Fred’s new ad
posted at 4:10 pm on November 6, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Everyone’s posting this new ad so I guess I will too. It starts its broadcast run tomorrow. It’s a solid ad, nothing to jump up and down about, though you see a little bit of Fred’s Hollywood chops in it. Folksy Fred is fine but I prefer the cigar-chomping Fred who talks smack to Michael Moore.
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 3 Next »
You are kidding right? I scoured that post looking for notable achievements, other than impregnating his two wives three times, I didn’t see a thing. Being elected this or appointed that is not an achievement.
tommylotto on November 6, 2007 at 6:29 PM
For goshsakes guys… are you saying this is the 1896 election all over again, and Fred is William Jennings Bryan???
You know how that one turned out.
Always Right on November 6, 2007 at 6:30 PM
I’ve had similar thoughts lately, although I’ve been wondering if perhaps some of the stark raving Fred haters might actually be secret Ron Paul supporters. Their level of dedication to their task of destroying Fred suggests to me that they are either on the payroll of the various candidates or suffer from a disorder of such magnitude as is most commonly found in Ron Paul groupies. Of course there is also the possibly that they simply have no life. In CSD’s case, maybe this is his “mission” for the church?
CSD makes Mitt look bad at the same time he tries to smear Fred. Tommylotto does the same for Rudy. From the perspective if Ron Paul supporters it’s a win/win scenario. They can’t openly support Ron Paul or else their voices would be silenced, so absent the direct approach this tactic is the only means left to them here at HA.
Then there is the story today about Ron Paul supporters setting up fake websites to trash competing campaigns, so I wouldn’t put anything past them.
This is pure speculation, of course, but it would explain a lot.
FloatingRock on November 6, 2007 at 6:30 PM
No, they do not.
Gatordoug on November 6, 2007 at 6:33 PM
impregnating his two wives three times
Dude’s got the Strangelove vote locked up.
Cuffy Meigs on November 6, 2007 at 6:33 PM
Doesn’t he have a 100% rating on anti-abortion? What other candidate has that? I have a dozen more.
Just one that you seemed to overlook.
And you guys (and tommylotto) should learn to find your own quotes, rather than using my words.
Here is another quote you can steal:
Not all candidates are pro 2nd, some have even fought to keep guns out of the hands of citizens.
Can you name me the ones?
right2bright on November 6, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Better tighten your lug nuts, your wheels are coming off.
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 6:34 PM
He lobbied for John Roberts nomination and also for Scooter Libby to be acquitted, among other things.
Knocked up his hot wife as well, he has some vim and vigor in him all right.
CrimsonFisted on November 6, 2007 at 6:34 PM
No god and no religion can survive ridicule, no politician, no nobility, no royalty or other fraud, can face ridicule in a fair field and live.
- Mark Twain
MB4 on November 6, 2007 at 6:35 PM
If memory serves, you’ve been in the tank for Romney for quite some time now.
It’s not at least a little troubling to you that a candidate is so attracted to power that he’d spend $17 million (likely to be closer to $25 million by the time Super Tuesday rolls around) of his own money just to get the nomination?
We criticize the Clintons for their lust for power; isn’t that a legitimate question of our own candidates?
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 6:39 PM
Thompson/Steele. Perfect.
Rose on November 6, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Carter was a governor. Clinton was a governor. GW Bush was a governor. Clearly being a governor isn’t an indicator of potential success- particularly a one-term governor of a liberal state and few conservative credentials or accomplishments to show for it.
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 6:45 PM
Yeah, we’ve already established Fred Thompson’s greatest accomplishments involve a whole lot of talking and zip on action. Oh, and apparently spreading his seed.
So if I want a President who needs to serve on committee and talk a lot on behalf of America at the behest of better, more competent men, I’ll call him.
Romney impregnated his ONE wife FIVE times. Based on the MANHOOD factor, Mitt wins this. And Ann Romney doesn’t have to show copius amounts of cleavage to get attention, either.
BKennedy on November 6, 2007 at 6:48 PM
LAME
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 6:52 PM
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 6:39 PM
I am in the tank for Romney and Rudy. Decisions, decisions.
In any case I’d rather him spend his own money than spend donations grifted out of a poor Chinatown dishwasher.
If Fred had gotten off his butt and committed to running earlier he might have dough of his own to spend too. Fred’s complaining about Romney spending his own money is just a pathetically weak complaint. Your analogy that it betrays a “lust for power” is even more pathetic.
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 6:53 PM
What’s unfortunate about people spending their own money is that it sends the message that only the rich can be president. I’m sure there are many far more capable of running this country out there who will never have a chance because they are not rich or connected to rich people.
Rose on November 6, 2007 at 6:56 PM
So the homo had vaginal sex five times in his life…your point is?
Ochlan on November 6, 2007 at 6:56 PM
Thats not cool.
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 6:58 PM
From what I can tell from SCOTUS Justice Thomas’ new book…his granddaddy woulda been one kickass prez…except I think the man would rather be workin’ hard in the dirt.
A little OT I know…but I’m blown away by that man. Reminds me of my grandpa…
Ochlan on November 6, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Can you please peel, really peel, the Glacier’s onion?
Entelechy on November 6, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Do I look like Fonzie?
All these threads devolve into bullsh!t smack…I’m just hurryin’ it along to the edge… ;-)
Ochlan on November 6, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Fred can’t win. He’s too old, and he looks old. And all the people in his ad are old. There are two Americas… young and old.
B26354 on November 6, 2007 at 7:05 PM
Sure, just ask Albert Arnold “Al” Gore, Jr. and John Forbes Kerry how much it hurts not to be elected “this or that”, as you say. And after this time next year, Hillary.
Entelechy on November 6, 2007 at 7:07 PM
When you consider the vast amounts of his own money he’s committing to the primary race, the flip-flops and the too-slick pandering I hardly think it’s baseless to suggest that he’s perhaps a little too attracted to power.
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Rose on November 6, 2007 at 6:56 PM
I wasn’t aware that the Clintons were independently wealthy before they, err, he was elected.
Romney has worked very hard to become “rich”. What’s wrong with that? It’s not like he inherited his bootlegging grandfather’s ill-gotten fortune, or traded in amazingly profitable cattle futures.
(Here is where r2b pops in and tells us all about Romney being the product of a life of privilege, waaaaah!)
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 7:10 PM
Romney is as slick, and as ruthlessly attracted to power as Hillary is. That blind ambition and slipperiness will be their undoing btw. now and one year from now.
Entelechy on November 6, 2007 at 7:11 PM
And the old vote at higher percentages than the young. Anyway, my kids like Fred and will be voting for him. Two of them are young enough to be voting for the first time.
Rose on November 6, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Buy Danish, I said were rich or connected to rich people.
Rose on November 6, 2007 at 7:15 PM
What a miserable cynic you are!
Why don’t you share with us what evil plans you think Romney has in store for us once he gets this power you claim he lusts after?
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 7:15 PM
Wouldn’t be prudent.
If I did that anyone who looked would be turned to stone.
I would not want that on my conscience.
MB4 on November 6, 2007 at 7:17 PM
Rose,
If you haven’t managed as a candidate to get “connected to rich people” then you are probably too incompetent to run this country.
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 7:18 PM
No evil plans.
Just a photogenic, idiotic, sh!t president.
The mormon bimbo needs to stfu and go home to his martha stewatr wife.
Ochlan on November 6, 2007 at 7:20 PM
BD, How elitist of you.
Rose on November 6, 2007 at 7:20 PM
Nice dodge of the question. I’ve not suggested any evil intent, but it’s certainly valid to question if someone is too power hungry- power corrupts.
But let’s see- just considering what Primary Romney (as opposed to Governor Romney, who politically was a completely different person) has said: he’d enact more gun control, spend more money on foreign aid, spend more money on corporate welfare, more money on ag subsidies, more money on health care, more money on programs to prop up homeowners… and that’s just off the top of my head from watching the debates.
We don’t know what he’d do about immigration- as recently as 2006 he as in favor of amnesty, but after sticking a finger to the wind he’s now against it.
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 7:22 PM
You are kidding right? I scoured that post looking for notable achievements, other than impregnating his two wives three times, I didn’t see a thing. Being elected this or appointed that is not an achievement.
tommylotto on November 6, 2007 at 6:29 PM
As the chief executive of a city with 8 million souls he was once again a crusader trying to make NYC a better place, reduce crime, promote business, cut welfare, get more money back from the federal government
Sorry but getting money from the Federal govrnment is not an acceptable conservative princable
Fred’s lists of achievements are very, very, very very small. As a US Attorney for three years he choose to used the resources of the US government that was put at his disposal to chase toothless banjo playing moonshiners.
One thing left out of that bio was FT’s succesful prosecution of a sitting Governor. Does that count?
tommylotto on November 6, 2007 at 5:54 PM
Granted the bio doesen’t go into specifics but it does dispell the ‘lazy’ critics and the committies FT served on did achieve goals. They were just done in a group. Is that a problem?
As for rudy. yeah yeah I give him alot of credit for the good work he did cleaning up NYC. So what did that take. He got federal funding for a new subway system and created a zero tolorance policy for the graffiti artists and a train wash. So what did it take to clean up times square? maybe he just got the cops to do the job they have been paid to do for decades and arrest hookers. That goes for the city maintainence department too they were only doing what they were suppose to do all along. The welfare policy was initiated by Ronald Regan and the federal funding spigot got shut off. Rudy didn’t have a choice or the money to pay out if he wanted to. As for the mob, how hard could that have been ? In NYC you can just pick up the any newspaper and follow the mob activity it’s a local hobby. Rudy hired prosecutors that were not on the mob payroll as well as judges. Thats the way it’s supposed to work. NYC was filled with so much crime,corruption and mismanagement when Rudy took over that he could have just had the run a street sweeper and it would have been a big improvement.
sonnyspats1 on November 6, 2007 at 7:26 PM
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 7:22 PM
I didn’t dodge anything. I don’t agree with your assinine assertion(s).
This WAS a dodge, and it came from you:
I didn’t mean he has evil intentions but power corrupts dontcha know!
Has it ever occurred to you that Romney loves this country and thinks he has a lot to offer?
As do I.
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 7:29 PM
I just heard Romney’s retort to Fred (whose full quote was “you can’t buy South Carolina, you can’t even rent it”).
Romney responded- You have to work South Carolina! I’ve made 50 trips here in the past year and Fred only made 4.
Mitt 1. Fred 0.
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 7:53 PM
I’ve not questioned his love of country, and don’t intend to start.
As far as my suggestion that he’s a bit too eager for power, I do question what he has to offer that justifies the money spent and positions changed.
As much as Ron Paul is a nut I’d never vote for, he does offer something different that certain
nutspeople find compelling. Tancredo has the immigration issue. But what does Romney have in terms of a distinctive, consistant message and philosophy that sets him significantly apart?Too many of his positions are based on how it affects his candidacy instead of being an indication of strongly held beliefs, switching positions almost overnight. Abortion? Changed. Roe v Wade? Changed. Amnesty? Changed. Fiscal policy? One minute he’s conservative, the next he’s supporting ag subsidies for Iowa, corporate welfare for the Michigan auto industry, and support Medicare spending for the AARP crowd. Gun control? Lied about being a hunter and gun owner to gain favor with an NRA member, but also supports a constitutionally questionable “assault weapon” ban.
Such pandering and flip-flopping combined with such massive amounts of own money injected into his campaign isn’t that reflective of a selfless leader wanting to serve his country- it’s the characteristics of someone who’ll say or do anything for power. Perhaps he’d use that power well, perhaps not. He’s simply given us little indication either way, as he’s not been consistant or conveyed a sense of strong, steadfast ideology.
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 8:37 PM
I dig it.
ballz2wallz on November 6, 2007 at 8:46 PM
Guys going to win – damn him for speaking directly to the American people instead of lecturing them or telling them how tough he is
The nerve implying that government is the problem
EricPWJohnson on November 6, 2007 at 9:14 PM
I like FREDles
TheSitRep on November 6, 2007 at 9:19 PM
We will see, wont we?
You don’t have to buy something you already own.
That just the american way.
TheSitRep on November 6, 2007 at 9:22 PM
Wow there’s a major thread about .Fred on AOL of all places.
sonnyspats1 on November 6, 2007 at 9:29 PM
And you hit it square on the head. I think this was the point Fred was trying to make in a nutshell, without coming out and saying it. I like Romney, but he is just so slick and changes his positions as often as his underwear, I can’t keep up with him. I don’t think my favorite (Duncan Hunter) has a chance (even though I still support him financially), I am looking to others in the top tier. I’m not a Rudy fan and Romney turns me off. Fred seems like a solid conservative. I guess I will still have to study and unlike some other commenters not make my decision just yet.
Neocon Peg on November 6, 2007 at 9:40 PM
Eric, if you are talking about Fred, in so much as Conservative values go, he should win; however, the party has the voters scared that “only Rudy can defeat Hillary.” with all these polls, etc. I for one, don’t give these polls any credence. Like I said earlier, I am a Duncan Hunter supporter, but he cannot get any movement because there is that “well, he can’t win, so we are looking to….” mentality out there. The party is just taking choice away from us and directing it to the person THEY want on the ballot, i.e., the top-tier candidates. JMHO. We voters have no choice, really.
Neocon Peg on November 6, 2007 at 9:49 PM
Who has already won what? I honestly don’t have a clue what that means, although I get the hint that you don’t like Romney.
I’ve heard all of this from you, like, a million times. I am not going to waste my time doing a point by point rebuttal, and you are wasting your time if you think you are going to convince me that you are right.
Like I said earlier, I try to like Fred but then he goes and blows it by whining like a baby that it’s not fair that he’s just a po boy instead of talking about the issues that define him.
Buy Danish on November 6, 2007 at 10:32 PM
I don’t feel like a victim. I am attempting to keep the subject on track, but for some inane reason, there are a few nut jobs here that like to follow me around from thread to thread using school yard insults as their preferred mode of communication. You know as well as I that I have shamed many of these groupies into curtailing their poor behavior. That has made for a better level of discourse here at HA. But we have a new group of douches that haven’t learned at the masters knee yet. It’s just a matter of time before this new group has responded to my training and become a force for civil discourse instead of a bunch of whining children complaining because someone challenges their imaginary world.
I know you know this to be true because you have seen me accomplish this many times over last summer. Give it time. I’ll get em on the right track and we can get back to discussing how poor a candidate Fred is instead of discussing the personality disorders of those who’d rather talk about other members of HA.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 11:00 PM
Pewee, the irony is getting a little thick in here.
FloatingRock on November 6, 2007 at 11:11 PM
Awwwwwww. Whaddda matter? You start something you can’t finish?
Look, it’s obvious you’re trying to extricate yourself from the embarrassment of starting the insults and name calling by projecting your personality disorder onto others. That don’t fool me and it don’t fool the group.
If you’ll take a few deep breaths and relax for a second, you’ll be able to analyze the facts. Those facts being that….
Oh, wait a minute…
Fair warning. Criticisms of Fred follow…
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fred is the least qualified candidate in the republican field. He lies about being 100% pro-life because in 1994, and Sunday on MTP, he admitted that he is a pro-choice federalist. Pro-life groups do not consider him 100% pro-life. That is why the social conservatives are flocking to Mitt and not “Dust Bunny”. “Dust Bunny” wants all his involvements with disgusting vile human beings to be judged in a vacuum. He cannot survive the scrutiny of his record as a scumbag lobbyist who lobbied for dictators, against victims of asbestos poisoning, and gave legal advice to terrorists. He funneled campaign cash to his son and authored McCain/Feingold. His record in the senate is piss poor on immigration and is generally uninspiring. He parades his children around like they are campaign props and was an unprincipled man whore for many years. The guy is unelectable because America has those down home values and those values don’t include support a lying fake like “What’s a dollar?”.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 11:19 PM
I know, the discourse was just fine before and after his previous visit.
BTW, condescending jerk is what came to mind, but irony works too. I know he believes he is among the chosen, but damn.
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Nice try. You’re just embarrassed that you got caught starting the insults and I 8itch slapped you for it. Come on back when you’re ready to sit at the adult table. Now shoo.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 11:21 PM
The discourse was fine before you and a few other weak minded individuals decided that since you couldn’t defeat the facts, you’d run the conversation off topic to obfuscate your weakness at debating your untenable positions.
It’s cool. We all can see it and are patiently waiting for you to wise up. Once you do that, you’ll be invited to have a conversation with me again.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 11:25 PM
BSdeven would have been a more appropriate user name for you.
FloatingRock on November 6, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Why do you always say we and us? You really do think you speak for all conservatives and all of HA. Well judging from every “Fred” thread you have decided to hijack by insulting then playing victim when you are called on it, you speak for NO ONE but your tiny little self. Get over yourself, your not that great. Just another keyboard commando, seen ‘em come, seen ‘em go.
Don’t hold your breath, your “Fred” conversations are nothing but looping circle jerks. Chanting the same mantra’s, using the same insults, calling the same names and when things are getting rough you pull out the “8’s” for “B’s” trick. I could go to DU.com and find the same discourse.
You really are a piece of work, do you have to grease the door jams to get your head inside?
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 11:36 PM
This is the last time I try to save you from your mouth. Your constant fixation on me is a clear indication that you have lost the discussion. You know that everything that I cited about Fred is fact. And since you cannot defend his indefensible position, you attack the one trying to enlighten you. You are doing this because you are frustrated that Fred has fooled you. So, you project that failure onto others in an attempt to convince yourself that it’s not so bad that you have been so fooled by “What’s a dollar?” Well, I’m here to release you from your embarrassment. People don’t want to watch you continue to suffer because you are too prideful to admit your failure to figure out that “Dust Bunny” is a fake. Don’t worry about it. It’s ok that you waited this long in your life to finally wise up. The best advice I can give you is to just ignore the errors in judgment you have made and come on back into the adult end of the pool. We wont hold your previous lapses in judgment against you.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 11:42 PM
Look, I understand your angst and I have avoided going to deep into this, but it appears you might be ready to take the next step in maturity.
I know it’s frustrating for people like you to try and keep up with my superior understanding of Fred’s psychology. This is why you lash out at me. But honesty, once you have your first experience with being so completely versed in a subject that you cannot in good conscience deny it even unto yourself, you’ll realize, like I have, that I have a moral responsibility to educate you and to try to elevate you to a higher level of comprehension. It’s tough for me, because I was at your level at sometime during grade school, but I’m doing my best to remember what it was like so I can understand your mentality. But fear not, I have decided not to give up on you until you give up on yourself.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Oh, you must have a PhD to trump my MS. Good for you!
I wish I could change my font size because I don’t think I can make this big enough:
LMFAO!!!
You stay classy saint.
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 11:56 PM
You’re a funny man, BSdeven.
As a rule I never argue with BS-artists. They just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. I’d much rather make fun of their BS instead. Fight BS with BS, they always say.
FloatingRock on November 7, 2007 at 12:07 AM
BSdeven—-Mr. Maturity. Sitting at the adult table now. We’re all so proud of you, BSdeven.
FloatingRock on November 7, 2007 at 12:22 AM
Well at least you know the story. What was that movie with Steve Martin?…”I was born a poor black boy…”
Mitt was born a poor kid, whose father happened to be one of the most powerful politicians in the country. But Mitt made it on his own, father kicked him out of the house at an early age so Mitt could make it on his own, and prove that he was a man. Mitt paid his way through Stanford and others by waiting on tables, washing dishes, working all night in the steel mills. He became an independent business consultant, who just by chance, ended up with his largest accounts being his fathers largest supporters.
Imagine the odds against that…and here Mitt was, born a poor black boy.
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 12:27 AM
“What’s a dollar?” admits he doesn’t want to be president.
Another scumbag associate of “Dust Bunny”.
“What’s a dollar?” is exposed as a poser. Mitt is THE MAN.
OUCH! I wonder if his wife has her eyes on that $8 million and don’t want “Dust Bunny” to get too far ahead that he’ll actually have to make a run at the nomination and end up spending all her, I mean all the groupies campaign donations?
Another conservative endorses Mitt. “What’s a dollar?” is going down baby!!!
While Fred brags on being a man whore, Mitt speaks on family values.
Poll says: Mitt catches the lying fake “What’s a dollar?” in SC. It’s over for Fred. Buh Bye!
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 12:48 AM
Another loss for “What’s a dollar?”
OUCH! And the hits keep coming! Mitt wins another one and Fred is shown for the loser he is!
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Hillary’s ad: It’s mourning in America.
Fred’s ad: It’s morning in America (all over again).
*cue music Louie Armstrong’s “What a Wonderful World”*
Mojave Mark on November 7, 2007 at 1:11 AM
A Wyoming county straw poll? How many people voted, like six maybe seven.
Yeah thats one hell of a victory from a state with 3 electoral votes.
Sammy316 on November 7, 2007 at 1:18 AM
CSDeven has never explained how Romney was given his multi million dollar job by his parents and the firm “Romney ran” was made up of wealthy friends of the family
EricPWJohnson on November 7, 2007 at 4:13 AM
And why Taxes went way up during Romney’s reign as governor….
EricPWJohnson on November 7, 2007 at 4:14 AM
Neo
Hunter can’t get any traction soo many cooks in the kitchen
EricPWJohnson on November 7, 2007 at 4:15 AM
Hey, I don’t know if you read the first line of my comment, but incase you did not take that in, here it goes again;
WE WILL SEE WONT WE?
That was an interrogative statement. ( because no one knows)
Then I go on to make a feeble attempt at humor, playing on the fact that since Fred Thompson is southern and likable, he has a much better chance at connecting with the fine folks of the Carolinas than say a not so folksy guy from MA that practices a form of religion considered heretical to very, very many in the south.
Let the chips fall where they may my friend.
TheSitRep on November 7, 2007 at 6:12 AM
As the primaries progress, we may see a bit more thinning of the tribe. Expect at least two of the lower tier guys to drop out.
I’m expecting an open convention, no one winning enough delegates to secure the nomination on a single ballot. Hopefully, after some horse-trading takes place, a conservative will be on the top and the bottom of the ticket. I like the ring of Thompson/Hunter, Thompson/Steele, and Thompson/Watts. Or substitute Hunter for Thompson on the last two.
Even Thompson/csdeven would do. :)
Texas Nick 77 on November 7, 2007 at 6:49 AM
Both of those have been explained many, many times.
The more salient points are that Fred came in behind Rudy, Huckabee, McCain, Ron Paul, and Hunter, and that with the amount of candidates to choose from, Mitt STILL took 61 of the 100 people who voted. Huck laid a butt whupping on Fred and Mitt smoked Huck! It’s becoming clearer by the day that the more regular folks learn about “What’s a dollar?”, the less they like him and the more they find out about Mitt, they see he is THE conservative candidate in the race and what he says resonates with REAL conservatives.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 7:22 AM
NYC still pays more in taxes than it get back in services from the feds. The city still pays more than its share. Is fairness a conservative value or is taking advantage of city folk a conservative value.
More Fred myth busting, he had nothing to do with the prosecution of a sitting Governor. He was a tort lawyer representing a disgrunteled employee that blew the whistel on her boss. Fred won $38,000 for her and took his 33%. Someone else did the prosecution of the Governor. No, Fred concentrated on moonshiners. His only corruption cases were two local sherrifs that tried to sell confiscated illegal stills (more moonshining!). He won one, and lost one.
tommylotto on November 7, 2007 at 8:09 AM
And when the baptists of the south begin the whispering campaign about Mitt working to have his wife become a Goddess, and him following men that believe that Jesus was married to three women…at the same time, polygamy I believe that is called, that the bible is a second class book, that the only religious book that matters is the book of mormon, and that the leaders and builders of his church hold Christians in disdain, then we will see where he stands in the polls.
Right now, no one can talk about his religion because you are called a bigot if you mention the word Mormon. So the campaign will be slower, but more insidious. It is wrong, but that is the south, and the south is the key. In the primary they may put on the show, but unfortunately, the talk after church will be wrong and devastating to Mitt.
The rest of us who are not supporters, for other reasons, just think he is wishy washy, a Kennedy politician, panders to his audience, and his business acumen very over rated. Spending 20 mil of his personal money (about 10 times more than anyone else) should have gotten him better results. But with his deep pockets of business and faith (if they can be seperated) supporters and he will try to buy this election. Monster, Marriot, Bechtel, etc. all have a stake in this race, and they will try to use their corporate muscle to win it. The last person to try to use his wealth to buy a race? Forbes, what happened? Before that, Perot? What happened?
But then Mitt-wits lovers can always point to Fred’s rental of a red truck, and Fred hiring his son to help in his campaign. To bad Fred didn’t have 5 sons.
Rudy is still the front runner, Huck or Hunter may make a move yet, and Fred is a quasi-longshot (probably where he should be, as a backup), Mitt’s poll numbers will grow, but his strength will weaken. Anyone dissing him will be called a bigot…as has been shown on these posts. So his negatives will go underground.
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 8:44 AM
Bet Mitt didn’t see this coming…
tommylotto on November 7, 2007 at 8:50 AM
Not quite. The following from my collection says it all:
Woody
woodcdi on November 7, 2007 at 8:53 AM
Don’t give up your day job to become a fiction writer.
TheSitRep on November 7, 2007 at 6:12 AM
My friend? Hmmmmm. Maybe you’re a McCain supporter!
I did not miss “we will see won’t we?”. What does that mean? Obviously no one can predict the primary results yet. I took it as more of a rhetorical statement than an interrogative, as I detected a certain snarkiness to it. Lo and Behold, I go to your website and you are a Fred supporter. Who woulda thunk it?
Saying things like “let the chips fall where they may” is a fairly meaningless statement and no one would contest the fact that the people of South Carolina will ultimately decide the outcome in their State.
I have never counted Fred out, I just don’t think he’s doing himself any favors by playing the poor boy card. He needs to step up to the plate with more than that if he wants to win.
Buy Danish on November 7, 2007 at 8:59 AM
This is great news for Rudy. I’d rather see Mitt get the endorsement, but as long as that lying fake Fred doesn’t get it, the conservative party will have the best candidate to fight the traitor the dems nominate.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 9:00 AM
Ouch, that really really helps Rudy. High profile, large following, he is one of the keys, just one but a big one. Looks like Pat is going for the win, and damn the conservatives.
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 9:01 AM
AND, if I have read the story correctly, Fred was enforcing laws that the federal government imposed on the states. Definitely NOT a federalist position.
“Dust Bunny” is CONSTANTLY attacking the little guy. He was against the family of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing. He was against the victims of a dictator. He was against victims of asbestos poisoning. He was against free speech. He was against unborn babies. He was against the gullible folks who, in good faith, donated their hard earned money to “What’s a dollar?”’s senate campaign.
He has never run ANYTHING. Not a city, not a state, not a business. Not even a corner store. He IS a liar and the least qualified candidate on the rep side.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 9:08 AM
great analysis on Mitt.
I’m scratching my head over Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Rudy. I don’t doubt Rudy can win in the general but Fred is a LOT closer to the hearts of evangelicals than Rudy is. Human life has eternal value but libs (including Rudy) choose not to see it.
Go FRED!
Mojave Mark on November 7, 2007 at 9:16 AM
ANYONE who wont vote for Mitt because of his faith is a straight up bigot.
The rest of your complaints have been exposed as misleading and in many cases HUGE stretches of the imagination.
With Mitts stellar accomplishments at Harvard and Yale, ANY company would be clamoring to give him a job. As a matter of fact, the guy who recruited him is a well know recruiter of the best and brightest coming out of business schools. Mitt was quite the catch and didn’t need his dad’s or anyone else’s influence to get him the job. Now had he been a sub-par student and barely passed his courses, then you might have a point. But even in the hypothetical, you’d need an eye witness to prove it. An eye witness by the way, you don’t even have in the real world surrounding Mitt’s life.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 9:19 AM
Thanks,
I think Pat’s endorsement of Rudy may be what Rudy needed to put him over the top. I can’t see (discounting any major goof) anyone catching Rudy.
I think it is as simple as, backing a person who can win, rather than the best qualified, or the one that fits a certain “mold”.
Pat can’t change the landscape without power, and Rudy (if he wins) can give him that power. Pat has been pretty ignored by Bush.
I think…
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 9:22 AM
Me:
Him:
I rest my case. I won’t repost his earlier foul-mouthed tirade of hatred and bitterness. BSDeven is right on. No one has driven away more potential posters, and shown such childish, bottom of the barrel, low behavior than this guy. He truly does belong at Daily Kos, where such conversation is standard.
MadisonConservative on November 7, 2007 at 9:35 AM
Strength. Conviction. Honesty.
Good ad – I liked it.
I’d like to see “punch the hippies” but that’s just me…
jdawg on November 7, 2007 at 9:38 AM
If someone danced around a fire at midnight on a full moon, and wore wolfs teeth around his neck to ward off evil spirits, but seemingly had most of the qualifications of a potential president. If you did not support him because of his religious oddities would you be a bigot? He would be unelectable, that’s how it is in the real world.
That is how some people may view Mitt. It is not bigotry to not support someone because of his religion. The religion drives that persons being.
I will say it, I would not support an extreme Muslim (or the aboe example) for president…call me a bigot, but I would not support him. And neither would you…that does not make us bigots.
Lay off the “bigot card”. that’s a way to deflect debate. Knowing someones faith and what drives that faith is important to some people. Bush got elected on his faith, you don’t think someone can be discarded because of his faith or lack of? Bush was shown in church, as was (is) Clinton, is Mitt going to show himself in a Stake? Running around to the Stakes in the south? I don’t think so, do you think the Baptists are going to open their pulpit for Mitt to speak from? I don’t think so. They (one or two did) didn’t let JFK do it and most considered him a Christian. You can have a difference of opinion without being a bigot…or at least most of us can.
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 9:39 AM
CSdeven
Oh you cann explain again last time I think you went off on a tagent about orbital discrepancies and didn’t address the issue of Romneys so called employment and the collapse of the firm and his raising taxes and spending in the already breathtakingly high Taxechuesets tax climate
Please enlighten us oh Fred-be-gone your are only hope :)
With Apologies to princess Leia
EricPWJohnson on November 7, 2007 at 9:46 AM
Just as a side note. I got the heebie jeebies when it came out that Nancy Reagan used tarot cards. If that came to be true (rather than some hit piece in a book), I would not have supported Reagan. Having someone that close to the Chief, and using tarot cards to run their lives…no thanks.
Guess that definitely makes me a BIGOT.
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 9:47 AM
ckquote>MadisonConservative on November 7, 2007 at 9:35 AM
What does all that have to do with “What’s a dollar?” and his pathetic attempts at obfuscating his disgusting associations with scumbags?
Here’s a list of the dredges of society he has aligned himself with:
1) Dictators.
2) Abortion clinics.
3) Terrorists.
4) Companies who poisoned their employees.
5) People who attack the first amendment.
Add to that his funneling of campaign funds to his son and his bald faced lies about always being pro-life, and it is hard to understand why you are disturbingly fixated on me instead of accepting the facts about Fred.
Fair warning. The following is a stark evaluation of you and why you act the way you do. Read it at your own risk…..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The only answer can be that you are suffering from a severe personality disorder. You seem to have a split personality. You continue to attack me for the comments I have written to defend myself from the attacks that you, and others, have initiated against me. You’re like “Dust Bunny” in the sense that you believe that your attacks exist in a vacuum.
Lets engage in a little exercise…….
I want you to give me $100.
You wont you say?
WOW! Why is it that I can MAKE you mad, but I can’t MAKE you give me $100?
In case you can’t figure it out, it is because you CHOOSE to be mad as a defense mechanism against the realization that I am smarter and more aware of my actions than you are. You are out of control and trying to compete at a higher level that you are unable to compete in. This frustrates you and that is why you go for the low hanging fruit insults when I skewer Fred for the lying terrorist supporting fake that Fred is.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 9:58 AM
First off, I never called you a bigot. But it appears that you have exposed yourself as a bigot. If we had a candidate that danced around a fire and howled at the moon, I would have zero problem with them if they held fast to conservative values. You need to clarify your position, because bigots are so convinced that they are thinking clearly they cannot conceive that someone else would not feel the same way. It’s called projecting.
Bigotry has no place in debate unless it is to debate bigotry itself.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 10:03 AM
I apologize sir, but your comment was a bit hard to understand and I don’t want to make assumptions about what you are asking. If you could re-post it I will do my best to answer your question.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 10:06 AM
Do you expect anyone to argue with you about your assessment of yourself? Don’t hold your breath.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 10:09 AM
You don’t make me mad. Apparently, I make you write complete analytical dissertations on those who oppose your foul language, gutter humor, and schoolyard style of insulting those who disagree with you and your psychotic replies.
There are a few things that Ron Paul and Alex Jones say that I agree with. There are a few things you say that I agree with. You’re all still absolutely delusional cranks with severe problems communicating like normal human beings.
Get it yet? Or can you not get your points across with copy/pasting what you’ve said 879 times before and frosting it with more hatred than any member of this site?
MadisonConservative on November 7, 2007 at 10:20 AM
You consider anyone who disagrees with you about Fred somehow deserving of insult and ridicule. That’s bigotry, pal.
MadisonConservative on November 7, 2007 at 10:21 AM
He didn’t raise taxes, sheesh, he implemented “fees”. You see you can raise fees on essential items, but that isn’t raising taxes. It is a very mysterious.
Therefore, Mitt didn’t raise taxes substantially, he just made it more difficult for the average citizens to live by raising essential fees.
Kind of like giving someone who is starving smaller portions on a big plate. They can always say, “we gave them a larger plate of food”.
“Fee and spend” doesn’t sound as good “Tax and spend”.
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 10:24 AM
As a matter of fact you have called me a bigot in past posts. Of course you taking things out of context is your way of debate.
So if someone espouses conservative values, but his religion drives him to howl at the moon and wear emulates to protect himself from evil. You consider that presidential material? If he used tarot cards to make his decisions, but he had conservative values that is all you need? I assure you extreme Muslims can be very conservative.
Well I guess you aren’t a bigot (by your definition)…but you don’t have much of a standard for being a president.
I think you defined what is important to you.
(ps, then why all of the touting of Mitts business acumen, if conservative values are the only important thing…unless you think being a conservative means you have to be a “great” businessman)
right2bright on November 7, 2007 at 10:38 AM
r2b,
Even this negative Boston.Com story about the fees Romney raised makes it pretty hard to argue that he injured the little people.
These are nickel and dime increases which are hardly punitive and which certainly beat raising taxes to fix the $3 Billion dollar deficit he had to deal with when he took office.
But hey, since you’re so “bright”, what would you have done?
Buy Danish on November 7, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Sorry, but you have been excused from the adult table. When you’re ready to stop lying, come back and I decide if you are worthy of my valuable time.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 11:31 AM
I believed you were a bigot, but you disagreed. You seemed to back off of the bigoted rhetoric until this thread. I still gave you the benefit of the doubt, but you have admitted you are and I will not argue with you.
No. But he is an HONEST businessman. “Honest” being the key word.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Show me where I’ve lied. You’ve used foul language, baselessly insulted others, and engaged in schoolyard flippancy “wahhhhh” and the like. You do keep copying and pasting everything you’ve said before as if we haven’t already read it when you explode. You also keep accusing those who don’t accept your view that Fred is from the seventh layer of hell as being “Fred shills” or “licking his boots”.
Oh, wait, I think I’ve just shown every reason why the majority of posters take one look at your diatribes and laugh.
MadisonConservative on November 7, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Don’t worry, his adult table consists of him and and a dozen empty seats. He is just working on becoming a god of his own planet.
Sammy316 on November 7, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Lie #1
Lie #2
That particular comment about WHY executive experience was a new comment by me.
Lie#3
You don’t need to do that to avoid the filter. I have almost always used “$” for “S” and “8″ for “B”.
Lie#4
Lie #5
Yeah riiiight. You are only on a personal quest to stalk me from thread to thread because you love me. You have made precisely 10 comments in this thread and 8 of them are off topic attacking me.
Lie#6
I don’t ridicule anyone until they ridicule me. You are the case in point. YOU started the attacks on me and I have duly chastised and ridiculed you for it.
You could solve your little problem by growing up and resisting the inclination you have to fixate on me. Get back to the thread topic and I’ll consider allowing you back at the adult table.
csdeven on November 7, 2007 at 12:43 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »