unamused on November 19, 2007 at 12:45 PM

Yep! I do not understand people listening to a real Conservatuve and thinking “he is not exciting” Good grief!

edgehead on November 19, 2007 at 12:31 PM

I could not agree more!

omnipotent on November 19, 2007 at 12:46 PM

WELL SAID!

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 4:33 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.

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.

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.

csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:42 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.

Connie on November 19, 2007 at 4:44 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.

Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 4:20 PM

In the context of debating?

csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:33 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?

MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 4:27 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.

doriangrey on November 19, 2007 at 4:12 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.

He can claim it’s his personal life all day long. He can also claim he was working within the law.

csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 4:08 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.

If you took that as a reference to a homosexual act, you are mistaken.
csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 3:54 PM

Actually, I was just referring to the base and crude nature of the remark. It’s tenth grade all over again.

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

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……

MadisonConservative on November 19, 2007 at 2:50 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.

Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 1:05 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.

Here’s the latest from Fred Files..

Reaction to Pajamas Media Interview –

The Sundries Shack:

Pajamas Media got to sit down with Thompson for a while and talk to him in depth about terrorism and the war we’re fighting against the Islamists. It…

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

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……

Tennman on November 19, 2007 at 1:08 PM

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.

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

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.

It isn’t normal behavior to attack someone because they attack your candidate.

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.

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.

csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 12:08 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:

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.

csdeven on November 19, 2007 at 11:40 AM

Yes, and Jews did 9/11, and Bush is preparing a dictatorship, and the new world order is amongst us. Thanks, Alex.