Video: Fred gets testy with Jane Skinner over “fire in the belly” questions
posted at 2:10 pm on January 2, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
He’s perfectly polite but obviously it’s wearing on him. So wedded is Skinner to this meme, in fact, that after he scolds her for it she actually brings it up again at the very end of the interview, thereby eliciting a little extra parting snark from Fred. Comedy gold.
Sorry for the bad sync and the tiny audio blip in the last few seconds. For dessert, enjoy Ed “I Want to Knock Out Romney’s Teeth” Rollins wishing Fred luck in scrounging up enough gas money to get his bus back to Tennessee when he inevitably flames out. It comes at about the halfway mark of J$’s clip.
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 »
Seems like Fred’s always testy these days.
Vizzini on January 2, 2008 at 2:14 PM
I still trust Fred more than all the others combined.
stillaneocon on January 2, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Saw this live a couple of hours ago…
Fred hit the nail on the head here…
The media is all about perception, not substance… they are worried about how many hands he’s shakeing, not his policies…
If this is what Presidential politics has come to, we are really in trouble.
Romeo13 on January 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM
I liked Fred at first but he lacks the right stuff.
He is starting to venture into Ross Perot land.
RobCon on January 2, 2008 at 2:16 PM
B-I-N-G-O!
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 2:16 PM
She didn’t ask him to sing God Bless America?
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Compared to whom?
stillaneocon on January 2, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Was Fred testy or was Jane defensive? She sounded like a chastised teenager looking for a grounding from a parent. Must be from hanging out with thrill-chasing Shep too much.
Connie on January 2, 2008 at 2:19 PM
It’s been this way for all my life anyway.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Skinner = one of the TV babes
Rollins – not one who believes in graceful ageing.
Fred, when compared/contrasted to Edwards should have said “Well, he’s got hair and he’s so pretty, and I don’t, and am not”.
Other than that the interview was a waste.
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 2:20 PM
America will get what it deserves, 4 years of Hillary.
omnipotent on January 2, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Sorry, should have said – the interview was a (solid) waste.
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Or could it simply be that Fred lacks the ability to turn his much-vaunted substance into dollars with which to fund his campaign.
The problem is the only thing Fred has is positions. Don’t ask him about any actions he’s ever taken, they’re all passive verbs. “Guided, Influenced, Debated” is Fred’s record. You could replace Fred with a button-pushing chimp that had the same voting record and there would be no difference, bar the chimp could probably do something outrageous or fascinating enough to raise some dough.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Why do so many of you believe that w/b just 4 years? Weeds have a way to survive anything.
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 2:24 PM
I’m sorry, but it came to that a very long time ago. Were it not for televised debates, Ronald Reagan might not have been considered as a candidate for his acting skills.
Esthier on January 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM
Fredmentum baby.
CP on January 2, 2008 at 2:26 PM
After the next terrorist attack (~spring 2009) Americans will (again briefly) come to their senses and elect a real hardass Republican.
omnipotent on January 2, 2008 at 2:26 PM
If enough people stick to their guns, America will get 4 years of Hillary, and by 2011 will be starving to have conservatives back in power. Then moderates like Huckabee, McCain, and Giuliani won’t even be considered, and Romney will be considered the most liberal of the candidates.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 2:26 PM
…and all those who’re against Romney are “swine”…and all those who’re not going to vote conservative are idiots…and I stand by my comments – - BKennedy
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 2:27 PM
There are a lot of low functioning people now who are enfranchised. Truly, what else could be expected?
300 years isn’t a bad run. Bet you didn’t think you’d witness the decline. Quite a kick in the balls.
JiangxiDad on January 2, 2008 at 2:28 PM
I think the take away for the lesson of the Thompson campaign when he is out of the race by next week is that as much as people say they want substance over style, they’re not really being truthful. Fred has my vote, but I’m not going to blame his campaign’s demise on the media, that’s a cop out. His message is out there, and people either don’t have enough interest in the political process to go find it, or they simply want someone to be a salesman to them, to kiss their a$$ and tell them what he’s going to do for them if he gets elected, and that is simply not the way Fred works. The media aren’t voting in these polls that have Fred down, the people are, and they are the ones who will be griping when some lightweight like Huckabee or Edwards or Obama is sitting in the White House, and they haven’t got a friggin’ clue on how to run the country. But man, they sure looked vigorous on the campaign trail, and could give a real stemwinder of a speech, and that is apparently what defines a strong candidate these days.
Dudley Smith on January 2, 2008 at 2:29 PM
LOL! The short term memory of the MSM. I want to point out something for a few people who thinks Fred is boring or not Fresh enough. Success is boring! If you want to be the best marathon runner in the world, you have have to get up every morning, slowly put on your gear, lace your shoes and start and just keep going. There’s no 7 minute fab workout to make you good at doing hard tasks. It’s slow repetitive action and not very exciting. Sprinters don’t do marathons they wouldn’t last but sprinting is a spectator sport. No one follows a marathon runner, they just wait at the finish line with their cameras ready.
Fred is repetitive, consistent, and boring as hell. He is predictable and has been doing and saying the same things for many rears. Sprinter can be considered as having fire in their belly’s because of their ability to do short bursts of tremendous power. They would die in a marathon.
Egfrow on January 2, 2008 at 2:31 PM
I have to admit, I watched it just to look at “Skins”
conservnut on January 2, 2008 at 2:31 PM
That was in an earlier time, however, when the networks at least let actual debating take place before they spliced them up for 30-second soundbites.
steveegg on January 2, 2008 at 2:33 PM
I was thinking more like “cockroaches” can survive anything.
heatherrc77 on January 2, 2008 at 2:33 PM
You assume that the enemy is that stupid. They’d enjoy the liberals in charge. It would give them a lot of leeway, and other tools to use, to ‘progress’ globally.
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Thanks for ripping that out of context Entelechy. For those who missed that posting over a week ago, I made my “swine” comments specifically about those backwater hayseed evangelicals like Huckabee who wouldn’t support Romney solely because he’s a Mormon.
You’d make a great Kossack Entelechy.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Many times I think the enemy is SMARTER than we are (collectively).
omnipotent on January 2, 2008 at 2:38 PM
The whole of politic is a pathetic show of ignorance and circumstance. We like to blame it on the media, but its become a constant pandering to the media by candidates that has trivialized the process. Most of the media are talking heads whose few qualifications are physical appearences, the ability to ask questions without looking excessively stupid (I am not sure I could do it). The problem is that people believe them (to not be idiots)….it is all ego in a nice package.
jimwesty on January 2, 2008 at 2:39 PM
That “interview” in a nutshell:
“Senator Thompson, you’re a lazy loser. When are you going to give up and go home?”
But I don’t want to “whine” about the media’s treatment of Thompson, so I won’t comment further.
aero on January 2, 2008 at 2:41 PM
That’s all you do on a regular basis, hypocrite.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Fred tied for third – Reuters
News2Use on January 2, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Got an example, or would prompting for such entitle me to another spewing of personal invective?
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 2:45 PM
I’m predicting a surprise/ upset: Fred comes in second !!!
Just a hunch. Mitt comes in 1st. I’ve never believed the hype about Huckabee – it’s all part of the media game.
stenwin77 on January 2, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Yup. Huck’s supporters are coming over to Fred. Huck is falling, Fred is rising, Mitt is staying the same. Just like I mentioned last night.
A Mitt/Fred 1/2 finish looks more likely today than yesterday.
wccawa on January 2, 2008 at 2:50 PM
I like Jane and Fred.
Jane was simply aping the media narrative one more time. It must be awfully boring for a presidential candidate to hear the same idiotic questions over and over. Especially, as Fred carefully explained to Jane, there are bigger issues to consider.
Let’s see: trophy wife, fire in the belly, etc. Have we missed anything?
Good responses by Fred!
Captain America on January 2, 2008 at 2:52 PM
It is basically a product of technology. Candidates are judged in terms of soundbites due to the medium. The debates are a farce, with no real debate including point-counterpoint. That’s why someone like Huck with a degree in communication, good podium skills, and little else of value in choosing a president, can rise. The superficiality of the process is a function of shaping by the media, and the candidates just respond to that enviorment. Think how YouTube has now become a tool for an audience with easily diverted attention spans. It all reminds me of having a TV remote, so one doesn’t have to get too involved.
a capella on January 2, 2008 at 2:53 PM
Amazing how little time it took:
Let’s talk spew.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Rollins ‘enough gas to go home’ statement could be just what FT needs to light the so called fire in the belly. Huck-a-Buck is essentially broke too but since the MSM is giving him free coverage he now is a contender. I think what Rush said today about Huck-a-Buck being a kind of decoy from the MSM is worth thinking about.
sonnyspats1 on January 2, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Yes, I also think so.
a capella on January 2, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Thank you.
Other than that, you know exactly what I tried to convey, your arrogant use of terms, and nothing else. May your life be this charming forever. I have a hunch, though, that you will have to learn the hard way. I don’t wish it on you, though. May your perfection prevail, always,
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I saw it live and Fred was right on the money. Let’s get to the meat and potatoes of it, not this fluff bullshit.
Afterimage on January 2, 2008 at 3:01 PM
LOL! The definition of irony, being that BKennedy’s own candidate’s “actions” have been historically LIBERAL! Wouldn’t want to ask Romney about THOSE!
Fixed it for you.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Yeah, how about suggesting that my second choice for President is Hillary?
You’re one of the most dishonest members of HotAir.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Fred seems to be a pill most of the time. Instead of taking interview time to point out what he already said, he could be getting out some choice points on why he is the one. I’m sure there are some old, grouchy, “common-sense” types that find his persona charming, but I think it’s wearing thin, and not characteristic of the people who would like to vote for him.
Regan managed a sparkle in his eye, a genuine smile, and when he got riled there was at least some contrast to make it effective. Regan always was the winner and upbeat, Fred comes across to me as being ticked-off for losing already.
Hening on January 2, 2008 at 3:10 PM
By the way are we going to let Rollins take shots at our guy FT? C’mon, I mean that crack about enough gas to get home are fighting words where I come from folks. Give to Fred. FRED THOMPSON NEEDS OUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT! Talk is cheap,and typing under an assumed alias is even cheaper. Fred is not a Chicken-Huck. FRED THOMPSON NEEDS OUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT!
sonnyspats1 on January 2, 2008 at 3:14 PM
So, Fred Thompson’s substance backed by tangible actions.
To this very day no Fredhead has ever illustrated them to me, and yes, I’ve looked on Fred’s site. It’s just like Fred: All talk. Lots of ink on paper. No action.
Perhaps since you love Fred’s policies so much, you could tell me where and how he implemented one. Perhaps Fred voted for the border fence. Did he ever send personal funds down to the border to help build it, was he ever seen walking around where the fence should be and making a loud plea in the Senate? How about punching hippies? Has he ever really stood up to the EPA? Has he ever tried to expose some of their ponsi schemes, or is he just happy to say “I voted against the EPA” and be done with it?
I’ve been trying to get answeres for these since July, but Fredheads usually respond to my request by attacking Romney.
And besides Gregor, if you replaced Romney with Hillary Clinton, why would you have a problem voting for him? After all, it would imply Fred didn’t get the nomination, therefore HillaMitt would be just fine for you.
And yeah, Romney’s been a liberal:
On healthcare, he drafted the idea with the Heritage Foundation (LIBERALS!).
His veto pen was always at the ready in Massachusetts to strike down that 85% Republican legislature (THE FIEND!)
He fought for embryonic stem cell research by vetoing it (THAT SCOUNDREL!)
And sadly, when the Massachusetts Supreme Court outlawed gay marriage, Mitt fought against it but reluctantly said the law should be ignored. (EVIL!)
And Fred’s record of actions Gregor. Any chance you might discuss that, for the first time ever, I might add? Or would you rather focus another attack on Romney?
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Did you even watch the video? He wasn’t asked a single question about his policies. He was repeatedly asked about his campaign, his fire in his belly, and when he might QUIT!
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Hey, look! More out-of-context unanswerable hyperbole! Since you stuck it in-between two legitimate questions, I can only assume you actually want an answer. In which case, I’m going to be more emphatic in calling you TedKennedy, because you both rely on much of the same ludicrous emotional BS in trying to argue your points.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Well, considering you’re constantly drumming on about how everyone who isn’t Fred is a RINO, I figured you wern’t really preferring Hillary over Huckabee as much as you were Hillary over a RINO, therefore it led me to this series.
1. Fred Thompson is the only true conservative running for president.
2. Hillary Clinton is more preferable than Mike Huckabees running for president.
3. All Mike Huckabees running for president are RINOs
4. All Non-Fred Thompsons running for president are RINOs
5. Therefore, Hillary Clinton is more preferable than RINOs.
6. Therefore, Fred Thompson is the first choice and Hillary Clinton is the second choice.
I mean really Gregor, be honest. If Mike is worse than Hillary and Mitt is Hillary to you, you’re pretty much saying the only Republican you’d prefer to Hillary is either McCain or Guiliani. Since I know you believe Giuliani is as bad as or worse than Romney, it really makes McCain your second choice I suppose.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 3:24 PM
I did watch the video, and that is what I heard. That was my perception of the interview, and it just could have been tainted by the other interviews I watch with him. Fred seems to be talking down and lecturing when he speaks, and that doesn’t always sit well. I’ve known the real deal, and grew up around farming Korean and WWII vets that were short on words and deep in common sense and wisdom. That generation also had a sense of making you want to listen and learn (aka Regan).
Gregor, I’m just calling it as I saw/heard it. I have no ax to grind for another candidate. I’m still not impressed with any of them, but will vote for whoever gets the nomination.
Hening on January 2, 2008 at 3:26 PM
In the future I will avoid putting any comedic summaries (punching hippies = standing up to the EPA) in order to get straight answers from Fredheads, who again seem to dodge the question deftly.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Pissy pissy piss piss
Ochlan on January 2, 2008 at 3:26 PM
LOL! Your entire comment was a collection of lies, manipulation, and misrepresentations.
There’s been six months of comments and posts about Fred’s “actions.” You’ve spent your life over the last six months re-posting nasty “Fred’s lazy” comments to every one of them. It’s not like it’s hard to find Thompson’s conservative history of voting. I know you’re smarter than that, aren’t you?
Here’s what’s funny about this latest BKennedy nonsense is that while you’re suggesting that we have failed to list Thompson’s conservative actions, all you can do is list Romney’s LIBERAL actions. Yet you support him.
Go figure.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:27 PM
Ask serious, calm, collected questions, and you’ll get the same kind of answers. Pretend you’re Jon Stewart, and we’ll treat you like a comedian.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Geez, I meant “Reagan”. Sorry.
Hening on January 2, 2008 at 3:28 PM
hahaha!!
I thought I was good at snark, but that was the snariest snark I have ever had the pleasure of reading.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 3:30 PM
You must have watched a completely different interview. Thompson was asked specific questions which did NOT relate to what you said he should have talked about. The way an interview is supposed to work, is the person doing the interviewing asks the person being interviewed a question, and then expects an answer to that question. It’s tough for a person to talk about his positions if the questions have nothing to do with positions.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:32 PM
Perhaps you missed the fact my quicl four point listing of Romney’s actions was a satire of your particularly idiotic spin on them.
Yes, we’ve had 6 months of Fred threads. 99% of them are bloviating about Fred’s policy positions. None of them reference anything he has ever done, they are all ad spots and fireside chats which I have taken the pleasure to listen to.
See, my problem isn’t the talk, its the walk. Fred has never put himself out on a limb. He’s always played it safe. He always has a script to go by, and when he doesn’t he plays an extra, not a protagonist. The few times he has had starring roles it was all about McCain Feingold and letting Clinton slide. Quite frankly Fred’s show ratings are abysmal, and that’s why he’s getting cancelled.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 3:35 PM
The pen is mighter than the sword. Google it!
sonnyspats1 on January 2, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Yeah. Obviously. Romney is a true blue conservative. It’s obviously just my “idiotic spin.”
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Robert Novak on Thompson …
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Rush Limbaugh on Fred Thompson:
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Bingo – outstanding post.
We really do get the government we deserve.
thirteen28 on January 2, 2008 at 3:51 PM
When Instapundit is right, he’s right:
[Fred] 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.
CommentGuy on January 2, 2008 at 3:55 PM
I enjoyed that interview. Fred is pretty entertaining when he has just a slight edge to him.
Spirit of 1776 on January 2, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Uh yeah Gregor. So Fred sat on his ass and cast a yay or nay. Huzzah for having a pulse.
Actions, Gregor?
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 3:56 PM
…that’s what congressmen DO. They sit on their ass, occasionally stand up and talk, and cast a vote every now and then. That’s reality.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 3:59 PM
What type of actions are you looking for dufus? You want him to beat someone up? Take their lunch money? In your mind, conservative votes are not actions for a Senator? What world are you living in exactly?
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Fred Thompson, true conservative man of action.
Much better than that lame Tancredo fella, who thought a Senate seat shouldn’t just be a seat.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Well, Tancredo was in the House, granted, but it’s the same principle.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Or that Romney cat, who felt that running as a conservative doesn’t really mean he has to be a conservative. Heh.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Oh, so you’re looking for activities “above and beyond the call of duty”, as it were?
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Also:
Considering that everyone that doesn’t seem to like Fred keeps talking about the SCOTUS, this should be driving them into the flatbed of the red pickup.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 4:08 PM
OK, so he’s a lawyer who caught a Democrat with his hand in the cookie jar and did his job.
Aside from punishing people who ought to be punished, how does that display his commitment to conservatism? I wasn’t enthused by Fred’s “do things only a president can do” comment, since that seems to display a lack of knowledge of the job. Does it mean he wants to press the shiny red “nuke the world 10 times over” button?
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:09 PM
She was fine, he was fine. I like Fred’s style. Did I mention that she was fine…dang, she’s a lovely girl.
Jaibones on January 2, 2008 at 4:10 PM
informal position, guided. Sounds like Bush was appointing an escort, and Fred, not being busy on anything particularly important, had some time away from being dead weight for a while.
How about this. Legislation Fred Thompson (co-)authored. that requires more than waiting for the president to appoint you to do something or just showing up and pressing the button.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:13 PM
It’s obvious that BKennedy isn’t really looking for an answer and there’s no possible answer that he’ll accept.
Proof of my earlier statement that BKennedy is one of the most dishonest commenters on HotAir.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Really? So why are you supporting Romney then? Can you list all the bills that Romney has “co-authored?”
Of course, I’ll give you that he HAS had spent some time backing a few bills, but I’m not sure you’ll want to talk about that.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Knowing his policies are good for telling us what direction a president will go in, but tell us nothing about how successful he will be in actually getting things done. First you need experience to know how to get things done, and second you need experience to prove to people that you can get things done.
It’s the easiest thing in the world to be a pure-as-as-the-driven snow conservative, its quite another to have been in the fight and had to make compromises to get things accomplished. Fred’s no better than a hope-and-smiles Obama of the right.
pedestrian on January 2, 2008 at 4:17 PM
When your only credentials for president are “I was in the Senate and did nothing except vote” and “See my shiny, far reaching policies I have never even attempted to suggest or implement” it kind of puts a damper on my enthusiasm.
Implementation for a Senator would be authoring legislation on a particular matter and getting it passed.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:17 PM
That’s slighting him, don’t you think? His job was to represent his client. The outcome, her compensation and reinstatement, was his job. If he were the typical cold lawyer, he wouldn’t have gone further to out Blanton. He did more than was needed.
Now, granted, that was one example, albeit with a very commendable result. So, feel free to present an example of Mitt going above and beyond “his job”.
Again, hyperbole. Don’t go there, remember? Now, as to the “things only a president can do” comment, don’t act naive. You know that the president has the power to pressure Congress in order to either prevent or help a bill going through. He also has executive privilege, and the ability to approve military excursions up to a certain amount of time. Since, as you said, the war on terror is an issue of concern, I’m sure he’s considered potential moves that could be made.
In short, give him some credit. You’re not giving him nearly the benefit of the doubt you give to the likes of Romney.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Yet another post made up of complete lies.
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Well Gregor, Romney’s never been a Senator. Perhaps you should check out a basic outline of the US governmental system.
Romney vetoed loads of liberal legislation as Governor. When he went to implement something he sought conservative advice from the heritage foundation, and most of the attacks on Romney come from the Boston Globe, which was willing to pay two reporters to stake out Romney’s lawn for 2 months, and thus cannot be trusted. (They’re run by the NYT, btw.)
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:21 PM
I give you that. He has little in that regard. Then again, neither do any of the other candidates. In some cases, it’s worse. How about McCain’s connection with Charles Keating in the S&L scandal? How about Huck’s backing of further taxation in his home state? How about Mitt’s cozying with the Brady organization over the AWB?
To be perfectly frank, in the base contest between bad record and no record, the better odds lie with the latter.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 4:22 PM
There’s that word being used by conservative hypocrites again. “COMPROMISES.”
When Democrats flip-flop, it’s called “flip-flopping” or sometimes even “selling out.”
When Romney flip-flops, it’s called “compromising”
Gregor on January 2, 2008 at 4:22 PM
He shut down his entire business once to look for the lost child of one employee. He turned around the Olympics when he could have declined the offer. As far as his job at Bain Capital he was basically supposed to be a miracle worker, and he did it quite well. Most of what Romney did during his life required exceptional skill and competence. Knock him for his policies if you like, he’s as competent an executive as they come.
In contrast Fred has never run anything of his own and his most important venture to date, his campaign for president, is sinking like a stone under his leadership. You wouldn’t let a mailman drive a bulldozer, would you? Same concept, the Chief executive clothes are just too big for Fred to fill.
Yes, I realize Bush wasn’t exactly the most sterling businessman, but he was governor and has done more good than ill generally.
BKennedy on January 2, 2008 at 4:28 PM
I’m uncommitted at this point, but i gotta tell ya Thompson impresses me. talk about a straight forward, straight talking gentleman he’s it.
And I love the way he can back slap these MSM dimwits, even the ditsy blonde’s on Fox.
oldernslower on January 2, 2008 at 4:35 PM
If Fred were the mailman, he would have previously worked heavy machinery(He was in the Senate, where a lot of presidential candidates come from). Poor analogy.
You probably won’t like hearing this, but shutting down your entire business for the sake of one employee’s personal problems is not a good executive decision. It’s extremely to his credit as a human being, don’t mistake me for not thinking so. However, does this mean that if someone is being held hostage by terrorists, he would close down the DHS or FBI for their sake? That’s a cogent paradigm. Again, I’m not trying to downplay the weight of his noble action, but it was neither a good executive decision, nor does it apply in any way to the qualifications for running of the highest office in the land.
And yes, I will knock him for his policies if I disagree with them, and I certainly won’t vote for him if I know he’s good at implementing policies I disagree with! Again, good for him if he’s a competent businessman, but if he’s going to be pushing for universal health care and stricter gun control, I’d rather he be poor at getting those passed.
Essentially, you listed proof that he is efficient and competent at what he wants to do. That’s fine. I posted proof that Fred Thompson cares about clean government. I’m curious to know if Mitt has done anything in that regard.
MadisonConservative on January 2, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Useless MSM. It’s Entertainment Tonight covering politicians.
Dusty on January 2, 2008 at 4:44 PM
SHHHHH! You’re messing up the MSM’s meme! Fred’s boring, not entertaining. Fred is boring. Fred is uninteresting. Don’t look at the wrinkly guy who doesn’t kiss the MSM’s collective hiney. No “edge” to see here. Move along.
aero on January 2, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Fred may not be the second coming of Teddy Roosevelt, but as far as I’m concerned, he’s miles ahead of anyone else, save perhaps Duncan Hunter.
Guliani gives me conflicting views. Mitt and Huck give me the shivers. Ron Paul gives me the shingles.
And the Dems…Crimus, they just give me an itchy trigger finger.
thejackal on January 2, 2008 at 5:06 PM
I’ve heard just about enough from Fred, and of Fred.
.
The great savior led everyone along (for too long), and still became the next conservative hero. Up to second or third in early polls. Then he comes out and lives up to the perceptions of being one fatass, lazy cowboy. With just an ounce of effort he likely would’ve cruised through the nomination process. He can go back to Law and Order now. I don’t watch that anyway.
stacman on January 2, 2008 at 5:09 PM
Heh. Okay let the record show I would have said that it was entertaining. Poor Skinner though:) I don’t think she was out to get him and she got reprimanded by Grandpa.
Spirit of 1776 on January 2, 2008 at 5:17 PM
I like this grumpy Fred. Go Fred. She’s a nitwit.
Mojave Mark on January 2, 2008 at 5:35 PM
I Love Fred, he just lays it out there plain and simple. (which you have to for the idiots in front of the cameras)
jdsmith0021 on January 2, 2008 at 6:02 PM
The more I see Fred the more I like Fred. The problem is that his campaign is nearly broke, I believe. I honestly think that he’s the best of the field, but if you can’t translate your policy stance into cash you can’t run an effective campaign.
Hope he can stay in it long enough to make a good run.
zombyboy on January 2, 2008 at 6:28 PM
I think you would be, too, if you kept getting asked a question you’d answered in detail not all that long ago by people who are getting paid to know that you had answered it.
Jimmie on January 2, 2008 at 6:30 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »