Video: Pajamas Media interviews Fred Thompson
posted at 8:41 am on November 19, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Pajamas Media CEO Roger L. Simon and Bob Owens of Confederate Yankee interview Presidential candidate Fred Thompson about the war on terror and several related issues. This is the first of PJM’s War on Terror Conversations.
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:
Is he still running???
tommylotto on November 19, 2007 at 9:01 AM
Hmmm, Old Fred just might be on to something, he doesn’t trust the Chinese, the North Koreans or the Iranians.
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 9:06 AM
Are you still a lawyer?
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 9:06 AM
Regardless of whatever faults one might find with Fred, he ‘gets it’ on this key issue.
flipflop on November 19, 2007 at 9:09 AM
I’m so disappointed with Fred’s campaign since he declared. I’ve been pushing for him long before there was even talk of him running, and yes…he “gets it” on the issues…but he doesn’t get how to run an energetic campaign.
He was posting higher numbers as a non-candidate then he is now.
JetBoy on November 19, 2007 at 9:21 AM
I ask a serious question and immediately you attack. I figure with Fred’s numbers in the toilet and without a lead in a single early primary he would do the smart thing, call off his campaign and start funneling that campaign cash to family members. Fred is a very smart cookie, you know, and I think that if he keeps up with this facade of a campaign much longer his expenses are going to be greater than his dwindling fund raising — then there will not be as much left over after he gets lazy and quits to give to his relatives. Ah, If he could have just continued to fly around in that drug dealer’s plane…
tommylotto on November 19, 2007 at 9:37 AM
Folks- Did ya catch the allegations this week that Murdoch(FOXnews and WSJ owner) is pushing Rudy Guiliani for POTUS to the point of alledgedly asking employees to lie to the Feds about Bernie Kerik.
Do ya think that this MIGHT have something to do with the fact that even though Fred polls every bit as well as Mitt or Huckabee or McCain – HE CAN’T GET ANY GOOD PRESS WITH EVEN THE RIGHT-LEANING MSM???!!! Shoot, Murdoch owns it all!
And the left-leaning MSM is the MOST SCARED of Fred! They won’t talk about him at all- they’re hopin’ everyone will forget about Fred. THEY’RE REALLY SCARED! The left WANTS Rudy, or Mitt, or McCain or Huckabee because they BELIEVE HILLARY CAN BEAT’EM!
Fred’s poll numbers SHOULD be gettin’ him as much press as all the others- BUT IT DOESN’T- ask yourself WHY?
P.S. Check this out (Did Mitt Push-poll himself?)
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2ZkMWNkZDkzOTk1YTM0NT NkNmJlZThmYjJmM2ZmOGE=
Ex-tex on November 19, 2007 at 9:38 AM
Fred had a drop in florida as he touched the third rail of politics – Social Security
It will be interesting to see how far the other candidates go to self destruct
Freds not a look at me look at me candidate
Much to the dissapointment of the pundits and the media
EricPWJohnson on November 19, 2007 at 9:49 AM
Question #1; What can we do to recapture the will of the American people?
Answer: Let me tell you about a book. The will of the people is important. We will have bad times. We have the need for perseverance.
Q #2; How does Thompson recapture the will of the American paople?
Answer; By honest. Rebuild military. You can’t do guns and butter.
Q #3; How do we get the Nuslims to help in the war?
Answer; Some lie. The rest need to recognize the commitment they need to make.
Q #4; How do we deal with Iran?
Answer; I don’t know. Talk I guess.
Q #5; Do we have an obligation protect the Pakistani nukes?
Answer: Yes.
Q #6; Is Bush going backwards in the war on terror?
Answer: Korea lies to us, and is outsourcing nukes. We need to verify before rewarding them.
Q #7; What do you make of the Arab/Israeli talks?
Answer; I don’t know.
Yawn. The non-answers are just more of the same from Fred. For the questions he answered, that could have been any other republican speaking over the last two years.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 9:53 AM
Not seriously, but his wife is still seriously collecting campaign contributions.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 9:55 AM
No you didn’t, you were being the same arrogant despicable vile person you always are in Fred threads.
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 9:58 AM
You asked if he was still running. So, either you didn’t ask a serious question or you are so far outside of reality you didn’t KNOW he was still running.
Which one is it?
Darksean on November 19, 2007 at 10:06 AM
Tommylotto and cdseven just go on an’ play in traffic now until yer school bus comes. The adults would like to have a REAL conversation with out havin’ to wade through yer bul*sh*t.
Ex-tex on November 19, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Fred is solid on all the policy issues, but he simply doesn’t pander to anyone, either to voters or to the media. His campaign seems to be “You all wanted me here, so here I am, and here’s what I have to say, like it or not.” I still like the guy a lot and would definitely vote for him, but this doesn’t seem to be a winning strategy. Remember that the next time we lament that we want a candidate who has core principles and won’t just tell us what we want to hear.
Dudley Smith on November 19, 2007 at 10:29 AM
I dare not say a thing, because csdeven considers me a stalker for saying the exact same thing you all are. So I’ll let other’s utter disgust with these two stand on its own.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 10:32 AM
Heh heh csdeven is kind of funny about that. Other than his bat $hit crazy obsession with Fred, he’s a pretty cool dude. He just cant seem to grasp that he is stalking Fred in the exact same fashion that he accuses you of stalking him.
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Ya know there was a review of the last GOP debate that said somthing like ” Yeah ole Fred did better THIS time- but he still took too long to come out with his answers. It almost looked like he was THINKIN’ first.”
I nearly fell oughtta my chair. I don’t know about you folks but I think I might like that in a POTUS.
Slick and practiced ain’t always what it’s cracked up to be.
Ex-tex on November 19, 2007 at 10:56 AM
I’m still not sold on Fred, but I do tend to have more respect for a guy who says “I don’t know” when he doesn’t know, and says “It may be impossible”, than a guy who offers a lot of platitudes just for the sake of sounding optimistic. I think what a lot of people might perceive as “lazy” or “slow”, I would perceive as “thoughtful”.
At the very least, I think he understands what’s going on with radical Islam, and the importance of continuing to fight it.
Farmer_Joe on November 19, 2007 at 11:01 AM
I thought the same from Fred was lies. If he’s saying he doesn’t know, is that a lie? If so, what does he gain from that?
The rhetoric unravels…
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 11:09 AM
You can’t really believe that Fred is in a serious run for the presidency do you? He’s got something else in mind and it certainly is not whats best for this country. Well, I take that back, Fred not being in a position of power IS what is best for this country. So, by running a piss poor campaign that will guarantee his loss, he is doing his part to make this country great.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:40 AM
Cs, you captured only part of the answers. Accurate, but not the truth. I had hope for a second until I realized you left out the important substance of his answers.
But that’s what I am coming to expect from your side of the aisle, my friend.
Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 11:41 AM
Did he DECLARE his candidacy? Is he CAMPAIGNING?
Can you actually ANSWER these questions and ONLY these questions?
Darksean on November 19, 2007 at 11:53 AM
If Fred is as you say, a self-serving money sucking conservative-faking opportunist in the Elmer Gantry style, and if Mitt is only somewhat better, a snake-oil salesmen as his opponents say, then Tommy L. wins. Doesn’t say much for conservatism that it can’t produce any leaders.
JiangxiDad on November 19, 2007 at 12:02 PM
OFF TOPIC…..
I know exactly what I am doing. I am a private citizen who is mercilessly scrutinizing a person who desires my vote for president. That gives me the right to stay as vitriolic as I desire.
Now, when members of HA who follow private citizens from thread to thread and attacking them with personal insults, well THAT is a serious cause for questioning the psyche of the stalkers. It isn’t normal behavior to attack someone because they attack your candidate. It is especially disturbing when those stalkers try to justify their stalking by saying that “I make them mad”. No one forces them to read any thing that is written and I doubt someone has a hand up their a$$ forcing them to respond with personal insults.
Here’s a little exercise for the stalkers…..
You say I make you mad.
OK, I say that you must give me $100.
You say no.
I say why?
You say because you don’t want to.
I say that it is very strange that I have the power to make you mad, but I don’t have the power to make you give me $100.
Hey stalkers! I ORDER you to send me $100!!! Bwahahahahaha!!!!
This thread is just another example of the troll stalkers who ALWAYS hijack these threads because they are unable to defend the on topic comments others amke about Fred “What’s a dollar?” Thompson.
OK, back on topic…..
I understand that, but I am looking for someone to know enough about a situation that is of grave concern to this country, that he has a plan to deal with it. That is called leading. I know it’s tough for these guys to take a stance on an issue because if they have made an error and decided to amend his position, he is accused of being a panderer or a flip-flopper.
My problem with Fred, besides his immoral personal life, is his refusal to take any position that isn’t of his own making. He sounds like every other conservative over the last two years.
Rudy is taking a stand on certain issues as is Mitt. We may not like them, or think they can work, but there are many people who do think their ideas are pretty good and will work. Those people are willing to follow him, thusly he is leading. Fred takes the position that he’ll just sit around until everyone tells him what we want. The American people are not privy to enough information to tell the president what he should do.
Here is a perfect example of what I am talking about…..In his interview with the Hoover Institute, he was asked what we should do in Iraq. He talked about a couple of friends he has that are enlisted personnel in Iraq. Fred actually said that if THEY were optimistic about Iraq, then he would be also. Those two guys are in very small areas of Iraq and the attitude about Iraq varies from FOB to FOB. We cannot have a president that thinks like that. We need a president that will tell those two soldiers that he understands their concerns, but he has the intel and he must make the decisions that are best for America.
Fred is to chicken$hit to lead, just as he was too chick$hit to run until his friends and family had to drag him kicking and screaming into it.
No thanks.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 12:08 PM
YOU WERE SOOOOOO CLOSE to actually having a discussion, but then you veered off into talking about little old csdeven!
I know exactly what Fred said and I purposely left parts of it out to encourage debate. If I summarize the entire interview all you can say is “I agree”. That isn’t debate. That’s mutual masturbation.
Why don’t you fill in the spots I left out? Then we can discuss why I don’t think they are as important as what I focused on and you can make the argument why Fred’s responses were very relevant.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Dang skippy there! 2008 is about the lesser of evils that can beat the Hildebeast.
YUCK!
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 12:17 PM
yup
JiangxiDad on November 19, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Says who? The drive-by media and his opponents? Come on people. Isn’t this supposed to be about ideas and issues? I hear it all the time (from bloggers) that Fred says the right things but he doesn’t sound energetic. I for one think Fred is a superb communicator. I hope it’s not a pre-requisite that any successful candidate needs to look like JFK in order to be taken seriously. He will get through to the voters when the voting starts.
edgehead on November 19, 2007 at 12:31 PM
It makes me sick how the only thing people can find wrong with Fred is how his campaign isn’t as entertaining as everyone else’s.
You say you want a leader, not an actor, then you go and bash him for not acting.
The sad thing about 2008 is that the conservative movement has been unwittingly trained to react to politics as the left would have them…
Are you people really that intellectually shallow? Is “energy” and “fire in the belly” really all that meaningful when compared to a leader’s stance on such important issues as our leaders are faced with today? And don’t play the resolve or commitment cards. Fred’s commitment to being our next president is validated by his jumping into what must be a nightmare for himself and his family.
unamused on November 19, 2007 at 12:45 PM
WTF, do people want Fred! to do cartwheels at his press conferences?
Freds thoughtful answers are indicative of what kind of leader he’d be. Some of the other candidates pander so much that it’s unworthy of the office that they seek.
If we nominate Rudy or Mitt, we’ll DESERVE 4 years of Cankles.
omnipotent on November 19, 2007 at 12:46 PM
Please.
I’m not a prude, but I’d really appreciate it if you wouldn’t make remarks that make HA look like Kos. If you want to raise the standard of discourse, I’ll be happy to respond.
Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 1:05 PM
I found the interview to be thorough and thought-provoking. It’s not an interview that would lend itself to a 15- or 30-second sound bite. It’s an adult conversation with FTD having a clear understanding of the war we face.
I want to thank Pajamas Media for conducting these interviews. I am looking forward to the interviews of the other leading candidates.
Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Is there an option I can set when viewing the comments so each poster’s name appears at the top of their post instead of at the bottom?
Dave Shay on November 19, 2007 at 1:21 PM
oops…Sent this to you. I didn’t even see it here in my confusion over not being able to log in.
Fred Thompson has it exactly right. Do not trust North Korea. It is probably impossible to deal with the current religious regime in Iran, but we need to watch for proper opportunities. We need to hear the voices of non-violent Muslims, not CAIR propaganda. We need to support those who have the courage to stand up and speak out against Islamofascism and Islamism. We need to rebuild Americans’ desire to stand up and serve their country so we can protect ourselves, our country, and liberate people around the world who live under totalitarian regimes.
Connie on November 19, 2007 at 1:24 PM
. . .a direct quote from this interview with Fred Thompson. Too bad he doesn’t follow his own advise. Very disappointing.
Tancredo ‘08
heroyalwhyness on November 19, 2007 at 1:26 PM
What you really want is an “ignore” feature, but that kinda defeats the purpose of a political site like this. Wouldn’t it be great to just hit a button and all differing opinions just simply disappear?
tommylotto on November 19, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Heh heh heh yea, the last thing you would want is for everybody to have the option of putting you on ignore, because you know good damn and well there would only be about 3 people that would read anything you post.
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 2:04 PM
I go through the comments of nearly every thread on HotAir, particularly the ones on candidates. That means I go to nearly every Fred thread. You post in every Fred thread. Because you choose to post in every Fred thread, I am stalking you?
You’re the only true psychotic here:
Yes, and Jews did 9/11, and Bush is preparing a dictatorship, and the new world order is amongst us. Thanks, Alex.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 2:45 PM
Oh…
But it IS normal to attack someone because they like a candidate that you don’t? Because you do it. Thread. After. Thread. You turn debate against your slanderous remarks into a personal fight, and then you claim they made it personal. It’s personal the minute you trot out your platitudes, sound bites, and rhetoric, all of which combine into the most worthless and time-wasting posts on this site, bordering on the edge of gospel. You leap on every single remark, calling it an attack, using that logic to justify you being a totally out-of-line jackass. You ever notice that in nearly every thread that you do this, numerous people tire of the same old crap? That’s why the first time I posted, I just quoted others. I don’t need to post myself. The proof is there. Just ignore it like you claim to ignore me, while slandering me. You’re an absolute nutroot, and you belong at Daily Kos.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 2:50 PM
I’m not interested in blocking differing opinions. I’m interested in blocking the opinions of the kind of people who say things like “Ron Paul is the ONLY HOPE FOR AMERICA!” or “What’s a dollar scumbag lobbyist dictator cuddler terrorist protector”. Both are the rantings of deranged people, and I’m sick of wading through them every time someone wants to discuss a candidate civilly.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 2:53 PM
OFF TOPIC……
The problem is that many of them are entirely too immature to just stick to the topic of the thread. They already have the power to ignore what a person writes, but they choose to go off on tangents because they are basically angry deranged people who cannot release their rage on people face to face because they are cowards.
I’ve never understood the desire for an ignore feature. I am in control of what I read. I CHOOSE how I react to what I read. I ignore some and I respond to some, and I don’t get the mentality that wants Hot Air to protect a person from them self. The ultimate responsibility for what you read belongs to each person. The beauty of it is that there is NEVER a reason to humiliate ones self by leveling personal attacks against other members. It takes a while to respond when typing, so there is plenty of time to reflect on the knee jerk reaction and make the adult choice to NOT respond. Ya know whats funny? These same people who are whining this place is turning into KOS are the ones who are doing what the Krazy KOS dopes are doing. Namely leveling personal insults directed at fellow members because they can’t deal with an opposite view than theirs. Every single thread that goes off topic and into personal insults is started by them. The irony would be funny if it wasn’t so sickening.
My response to the people who have no self control is….
I DEMAND THAT YOU GIVE ME $100!!!!
Bwahahahahaha!!!!
OK, back on topic……
That interview provoked me to wonder how Fred cannot have a clear plan on what to do with Iran and the Arab/Israeli problem. These two issues are integral to the WOT. Bush is not going to have them solved before he leaves office and we don’t have the luxury to nominate Fred on the hope that he’ll figure out what to do. Heck, we could have a serious problem the day after the next presidents inauguration and he needs to be ready.
No, we need to know NOW what his plan is, because we have to nominate someone in less than two months. And here we have Fred just dismissing it like it’s some back burner issue that doesn’t deserve his attention.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 3:45 PM
If you took that as a reference to a homosexual act, you are mistaken. It refers to people who agree with each other and stand around telling each other how great the other one is. That is not debate and it does not encourage vigorous examination of all sides of an issue. I have always used that and I’m not going to stop now. If you can’t get past it and still debate the issues then that is just the price you’ll have to pay I guess.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 3:54 PM
That interview Fred gave, softball as it was, shows just how unprepared he is to be the nominee for the rep party. Even if he were saying all the right things and had every talking point down pat, he still has his disgusting personal life to deal with. He lobbied for dictators and other various scumbags. He gave legal advice to terrorists and funneled campaign cash to his son. He lied that he has always been pro-life and he bragged about chasing tail all over Washington DC. He is associated with two of the most despised professions. Lobbyist and lawyer.
He can claim it’s his personal life all day long. He can also claim he was working within the law. His problem is that regular Americans realize that lawyers and lobbyists DO NOT have to take on those type of clients. The fact that Fred does says volumes about his choice of causes he wants to further. Sorry, but terrorism and dictatorships ARE NOT things the American people find cause worthy.
Fred would lose in a landslide of historic proportions. It’s best he just drop out and return all the unspent donations to his contributors.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:08 PM
You need to work on those listening skills. when a plain talking man tells you he is through negotiating with you, it means he is through negotiating with you. Fred made it clear as day that he is has no intention of negotiating with Iran, that means only one of two things, Ignore Iran, which Fred also said he has no intention of doing or it’s beach Boys hit single time…………Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran……
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 4:12 PM
Actually, I was just referring to the base and crude nature of the remark. It’s tenth grade all over again.
Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 4:20 PM
You honestly think his personal life is anything to compete against the likes of Hillary? Norman Hsu? Whitewater and Vince Foster will definitely be making comebacks. Those aren’t her personal life.
And as for claiming it’s his personal life, Rudy and Mitt supporters have both used those excuses for decisions that other people have pointed out as being problems. So why doesn’t it apply this time? And for the final time, and this is NOT an attack: We’ve been over those out-of-context claims over and over, and everyone’s heard them. The context is much less serious than you make it out to be, and is no different than a lot of connections that would be just as damaging to other candidates. With Rudy, let’s talk about his child-molesting priest friend. With Mitt, let’s talk about how his church is one of the most scrutinized next to Scientology. It’s not unique, and if you looked at some of Reagan’s links, it’s disturbing. Didn’t make him any less of a fantastic leader.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Fred said there wasn’t an answer to the question on how to negotiate with Iran. His inclination is to talk but he doesn’t hold out any hope for that. And.that.was.it. No plan. No specifics. No discussion of economic or military options. No mention of the roles other countries might play. He said NOTHING about bombing Iran. He never got even close to answering their question.
Fred is not a plain talker. If he was he would have answered the question with specifics instead of telling us what we already know. That being, Iran is a rogue state that can’t be dealt with the way you could with a rational nation. That is not the answer.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:33 PM
No one can directly link Hillary to a lot of this stuff, and even with the ones that can, it’s been rehashed for years and nothing sticks. She never gave legal advice to terrorists and the American people do not care about how lawyers justify their behavior by claiming “context”. There is no excuse to be involved with terrorists, dictators, and other assorted scumbags. People hate lawyers and lobbyists and hate them because they try to hide behind “context”. Legal or no, Fred will not be able to stand there and justify his involvement in a way that will convince anyone other than other lawyers and lobbyists and those who want to vote for him. The truth about what Fred is, is completely at odds with the image he portrays on TV. This just makes him look like more of a scumbag liar.
I have tried this experiment many times…..I ask regular folks if they would vote for a guy who lobbied for a dictator, against victims of asbestos poisoning, and gave legal advice to terrorists. To a person, the reaction is of total disgust! They cannot even be calmed down by giving them the typical lawyer “context” line. They don’t care. No one HAS to be involved with terrorists and dictators.
Fred will never be nominated or elected.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:42 PM
What specifics would you like? “If President Bush hasn’t bombed the crap out of Iran by the time I take office, then I’ll do it myself?” ;)
Oh Allah, he’s behind me, isn’t he?
Connie on November 19, 2007 at 4:44 PM
In the context of debating?
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Some kind of specifics. What ever Fred’s plan is. All he did was tell us what Iran is. We already know THAT. The guy asked how Fred was going to negotiate with them. I suspect Fred has no plan. This is why I really doubt he is making a serious attempt at campaigning.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:49 PM
And I’m sure you’ve heard the trick history professors do, when they talk of two leaders: One who was faithful to his wife, got up early every morning, and was always sober, and the other who was drunk, slept around, and slept in. The latter was Winston Churchill, and the former was Adolf Hitler.
You see what I mean about how those sound bites are misleading? It’s like asking a voter if they would vote for someone who refused to “hold gun companies accountable for the people whose lives were ruined by their products”. It’s an underhanded tactic.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 4:59 PM
You missed the point. After telling them who he is and that he was acting in the role of a lobbyist and lawyer, they still don’t care.
Underhanded tactic is dang right! I frame the question the way I do because that is how Hillary will come after him. She will smear him in the worst possible way and then let Fred try and “context” his way out of it. It wont work.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 5:05 PM
Hah hah hah…dude you are soooo full of $hit…….He said …The chances of negotiating with the current Iranian administration were in his opinion nil…….In other words he has no intention of negotiating with the current Iranian government. He also said there was no way we could ignore Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. He might as well have said as soon as I am elected I plan on bombing Iran back to the stone age.
doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 5:09 PM
IN OTHER WORDS? Why didn’t he use those words? THAT is the question he was asked.
See, this is typical Fred. Remember last summer I told you this is what he does? He obfuscates to the point where people can get different messages from what he said and depending on your take on the guy, you just fill in what you want him to mean.
And he did say he would negotiate but that he didn’t have much hope of it. You assume he meant military bombings, but he could have meant economic sanctions, or the use of other countries. The fact is he was asked for a specific course of action and he did what he has always done. Been vague and obfuscatory.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 5:43 PM
WELL SAID!
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 6:43 PM
I could not agree more!
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 6:44 PM
Yep! I do not understand people listening to a real Conservatuve and thinking “he is not exciting” Good grief!
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 6:45 PM
OOPS! That is Conservative!
Gatordoug on November 19, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Comment pages: