Fire chief: The hat incident didn’t happen the way Politico said
posted at 11:55 am on December 22, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
The bone of contention is whether in fact he had a “sour” expression on his face when weighing whether to don the hat. You can judge for yourself by watching the video, but for the record the chief says the visit was perfectly friendly and no offense was taken:
Unlike Simon’s characterization of a “sour” Thompson, McKenzie recalled that the firefighters were joking with the Thompsons during the visit, which corroborates the CBS News video that captured part of the event. He stated further than any attempt to portray the event as Simon described was the work of “someone who had their own agenda.”
Unprompted, McKenzie stated that he was well aware of the dangers of politicians wearing hats, and he and his fellow firefighters understood why Thompson declined to wear the helmet. He also stated that he understood that someone might want to make an issue of Thompson wearing his helmet, and that it seemed that when Thompson declined, “someone decided to make an issue out of it anyway.”
Chief McKenzie concluded that the Waverly firemen was very appreciative of Thompson’s visit, as they would be of any presidential candidate that took the time to stop by.
Bob also hints that Politico might have misquoted the newspaper editor interviewed for the same piece, although there seems to be no evidence for that beyond her declining to comment when asked about it.
Update: Here’s a transcript of Fred’s private interview with the newspaper editor and a brief account of the visit to the firehouse. The fire chief appears to be something of a Fredhead: “He seems very personable. I think the message he’s trying to get out is consistent with some of my views.”
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 »
Shocka!
hillbillyjim on December 22, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Looks to me like Simon got his knickers in a twist because he was shut out of their closed-door confab.
hillbillyjim on December 22, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Oh, it’s a tempest in a teacup, but it’s also one Fred! could have easily avoided by saying something to the effect that he had too much respect for firefighters to fool around playing dress-up with their hats. Maybe next time…
Laura on December 22, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Which why it was wrong to set the tone of the whole of Fred’s visit to just one incident. If he was nice and polite and engaging the rest of the time then politely refusing the hat would not have been taken as a putdown
William Amos on December 22, 2007 at 12:01 PM
I’m glad. It sure beats the alternative.
AP, here is the article by J. Perry from the Waverly Democrat.
Spirit of 1776 on December 22, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Yeah, although that’s why I was surprised they put out that web video yesterday of him referring to the hat. The networks didn’t pick it up so far as I know.
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 12:04 PM
So did I miss the retraction by MM and Allah for taking this a little too seriously? I understand how quick the information is flying out about the candidates and understand the tough nature of posting like a shotgun but this whole thing disappointed me especially considering I’ve come to respect and trust in Hot Air to cover every facet of a story pretty damn good.
CTDeLude on December 22, 2007 at 12:07 PM
I should state that a retraction about the comments should only happen if you believe there should be one. If you don’t think you’re wrong…I guess we’ll live. I still love you guys, especially this Christmas season.
CTDeLude on December 22, 2007 at 12:09 PM
So are we done with this now?
Connie on December 22, 2007 at 12:11 PM
I (heart) Fire Chief Dan McKenzie.
Nice job, Bob.
RushBaby on December 22, 2007 at 12:11 PM
No. He should have put the hat on, and the article was about more than just the visit to the firehouse. Not sure what you mean either when you say we took it too seriously. I wrote one post about it and posted the video as soon as I knew about it. What is it you want me to retract?
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 12:12 PM
So Fred! IS NOT a curmudgenly old fart as described by Politico and taken hook, line and sinker by MM, AP and BP.
Stephen Hayes has the real story.
omnipotent on December 22, 2007 at 12:14 PM
So your saying we should be upset over something that was a trivial matter in the first place ?
Allah and Hotair have been rough on all the candidates and have played no favorites.
William Amos on December 22, 2007 at 12:17 PM
We didn’t say that he was. I said the story made him sound inept and antisocial, which it did, and the story was bigger than that one incident. And it was inept of him not to put the hat on. Not the first evidence of ineptness and unsociability on the trail, either.
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Lying and flip-flopping are worth posting about. Hats are not. And obviously, the fire chief disagrees with the Fred-bashers. End. of. story.
Connie on December 22, 2007 at 12:21 PM
After watching the vid : “Silly hat rule” is short for, “I have this hat rule that you will find to be silly.”
captivated_dem on December 22, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Dierks Bentley’s “Free and Easy Down the Road I Go” comes blaring from the sound system.
Free and Easy Down the
RoaddrainIwe Go.Entelechy on December 22, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Dude. I said he shouldn’t have described the fire hat as “silly,” and I stand by that. I said he missed an opportunity to do something cool, and I stand by that. If you have a problem with that, it’s your problem, but don’t put words in my mouth. You’re no better than the bad Roger Simon if you do that.
If you want to yell at someone for describing Fred in unflattering terms, kindly take your argument to the guy who said this:
You’ll find him at Ace’s place. Pay attention to the comments too, especially this one. You Fredheads need to stop banging your spoons about this one story and realize that your guy does have a problem, either of perception or reality. And I say that as someone who had high hopes when rumors of Fred’s entry into the race first started swirling.
Bryan on December 22, 2007 at 12:21 PM
But Allah, you are continuing to take your jabs. I have not horses in the race, I just want a conservative, but unlike some, I will take a partial conservative.
Your jab? Saying the chief must be a Fredhead, just because he feels he has some of the same views as Fred is putting out? I guess we are all Fredheads then, right? But to me, you once again took a jab at those who are in Freds corner.
I visit this site maybe 10 times a day, one of the best sites around. We all love the snark, so I would not want you to change a thing.
WoosterOh on December 22, 2007 at 12:24 PM
While I disagree that he should have put the hat on (he should have declined more graciously though), I concur that Fred! has had many missteps, especially early on the trail.
However, you guys DID insinuate that Fred! is a grumpy old codger. I ain’t cryin’, I’m just sayin’.
All is fair in Love, War & Politics though. I just like to give you crap once in a while AP. (BTW, my brother got an iPhone last week and it IS worthy or your Greatness.)
omnipotent on December 22, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Of course he shouldn’t have described the hat as “silly,” but neither did he have to put it on to avoid the appearance of a problem. He just should have been more graceful about it.
“Antisocial” is a word with some pretty specific psychological connotations, btw. “Asocial” is the word you’re looking for, guys.
Anwyn on December 22, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Simon’s account of the meeting with the newspaper staff, and the reason he was excluded, is pretty much bunk, too. Looks like the editor didn’t quite give him the whole scoop.
The additional nugget there is, as I noted, that what Thompson had to say about what he would do for Iowa farmers as President ought to warm the hearts of every conservative.
Jimmie on December 22, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Alright then, but just note Allah that there are people beyond myself that feel as if the editorial tone on this issue has been too quick trigger and certainly a little overblown. Certainly it isn’t even close to 5% of the overall great work you put out here. But you did react to the Politico (questionable source it has been) a little too quick and that’s what disappointed me. And remember I’m lumping the subsequent comments in those threads into the mix as well.
But, to say the least, the sooner all this is behind us and we can actually focus on who actually will be the best president (not just candidate) the better.
CTDeLude on December 22, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Fair enough, but I’d rather we conservatives take apart the Democratic candidates.
This whole hat incident is silly and really shouldn’t have even made it on radar.
The site is great, some of us just LOVE to bitch, nothing personal. (Hell, I visit 20+ times a day)
omnipotent on December 22, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Look Im a Fred supporter and I have been on this site for years. Right now I dont get why some are acting like Ron Paul fans ?
No candidate is perfect and Hotair has equally bashed everyone including Tancredo whom Im sure most on here agree with his stance if not his rhetoric on immigration
Michelle had some very kind words to say as Tanc bowed out. But Hotair was also very hard on tanc as well.
Same with Mitt, Same with Huckabee, Same with Guiliani.
So trying to say Hot air has some agenda to discredit any one politician over another is unfair and really not based in fact. You can find both pro and con articles on most the candidates on this site.
So really start growing a thicker skin out there because its a long political season
William Amos on December 22, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Way beyond hatgate…
I no longer have any hopes, for any of these candidates, nor for us independents/conservatives/freedom-lovers of all sorts, and we are a huge majority, together.
Like Professor Blather eloquently stated yesterday, something to this effect – the only thing we have in common is a certain philosophy; other than that we are the same (whores), beholden to our fixated loves, making abstract excuses for them, for whatever reasons. It’s very depressing.
Ronald Reagan, from the grave “Weell…children…you must think of the greater good. You must not be so selfish”.
Entelechy on December 22, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Also I’d like to note that all the noise my fellow commentators and myself about this rather insignificant issue is because we trust you guys so (at least I do). I used to go to The Corner/Instapundit for anything in the blogosphere but they have become in someways afterthoughts because of Hot Air. I consider that rather high praise for you guys and what you do.
CTDeLude on December 22, 2007 at 12:32 PM
“And it was inept of him not to put the hat on”
That is your opinion, AP, not a fact. I happen to disagree with it, because people wearing hats they are not supposed to wear tend to look like total ‘tards.
wccawa on December 22, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Praise Allah.
Griz on December 22, 2007 at 12:33 PM
The most stubborn man alive.
Griz on December 22, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Fredhead disclaimer.
That said…..Geeez guys. I want Papa to win too but all this banging on HA is BS. Move on. I reacted negatively to the Politico post also. Bad Fred. Then I took a breath and put it aside.
Not to pull a Huckabee on you guys but there have been plenty of times I have had to go to the emergency room to get my foot extracted from my mouth (or elsewhere).
You want Fred to win? Go give him some gas money.
Limerick on December 22, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Maybe this is the lesson HA needed to learn. POLITICO is always bias and wrong.
Griz on December 22, 2007 at 12:35 PM
What’s the fun in that? It’s politics, baby! Thrust, counter-thrust, riposte. We’re political junkies and need our fixes. It’s a disease with no known cure.
Tennman on December 22, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Major correction: s/b – “other than that we are the same (whores) as the Democrats, beholden to our fixated loves, making abstract excuses for them, for whatever reasons”.
Entelechy on December 22, 2007 at 12:41 PM
The hat thing was problematic. Don’t don the hat and he gets hit for “dis’n the firefighters”. Do don the hat and he would get accused of wearing the hat, that he didn’t earn and doesn’t deserve, purely for political gain. Everyone’s perfectly free to express thier opinion, but mine is that it was a no-win situation for him with Jeri stepping in to save the day.
And that, I think, is the real story here. The dynamic between Fred and Jeri, not the hat.
P. James Moriarty on December 22, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Actually you did get it wrong Bryan, Fred said he had a silly rule about hats, not a rule about silly hats. Silly hat rule = silly rule about wearing other peoples hats, he was not suggesting that fireman’s hats are silly. It’s kind of silly that you misunderstood what he said.
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 12:43 PM
That’s it….I’m going with Kucinich.
Limerick on December 22, 2007 at 12:44 PM
The full quote was “I’ve got this silly hat rule that I’m about to violate.”
P. James Moriarty on December 22, 2007 at 12:46 PM
Ron Paul baby…Ron Paul…If we’re going to go off the deep end might just as well elect the craziest ba$tard out there…No sense pretending that we aren’t going insane.
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 12:47 PM
And soon enough csdeven will step in to berate the “power-hungry, political whore” that is Jeri, as if that is any different from Mr. Clinton, Mrs. Edwards, Mrs. Obama, Mrs. Romney, and on, and on…
Entelechy on December 22, 2007 at 12:47 PM
In this context “silly” is a verb modifier for hat rule, not a descriptor of hats. In other words Fred is saying that the hat rule is silly, not the hat.
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Moriarty has the quote right, you have it wrong, doriangrey. “Silly hat rule” can be taken more than one way, but the most obvious is that it’s the hat that’s silly, not the rule that Thompson says is his own rule. I took it to mean “silly hat,” not “silly rule,” because, duh, “silly” and “hat” are right next to each other in the sentence. Step back to grammar school and diagram that puppy–what word does “silly” modify in that construction? You could say “silly hat” modifies “rule,” but “silly” doesn’t modify “rule” directly because “hat” is in the way.
Yeah, I paid a lot of attention to this stuff. Don’t ask me why.
For the record, I can’t believe that we’re still arguing about this nonsense. What an ultra-plus-non-story and near total waste of time.
Bryan on December 22, 2007 at 12:51 PM
I’m seriously baffled at why there’s still any negatives for Fred here. The Politico story has two major components: Fred showed up and did a perfunctory and platitutde-laden interview with a local newspaper and then went to a firehouse and ticked off some firemen with his curmugeonly “silly hat” rule.
We’ve seen with our own eyes that neither one of these things is true. The Politico story was dead wrong.
So what’s the deal here? Seriously.
Jimmie on December 22, 2007 at 12:52 PM
So are “hat” and “rule.”
Connie on December 22, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Hats are worth posting about if they stand a chance of altering Fred’s chances in the race. At the time it was reported, it looked like that silly hat could have really tripped him up.
Why in the world would Fred call his own rule silly? I think most people would interpret it as a rule about “silly hats”, although I’m no English major. Maybe we should get Mitt in here to settle this dispute…
Big S on December 22, 2007 at 12:56 PM
The politico spinning an event into bad news for Fred, not suprising. Certain conservative pundits have been doing this for awhile now. His speechs prior to announcing his candidacy were spun as uninspiring, rusty, etc., but when I saw them online Fred was performing very well and being treated like a rockstar. No biggie, just bias.
Theworldisnotenough on December 22, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Yes, “silly” could also modify “hat rule.” That’s not the way I took it, but it’s a perfectly valid way to hear it. “Silly” could also describe this entire fracas from stem to stern. “Pointless” might be another.
Jimmie, The Politico story does not say that the firefighters were “ticked off.” I just went back and re-read it. It describes Fred as having a “sour” look on his face, which he nearly always does. Then Simon guesses that the firefighters don’t think the hat is silly, which they probably don’t. But that doesn’t make them “ticked off.” If you’ve spent more than two seconds around firefighters, you’ll know that they’re a very hard lot to offend. You pretty much have to kill one to offend others.
Bryan on December 22, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Of course that’s how he meant it. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t have put out that video yesterday about not wearing any hat that isn’t your own.
His speeches weren’t “spun” that way; to many people they were uninspiring giving the hype he helped nurture for his grand entrance into the race.
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Thank you. I agree.
Don’t feel that way. Think back a bit to the 2000 and 2004 elections. Remember how close we came to having Gore as Pres when the towers came down? Whatever else one thinks of dubya, he has brought the Oval Office back as a dignified, honored place. I’m not nearly as down on Rudy, Mitt, or Fred. I think any of them would be strong presidents, in spite of the defects. We could have it so much worse in terms of a field from which to choose. The cup is half full. And, it’s fun to have Huck and RP to kick around a bit during the pre-game warmups.
a capella on December 22, 2007 at 1:02 PM
*sigh*
Bryan, Allah, and Michelle have the right to their opinions, particularly on this message board. Quit badgering them about those opinions.
So why has CSD allowed to come back and carry on his contemptible crap?
MadisonConservative on December 22, 2007 at 1:04 PM
And when Jeri put on the helmet, Fred said, you look cute, Chief McKenzie said to himself, you got that right.
Speakup on December 22, 2007 at 1:06 PM
That’s what you infer he said. Many here infer that he said he had a “silly ‘hat rule’ not a “’silly hat’ rule”. With his later vid about wearing only your hat, it reinforces the point it is the rule he suggested was silly, not the hat, and those holding with the former inference are standing on firmer ground.
Dusty on December 22, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Agreed. No offense guys, but why are you allowing this:
over on the “If Fred tanks” thread?
P. James Moriarty on December 22, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Probably because it was posted as a headline to start a thread.(wink)
a capella on December 22, 2007 at 1:10 PM
If I post does that mean I violate my silly thread rule?
sonnyspats1 on December 22, 2007 at 1:10 PM
And Kos laughs.
Limerick on December 22, 2007 at 1:11 PM
Ridiculous. Can you say “damage control?” How about “spin?” Noooo, Fred! always has to be right, Fred! is the omnipotent, all-knowing, all-seeing master of time, space and dimension and can do no wrong.
I’m done with this. Hate me if you want. I have some Christmas shopping to do.
Bryan on December 22, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Words of wisdom.
hillbillyjim on December 22, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Fred Thompson is the only man who can save America. rEVOLution! Cowboy hats for everyone!
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 1:14 PM
In the end, it doesn’t really matter what he meant; it matters what other people heard. That’s the only reason why anybody paid any attention to this ridiculous episode anyway.
Big S on December 22, 2007 at 1:15 PM
The reason you can’t believe we’re still talking about this Bryan is the simple fact that AP got it wrong. Completely suckered by an out-of-line liberal pundit propaganda story. Then you got it wrong and tried to spin for AP. And then once proven wrong you’re both stubbornly sticking to your opinions which have been proven wrong over and over again.
Pretty much a let-down for a lot of folks here. You should have taken your own advice which I’ve seen you toss to pundits and candidates alike many, many times. “Admit you’re wrong. And move on.” Regain our trust and put this crap to rest.
Frankly, it’s just unbelievable to me that MM and AP who I’ve been reading for 4 years now and have never seen them completely wrong about anything… without immediately printing a retraction, have now found theirselves completely wrong and spinning like nothing I’ve ever seen out of either of our heros.
I will say, this will be the last I speak of this here. If you prefer to stain your own credibility by sticking to a propaganda story, then have at it. You’ll be served well by it I’m sure.
Griz on December 22, 2007 at 1:15 PM
I’ve worked with cops for almost 20 years – same breed in thar regard, so I’m with you on that. The clear inference was that Thompson put his bitter scowl upon the hat and miffed the firemen. That’s where Simon was going with his story and he drew a clear enough line through the entire story that he could have called it “Fred Disses Entire Iowa Town”. Well, it turns out that there wasn’t any dissing to be found. What Simon did do was to bury that he made a pretty solid connection to the Fire Chief and managed to get a bunch of firefighters to not hate his photo op, which you know they tend to hate with a passion. Not too shabby.
Simons story was pure weapons-grade cowflop. That ought to be the end of it and opinions ought to revise themselves to at least reflect the real events. The transcript of his interview with the paper is up, though, and there’s stuff in it worth combing over, if we’re finally going to get back to talking about issues and such.
Jimmie on December 22, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Indeed!
Entelechy on December 22, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Only when he’s awake, Bryan. Only when he’s awake.
Jack M. on December 22, 2007 at 1:17 PM
We don’t, Bryan. In a few months, this will all be behind us, and most of us know that. Don’t buy into that division that will mean nothing in a matter of weeks.
MadisonConservative on December 22, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Because we weren’t wrong. The core objection was that he didn’t wear the hat. And guess what? He didn’t, because it was “silly.” Total tin ear. If only he had his wife’s political savvy.
And now, like Bryan, having beat my head against the Fredhead wall, I’m done with this. Fred rEVOLution!
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Allah, this is your true problem here. You’re reacting to a very reasonable counterpoint about your conduct by making your conduct worse. You’re alienating an entire section of your readers and admirers simply by insulting them, and comparing them to Neo-Nazis, site slammers, and 9-11 truthers. It’s totally and completely uncalled for, and it’s making you go down a hell of a lot in good people’s estimations.
MadisonConservative on December 22, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Well, Allah, I still say the core objection ought to be to calling the hat silly, not not-wearing it.
On the other side, people actually attempting to say Fred was referring to the rule with the word “silly” are beyond silly themselves.
Anwyn on December 22, 2007 at 1:22 PM
Go read the $&$& story again, Jimmie. Simon says no such thing. He “guesses” something that’s probably true, but couches it as his own guess. If you people want to differ with us, fine, but if you’re actually going to attempt to correct us, make sure that you have your facts right first. I’ve corrected you on this twice now and dorian on the quote itself. Commenter, correct thyself.
And now, I’m actually, perpetually and for all time officially done with this tiresome nonsense.
So I hear, Jack, so I hear.
Bryan on December 22, 2007 at 1:23 PM
It’s called self deprecating humor.
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:25 PM
No I’m not and you know it. You’re just looking to play the victim. I’m comparing the Fredheads to the Paulbots only insofar as they apologize relentlessly for their guy, and you know it.
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 1:28 PM
The way I look at it, it all depends on how you define “hat.” And “sour.” And “silly.”
A few lengthy dictionary definitions would clear this up.
But I’ll tell you this: if you people think “hat” has only one definition, you’re fascists. It’s obviously open to interpretation.
Especially if you’re voting for him.
Professor Blather on December 22, 2007 at 1:29 PM
Christmas cooties.
To anyone who is still sane around here…..Merry Christmas.
The Limerick Clan on the Trinity (no not a papal bull, just a river), wish you all the best.
Limerick on December 22, 2007 at 1:29 PM
That would be a valid viewpoint if the fire chief had said in the interview; “I really was appalled and offended” or “I can’t believe he insulted the brave guys at my firehouse.”
Didn’t happen that way.
That would be a valid viewpoint if I insisted on defending Fred even if the story had turned out be true- if Fred had insulted the men in the firehouse. That would indicate a RP-level of blind faith on my part worthy of contempt.
Didn’t happen that way.
This whole story was a knife job on Fred, and HA was initially snookered by Politico.
No one hates you, Bryan, or anyone else here at HA. But I think the Fredhead contingent would be put at ease with a quick note like… “We found the story, we posted the story, and it’s obvious now we got snookered by Politico and ran with it a little too quick.”
Merry Christmas, and enjoy your shopping trip.
wccawa on December 22, 2007 at 1:31 PM
Many here infer that he said he had a “silly ‘hat rule’
And being an Iowan, I can tell you most Iowans I know would believe he was talking about the rule. They sure wouldn’t take his comment as an insult. We have a good sense of humor around here.
Gianni on December 22, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Oh please, you guys jumped the shark on this one. There’s no need for you to be getting all defensive and hostile. In the grand scheme of things this is pretty insignificant. Everyone makes mistakes now and then and if this is the extent of HA’s mistake making than god bless you guys. But it was a mistake and your inference was wrong.
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Wow, two you-know-its in one post. Except that you have now done it incessantly, and you know it. The revolution comments, the “only man who can save America” comments. You know you’ve crossed the line, and seem to have no interest in coming back from it.
Many of us who were arguing with you before did not apologize for him, because we didn’t hear anything wrong. We heard him say something that even Bryan has admitted to understanding Fred say: silly “hat rule”. So, because we hear that, we’re crazed apologists who go on every site and say “If Fred Thompson is not made president it will be 1984 and kittens will immolate and the baby Jesus will cry every Christmas”?
You know you’ve gone over the line. You know it. It’s the Christmas season, maybe you’re dealing with insanity in real life. That’s understandable. It’s no reason to refuse to let your problems sink into this kind of behavior. It may well lose you some readers.
MadisonConservative on December 22, 2007 at 1:36 PM
Jesus
weptbawled.When exactly did Hot Air shift from 24/7 atheism vs. Christians to 24/7 Clintonesque semantic parsing and spinning?
I never got that memo.
Seriously. Gag. And then we get to be upset when our opponents twist the words of the Constitution?
Parsing and spinning and lying and self-delusion. Barf.
What happened to speaking plainly?
Verb modifier? Seriously? That’s what we’re doing now?
Dear God. When I find myself missing the discussion over whether it was appropriate to call Edwards a “faggot,” I know things have gotten bad.
Verb modifiers. Jesus.
Professor Blather on December 22, 2007 at 1:37 PM
I’m a little late to this dance, but wouldn’t Fred in a fire hat be about like a Micheal Dukakis in a tank?
Wife’s political savvy indeed…
PS.
Don’t demagogue your readers with the “rEVOLution” crap just because they back Fred and will stick up for him. You don’t like it when people do it to you Allahpundit(trade mark; copyright; pat. pending)……
liquidflorian on December 22, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I think you are mistaken, I seriously doubt that this will cause anyone to think any less of AP. I believe that we all recognize that he is human just like the rest of us. He puts his pants on one leg at a time just like all the rest of us. He is very good at what he does and we respect him for that. For the most part this is just one of those things where we will agree to disagree with him and there will be no hurt feelings.
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:38 PM
Meh…I blame this all on the d@mned english language…
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:41 PM
I think he stuffs both legs in at once and does that rock-back-on-the-bed thing to wiggle his hips in.
Anwyn on December 22, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Sounds like you have much in common with Shep Smith. The most fascinating car chase in the history of car chases was one where the car was doing about 15 mph and he made FOX stop running it because the cars weren’t going fast enough to suit him.
Connie on December 22, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Fools. You think he wears pants?
MadisonConservative on December 22, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Why ? You guys made it a BFD… when do we get the other candidates position on the all important hat issue ?
Are illegal immigrates here to wear hats that Fred! won’t ?
If the DoHS identifies what types of hats terrorists wear, would that be profiling, and will that violate any Constitutional guarantees ?
elgeneralisimo on December 22, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Someone definitely spike the Christmas punch around here. How come no one offered me any?
baldilocks on December 22, 2007 at 1:47 PM
spike=spike :::Never mind. My typing’s bad enough without it.
baldilocks on December 22, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Fred Thompson is the only man who can save America. rEVOLution! Cowboy hats for everyone!
Allahpundit on December 22, 2007 at 1:14 PM
Yee Haw! Think of all the cowboys and NASCAR dads that would attract. Then all you have to do is get them to the voting booth and wham the christian conservatives become a none issue. I mean what precentage of the population votes anyway?
sonnyspats1 on December 22, 2007 at 1:48 PM
arrggghhh spiked
baldilocks on December 22, 2007 at 1:48 PM
great another controversy….spike vs spiked.
(either way the effect is what I am after).
Limerick on December 22, 2007 at 1:50 PM
I think people react differently to things that candidates say and do. It sounds like Bryan has a connection with firefighters and took what he did personally. In the same way that if Fred made an offhand remark about “regulating those mortgage broker guys” I would be very pissed and would look elsewhere.
I like Fred and if he is still around will vote for him, but will not incessantly apologize for him. I think the admins got this one wrong but thats a matter of opinion. I dont hold it against them. Its their opinion.
broker1 on December 22, 2007 at 1:51 PM
Heh heh, that what people who weigh 300 lbs do, rumor has it that AP is a tad bit shy of 300… Probably weighs about a buck 80…And with his beer drinking habits he probably has to keep one foot on the ground in order to get the other one in the pants…While precariously leaning up against something…
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:51 PM
Yeah, and you never, ever see that from the Romniacs or Rudybots. Well, except in every single thread even remotely non-positive about their candidate that is.
Point is- even if the Politico story was accurate (and it wasn’t), making this out as some significant gaffe was overblowing it a bit.
Hollowpoint on December 22, 2007 at 1:53 PM
Aw… I wanted a pony!!
Laura on December 22, 2007 at 1:54 PM
Do you mean you can’t believe we’re still arguing? Or you can’t believe that its about the nonsense? Or is your emphasis on the ’still’ part, like maybe its okay that we’re arguing, and its okay that its about the nonsense, you’re just surprised its continuing? And when you say you “can’t” believe it – do you really mean you are unable to? Or that you won’t? And what’s this “record” you refer to? Is this going to be on a CD or something? Can I get it on i-Tunes?
You really must be more clear in your use of language.
Sure, that sentence is the only true thing in this thread. But, man … I could interpret it a dozen different ways.
Assuming I was an intellectually dishonest spinning Clintonian parsing weasel. Assuming I was willing to engage in that stupidity for political gain.
This is bad. Really bad.
My favorite line in the movie Armageddon comes when everything starts to go wrong on the asteroid, and Rockhound utters the utterly obvious: “This is a ***damned Greek tragedy.”
Watching the ridiculous spinning, the empty arguments about semantics, the lies and the self-delusion and the parsing of every word and thought …
It’s a ***damned Greek tragedy. It really is. What the hell happened? No. Really. What happened?
Somebody tell me its at least as bad for the Democrats. Find me a silver lining to this ugly dark cloud. And tell me one of these days we’ll all go back to acting like plain-spoken, principle-having conservatives … who, by definition, don’t act like this. Who don’t use dictionary definitions and dissection of verb modifier to parse their meaning.
Please? I’m begging. This sucks.
Alternatively, let’s talk about the Cowboys. Who’s cuter: Jessica Simpson or Tony Romo? I say its a toss-up.
Professor Blather on December 22, 2007 at 1:55 PM
But on the positive side..AP and Bryan managed to squeeze three threads out of a non story…Man those two are good, talk about getting blood out of a turnip…..
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Cant we all just get along? -Some guy in CA
infidel on December 22, 2007 at 1:58 PM
doriangrey on December 22, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Well pardner…..I’ll take Jessica. No offense.
Limerick on December 22, 2007 at 2:00 PM
And you’re really going to leave the “see-saw” marching and life-long hunting Romneyites out of that one?
I’ve made my decision: find me the candidate who’s supporters aren’t mind-dead 24/7 apologists and spin-meisters, and that’s who I’m voting for. Whoever he is.
Professor Blather on December 22, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »