear with me ladies and gents… I’m only half way through this thread. And in Thailand, it is 7:30 PM.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:31 AM
If you think and live your life as a Southerner, then, my friend, you are most welcome.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:34 AM
tommylotto on October 19, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Did they teach you how to spell in lawyer school?
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 8:44 AM
Geez. What’s with the manifesto?
Bradky on October 20, 2007 at 8:55 AM
WAs I on a “role”?
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 9:02 AM
Double-dig.
I’m sitting in a bar in Thailand, having a drink and a good time. How are you doing?
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 9:03 AM
I just looked at the thread above…
Ooops. Cut and pasted tooooooo much.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 9:05 AM
Gramar and spelling?
I admit we don’t have spellcheck here, and it would be a nice featue, but…. A LAWYER?
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 9:26 AM
Oops. Grammar. Missed a keystroke….
Not that a lawyer would catch.
:)
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 9:28 AM
Is this what they teach in law school these days?
I suggest a sabatical for you. DO some service overseas as a DoD contractor. If you are still able, join the reserves or active service. Go out and risk your life in a combat zone. Not all wars are for profit.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 9:42 AM
I am beginning to get that impression myself.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Did not say that. Did not imply that. But if the US is spilling its blood and treasure, it had better not be for “others” benefit like Fred the demogouge claims. It had better be for US security or prosperity.
tommylotto on October 20, 2007 at 10:47 AM
I tend to agree…
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 10:49 AM
Veeerwy funny. LMAO.
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 11:03 AM
My appologies again, for coming in late. Also for the too-long “cut-n-paste.” Very amusing thread.
See y’all tomorrow….
Texas Nick 77 on October 20, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Indeed it seems to be that way
Gatordoug on October 20, 2007 at 11:35 AM
It was the ALL wars are for profits BS he swpewed that was a big clue
Gatordoug on October 20, 2007 at 11:38 AM
We are debating Fred. I cite fact after fact, reason after reason, example after example, and your response is attacking me as a liberal.
Debate tips: Don’t attack the messenger. Explain why Fred refuses to talk in specifics. Prove that just because Fred says “no amnesty” he is not going to allow the 12 to 20 million illegals a path to citizenship given his choice of campaign managers. Explain his lobbying past and his assistance to Lybian terrorists. Defend his lack of experience in both governmental service and in the role of an executive. Explain his prior lobbying activities and stated pro-choice position with his current claim of always having been pro-life. Tell me what accomplishment of note that he has that recommends him to be POTUS. Why did he give us CFR? Why did he botch the investigation of Clinton’s campaign finance crimes? Why did he vote to not remove Clinton on impeachment?
I guess you guys are employing the debating technique of avoidance and misdirection.
tommylotto on October 20, 2007 at 12:07 PM
There IS a path to citizenship. It’s called legal immigration. The efforcement side of this is the 3D’s.
Detect
Detain
Deport
All at once? No. But as people have contact with the criminal justice system, out they go. That and use the IRS and the Justice Dept. to crush businesses that hire illegals.
Any questions?
Mojave Mark on October 20, 2007 at 2:03 PM
I’m not asking how you would do it, I’m asking how has Fed said he was going to do it. Has he even said he was going to do it? Or has he just said NO AMNESTY, without explaining what he means by amnesty — expecting his gulible groupies to fill in the blanks with their wildest xenophobic fantasies.
tommylotto on October 20, 2007 at 2:45 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2