Video: The case for Fred
posted at 10:28 am on December 28, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Process of elimination via Right Wing News. Fredheads may be interested to know that their guy, in his hour of need, with a fundraising deadline less than eight hours away, is still almost $100,000 from his goal. For all my jokey comparisons between the ‘Heads and the Paulnuts, this much is clear: Either the ‘Nuts have a lot more disposable income or the ‘Heads aren’t nearly as enamored of their candidate as they claim. Chop chop.
As the rest of the field works hard to lower expectations in Iowa, Fred’s actually raising his. Last month it was fourth place that was unacceptable. Today the goalposts have moved. Does he know something we don’t or is it a simple case of not wanting to admit on television that he’ll be happy, and lucky, just to take the bronze?
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
BTW – has anyone (sane) ever looked into the ratio between pledges and actual receipts on Paul’s “money bombs”?
I’ve heard others raise questions, but I’ve never seen any credible answers. I’m not making any accusations, but the Ronulans’ internet shenanigans certainly are cause for suspicion, as is the way that an accounting quirk was turned by some, including the candidate himself, into a bogus claim of field-leading support among the serving military.
Fred’ll very probably make his goal on the ad. Deadline-driven efforts typically receive disproportionate interest and activity near the actual deadline. Or didn’t any of the rest of you ever cram for a final exam (or bid on an eBay auction… or… or…)?
CK MacLeod on December 28, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Huckabee. We don’t want him either.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Talk really is cheap. Time to buck up folks. Fred Thompson is a proponent for small government so consider it an investment. Give Give Give now so the Feds won’t Take Take Take later.
sonnyspats1 on December 28, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Thank you everyone.
Rushbaby, thanks. That is very kind of you, and made me start bawling again. :)
StephC on December 28, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Well, I’ll be.
wccawa on December 28, 2007 at 12:32 PM
whatcha been smokin there buddy? One point?
Like bringing all the U.S. forces everywhere home?
Maybe firing and banning the CIA?
Maybe firing and banning the FBI?
Maybe turning a blind eye to murderers and monsters just because they don’t live in my neighborhood?
Maybe it is that thermite thing in the WTC?
BTW there are more ZigZags in the glove box.
Limerick on December 28, 2007 at 12:32 PM
What was the word? Schadenfreude?
Time for an update, Allah.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Come on. You seriously expect me to believe that he has the political gumballs to stand up to anyone? If he gets elected, he’ll nominate whomever he knows the democrat congress will approve so he doesn’t look bad. Check his record as governor – he’s not willing to go to the mat. Ron Paul votes what he believes, whether it’s popular or not.
Reckon how it felt to be the only Republican to vote NO on the Iraq war resolution? But he did it. What has Huck ever stood up for other than illegals getting instate tuition?
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Now THAT kind of gesture is how you connect with your base.
Imagine that: Trust.
wccawa on December 28, 2007 at 12:35 PM
What a crappy ad.
Big S on December 28, 2007 at 12:35 PM
See this comment by the goddess anna:
If you really thought Fred was going to save the country, you’d find some way to stretch your money.
Fred Thompson for King of the World 2008? This is why Ron Paul gets $10 million in the span of time it takes Fred to raise $168,000. You scare the crap out of us with your “ruler of the planet earth” rhetoric. You talk a good game about a limited, conservative government, but you’re not even willing to reduce the size of our government in other f-ing countries.
Big government conservatism is an oxymoron, and the goal of today’s GOP.
Mark Jaquith on December 28, 2007 at 12:36 PM
I’m stumped by this video.
Am I supposed to laugh, cry, or just throw up a little in my mouth at the end?
Always Right on December 28, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Me, too. (and $50.00 more for csdeven)
Ex-tex on December 28, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Trolling or something Limerick? I’ll respond to you exactly ZERO more times unless you immediately post a link to Ron Paul saying he believes that there was thermite in the WTC.
Good luck.
As for the FBI and CIA thing, it’s all related to federalism and reducing the size of the government. Fred says he believes in it, Paul’s actually espousing a plan – what’s the difference other than Paul has laid it on the table and Fred has not.
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 12:38 PM
The problem with Paul is the same one with McCain: He’s right on most things, but the one issue he is wrong on is incredibly important (McCain’s stumbling block is amnesty). In Paul’s case he shows that his knowledge of reality starts and ends at the coasts of the United States of America.
The problem is that the US IS the biggest kid in the yard and unfortunetely the European children at the UN have depended on us to fight their battles while they’re off raping children in the Congo. If Ron Paul educated himself on matters outside the US border he’d be a nearly perfect candidate, but he’s so disastrously wrong on FP that it discounts all his good points.
BKennedy on December 28, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Thanks Dusty.
I just wonder how someone can raise 6 mil. in 1 or 2 (or whatever days) without some big time (corp.?) donors.
ChrisM on December 28, 2007 at 12:40 PM
Ex-Tex —- that’s the spirit!
RushBaby on December 28, 2007 at 12:40 PM
I’ll respond to you exactly ZERO more times unless you immediately post a link to Ron Paul clearly saying “I don’t believe America brought 9/11 upon itself.”
Good luck.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Thank you Rushbaby- I am honored.
Ex-tex on December 28, 2007 at 12:43 PM
With the death of his daughter and other issues he decided to do other things…Seems like a conservative thing to do.
tomas on December 28, 2007 at 12:45 PM
More likely he already had the money.
Spirit of 1776 on December 28, 2007 at 12:46 PM
Wow, that video was in a word…
awful. ridiculous too, but I don’t know if there is an adjective which combines both awful and ridiculous into one coherent word. Idiotic doesn’t quite cut it.
Seriously, the ending was crap, and the guy had nothing to say about Romney. Just went into the same kind of “unfairness” that Jeri complains about when people talk about Fred’s laziness. The hair? At least Romney has some. Fred Thompson is like Sampson: he’s got no energy after his hair was removed.
BKennedy on December 28, 2007 at 12:46 PM
Good points BK. So we’re the big kid on the playground, eh? Guess we should go save Rwandans from the carnage over there? Just please tell me where we start and stop.
And why is pulling out of Iraq now a loss? You all are buying into the MSM’s propaganda. Dudes, we whipped one of the 5 largest armies in the world (see “Iran doesn’t have an army inserted here”) in like 2 weeks, deposed their ruthless leader, set up a government which has conducted 2 successful democratic elections (we shouldn’t be nation building, but we did pretty good at it,) and we’ve decimated countless jihadists. How much longer do we have to be there to call it a victory????????
Look, we already won, let’s come home before (too late) the propagandists snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 12:46 PM
When election day comes, and suddenly the Paulbots realize they can only vote once, it is going to come as a shock to them. He’ll pull 1 or 2 percent in the general.
America won’t elect a man who wants to hide in his house. Ever.
Limerick on December 28, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Fred
Mitt
McCainRon PoopRudiani-KerikHucklesbillyLooks like we are getting closer to a third party candidate everyday.
saved on December 28, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Thanks Dusty.
I just wonder how someone can raise 6 mil. in 1 or 2 (or whatever days) without some big time (corp.?) donors.
ChrisM on December 28, 2007 at 12:40 PM
Either RP people even counted the pledges as a donatin or the same contingent of left winger type zealots are gettin it done.
sonnyspats1 on December 28, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Ha Ha Ha I can see them now at the voting place. What do you mean I can only vote once but but …………
sonnyspats1 on December 28, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Did anyone hear something? Like maybe a rhyming poem with definate cadence?
Hmmm… Oh well, must have been nothing. Or maybe I missed it. I was busy looking for a link about thermite. Somebody let me know if they see one.
Thanks
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Yup. that’s the only thing that makes sense.
Ex-tex on December 28, 2007 at 12:52 PM
You never win by losing…some idiots never figure that out.
tomas on December 28, 2007 at 12:53 PM
I almost never give money to political candidates but Fred is so obviously the “class” of this field that I am going to pitch in again. Besides, if I go to Fred’s website I’ll be spared reading any of csdeven’s additional diatribe.
duff65 on December 28, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Actually, I’d be more than willing to pull out of wherever.
The problem is if we do, the Euroweenies won’t pick up the slack. The European countries closest to Darfur, Sudan, and the Middle East in general are Turkey(border), Greece, Italy, and Germany, with France and Spain having easy access through the Mediterreanian.
But who gets called to do all the rescue? The guys across the pond. The US is unfortunately a sucker for freedom, and while our troops fight and die the Euroweenies roost on their lardbutts in NYC and Brussels in complete safety and have the gall to criticize us.
I would be more than happy to grant their wish of pulling out from wherever and getting the “damn Americans” off “their continent.” Of course, whenever we try that they start whining “Wait! Don’t leave us! We can’t defend ourselves! What if Germany steamrolls us again!”
The problem is getting the Euroweenie children off America’s global teat means that middle eastern nutcases like Assad and Armageddonjad get all the nukes they want and the terrorists get a whole new continent of dhimmis to subjugate.
Pauls problem is that he never mulled over any of these thoughts in his head.
BKennedy on December 28, 2007 at 12:54 PM
There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.
Ronald Reagan
Mark Jaquith on December 28, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Agreed
MarkB on December 28, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Truer words were never spoken. A normal person who supports Fred is nothing like a Fredhead and most Fredheads are a far cry from being whackadoodles like the Fred groupies/Fredbots.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 12:56 PM
He doesn’t have a choice. He needs to pick up some momentum or he is lost it all.
bnelson44 on December 28, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Definately.
It is absolutely inconceivable that large amounts of people are donating money to Ron Paul. Never could have happened. I must have been totally delusional last night at the local Ron Paul meetup meeting in Chattanooga. About 30 folks who were present (of the 250+ members) ponied up over $300 in $10’s and $20’s to run 30 minute TV commercials, which were voluntarily produced by our members, for the next month.
But ya’ll are right. There’s no way that the stay-at-home mother of 3 small children who leads our group would ever have the money to donate to Ron Paul. And loading up your whole family to go to New Hampshire to work for the candidate you love is just, well frankly inconceivable.
I’m not sure if the posters here know what that word means.
/sarc off
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Nyog_of_the_Bog on December 28, 2007 at 1:01 PM
So sorry for your loss Steph. Many airlines have lower rates for folks in your situation. Call them all before you give up. And many usually hold a couple of seats until the last few days before the flight for military personnel and family members of those who have passed away.
I hope you find only happy memories of your aunt in the days and weeks to come.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:02 PM
No kidding.
To quote Dr. McCoy, “I’d give real money to shut him up”.
Jimmie on December 28, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Of course if your thinking time starts and ends in New York than sunset comes there in 4 hours. Here in the Midwest, were 5 hours yet from sundown.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on December 28, 2007 at 1:03 PM
It’s gone from fundraising effort to damage control at this point. Fred’s done.
Big S on December 28, 2007 at 1:03 PM
A) This site doesn’t have a filter. If I were to spell it correctly, then you’d know I was serious.
B) CFR was an assault on free speech.
C) In 1994 Fred admitted he was OK with abortion through the first trimester.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:05 PM
“I am as constant as the Northern star!”
Best of the bunch, in my opinion. Nice bit of allegory, too.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:06 PM
So, in 3 hours he picked up 40k, or 13.3K per hour.
5 Hours to go, 60K needed, or 12K per hour.
Yep, he’s done… By done did you mean on track to meet or exceed his goal?
Will he make it? Dunno. Don’t really care, and not giving him any money as he doesn’t seem engaged enough in his effort to be worth my cash.
But he isn’t “done”, he’s on target if he keeps the same pace he’s had for the last 3 hours.
gekkobear on December 28, 2007 at 1:08 PM
hahaha!!! Oh yeah, it’s much easier to run away than to choose NOT to read a particular persons comments.
Holy crap!
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:11 PM
B) Council on Foreign Relations? You mean the one John McCain is part of? And Robert Gates? Explain how.
C) In 1994 Rudy and Mitt were saying a lot of things you don’t seem to mind. Point B seems to focus on the first amendment. How about their direct opposition to the second?
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:12 PM
Paul has a 75% NARAL RATING!!!!!!!! He is not all that “Pro-Life”, he’s a crank idiot and a fool.
Thompson had consistent 0% NARAL ratings while in the Senate.
jp on December 28, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Sigh.
wccawa on December 28, 2007 at 1:14 PM
We found Fred’s new campaign chairman. Kids and puppies indeed!
Go Fred!
He’s only $67,451 short on filling the truck as of the time of this posting so Fred deniers beware.
Mojave Mark on December 28, 2007 at 1:14 PM
LOL…I hear ya brother!
Limerick on December 28, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Hey! I didn’t know we had a Ronulan here!
Sweet.
Can you get me a ride on the blimp?
Professor Blather on December 28, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Heck, lets just make it Hawaii time. That’s an extra 5 hours from eastern time I think. I’d love to see the spin after an extra 60K or so. Then the Ronbots will point out that RP made more money in an hour than Fraud did in three days.
Ahhhhh. The politics of lowered expectations! It’s refreshing ain’t it?
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:17 PM
I’m not sure why some conservatives don’t like Fred!. He’s a lawyer and a politician, and in this universe it would be impossible to find an example of either one that hadn’t done something against his principles at one time or another. We all hold our nose and compromise. It’s what you do when you have to make a living.
What did Thompson do in his lawyer/lobbyist past that was so bad that some conservatives really seem to despise him?
Most of the complaints I’ve read about Thompson from conservatives are that he’s lazy, he doesn’t want it enough, and he can’t win. Seems to me that he wants it enough, he’s just not willing to demean himself in the process of getting it. His campaign style is one of the reasons I gave him a hundred bucks last night. There is a big difference between wanting to win, and needing to win. He doesn’t need it, so he’s not going to kiss the ass of every conservative out there to get it.
I like that. I think he means what he says and says what he means, and unless there is some Kerry-like April 22 1971 skeleton in his closet, he’ll get my vote.
You can’t have everything in a candidate. I’m pro-abortion. Not pro-choice, but pro-abortion. And I’d vote for Fred!
Jaynie59 on December 28, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Ahhh…so money-raising is key to a candidate’s viability as president? Does that mean Hillary wins?
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:19 PM
beware of what? That Fred is going to meet his goal of lowered expectations? Or should we beware because he’s “waiting in the weeds” to surprise us?
You guys are hilarious!
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:19 PM
You, sir, owe a new monitor.
wccawa on December 28, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Gotta go donate what I got left to the grocery store, Exxon and the VFW barkeep. I’ll check in back at sundown for the victory dance.
Limerick on December 28, 2007 at 1:22 PM
Thank you gekkobear. My hope is that Fred will stay in the game and perceiver to the point that he will convince you and others like you to take a second look. Intellectual honesty is all I ask of my fellows.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on December 28, 2007 at 1:23 PM
I don’t know why you think I’m kidding about the blimp. AP had his iPhone – I want that blimp. It’s so big and phallic and shiny.
I covet my neighbor’s blimp. And by “neighbor” I mean “that kooky krusty kandidate down the street.”
Seriously though (or not so much), I didn’t know we had any Ronulans here. I’m kind of excited. It’s like looking through your piggy bank and finding a rare coin. And I just made the worst analogy ever.
If we got our Ronulan to explain where Iran’s army went and one of Mitt’s maniacs to explain what “saw” means and stuck them both in a room together at the same time … would the universe implode?
Professor Blather on December 28, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Cartman: I love you guys.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:29 PM
I know I shouldn’t use acronym’s…..
CFR= Campaign Finance Reform (McCain/Feingold)
Rudy and Mitt have admitted what they said. Fraud continues to lie about it. They were even trying to say a “staffer” signed the form.
Fred’s assault on the first amendment has done (will do) more damage to this country than the assault weapons ban has. I still have 27 guns, and I can supply my entire neighborhood if it ever came to a need for it. But it never will. And if it did, how is my full auto M14 (with a 30 rnd mag and flash suppressor) gonna fare against a M1 Abrams or a F-15 Strike eagle? I would never use it as home defense because I don’t want to kill the neighbors when my round goes through the bad guy, my walls, and into their house. Nope, a dbl barreled shotgun (with )) buck)sawed off to 18″ will handle the job nicely. Eighteen .30 caliber slugs at 25 feet is devastatingly effective.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Ok, you’ve pointed out the major reason that potential Paul supporters have held their conservative noses and leaned toward Huck. Why they haven’t gone toward Fred I can’t explain, but perhaps they like smooth talkers.
Here are the facts: He’s got a 75% NARAL rating because he continually votes for the federal government to keep its noses out of state business. Now, note the to galley, I have such a major issue with abortion that I wouldn’t mind the feds messing in state affairs. Abortion is morally repugnant and must be stopped. But hey, he’s consistent. His claim is that it’s up to the individual states to decide and that’s how he votes.
Now, I know a girl who works with my wife a the local women’s crisis pregnancy center. We are all vehemently anti-abortion, and she personally went to find Ron Paul in South Carolina just so that she could ask him to clarify his stance on abortion. He told her that he believes it will take 10 to 12 years to push through a US Constitutional ammendment banning abortion. However, if left to the individual states, they could begin outlawing in within 2 years. He is an OB-gyn who has stated that he has never seen an instance in his career where the woman’s life truly depended on an abortion. He is against it. Look beyond NARAL’s numbers and understand why he’s voting the way he’s voting.
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 1:32 PM
No. Viability is the key to fund raising in conservative circles. Fred is a scumbag and therefore not viable in the general. A dem dog catcher would beat him.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Did you hear him on MTP.
He is against a constitutional life amendment:
He also stated he did not want to criminalize either women or doctors.
That doesn’t leave anyone against which to force a prohibition. Fred is a pro-choice federalist that has hoodwinked the Fredheads into thinking he is pro-life.
tommylotto on December 28, 2007 at 1:33 PM
No offense … but WTF is pro-abortion?
I thought even the President of NARAL claimed not to like abortion (at least publicly). In fact, I can’t remember ever hearing the nuttiest moonbat openly admit to being “pro-abortion.” And I had a law school class with Catharine Mackinnon.
I’ve now seen everything. But not with my eyes. In the Romneyesque sense.
Don’t respond. I don’t wanna know. I’m already depressed.
Professor Blather on December 28, 2007 at 1:37 PM
THAT CFR. Gotcha. Campaign Finance Reform is a bipartisan pseudo-issue. They’ve been talking about it for 30 years, and it’s a constant annoying gnat that politicians keep letting fly around for a bit before swatting at it. Of all the issues we’re facing today, that’s one of the least of them. Plus, I still don’t get how it’s challenged free speech.
UH OH! You got a flash suppressor! That means it’s a deadly ASSAULT weapon as opposed to a weapon without one, which is a…non-assault weapon. It’s not used for assaul…wait. Hang on, need an aspirin.
How do you manage 18 slugs? Specially made magazine?
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I didn’t say he was for it. I said he’s for making that decision state-level, which, I repeat, has been called a step in the right direction by groups such as the NRLC. That’s why they endorsed him.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:40 PM
It’s what pro-choice actually is. I actually have more respect for people who are not trying to hide their stance behind softened language.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:41 PM
How about giving legal advice to Libyan terrorists responsible for killing 270 innocent lives so that the terrorist could avoid justice for 11 years… Works for me.
Well then you have found your candidate, because Fred is pro-choice too, but then you do realize that you would be voting for a politician so craven that he would lie about his position on abortion and rely on the sheer stupidity of his followers to not realize he is lying.
tommylotto on December 28, 2007 at 1:43 PM
So Lotto and Madison, who are ya’ll voting for? I assume you also find Mitt’s record on abortion as unacceptable. McCain’s a flip-flopper, too.
Surely not the Huckster….
Who’s your man?
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 1:47 PM
I’ll vote for Fred. I won’t vote for gun-grabbers(Mitt, Rudy) or amnesty shills(Huck, McCain). I definitely won’t vote for a guy who says Iran has no army, navy, or air force and would withdraw troops from Japan and South Korea(you know who).
Past that, I might be convinced to throw a vote Lieberman’s way if he ran.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:50 PM
No, I think it must’ve been the voices in your head. All I heard was a Ron Polyp.
FloatingRock on December 28, 2007 at 1:51 PM
His opposition to the Life Amendment is just the cherry on top. He does not want to criminalize either women or doctors. If you are against criminalizing doctors, you are pro-choice.
tommylotto on December 28, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Amen, brother.
Ex-tex on December 28, 2007 at 1:52 PM
It’s very simple: abortion is a private medical decision that is nobody else’s business. Abortion should be legal and readily available to any woman who wants one for any reason she wants one. It’s nobody else’s business except for her and the medical team that performs it. Period. Nobody should be compelled to have an abortion, or perform abortions, and payment should be out-of-pocket or done on a volunteer basis by any doctor who decides to donate his/her services.
There is no other medical procedure performed, that has no impact on public health, that has laws limiting it.
It’s none of my business.
Abortion is the most hypocritical issue for conservatives.
Btw, I chose not to have an abortion. But if my daughter, who turns 15 next week, ever gets pregnant while still living with me, I would get her to an abortionist so fast her head would spin.
Yes, I hate kids. I love puppies, though.
Jaynie59 on December 28, 2007 at 1:53 PM
…and allowing individual states to come to a conclusion to criminalize doctors within their border is pro-choice?
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 1:57 PM
Should you be as blessed as I have to find the forgiveness that Christ offers all of us sinners, when you get to heaven you can explain that last comment to the 50+ million innocent members of the American public who have been mercilessly executed over the past 35 years.
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 1:58 PM
You want to come lend a hand in fixing up our house to sell, and I’ll donate more money to Fred. In the meantime, no matter how much I do think he’s the best bet for the country, Fred’s going to have to live with the $20 I sent him a few months back. It’s a shame that the election process has gotten so mucked up that candidates need oodles of money just to get their name out there and their message heard. I’d like to be a bigger part of the process myself, but I know my pocket change is practically worthless (as well as my vote, being that we’re stationed consistantly in blue states).
Even if Zombie Reagan were running, my money would still be going to groceries, supplies, and childcare.
the goddess anna on December 28, 2007 at 2:06 PM
And as soon as you can provide indisputable proof regarding the moment life begins – and demonstrate that no abortion takes place after that moment – you’ll be right.
Until then, you are at the very least pro-risking-murder.
It’s inescapable logic. But for what it’s worth, you aren’t pro-abortion. Unless you really want people to get pregnant and go have abortions. Unless you’re actually pro-unwanted pregnancy.
You’re pro-choice. Which means you’re confused, logically inconsistent, and intellectually dishonest. You’re forgiven.
Now, really, don’t waste your fingers responding. Trust me.
I’d rather read about blimps. Where’s that Ronulan? Hey, Y2Church … what’s the scoop on the blimp? Has Paul considered using it to track down the missing Iranian military?
Professor Blather on December 28, 2007 at 2:06 PM
That explains pro-choice right there.
AZCON on December 28, 2007 at 2:07 PM
We experience it every time you post.
deepdiver on December 28, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Has Paul considered using it to track down the missing Iranian military?
Professor Blather on December 28, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Iranian military? Are you refering to Iran’s invincable mall security gaurds? Why they are in stealth mode, as is the Pauldenberg.
christophercube on December 28, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Romney is an executive, he’s in the same camp of Build-Act-Fighters as Tancredo is.–BKennedy
A business executive who plays word games for a profit and NEVER built a damn things with his own hands is Romney with the silver spoon stuck up his *ss. Romney’s claim to fame is APPEARANCE alone, and that is all his business amounted to, refabricating appearances for a pretty penny. Romney can spin but that ain’t worth squat in battle, only in headlines.
BKennedy’s rhetoric parallels Romney’s semantic playbook.
maverick muse on December 28, 2007 at 2:48 PM
No that is federalism. That is a totally separate issue. Fred is a federalist and thinks Roe was wrongly decided (which it was). He thinks the decision should be made on a state by state basis (which it should) — even if that means a state makes a rule he personally disagrees with (such as criminalizing abortion). However, when the decision is sent back to the states, and Fred is back in Tennessee voting on the Tennessee abortion bill, his personal view on the issue is that women and doctors should not be criminalized for having or performing abortions — that is pro-choice. Actually, it is the same position that Rudy holds, just that Rudy is honest about his position.
tommylotto on December 28, 2007 at 2:53 PM
I hit the shift key when typing two zeros. It read this…..
It should have read….
00 buckshot shells have 9 .30 cal slugs in each round. Point and shoot. You can cover and entire hallway with one shot. 2 barrels times 9 slugs is 18.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 2:53 PM
And that mitigates Fred’s failure how?
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 2:54 PM
The Fred groupies are impervious to logic. Good for them though, cause that one would leave a mark.
hahaha
But if they were rational, they’d be voting for someone else.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 2:55 PM
I’m hereby dubbing you “Captain Irony.”
Teach us the ways of your consistent logic, oh Captain my captain.
Professor Blather on December 28, 2007 at 3:00 PM
I was gonna say, if you had a street sweeper, watch out for your boy Mitt. He considers that “unusually lethal”. You know, the kind that makes you more dead than dead.
MadisonConservative on December 28, 2007 at 3:08 PM
If thats the case, then why did he vote for a Partial Birth Abortion ban????
the guy is all over the map and makes no sense and doesn’t live in reality.
the bill he sponsored, which he claims would send the issue to the states, would not! It’s completely useless until Roe is overturn by the SCOTUS. All his bill would do is make all future cases related to abortion not a federal issue, the problem is the important rulings are in the past and it will not be a state issue unless Roe is Overturn. As long as the Roe ruling by the SUPREME Law of the land is upheld it is a federal issue.
Paul has alot of Abortion empowering votes in the congress, he is not really that pro-choice. He’s confused on a number of levels.
just remember, Ron Paul is a Vagina Doctor and not a Constitutional Scholar, regardless of rhetoric.
jp on December 28, 2007 at 3:20 PM
jp on December 28, 2007 at 3:22 PM
I don’t care if Fred is personally pro-choice or pro-life. I 100% agree with him that it is a state’s rights issue. I agree with him as to several other things that should be state’s rights issues. Once such things become state’s rights issues and are off the federal landscape, it no longer matters what presidential candidates think about them. That takes away the MSM’s ability to manipulate the voters and make abortion and other non-issues for many people into a litmus test for GOP candidates. It is just distracting and doesn’t belong in presidential politics.
deepdiver on December 28, 2007 at 4:28 PM
csdeven, blaming Fred for supporting McCain-Feingold again?
I’m curious how legislation written and Proposed by McCain and Feingold get exclusively tied to Fred in your mind. I must have missed you on the McCain posts slamming McCain-Feingold, you only seem to trot out this argument for Fred…
You do know it was named for the two senior senators who initiated, promoted and pushed the legislation… i.e. McCain and Feingold; right?
But that’s ok, you need something to yell about on Fred posts. And blaming Fred for McCain’s self-named mistake is amusing anyhow.
I personally blame Edwards for Hillary-Care…
gekkobear on December 28, 2007 at 5:23 PM
jp on December 28, 2007 at 3:22 PM
Thanks for posting all of those jp. Federalist votes one and all. He voted against large government intervention into state matters in each of those instances. You just proved my point as to why he has such a high NARAL rating.
Off to the live threads…
y2church on December 28, 2007 at 5:26 PM
Actually, Fred was fired up that McCain and Feingold froze him out on putting his name on it. Fred WANTED to be remembered for the bill.
And if McCain had the groupie support that Fred has, I’d be tweaking them also.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 5:49 PM
Fred did enough to get his name on it. It’s not like he denies it, he just says now that his judgment was/is faulty. If you question his involvement and its depth, check out the Senate record, which you can find by search here.
Spirit of 1776 on December 28, 2007 at 5:50 PM
I would suggest aiming a bit. You can anticipate a 1 inch pattern spread for every two or three feet the shot travels. At close range there won’t be much pattern.
And 00 buck goes through walls nicely.
a capella on December 28, 2007 at 6:07 PM
It wont go through the bad guy and then through a wall. I doubt it would go through more than one wall before being ineffective.
csdeven on December 28, 2007 at 6:31 PM
#1 reason to vote for Mitt Romney:
Romney Derangement Syndrome has already started.
The man shut down his company to search for the daughter of one employee. The man does charity work when no one is looking, just like GWB (one of his finer qualities). His company Bain Capital helped start up juggernauts like Staples.
Seriously dude, you don’t become a CEO, at least not a successful one, because your dad is loaded and you look good in a suit. The RDS is strong in this one.
BKennedy on December 28, 2007 at 8:42 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »