Another candidate question from the AP yields more comedy gold from Fred Update: Favorite gadgets named
posted at 10:15 am on December 18, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
The AP has rolled out the answers to one more of its silly candidate questions, this one about who is the candidate’s favorite 20th century president (of the other party). Most of the answers don’t surprise. Clinton, Edwards, Obama and Richardson all cited Teddy Roosevelt (not for this quote, which Ron Paul would surely dub “fascist”) for his progressive, trust-busting policies. Hillary especially must salivate at the thought of swinging a stick at the oil companies. Edwards wants to “fight” pretty much every corporation in America. And Obama just liked the progressive name. Richardson liked TR because of handshakes and conservation. In that order. Really.
Most of the Republicans crossed the aisle the other way and picked Harry Truman. Rudy and Huckabee don’t say why; McCain and Romney admire his toughness.
Which brings us to teh Fred, recipient of Rep. Steve King’s endorsement yesterday.
Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson: “Martin Sheen.” The fellow actor played two Democratic presidents on TV, the fictional Josiah Bartlet in “The West Wing” and John Kennedy in a miniseries.
He must have chuckled to himself all the way through filling out this questionnaire, much as a mischievous 6th grader filling in joke answers to questions on a test that won’t count to his final grade (yeah, I used to do that all the time, all the way through college). As to naming Martin Sheen his favorite president, is it another sly slap at PEST-afflicted liberals who’ve spent the Bush years pining for their own president, to the extent that they manufactured not one but two fictitious ones? Or a sly slap at the press for puffing up Hollywood liberals who sleep on gratings to slam America’s homeless problem while they coddle dictators like Castro who imprison entire countries? Or is it another slap at the AP for asking frivolous questions?
By the way, the next question is about the candidates’ favorite gadgets. The possibilities…
Update: After his earlier comedic answers, Fred plays the gadget question straight. Which was probably wise, come to think of it. But Rudy…a CD player? Seriously?
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: 1 2 Next »
Who cares? You know they expected him to answer Reagan. He got another good shot at them, and an answer that will keep his name in the news, which was probably his plan all along.
Kowboy on December 18, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Every time I read one of these AP quick-question thingees, that old song from Sesame Street pops into my head:
One of these things is not like the others.
One of these things just doesn’t belong…
aero on December 18, 2007 at 10:23 AM
I can’t believe no-one said Reagan. Another good Fred answer would have been: “Reagan. Duh.”
aero on December 18, 2007 at 10:24 AM
I don’t understand why this is a silly question.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Another would be:
“Jimmy Carter because he sent me a bad of peanuts and that rabbit chased him right onto my lawn. That rabbit stew was great.”
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Actually, the question was favorite 20th Century President from the other party. That’s why the Reps couldn’t say Reagan.
JDinSC on December 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Ask a stupid question…
Fred’s answer was pitched just right…nicely done
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
That should be bag of peanuts.
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Next question, “If you were a tree…”
KelliD on December 18, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Not _silly_ per se, but _inane_.
Who gives a flying fark about “who’s yer fave prez?”…this is the future chief exec of the most powerful nation in history…this whole electoral process is a giant distributed job interview…and we’re asking questions that belong in a teen idol magazine.
Ridiculous
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:33 AM
Liberals: so much stupid, so little time.
Hmmmm, Hillary’s friend, a business opportunity?
Speakup on December 18, 2007 at 10:34 AM
Fred shows again why he is a leader, the others follow…here answer this stupid question, uhhh ok. Here raise your hand, uhhh ok. Be on O’Reilly and dance, uhhh ok. Tell everyone you go to church every Sunday, uhhh, ok.
Fred: Disses the stupid question, doesn’t raise his hand, will go on O’Reilly when Fred wants or needs to, and honestly states that he goes to church once in awhile. And on his website states clearly his position…far before anyone else has or did.
He leads, the rest….uhhhh,ok.
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 10:34 AM
Wait. Teddy Roosevelt of Franklin D. Roosevelt?
There’s a big difference.
Nethicus on December 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Oooooh! Missed that. Makes more sense now. I was wondering why no Dems said FDR and no Reps said Reagan.
My favorite 20th century Dem prez would be JFK. “Ask not what your country can do for you…” Wish modern Dems had taken his words to heart.
aero on December 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Yep, it’s Teddy. I don’t think I’d see any of the Democrats leading the Charge on San Juan hill, tho.
Nethicus on December 18, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Fred for President.
Griz on December 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
Okay, here’s the Sesame Street song I was talking about: “One of These Things is Not Like the Others.” I think Fred should make it his campaign song. LOL! Wouldn’t that be hilarious? But it’s true. He’s as obviously different from the pack as he can be. A real stand-out.
aero on December 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:33 AM
I don;t have the time or energy right now, but I could tick off a list of my favorite 20th century presidents with in-depth justifications based on performance and ideology. I bet a lot of other people here could as well. Just because candidates give stupid answers doesn’t mean that the question was inane. Fred’s answer, by the way, was moronic. I guess he’s accepted that he won’t win, and has settled for being class clown.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 10:39 AM
You know, Hillary probably could have scored big with moderates if she chose Eisenhower.
Just sayin’.
(What she actually wanted to say was Richard Nixon. Cause she’s not a crook either.)
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 10:40 AM
It is unsettling and disturbing that our guys didn’t answer Reagan. That signals fear, not leadership.
Halley on December 18, 2007 at 10:41 AM
I’m not entirely sold on any one candidate, but I’d like it if he got the nomination.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Bryan neglected to mention that they were supposed to pick someone from the other party. That was the question.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Also, I feel this is appropriate:
Death to the Insulters of Theodore Roosevelt!
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 10:43 AM
I’ll bet you could. Kudos.
Do you think that that was the kind of answer they were hoping to elicit with such a question? With TV format time constraints? Of course not? They wanted a marketable soundbyte.
Fred’s answer was _not_ moronic…it communicated the level of stultifying idiocy the question deserved.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Am I the only one alarmed by the endless campaign shows and meaningless questions. The more I am exposed to the “candidates” the less inclined I am to vote for any of them. Why can’t someone with a real plan run for President. I feel so unrepresented, I can’t stand it
deadbackpacker on December 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
As a lifelong devotee of TR, I concur. Bully, indeed!
thejackal on December 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
My point is that instead of acting like an ass, Fred could have given his long answer. He was given a forum (however inconsequential) and an opportunity to say something of substance, and chose not to.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
I’m sure you could, but what does that have to do with anything? Do you like Hillary more because of her justification for liking Roosevelt? Does her justification tell you anything about her that you didn’t already know?
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Ditto.
bigbeas on December 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
If Fred doesn’t win the nomination, I’ll be more inclined to vote for Clinton if she gets the nod.
The whining, screaming and sulking around here will be priceless comedy gold.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:50 AM
You’re missing the point. I’m disappointed that none of the candidates took a moment to give any real insight into this, if they bothered answering it. However, I’m supposed to think Fred’s cool for offering moronic answers to a question that could be taken seriously? That’s leadership? I’m underwhelmed.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Since idiot questions are going to be asked of them anyway, should we nominate some, just for fun?
Which Star Wars movie is your favorite?
Sraight or curly fries?
Is Pluto a planet?
Van Halen or Van Haggar?
What is the airspeed and velocity of an unladen swallow?
Inara, Zoe or Kaylee (or Saffron!)?
Should the NFL adopt the college overtime system?
Darksean on December 18, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Switching from Fred to Hillary is easily the most unreasonable, idiotic thing I have ever heard. Mayeb if Huck gets the nod, in which case we’re pretty much doomed either way, only Huckabee will be a poison pill to us all.
As far as Fred’s zinger. Huzzah Fred. Two joke answers in a row for a joke candidacy. Fred could have used this for a blurb on substance or even a veiled attack on the Huckster (e.g. JFK because he believed in religious freedom), but instead he just emphasizes he’s spent too much time in Hollyweird.
He might as well have just answered “Trophy Wife” again.
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
You say “acting like an ass”, I say “swatting the inane aside”
Not satisfactorily within the time constraints of such a format. They reduced the Q&A to the significance of cheerleading. Idiocy.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
The whining, screaming and sulking around here will be priceless comedy gold.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:50 AM
YOU LEAVE HOTAIR ALONE!!!! *sobbing*
aero on December 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Couldn’t agree more. I’m still gonna do it if I have to…and you can whine about it on this blog for 4-8 years.
That, of course, is precisely _why_ I’ll do it. Creative destruction. A lot of you need to wake up…and a Clinton presidency may be the smelling salts you need.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:58 AM
We already had one. For 8 years. They sold nuke tech to the NoKos, shredded our defense forces and intel, emboldened America’s enemies through hasty retreats from unneccesary conflicts, and would have spent like drunken monkeys if a Republican congress didn’t keep them in check.
We’ve had enough Clinton to last a century. Call us when the Grandchildren of Chelsea Clinton are running in 2092
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Oh…I think that the complacency and lack of focus among ‘the right’ indicates a need for a good reminder.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Haven’t you heard of “Advance to the rear?”
ScottG on December 18, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 10:52 AM
I understand the sentiment, but I think he’s taking a larger stand rather than simply offering moronic answers.
I’ve said for months that these early debates and, indeed, the entire early campaign is a waste of everyone’s time for the most part. The entire process is reduced to very scripted, canned soundbite responses to obnoxiously contrived questions… the campaign is run almost like everyone is running for a junior high student council election.
I think people appreciate Fred’s responses, because what he is basically saying is “This is a waste of my time, ask substantive questions. If you’re going to waste my time, I’m going to waste yours back–and be funny about it at the same time.”
DaveS on December 18, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Nailed it ;-)
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Awsome Answer by Fred. Bartlett was a Democrat and a badass. He had empathy for the common man and was willing to violate international law to protect the American people. He was also a figment in Arron Sorkin’s mind and had nothing in common with “Real” Democrat Presidents.
BohicaTwentyTwo on December 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
I am not looking forward to hearing about Hillary’s favorite gadget.
bRight & Early on December 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
I agree and I’ll be joining you. I’m sick of listening to people claiming to be conservatives explaining how they’re voting for Giuliani, Huckabee, or Ken Doll … “because they can win.” It’s vomit inducing and if American conservatives insist on nominating a liberal as the GOP candidate … I’ll be happy to help them get the most liberal possible President.
Go ahead. Make my day.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
If you don’t like liberal Presidents, it’s quite simple; vote for Fred Thompson. If you insist on voting for pandering, lying, frauds … you deserve what you get.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 11:13 AM
They all took it seriously, and they all gave the exact same answer. What would you expect? These people are politicians.
I’m not saying you’re supposed to think anything about Fred. I’m just saying this wasn’t the insightful question you seem to believe it is, and Fred’s answer actually tells you more about him than any other answer said of any other candidate.
For example:
McCain answers Truman, because of the fact that he kept troops in Korea. Gee, McCain admires someone not swayed by public opinion against a war. Are we really surprised there?
Romney’s answer is fairly generic, painting a “tough guy” picture.
Richardson just wanted to talk about his hand shake record.
Barack talks about progressives.
Edwards is worried about the little guy.
And Hillary is tough on monopolies.
Are you shocked by any of this? Really, if these are answers you didn’t know already, then you’ve been living in a cave for the past two years or more.
Without writing your PhD thesis, how would your answer have done any better?
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Fred is funny.
Spirit of 1776 on December 18, 2007 at 11:16 AM
You’re one vote. I do not care at all if you waste it. That’s your burden to bear, not mine.
You sound like a kid who won’t share his ball because the other kids won’t play exactly the way he wants to play.
With “conservatives” like you, who needs liberals.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 11:22 AM
Well, I thought it was funny anyway.
Asher on December 18, 2007 at 11:26 AM
LOL! Riiiiiiiight. Because all those conservatives voting for sloppy mushy liberals in drag are the TRUE conservatives. Give me a break. Please don’t preach to those of us who feel it’s important to actually insist that our candidate represent our values and beliefs. If you want to elect a liberal … you’ll get a liberal.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 11:27 AM
The notion of voting for Hillary (or any Dembot) if Fred doesn’t get the nod just so one can make a statement is plain silly. If you want to make a statement, cast a write-in vote.
flipflop on December 18, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Thing is, there are a couple of reasons why that sixth grader might choose to be mischievous:
1. He’s bored and considers the questions beneath him.
2. It’s his way of tweaking the authority of the people asking the questions.
So, yeah, go Fred!
saint kansas on December 18, 2007 at 11:28 AM
You think so? I believe you’re completely wrong. I believe TRUE conservatives will sit out the election rather than vote for Huckabee or Giuliani. But go ahead and test your theory. Good luck with Hillary or Obama.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 11:29 AM
What, African or European?
Frozen Tex on December 18, 2007 at 11:30 AM
So you’re more of a conservative because you’ll vote for Clinton.
You’re twisted.
I like Fred, but if he’s not the nominee, I won’t jeopardize this country.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 11:32 AM
I’m not saying it was a particularly insightful question, but just one that might have deserved a bit more respect than Fred gave it. I actually think answers like McCain’s are OK; he showed that he understood the history, and its ramifications for how things have turned out since. You know from his answer that he’s thought about it, even if he’s light on the details.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Fred isn’t following the herd, its a good thing.
His substance has always been real good and with Mitt’s RINO responses on gun control and immigration non enforcement, Fred! is looking even better.
Now if somebody would turn up his microphone.
Speakup on December 18, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Yeah, because TRUE conservatives think terrorism isn’t a big deal right? TRUE conservatives are sure Hillary will be just as good at fighting radical Islam as any Republican candidate.
TRUE conservatives will help get Hillary Clinton into power.
I get it now.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 11:35 AM
When you keep your mouth shut, whether it’s out of spite, laziness, or lack of anything useful to say, the microphone will be turned off.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Amen to that. He should replace all of his PR flaks…they ain’t gettin’ it done.
flipflop on December 18, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Fred says to expect more surprises
News2Use on December 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM
This one.
Fred “Now, this is easy. I like tools “all of you, the media”".
Entelechy on December 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Were you previously under the impression that he didn’t know anything about the Korean War? He’s a war vet.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Fred has plenty worthwhile to say, when he’s given the airtime.
flipflop on December 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
I’d like the MSM to extract their single microphone from Huckabee’s anal cavity so we could hear some of the other candidates a little better.
Anyone who hogs the mic gets tased, bro.
saint kansas on December 18, 2007 at 11:40 AM
It’s not about me. It’s about getting his message out. Perhaps you’d be surprised how few people know the details of McCain’s history, let alone anything about the Korean War. The AP reaches a lot of media outlets.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 11:42 AM
LOL! Agree.
aero on December 18, 2007 at 11:43 AM
That assertion starts to ring hollow when Fred has shown, from day one of his campaign (literally!) that he would rather speak in snarky zingers or vague platitudes when actually given a public forum. That he wants to be President to “do some things only a president can do” based on “first principles” isn’t going to cut it.
Big S on December 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Fred Thompson has it right. He refuses to be pushed around. I would like to see him at a press conference while in office.
Can you imagine the response,when the MSM reporters have their panties in a wad and they are trying to sweat him for answers? That would be a hoot.
sonnyspats1 on December 18, 2007 at 11:47 AM
The notion of voting for Hillary (or any Dembot) if Fred doesn’t get the nod just so one can make a statement is plain silly. If you want to make a statement, cast a write-in vote.
flipflop on December 18, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Here’s why you’re wrong.
The GOP has been torn apart due to years of Republicans voting for left leaning candidates. It’s now to the point that voters are throwing their arms in the air, waving the white flag, and voting for “who they think will win” rather than the candidate who represents conservative beliefs.
Every time this happens, the “experts” spend the next four years talking about how the country is “moving to the left.”
The country is NOT “moving to the left. Voters are simply refusing to vote for the candidates they actually agree with because they’re being told that candidate will not be able to win the general election.
This will continue to push the GOP further left until it reaches the point that we are no different then the left. I believe we’re not very far off right now. Several of the leading GOP candidates have spent their entire careers implementing policies that ten years ago would have been considered “extreme left” but now we’re told we need to accept them because they are “centrist.”
Sorry. Can’t do it.
If conservatives continue to sell out their Party by voting these weasels into office … I’ll do everything I can to help them understand where they are leading us. In fact, if conservatives nominate Huckabee or Giuliani … I’m going to start an internet campaign of “vote for the worst” modeled after American Idol.
I will not continue to watch the country move left without attempting to stop the slide. If you really believe having Huckabee or Giuliani in office, along with a liberal majority in both the House and Senate is going to be any different than Hillary, you’re sadly mistaken. They both have liberal tendencies and when faced with a liberal Congress … there will be no telling the difference.
I believe there are millions of conservative Americans who feel the way I do and I predict they’ll be angry enough to join us. You add those angry voters to Hillary’s Democratically registered dead people, goats, dogs, and illegal alien voters and she’ll win going away.
A write in vote does absolutely nothing.
Vote for Huckabee or Giuliani and you WILL get Hillary or Obama.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Big S channeling csdeven…come in csdeven…
Entelechy on December 18, 2007 at 11:54 AM
The point is, and Fred knows it, the press does not speak for the American people. Ridiculing the press will just endear him to all but the liberal (a lost cause anyway). Anytime he doesn’t raise his hand, or answer stupid questions, he wins. The rest are just sheep, following orders…instead of “Simon Says” it is the “Press Says”, and Fred is too much of a leader to fall for that.
*
He becomes an “Independent Conservative”, as opposed to a “Dependent Conservative”.
Now, the question is, will the American people vote for an Indpendent Conservative, or will they fall in line for the person who has the most money, best looking, slickest campaign, the best panderer. Right now, the panderers have the inside track and the poll numbers.
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM
LOL! Do you really believe Huckabee is going to do a better job defending the country than Hillary? Seriously? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeze! I’ll take Hillary ANY day over Huckabee. She might be a far left socialist goon, but you might remember historically what happened when weaker nations pissed off brutal Queens. Hillary just might be more brutal than any President we’ve had so far. Something tells me Huckabee would have to be dragged out from under his desk.
If you’re worried about national defense, Hillary isn’t the problem. The liberals are a problem when it comes to our nation’s worst threat, which is illegal immigration and lack of border security. They are a threat when it comes to socialist views and continuing our capitalist foundation.
The current leaders in the GOP race all have records which tend to match those of the current liberal leaders. It’s not like you’re going to get anything different.
Do you really believe the threat of terror is a bigger threat to this country than illegal aliens, lack of border security, La Raza, and their desire for Aztlan? Maybe you haven’t noticed that they’re actually managing to get themselves elected into public offices. Go ahead. Keep voting for the Giulianis and Huckabees of the world. See how long it takes before you’re kids are learning English as a second language.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Yep. And yet he might be the best the GOP can do this cycle. Sad.
Spirit of 1776 on December 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
“your kids”
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 12:10 PM
Are you kidding? He answered the question and made a point. He was forced to choose a fictional president from the other party because the real ones were so lame.
Sue on December 18, 2007 at 12:20 PM
“Trophy wife”?
ReubenJCogburn on December 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
LOL! Perfect answer!
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Please, Fred’s giving the media about as serious an answer to their goofy questions as is warranted. As to whether he could have given a long answer, sure, and that would have been as effective, if it was reported in an unfiltered manner, but he had no way to know if they’d add his reasoning, and given that we live in the soundbite age, its a reasonable strategery.
On an aside, I like Fred better for goofing on the media, Bush has been way to conciliatory toward them, and its cost him dearly. I think Fred gets that, so his dismissive/combative attitude toward the media is a net plus in my book.
Bad Candy on December 18, 2007 at 12:27 PM
I haven’t been a Fred supporter in the past, but he has, more than any other candidate, articulated his positions in a comprehensive manner.
Answering AP one-line questionnaires makes all the other candidates complicit in the “details don’t matter” pop news biz. It is far better for a candidate to show the AP the disdain that it really deserves.
sweeper on December 18, 2007 at 12:33 PM
FRED! gave the perfect answer. I love the way he baits the MSM. He’s never gonna get a fair shake from the morons anyway, might as well have a little fun and shove the stick back in their eye for a change.
Tim Zank on December 18, 2007 at 12:34 PM
This isn’t the first AP story on McCain or any of the candidates.
First off, I never said I’d vote for Huck or Rudy in the primary.
I just believe that it’s stupid to vote for Hillary over a Republican, and your talk about women historically getting tough on their enemies is hardly convincing. I think it’s stupid that Democrats would vote for her because she’s a woman and believe it’s equally stupid for you to claim she’d be tough on terror because she’s a woman.
In her “co-presidency” she and her husband let Bin Ladin go. Yet somehow, you think she’ll be better this time around.
Your assumption that another language will replace English as my nonexistent children’s first language is worthless considering that English is taught world wide. I currently have two friends in Japan who are teaching English to kids over there, another who just got back from Prague doing the same thing and a multitude of other programs available online.
Meanwhile, radical Muslims think it’s OK to bring Sharia law into our northern neighbor.
Forgive me if I see the latter as the larger threat.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Considering all three of Fraud!’s previous occupations (actor, Senator, lawyer/lobbyist) required pandering and lying and Fraud! himself has a personal ethical lapse worth six figures in dough funneled out to his son for services not rendered, I doubt I’ll find Fraud! an acceptable alrernative to pandering, lying frauds.
Fred was an enemy on McCain Feingold and dead weight in the Senate. His clientele as a lobbyist were not generally above board, and on pro-life he’s already tossed a bone to anyone who would debate him with that gaffe on MTP.
Sorry Gregor, don’t tell me I have to vote for Fraud! Dealin’ Thompson to be a real conservative, especially when your second choice is Hillary Rodham Clinton.
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I’m with you too Gregor ;-)
Do I like or want Shrillary as prez? No way!
My switch to her would be to help throw off the corrosive denial that ‘the right’ has about its candidates. These are not ‘conservatives’, they’re professional politicians, and they are devoid of a philosophical core. At least Hillary believes her shtick through-and-through.
Rather than continue with this erosion of America, I’d rather chuck it all over to Hillary and let the whole country, and world, see what full-blown contemporary liberalism is like. Feel the pain. See the carnage.
In the meantime, the unemployed Republicans can be fed to the dogs, and long, hard work can be undertaken to clean house and reconsolidate ‘our’ base.
Bill left a stink behind that has taken a long time to recover from…Hillary would be the coup-de-grace for liberalism.
And ‘we’ would learn a valuable lesson about cheapening our standards.
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 1:06 PM
They once asked Pat Buchanan who his favorite liberal was. He said “Bob Dole”.
Labamigo on December 18, 2007 at 1:13 PM
I love Fred’s answer.
I for one am tired of a bunch of questions which really give the voter no information on what’s important: the candidate’s stance on the issues.
I have never heard Fred give a flip answer to a question in regards to the issues, and as long as he doesn’t blow those off, I personally don’t have a problem with him joking around. The reporters are the ones wasting time with inane questions, not Fred.
Jodella on December 18, 2007 at 1:16 PM
I didn’t say she would be “tough on terror.” I suggested that she’ll be better than Huckabee. You know? The liberal fraud currently leading in all the GOP polls?
If you truly believe terror is our biggest threat, then you would be much better off voting for Hillary over Huckabee.
Yeah. I can see it now. Huckabee, the man who’s faith won’t allow him to deport an illegal alien, is going to bomb an Islamic terrorist infested city. Good grief!
Better than Huckabee? HELL yes! No doubt about it. Especially since she’ll have something to prove.
You obviously don’t live in a border state.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 1:19 PM
The Acme Trophy Wife Detector?
radjah shelduck on December 18, 2007 at 1:22 PM
Ok, I think its time for the doofuses at NRO to rescind their Romney endorsement and come out for Fred!
Iblis on December 18, 2007 at 1:24 PM
LOL!! Riiiiiiiiigt. Keep pushing that nonsense BKennedy, all while ignoring the fact that your own candidate has an entire basement full of skeletons and a liberal record to boot. You’re in absolutely no position to talk about who’s the better conservative candidate, while supporting a liberal yourself. Gag.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 1:24 PM
And Huck doesn’t?
I’ve lived in Texas my whole life. The people I know currently abroad teaching English in other countries are from Texas as well.
And Mrs. Clinton will? She’s waffled on whether or not she talk to Iran unconditionally.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 1:28 PM
What no one say Millard Fillmore?
GREENTURTLE on December 18, 2007 at 1:31 PM
By the way, the next question is about the candidates’ favorite gadgets. The possibilities…
I bet Hils’ takes a couple of D cells.
bobeast on December 18, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Darksean, you forgot the most obvious…
Boxers or briefs?
GO FRED!
MsUnderestimated on December 18, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Keep it up Gregor. We all know what a committed conservative you are when you consider the enemy the alternative to the perfect while you claim the good is not good enough.
In the minds of actual people, the perfect is the enemy of the good and should the perfect fail, they will go with the good over the bad. Should the perfect fail, you go with the bad.
BKennedy on December 18, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Huckabee isn’t the sort to try to prove himself in that regard. It’s more likely he’ll try to prove that his Christian compassionate way of doing things is the way to handle negotiating with blood thirsty brutal animals. (I’m Christian by the way, so don’t think that was an attempt at Christian bashing. It’s “Huckabee bashing.”)
Hillary on the other hand, is exactly the type who will possibly come out firing in an attempt to prove that a woman President can be tough. She’s also a Clinton, and Clintons don’t like to be messed with. Although I despise her, I would hate to be the foreign leader who decides to be the first to test her.
Those who battle with the Clintons, many times end up DEAD.
What does that have to do with the fact that the country is quickly moving toward a Hispanic majority? What does it have to do with the fact that La Raza and Aztlan movement groups are succeeding at getting supporters elected into government positions, where they then forward their agenda of “taking back the country?”
It doesn’t matter how many countries speak English. What matters is that once La Raza and their supporters succeed at their agenda … the overwhelming majority of America will be SPANISH speaking. You’ll be able to speak English all you want. Just don’t expect anyone around you to understand what you’re saying. But hey! At least you know you can go to China and they’ll understand English over there.
She’s trying to get elected. That’s what her socialist liberal base wants to hear. You think Hillary is going to win the Democratic nomination by coming out in favor of bombing Iran? Get real.
And with that, I’m done defending Hillary. She makes me sick and I find it nauseating that I’m actually sitting here typing words defending her. My point is obviously not to suggest that Hillary would make a good President. My point is that she’s not going to be any worse than Huckabee, and really not that different from Giuliani, especially if they’re given a liberal majority in both the House and Senate.
Gregor on December 18, 2007 at 1:49 PM
Jodella on December 18, 2007 at 1:51 PM
But they didn’t choose this option in Nov. of 2006.
Entelechy on December 18, 2007 at 1:54 PM
That shouldn’t imply that I agree with Gregor’s choice for Hillary.
Entelechy on December 18, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Welcome back then :)
Entelechy on December 18, 2007 at 1:57 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »