You said it! I am ashamed that so many Conservatives are looking for style over substance. And swallowing up all the media is feeding them.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. Nice to know you think so many of us are mindless media-led idiots.

Tennman on November 14, 2007 at 8:43 AM

You said it! I am ashamed that so many Conservatives are looking for style over substance. And swallowing up all the media is feeding them.

non-conservative causes will be swamped by the actual positions that Romney and Rudy took as public servants.

I’m framing my response in the context of a general election. This country is moderate on abortion. This country is very anti-terrorist. I doubt that when asked to make a decision between Hillary, who only cheats campaign finance rules, and Fred who associated himself with the people I have mentioned, they will have no problem of picking the lesser of those two evils.

In the primary, Fred is steadily losing ground, while Mitt and Huck gain ground. His loss of ground is a result of his poor organization and his lackluster speeches and interaction with the voters. Both Mitt and Rudy’s abortion stances have been discussed time and again and up to this point, only Rudy has been hurt by it. Mitt, the more people hear him, the more they like him. Fred has the exact opposite effect on people. Except of course for people like you who are determined to support him. You are making a serious mistake if you think that other folks will see Fred the way you do. I would again challenge you to talk to your friends about supporting a guy who is a lobbyist, a lawyer, and associated with terrorists and dictators. I would be very interested in your experience.

I have already done this several times, and to a person, conservative and liberal, committed or not to a candidate, the reaction is always the same. A complete look of disgust and abhorrence at the thought of an American citizen engaging in those behaviors.

I think you are underestimating the visceral reaction people have to lawyers, lobbyists, terrorists, and dictators.

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 12:35 PM

I think you underestimate the reaction voters will have to videos of Rudy and Mitt espousing their pro-choice views. I am quite a little bit confident the minimal work that Fred did for non-conservative causes will be swamped by the actual positions that Romney and Rudy took as public servants.

Again, we’re not being “fooled” into anything. When you say things like that, it shows a fundamental lack of respect for the intelligence of those who support Giuliani or Romney. I can understand disagreeing with someone else’s primary choice, but essentially accusing them of being too stupid to know better is insulting.

Slublog on November 14, 2007 at 12:47 PM

Being uninformed is not the same thing as being stupid and I think there are a lot of primary voters who are uninformed about all of the Republican candidates and their positions, past and present. Not an attack on Rudy or Romney but a fact that the polls have shown. A lot of people just aren’t paying attention just yet.

And Bill, don’t listen to Madisonconservative. She is a stalker.

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 12:57 PM

This, on the other hand, is a personal attack.

And you responded by discussing me.

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 12:49 PM

Discussing your regular conduct when discussing Fred (and only discussing Fred) is relevant to answering your posts, and is not an attack. Disagreeing with you is not an attack. Mentioning you is not an attack. What don’t you get about that?

csdeven, I would not and have not personally attacked you.
Bill C on November 14, 2007 at 12:24 PM

Yes you did. I, little old csdeven, am NOT the topic of this thread. I asked you a question relating to this comment:

It is having a track record of holding conservative positions and sticking to those positions when it counts.

And you responded by discussing me. That is an argumentative attack on me instead of the thread topic.

Back to your comment…..

That is the description of a stanch conservative. Something no one says that Rudy is. Rudy is a lesser of two evils and the person who polls best against Hillary. If that is not what you meant, then please expand on your comment. I don’t see how it changes what others have said as their reason for supporting Rudy. I don’t see many claims he is a conservative, but rather that he can beat Hillary and that we have every reason to believe that he will honor his campaign promises.

And the truth usually does have an effect on rational people. The facts about Fred are out there for all to see, and I reject your assertion that the people who have changed their minds about Fred are somehow being led astray by little old me. The difference is that I saw him for what he is months ago and others waited for the evidence that their own eyes and ears have provided.

“What’s a dollar?” has screwed himself.

You can fool all of the people some of the time. Right now conservatives are getting fooled into supporting left leaning centrists.

Again, we’re not being “fooled” into anything. When you say things like that, it shows a fundamental lack of respect for the intelligence of those who support Giuliani or Romney. I can understand disagreeing with someone else’s primary choice, but essentially accusing them of being too stupid to know better is insulting.

Thompson was a lobbyist and a lawyer who did minimal work for some non-conservative causes. So what.
Bill C on November 14, 2007 at 12:11 PM

I think you are underestimating the visceral reaction people have to lawyers, lobbyists, terrorists, and dictators. They do not identify with the concept of getting involved with those type of people voluntarily. Those terrorists did not deserve representation from a US lawyer and the families of the victims of Flight 103 will swiftboat Fred’s a$$ so fast he’ll wonder what hit him. He is in the same profession as Abramoff and many people recognize the name Jean Bertrand Aristead. You guys, and Fred, try to pass this off under the old “hyperbole” tag because you don’t see it as a problem. I challenge you to talk to your family and friends who do not follow politics and ask them if they would vote for a guy who did those things. And don’t try to prime them with the “everyone deserves representation” line. Present it to them the way Hillary will and then try to convince them that he was only doing what lawyers do. The reason I want you to do it that way is because THAT will be the way Fred will be attacked. Hillary will begin the assault and Fred will have to react to that assault. Unless you think Fred is going to try and get out in front of this and expose himself before Hillary can. He hasn’t yet, and he wont because he knows it will be his death knell.

Compare to that the time Mitt shut down his entire company to go to NYC to search for an employees family member. Look at the activities that each candidate CHOOSES to be involved in and that is who that person is. The American people will react to that and Fred has a long, long, history of being on the wrong side of causes supported by decent folk.

I notice you didn’t produce a single person who has claimed Rudy is a stanch conservative. You made a claim that I asked you to back up, and you reverted to talking about me. I have seen this many, many, times from you Fred heads. Whenever you are asked to provide proof, you respond with personal attacks and never give the proof to back up your claims. That my friend is the actions of someone whose argument is untenable.

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 11:54 AM

Nice straw man argument. Since I never claimed that anyone said Rudy is a staunch conservative so I did not bother to respond. I do claim that Rudy and his supporters have consistently downplayed and obfuscated when it comes to his past liberal positions as have Romney’s supporters of him.

csdeven, I would not and have not personally attacked you. I have criticized your dishonest repetition of the “facts” when it comes to Fred Thompson. I do this because I am sick and tired of it. Also, I don’t see the same vitriol coming from Fredhead’s towards the other Republican primary candidates. (Ok, maybe towards Ron Paul but he deserves it.)

I used to just ignore you but I think your carping might actually be having an effect. So I will do my best to point out when I think you are wrong. Don’t take it personally.

I have a few that I support. But not Fred for many reasons. What you perceive as hate is really an extreme disgust for his past history and his current lies. What I don’t get is how you can say he is the most electable when the guy lobbied for a dictator (and other various scumbags), gave legal advice to terrorists, funneled campaign cash to his son, and authored McCain/Feingold. Can you square those facts with his electability?

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 11:51 AM

The only one of those criticisms that has any validity is his past support for McCain/Feingold which he has repudiated. The other stuff is, as MadisonConservative said, hyperbole. Thompson was a lobbyist and a lawyer who did minimal work for some non-conservative causes. So what. As a public official he has never been pro-choice. Romney and Rudy have.

Whenever you are asked to provide proof, you respond with personal attacks and never give the proof to back up your claims. That my friend is the actions of someone whose argument is untenable.

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 11:54 AM

Point out where he personally attacked you. Remember, disagreeing with you does not mean attacking you.

What I don’t get is how you can say he is the most electable when the guy lobbied for a dictator (and other various scumbags), gave legal advice to terrorists, funneled campaign cash to his son, and authored McCain/Feingold. Can you square those facts with his electability?

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 11:51 AM

What you don’t get is that we’ve heard those four sound bytes from you more times than we can count, and most of us have found the actual details behind them, and discovered that your sound bytes are pretty much hyperbole. They’re not too different in approach than the platitudes used by people who label illegal immigration opponents as “anti-immigration”. When you continue to use them, despite the truth behind them being posted several times, it comes across as something other than educated disgust.

Bill C on November 14, 2007 at 11:33 AM

I notice you didn’t produce a single person who has claimed Rudy is a stanch conservative. You made a claim that I asked you to back up, and you reverted to talking about me. I have seen this many, many, times from you Fred heads. Whenever you are asked to provide proof, you respond with personal attacks and never give the proof to back up your claims. That my friend is the actions of someone whose argument is untenable.

I hope Fred gets back on track but his stumble hasn’t shaken my belief that he is the most electable candidate with the most conservative record.

Bill C on November 14, 2007 at 11:33 AM

I agree, and I think he could smash Hillary into the ground.

However, his campaign is over. I realize it’s a long time in politics, but give the holidays, he has effectively less than two months till the primaries, and his numbers are pathetic. Barring a real wild card he hasn’t yet deployed, the Fred campaign is dead.

he is the most electable candidate with the most conservative record.

Bill C on November 14, 2007 at 11:33 AM

I have a few that I support. But not Fred for many reasons. What you perceive as hate is really an extreme disgust for his past history and his current lies. What I don’t get is how you can say he is the most electable when the guy lobbied for a dictator (and other various scumbags), gave legal advice to terrorists, funneled campaign cash to his son, and authored McCain/Feingold. Can you square those facts with his electability?

My biggest worry is that this presidential election turns into an all New York series with Hillary, Rudy, and Bloomberg.

But what’s for certain, judging by his statewide polling numbers, no one is being fooled by Fred as he is the most dishonest candidate on the rep side.

csdeven on November 14, 2007 at 11:09 AM

I get that you are a Romney supporter. What is really bothersome is your unrelenting and unsupported hatred of Fred Thompson. It is a joke on this site. You go out of your way to assume the worst about him while ignoring the 800 lbs. gorilla of Romney’s electability issues. Fred’s are so minor compared to either Romney or Guiliani it makes me wonder how any conservative can support them over Fred.

Frankly, if we were all true to our principles we’d be supporting Duncan Hunter but the truth is that being able to convey your message is an important part of being President and Fred is failing at that now. I am just not willing to make a fetish of having a polished delivery and a ton of cash. I hope Fred gets back on track but his stumble hasn’t shaken my belief that he is the most electable candidate with the most conservative record.

Right now conservatives are getting fooled into supporting left leaning centrists.

Bill C on November 14, 2007 at 10:50 AM

I challenge you to find anyone here that thinks Rudy is a stanch conservative. All of us have our eyes open to what both Rudy and Mitt are. We cannot say the same for the groupies. But what’s for certain, judging by his statewide polling numbers, no one is being fooled by Fred as he is the most dishonest candidate on the rep side.

Slublog on November 14, 2007 at 9:01 AM

Being Conservative is more than just being able to give a rousing speech. It is having a track record of holding conservative positions and sticking to those positions when it counts. Guiliani and Romney both have a records of espousing and implementing liberal policies. So they are the well financed and good campaigners and the Republican voters are eating it up, so far. Remember Lincoln’s admonition: You can fool all of the people some of the time. Right now conservatives are getting fooled into supporting left leaning centrists.

I don’t mean this to sound harsh, but I’m getting darned tired of being told that every time I or someone else criticizes Thompson, we’re tools of the liberal media. It’s become something of a meme among Thompson supporters, and it’s insulting.

It’s worked both ways. People who have defended Fred against rather hyperbolic accusational sound bytes have been labeled “Fred Shills” and “kissing Fred’s boots”. It’s been vicious.

Tennman on November 14, 2007 at 8:43 AM

Ditto to everyone else’s response to your accusation that anyone who doesn’t support Fred is a liberal tool of the MSM. WE have been watching this clown since early this past summer and like I have been telling you since then, Fred is a fake and can’t speak extemporaneously. The MSM wasn’t on his butt then, but I was. So if anything has happened, it is the MSM who is now MY tool.