As heart-ache looms, Fredhead recriminations against the media begin
posted at 10:15 am on January 2, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The shirt-rending won’t start in earnest until tomorrow night but why not join See-Dub and Patterico by getting a jump on it? This critique of the style-over-substance media is typically the lament of lefties looking for excuses as to why more socialist-leaning Democrats (like Silky) haven’t caught on with the public, but it works just as well for True Conservatives. And there’s more than a grain of truth to it: When Pew asked the public earlier this year how they were enjoying the election coverage so far, fully 77% complained that they weren’t getting enough policy stories. If only the media was more focused on attrition through enforcement instead of, to borrow Patterico’s phrase, Mitt Romney’s pizzazz, America might have a fee-vah and the only prescription would be Fred.
Or, alternatively, maybe he could have done a much, much better job getting those big policy plans of his across on the stump. I leave you with this:
That means trying to win over voters like Marjore Roy, who is backing Fred Thompson because the Bible says Mrs. Clinton needs to be blocked.
“There’s something in the Bible that says a woman’s not supposed to be in the lead,” she said after a Thompson event in Ames this weekend, adding that she’s dismissed Republicans Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney because they can’t compete.
“I just think this guy look like a president” — she nodded at Mr. Thompson yards away — “the others are too pretty.”
Update: Incidentally, the people at National Review seem pretty well up to speed on the policy differences between the candidates and yet they endorsed Romney. What foul media gambit is responsible for brainwashing them?
Update: A sharp comment at Patterico’s.
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 »
Let the floodgates open!
amerpundit on January 2, 2008 at 10:16 AM
You sir, have a masochistic streak.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 10:18 AM
I’m just tired of the whining.
Allahpundit on January 2, 2008 at 10:20 AM
More like sadomasochistic.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 10:20 AM
YOU LOVE IT.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 10:20 AM
I only hope Iowa caucus renders what the vast majority of Iowans want. Fredalanche©
TheSitRep on January 2, 2008 at 10:23 AM
I admit I am still hoping folks will give Fred a good look before making up their minds… because I still think he is the best all around candidate.
However, if this supposedly great communicator fails to find a way to communicate then he has only himself to blame.
I do think its possible the MSM is consciously or subconsciously avoiding Fred (e.g., no mention of Fred among the candidate rundown on GMA this morning) because he is a real threat to their candidates.
stillaneocon on January 2, 2008 at 10:23 AM
I am using Dragon naturally speaking to type this, and it spells much better than I
TheSitRep on January 2, 2008 at 10:25 AM
Over at Patterico, one of his commenters really laid down the wood. Some mentioned it here last night, but the specifics on Delaware there shocking. Less than 300 people sign out of 178,000. They have either had horrible organization or they don’t really care.
And begin? Don’t you mean continue?
Spirit of 1776 on January 2, 2008 at 10:25 AM
As Heartache Looms…sounds like the name of a soap opera…
While true, the MSM has all but ignored Fred, I won’t blame them. I’m sticking with my original assessment that the GOP has simply gone more moderate…quietly…and someone like Fred Thompson isn’t the great fit that, say, Reagan was in the ’80s. Of course, this can only mean a Giuliani nomination if true.
I’m still pulling for him tho…same as I was a year ago…but I’ll admit the fire is down to burning embers.
JetBoy on January 2, 2008 at 10:26 AM
And so now you are taunting the Fredheads into whining more? I’m begining to think that you enjoy the Fredheads expressions of agony in the same way you enjoy watching people get tazed.
Zetterson on January 2, 2008 at 10:27 AM
This critique of the style-over-substance media is typically the lament of lefties looking for excuses as to why more socialist-leaning Democrats (like Silky) haven’t caught on with the public, but it works just as well for True Conservatives.
Passive aggressive much? You have made this sort of thing an art form Allah. You manage to stick the knife in just enough that you can say “who me?” and still have plausible deniability.
True Conservatives like See Dub and Patterico = socialist-leaning Democrats
Fredheads = Nazi supported Truther Paulnuts
But you dont come out and say it though. You always add just enough nuance to cover your butt.
amish on January 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM
“Incidentally, the people at National Review seem pretty well up to speed on the policy differences between the candidates and yet they endorsed Romney. What foul media gambit is responsible for brainwashing them?”
No foul media gambit involved. They decided to hand ideology and go for who they thought “could win.”
It’s really just that simple. They sold their souls for a win.
Warner Todd Huston on January 2, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Sorry, I meant to say HANG ideology not hand it!
Warner Todd Huston on January 2, 2008 at 10:29 AM
That’s it! You just nailed Allah!
He’s a Beta-male sadist!
Ali-Bubba on January 2, 2008 at 10:30 AM
Did you need a towel after writing this, Allah?
The best thing about Fred withdrawing from the race is that you’ll have less of an excuse for patronizing his supporters. I’m sure you’ll find a way every once in a while though.
Darksean on January 2, 2008 at 10:30 AM
The tendency to believe there is MSM bias against conservatism is well-deserved, as is the tendency to believe that the Republican establishment is more interested in staying in control/power than they are about sticking to – and fighting for – conservative principles.
C’mon Fred!
MT on January 2, 2008 at 10:31 AM
What’s wrong with that? I still watch the MC Hammer “Don’t Taze Me” remix from time to time for a laugh.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 10:34 AM
I thought I smelled Vaseline, and lo, here comes another FredThread™ for AP to slow roast the Fred Heads over the fire.
flipflop on January 2, 2008 at 10:34 AM
I believe I’ll just stay away until after tomorrow night. Hang in there, folks, and good luck, Fredheads!
wccawa on January 2, 2008 at 10:35 AM
Allahpundit is a RINO and not a true conservative. Allahpundit is an atheist where Fred Thompson is a god-fearing humble and pious Christian whose mere presense at a single mass qualifies for a year of attendances. Where Allahpundit is into robots and technology Fred is a physical bear willing to tussle with anyone and destroy them with his bare hands! Allahpundit lives in evil, liberal New York whereas Fred roosts in the repsectable state of Tennessee.
Allahpundit has flip-flopped on the media issue, whereas Fred is always willing to poke the dinosaur media in the eye!
I’m with Fred! ‘08! It’s a Fredalanche!
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I only hope Iowa caucus renders what the vast majority of Iowans want. Fredalanche©
TheSitRep on January 2, 2008 at 10:23 AM
I like Fred but you are living in the land of oz
KBird on January 2, 2008 at 10:36 AM
So, if I’m understanding this correctly,Fred has had plenty of the pizazz from the media, but now, because he couldn’t follow up with it by using that attention to get his substantive message out, it’s automatically the MSM’s fault Fred has faded in the polls?
I mean really, according to that lady, Fred is the candidate because he’s bald, old, and a male.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Did you read what they wrote when they endorsed him? I guess you completely cast aside why they told you they endorsed him and replaced it with your own theory that more accurately matches your own personal opinions. Nice.
I was more inclined to agree with National Review’s explanation as to why they endorsed Romney. I thought they articulated my personal thoughts quite well.
Zetterson on January 2, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Yeah, I should have mentioned in the post how absurdly favorable Fred’s press was early on, including/especially in the blogosphere. If he’d gotten in during the summer and ridden that wave instead of taking his sweet-ass time, lord knows where he’d be now.
Allahpundit on January 2, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Are you speaking to AP or the old version of csdeven?
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Watched the ABC news last night…
On political coverage? They covered THREE Dems and TWO Repubs… and the TWO Repubs were Huck and Romney.
No Rudi… no Fred… no McCain… was rather interesting.
Romeo13 on January 2, 2008 at 10:41 AM
Oh please don’t get me wrong. I was merely poking at Allah in the same way Allah pokes at the Fredheads. He claimed he didn’t like hearing them whine. I was simply saying, please, you love it and there is nothing wrong with loving it. Just admit it. You (as do I) love watching people get tazed. You love hearing the Fredheads pumping their fists into the air yelling about bias against their man. Both are just amusing.
Zetterson on January 2, 2008 at 10:42 AM
That, at least, is a fair criticism. But it doesn’t negate the fact that while voters are now more aware of his policy positions, they shy away from him because they want to back a winner. It’s how we end up with such crappy political leaders.
flipflop on January 2, 2008 at 10:43 AM
Solution: Fire Mitt’s hairdresser.
Yeah, but he didn’t have any money.
SHOW ME THE MONEY.
Mcguyver on January 2, 2008 at 10:43 AM
Haha. Well some poster on hotair introduced a conspiracy theory the other day that csdeven and allahpundit were the same person. Perhaps they were on to something??
Zetterson on January 2, 2008 at 10:45 AM
If Fred is not the eventual nominee, I’m voting for Hillary because the GOP deserves her! After the disappointment that’s Bush has been, I’d rather Hillary than one of RINOs! End of story!
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on January 2, 2008 at 10:45 AM
Hugh Hewitt
Griz on January 2, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Hints:
- It’s green.
- It doesn’t have to do with environmentalism (well, directly).
- It’s the title of a Pink Floyd song.
Tom Blumer on January 2, 2008 at 10:47 AM
I’m suffering from HDS,…can’t think about anything else right now.
a capella on January 2, 2008 at 10:47 AM
If Fred is not the eventual nominee, I’m voting for Hillary because the GOP deserves her! After the disappointment that’s Bush has been, I’d rather Hillary than one of RINOs! End of story!I’m getting my candy or NOONE IS!Dread Pirate Roberts VI on January 2, 2008 at 10:45 AM
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Ouch! that’s going to leave a mark!
conservnut on January 2, 2008 at 10:47 AM
As I was reading through the articles referenced by Mr. Pundit, this one quote struck me:
What causes ‘fetal alcohol syndrome’?
How much ‘nanny state’ is enough?
What does this have to do with Fred?
rockhauler on January 2, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Yea well, if he’d started in ‘04 like Hillary and Mitt, lord knows where he’d be now.
Griz on January 2, 2008 at 10:48 AM
I can tell you where I’d be. I’d be eating tons of crow. I may still yet, but I’d definitely had my fill by now.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Good Riddance Fred, though we hardly knew ya.
And Allah’s right…whining about media coverage is something that should be saved for Ron Paul nuts.
ernesto on January 2, 2008 at 10:50 AM
New car, caviar, 4-star daydream think I’ll buy me a football team…
Zetterson on January 2, 2008 at 10:51 AM
Why leave off the Blogfather’s take?
Thompson is running the kind of campaign — substantive, policy-laden, not based on gimmicks or sound-bites — that pundits and journalists say they want, but he’s getting no credit for it from the people who claim that’s what they want.
Cuffy Meigs on January 2, 2008 at 10:56 AM
Yeah! Like Rudy did! Then Fred would be where Rudy is now!
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 10:58 AM
Well, “as heart-ache looms” and it appears more certain that the GOP won’t nominate someone who can beat the Democrats, remember the 10 good things about a Democrat victory this November.
flipflop on January 2, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Eh. I guess I don’t notice the whining of Fredheads because I just ignore them. But I haven’t seen too much of it, I don’t think.
I like Fred, and will happily support him in the general election if he pulls off a miracle. But I’m not voting for him for all of the very reasons stated here and in the Dana comment at Patterico. Right on the money: the guy has run a shit campaign; he has no apparent energy for this sort of thing; he has no organization to speak of; and he seems to think everyone should just come running to him.
This would be a recipe for disaster in the Presidency, which takes men with tons of energy and disciplined organizations, and makes them old, gray and hollow in 6 short years.
Jaibones on January 2, 2008 at 11:00 AM
It’s a shame.
So much anticipation.
So little follow thru.
natesnake on January 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Mitt has the money, the beltway support and the national organization behind him that money can pay for. And it shows.
Fred has none of these things, and it shows.
It all depends on if you want the Republican Party to continue the way it has the last eight years but with a president who is much more polished than George Bush or not.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:04 AM
You know, I am beginning to think more and more that Buchanan might be right after all. I can see him throwing support behind McCain and then McCain maybe (if not outright saying) hinting about Thompson being his Veep.
I think Thompson on the ticket would go great lengths to innoculate McCain for conservatives, especially if Thompson tries to give some assurance that McCain won’t sign amnesty. If McCain could pull such thing off, his campaign could explode. Further, it would make it much more palatable to throw the switch for McCain against the Dim he would end up running against.
If this campaign becomes focused more on foreign policy, a McCain/Thompson ticket would be hard to argue against.
Ick.
Darksean on January 2, 2008 at 11:04 AM
Patterico is spot on in his observations. IMO there is something wrong with Fred’s judgment. He has made one bone-headed strategic error after another, and that does not give me confidence in his decision-making and executive abilities.
Wow. Fred fever does some weird things to the brain. There is nothing to back up Amish’s conclusion that Allah surreptitiously equates Fredheads with Paulnuts.
But that response was pretty darn nutty!
Buy Danish on January 2, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Actually, I’m with DPR VI…and not because of any whiny tantrum-fuelled selfishness.
If there’s a chance of electing a RINO with a decidedly liberal congress, then the sh!tstorm that will ensue will stick largely to the GOP…the buck stops with the prez.
Instead, I would rather see Liebfrau Clinton in the White House, with her liberal administration, and liberal congress, so that the impending disaster sits squarely on the shoulders of the Dems.
While all this furore unfolds, the GOP should commence eviscerating itself and purging the RINO crap from its ranks…in preparation for a conservative horizon
Ochlan on January 2, 2008 at 11:06 AM
And he left it to his supporters to have the FITB that he doesn’t want to have. The stark contrast between them and Fred makes him look really lazy and unmotivated. He obviously has accomplished some stuff in his life, but it isn’t enough to overcome the appearance that he is lackadaisical.
Fred talked the talk last summer, but he failed to walk the walk afterwards. That is his fault.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:08 AM
The reason NR didn’t endorse Thompson didn’t have anything to do with policy. Here’s what they said in their endorsement editorial…
CP on January 2, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Something people need to think about:
Are we electing a candidate or a president?
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:08 AM
With exception to Ron Paul, Fred had the most savy pre-announcement internet presence. Confusing internet interest with typical American voters is a recipe for disaster.
Fred was wildly popular with Tennessee voters during his Senate run. That handicapped him when he finally announced. A presidential run takes a lot of organizing and windshield time. Neither of which he took seriously until it was too late.
Like Jailbones, I’m still hoping for a miracle.
natesnake on January 2, 2008 at 11:10 AM
That’s rational. But barring another attack, the immigration issue is the looming issue this cycle. On this issue, McCain is completely vulnerable.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Love the bullet points after “a supporter of … limited government”
• Government control of marriage
• Government intervention overseas
He forgot to add these ones:
• Government control of energy
• Government control of education
• Government control of the family
• Government control of employment
What sort of Hucked up definition of limited government is Romney using?
He should have put the “limited government” point last… maybe people would have forgotten his earlier big-government bullet points by the end. By the way, what’s with the ellipsis? Is it just that they couldn’t get someone to actually say that he supports limited government with a lot of qualifying words in-between?
Mark Jaquith on January 2, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Sorry, but I’ve never been a fan of cutting off ones nose to spite his face. This boils down to supreme court nominations. That is the over-riding reason to vote for any rep over any dem.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:14 AM
And the two of them together would make them a CFR clay pigeon.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 11:14 AM
FRED! for Vice President/08!
The vice-presidency is a good lazy man’s job. Go FRED!
Mcguyver on January 2, 2008 at 11:15 AM
You know, Fred has to take some responsibility for this. You keep wanting to blame voters for his errors. If he is so darned electable why isn’t he getting traction with Republican primary voters? If he can’t win us over, how the h^$# do you think he can win over Independents and Democrats?
I think McCain is mulling over Thompson versus Huckabee right now. McCain would be wise to choose Thompson as it would help mitigate McCain’s liberalism. It wouldn’t work for me, because no matter who he has on the ticket, McCain is a lib who has committed crimes against conservatism, but it could be an effective strategy with other voters.
Buy Danish on January 2, 2008 at 11:16 AM
That is true. But if we are talking about the General Election, the Democrats have a worse record. McCain just needs to get past the convention and he would be the strongest candidate against Hillary or Obama.
Mitt would have serious problems in the general.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:16 AM
I wouldn’t be surprised if McCain asks Lieberman to be his running mate.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:17 AM
It is hard to understand why Fred doesn’t get more traction. Not only does he have the most reasonable (and thought out) positions on all the issues but he is the only candidate that doesn’t seem to be on an “ego” trip. It is hard to figure how all this will sort out but my guess would be a brokered convention with Fred as the compromise candidate.
duff65 on January 2, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Yup.
I had a GREAT junior year history teacher in high school. He said the most important thing a president can do is appoint Supreme Court justices. Laws they sign or executive orders they create can be changed the day a new president is sworn in, but a justice’s votes can impact for decades or longer.
I would put that as the most important reason to elect a Republican, with terrorism and illegal immigration as 2a and 2b, respectively.
Indeed, but wouldn’t it be impactful if when Thompson goes all in for McCain, McCain says he will support and enact Thompson’s written proposals on immigration?
Darksean on January 2, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Money, or lack of it.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:21 AM
I’ll say it again.
This is why no matter WHO gets nominated, this is the election cycle for an Independent (I don’t mean Bloomberg) is going to rock the “old guard” election status quo.
MARK. MY. WORDS.
NEVER FORGET,
80% OF AMERICANS CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE.
Mcguyver on January 2, 2008 at 11:22 AM
Fred would make a good VP candidate. The problem is that during the election cycle, he would make the presidential candidate look dull in comparison. He soaks up too much of the lime light.
McCain does not interview well. It may be a stategic blunder to pick a VP who has more charisma.
natesnake on January 2, 2008 at 11:22 AM
hahaha. I think you’re right. That’ll be the next stage from some folks.
Stage 3: Bargaining.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:23 AM
I think Fred does have some room to gripe, he’s a famous actor but not a famous politician.
If Sean Penn ran for office the TV broadcast networks would froth at the mouth promoting him.
Its a proven fact that the TV networks are guilty of heavy liberal bias with Fox proven to be the most balanced (there isn’t a Conservative bias network) the only reason its not worse is alternative media (us and talk radio) keeps them from it.
Speakup on January 2, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Your probably right. Fred would complement Rudy pretty well though.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Lets think about who we are talking about. Dems don’t care about honor or values. Reps do and they’d have serious reservations with a rep being in bed with the dems. Might they might just stay home?
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Sheesh, this is pathetic. Ill come back in a couple of weeks. I loved this site, but its just getting ridiculous.
Peace out
broker1 on January 2, 2008 at 11:28 AM
But would he? The president deferring to the VP’s policy? It would give John some credibility, but he’d certainly have to continue to completely distance himself from shamensty and promise to build the fence etc. There is hope there.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:29 AM
And let Hillary win? I doubt it. Look at the head-to-heads, McCain does better against Hillary and Obama than any other Republican candidate.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 11:29 AM
Fred isn’t going to be anyone’s VP. If he opts out on the presidential side, he’ll walk. If he dislikes the campaign trail as much as it appears and wants to maintain his image, he’ll put on his cowboy hat and ride on down the trail.
a capella on January 2, 2008 at 11:29 AM
Exactly!!! As least we would know what to expect. But with a RINO you expect one thing and end up with the horn!
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on January 2, 2008 at 11:30 AM
O.K. Bye.
Mcguyver on January 2, 2008 at 11:30 AM
I have to agree with cs on this one. I am afraid that it would take a generation or two of conservatisim to undo all that a Hillary presidency could do to us.
conservnut on January 2, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Darksean,
“I would put that as the most important reason to elect a Republican, with terrorism and illegal immigration as 2a and 2b, respectively.”
Um, that would be if one was RUNNING besides Thompson. There isn’t (except Hunter, but he is about cooked).
Rudy has NEVER been shown to be a strict constructionist supporter and neither has Mitt the Malleable. Neither of these two can be trusted to put anything like a strict constructionist on the bench. And, who could believe a word either of them says about it?? Their records prove them liars.
And McLmae? He has proven 100% that he has no interest in nor any knowledge about the Constitution.
So, the choice is Fred and none of the others.
If Fred doesn’t make it, then we may as well not vote at all because nothing remotely like a conservative agenda will come out of the White House with Rudy, Mitt or McLmae as president.
So, your claim that we would be “cutting off our noses despite our faces” does not stand the test of the records of the other three top candidates.
Let the Dems be responsible for further destroying the Constitution, the economy, the war effort and all else. Maybe we will finally be given a stronger position for 2012. But if OUR guy gets in and a liberal agenda is undertaken… we are destroyed as a movement for the foreseeable future.
Warner Todd Huston on January 2, 2008 at 11:33 AM
…with his hot babe, because, nothing else matters.
Mcguyver on January 2, 2008 at 11:33 AM
And thus is the passion of the anti-Fredheads explained.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 11:34 AM
Yeah Fred Thompson came with all that required reading and stuff. Who has the time to read all his Senate acheivements and the detailed policy he has outlined on his web site about most of the issues of the day. Besides I looked into his soul and there was neither law nor order. /s
sonnyspats1 on January 2, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Agreed. Ane we are oh so close to getting a rational majority on the court. if Hildebeats gets two liberals on the bench, we will regret this election for many, many years.
Great follow up bud.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:37 AM
This little blogette courtesy of AP reminds me of the ‘98 Superbowl in San Diego between the Packers and the Broncos. If you read any of the football boards during that time, all the Packers fans were trash-talking all the Broncos fans. The media agreed. It was a done deal. Green Bay by two touchdowns.
Didn’t quite turn out that way, did it.
So, until the votes are cast on the first caucus, until super Tuesday is concluded, until we have a real nominee, not wishful wiseass thinkers and thinking, I’ll continue to support my man.
I’m not whining; I’m not posing; I’m not taunting others for their core values and identity. I’m just a mature Republican whose seen the whim and vagaries of voters change in a flash. I have no idea what’s going to happen tomorrow or the day after. Neither do you.
Hang in there Fred supporters. Remember, NOT ONE VOTE has been cast.
Tennman on January 2, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Would he? I’m dubious at best. I guess it would depend on how strongly both of them came out and expressed it. Honestly, I think McCain likes amnesty too much. But does he want the presidency more….?
Darksean on January 2, 2008 at 11:38 AM
I don’t think I will not vote at all, because I can still make a statement to a degree. I do NOT like the conservative slippage in the Republican party, but I will vote for any of them (sans Paul) over whoever the Dims put up. It’s a matter of degrees at that point.
That was not my claim. I believe csdeven said that.
I’m sure they will try their darndest, but I’m not going to simply give it to them and HOPE the next time around there will be some sort of conservative awakening. If it won’t happen this election cycle, short of massive terrorist attacks, it won’t happen in the next one.
Darksean on January 2, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Let’s keep in mind folks, that Iowa is merely the START of the primary season regardless of what happens. There’s only one conservative running this year and his name is Fred. If we Republicans choose to become Democrat-Lite it will be to our own peril.
Mitt Romney – pro abortion, pro gun control, pro illegal immigration as governor
Rudy Giuliani – pro abortion, pro gun control, pro illegal immigration as mayor
John McCain – pro abortion, pro gun control, pro illegal immigration as senator (In 1999, the “moderate” version of John McCain said that overturning Roe v. Wade “would be dangerous for women and he would not support it, even in “the long term.”)
Mike Huckabee – pro illegal immigration as governor, increased the size of government and taxes in Arkansas
To sum up:
Rudy RINO
John RINO
Mitt RINO
Mike RINO
…sigh
Mojave Mark on January 2, 2008 at 11:43 AM
And imagine the type they would be. Ruth Bader types. Nope, we have to get out and vote no matter who our nominee is. This election is just too important. The Libs know that they can’t hold elected power more than a term or two before their policies come back and bite them in the ass. It’s all about the court. That is where the true power resides. Don’t any of you forget that!
conservnut on January 2, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Right you are, Tennman, and you can count on it.
RushBaby on January 2, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Exactly.
The polls and all the press and blog posts and such are put out there for the same purpose the mass media reported Kerry was going to win in a landslide in 2004, based on the exit polls: they are pushing an agenda. In 2004, the agenda was to depress Bush voters who had not yet voted into not bothering to vote, since Kerry had already won in a landslide. In this case, the agenda is to depress Fred Thompson supporters to give up hope and not bother to vote for Fred Thompson and switch their vote to someone else.
Just ignore all the noise about all the candidates and stick to your candidate of choice and vote for him on your primary day. Then, we’ll see how things shake out after everyone votes. Simple as that.
All of this infighting doesn’t do anyone any good, except those looking for ratings or blog hits or those who take pleasure in making fun of others.
Michael in MI on January 2, 2008 at 11:47 AM
So basically what Fredheads are saying is that if we can’t get our Fred-Thompson flavored crack we should give power to people who act solely to destroy our constitution with their allies in the MSM, then pray they get blamed for shredding the constitution under Democratic watch.
Thanks Fredheads. You really are true conservatives. See, its not about who will best uphold and defend the constitution, it’s about electing Fred, and the Constitution be damned if we don’t.
Fred/Hillary ‘08. Just in case the Constitution defending thing doesn’t work out.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 11:47 AM
The record we have of Fred’s potential appointments is his rhetoric. Same with Rudy, Mitt, Huck, and McCain. Rudy and Mitt have promised to nominate constructionist justices, and I trust them on their word. What none of us know is how far they will fight for their selections. And we don’t have any more indication from Fred than we do anyone else.
We know EXACTLY what we will get with the dems. So, prudence dictates that we make the best bet possible and let the chips fall where they may. They certainly wont do any worse.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:48 AM
I take issue with you on one or more candidate’s who have displayed that they really want to be president.
They know the issues that “burn the candles on both ends”.
They are ambitious, desire a
legazylegacy. They want to stay for a full eight (8) years. They will choose running mates who could be in for another eight (8)years, thereby extending their legacy for a total of sixteen (16) years.Just see the example of slick Willy to confirm this.
….
….
Ambitious politician = desired legacy = do what the majority of people want = changing ones position as needed = accusations of flip-flopping = bad choices for president = cynicism of the electorate = more promises by candidates = same old, same old.
Solution: Choose the most ambitious politician, hold them accountable once and for all and FIRE THEIR HAIRDESSER!
See how simple life really is?
Going fishing makes one smart. Don’t believe me? Try it.
Mcguyver on January 2, 2008 at 11:48 AM
This Fredhead ain’t saying that.
conservnut on January 2, 2008 at 11:50 AM
This is today/now. Wait until AP puts up another atheist/theist thread or “the sun doesn’t rise/set in Romney’s ars, or hair, as it may be. He’s already made it pretty clear that he doesn’t like either one on this side. Also, you’re a real arskisser. However, an excellent satirist, btw, sincerely.
p.s. csdeven, your probation status is over.
P.P.S. SECOND LOOK AT THIRD PARTY BECAUSE THIS ONE PUTS UP IDIOTS.
P.P.P.S. WAIT, THE THIRD ONE DOES TOO, AND THE LIBS…this cycle is waaaay too loooooooooong.
Pray for Huckabee!!!
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 11:52 AM
How can all these people think Fred is a true conservative when he is pro-choice….
—lobbied for abortion group
—previously stated abortion should be available in first trimester
—against Life Amendment
—stated on MTP that he was opposed to criminalizing both patients and doctors
It boggles the mind. Is there a political equivalent of “beer goggles”?
tommylotto on January 2, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Tired of the whining? So am I, and if Fred doesn’t get the nomination you will see a lot of folks sit out, a Democrat in the Whitehouse and four years of whining.
Jay on January 2, 2008 at 11:55 AM
tommylotto, your guy is Rudy.
He’s pro choice.
Per you, Fred’s pro choice.
From logic class:
Therefore, you’re ok with that.
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 11:56 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »