If you had to blame someone for planting the story, whom would you choose in order to secure the most electoral advantage? He and McCain are friends so he’s not going to point a finger at him. Huckabee’s wearing his “Christian leader” halo and loudly denouncing negative campaigning (despite Ed Rollins continuing to act like a complete boor) so that’s not likely to fly with voters. The answer is Mitt, whose supporters are most likely to defect to Thompson.

Hey, let’s hear it for conspiracy theories!

It’s only important to come in strong, not win in Iowa. The ones who have to fear Fred! the most are the democrats, and based on their track record, rumor planting is certainly not beneath them. In fact, I wouldn’t put it past the Dems to have started one or more of the shenanigans now blamed on various Repub campaigns to give the impression that the Repubs are all a bunch of bumbling, corrupt bozos. Look how easy it is to do — just call the Politico. The Politico should be ashamed of itself for their Beauchamp standards of journalism. It matters not, however: after so many wrong stories on Fred! they have zero credibility except as a propaganda organ for inside attacks, and Fred! can refer to this fact again and again, as needed.

This may well be a good thing for Fred! in the long run: by his actions, he can destroy the story of him backing out he seems to be the only one coming out this with any cred.

Eugene Robinson I think from MSNBC. What an embarrassing mistake on my part. Apologies.

Spirit of 1776 on January 3, 2008 at 7:08 PM

That’s cool. Now I know Robinson isn’t to be trusted.

broker1 on January 3, 2008 at 7:11 PM

That was a great quote – I heard Rush read it today.
That should be his stump speech, instead of all that stuff about his red truck.

doriangrey on January 3, 2008 at 7:11 PM

I am cleverly disguised to look like a PaulNut.

[via Hot Air]

Video of Bob Haus with Shepard Smith discussing the phony Politico story. Typical Fox News spin. Smith defends the Politico by saying that journalists may push the envelope, but never go over the line….

You caught me! I’m the undercover operative who has been doing all these dastardly deeds.

Tommy is waiting until Florida when Rudy jumps in. The lucky dog, I wanted sunny Florida but got stuck with Iowa where I’m freezing my blank off.

Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 7:09 PM

No need for you to come clean, I have 8 x 10 fully color photo glossies with lines and arrows and paragraph on the back describing what each one is about… :P

These days all those candidates, all the Democrat leaders are one and the same, they’re all NEA, MoveOn.org, ACLU, Michael Moore Democrats. They’ve allowed these radicals to take control of their party and dictate their course. So this election’s important not just to enact our conservative principles, this election’s important to salvage a once-great political party from the grip of extremism and shake it back to its senses. It’s time to give not just Republicans, but Independents and, yes, good Democrats a chance to call a halt to the leftward lurch of the once-proud party of working people, the Democrat Party. So in seeking the nomination of my own party, I want to say something a little unusual. I’m asking my fellow Republicans to vote for me, not only for what I have to say to them, for what I have to say to the members of the other party, the millions of Democrats who haven’t left the Democratic Party so much as their party’s national leadership has left them.” Who said it? Who said that?

doriangrey on January 3, 2008 at 6:56 PM

You caught me! I’m the undercover operative who has been doing all these dastardly deeds.

Tommy is waiting until Florida when Rudy jumps in. The lucky dog, I wanted sunny Florida but got stuck with Iowa where I’m freezing my blank off.

I know him from NPR. He is on Brit’s round table every day.

csdeven on January 3, 2008 at 6:54 PM

Oh, sorry. I’m thinking of Eugene Robinson I think from MSNBC. What an embarrassing mistake on my part. Apologies.

RUSH: I will read the last paragraph again and ask you who said this. “So, in seeking the nomination of my own party, I want to say something a little unusual. I’m asking my fellow Republicans to vote for me and not only for what I have to say to them, but for what I have to say to the members of the other party, the millions of Democrats who haven’t left the Democrat Party so much as their party’s national leadership has left them.” It was interesting; members of my staff during the break answered my question.

“That was Lieberman that said that, right?”

I said, “No.”

H.R. said, “It was Reagan that said that, right?”

“Rush : No. It was Fred Thompson who said this.

Doriengrey,

I get it! Fred’s long term tactics and planning are great, it’s just the short one’s he has difficulty with! I don’t see what Hillary gains now, except to hope the all our candidates get in a cat fight and hopelessly tarnish each other before we get to the general election.

Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 6:51 PM

Hmmm, and yet you wonder why anyone would suspect the Romney campaign of something like this when he has supporters like you and cs and tommyboy…I just cant imagine why either…

broker1 on January 3, 2008 at 6:52 PM

Agreed. Huck is a win/win for the dems.

Williams of WaPo? He is not be trusted as an analyst.
Spirit of 1776 on January 3, 2008 at 6:48 PM

I know him from NPR. He is on Brit’s round table every day.

Jaun Williams thinks Huck can be the president.

Wowza!

csdeven on January 3, 2008 at 6:46 PM

Of course he does, just like every morning David Schuster fawns over Huckaboom. They dont have Bush to bash in the race so the closest thing would be Huck. An evangelical that they will beat over the head and claim “Do the American People want another Bush in office proclaiming God talks to him?”

It sure stimulated lots of face time for THE FRED in the MSM. They all ran flocking and gave him a platform to deny it among other things.

NickTx on January 3, 2008 at 6:24 PM

Aha!

Which candidate thus far appears to have the greatest proclivity for extremely long range planning and tactics and consistently employees underhanded and dirty tricks of this nature.

Doriengrey,

I get it! Fred’s long term tactics and planning are great, it’s just the short one’s he has difficulty with! I don’t see what Hillary gains now, except to hope the all our candidates get in a cat fight and hopelessly tarnish each other before we get to the general election.

csdeven on January 3, 2008 at 6:46 PM

Williams of WaPo? He is not be trusted as an analyst.

Wowza!

Ah. Hadn’t thought of that, but that seems as likely as anything. Help kill the baby in the crib so to speak. That could be it.

Spirit of 1776 on January 3, 2008 at 6:33 PM

Yup, everybody including Hillary knows that the democratic nomination is hers to lose and always has been. So from a strategic tactical point of view what the Clinton machine needs to do is eliminate the republican candidates that they least want to face as soon as possible or when ever a opportunity might present itself.

Making Iowa voters think that Fred has already decided to drop out would achieve both goals.

As far as I can tell the story was designed to harm the Thompson campaign, not give it a backhanded boost. It does not seem consistent with the manner in which Fred has portrayed himself or with the campaigning tactics he has thus far employed.

Agreed as regarding manner/tactics.

Not that I would want to name names *cough Hillary cough* but I tend to look at this from a stand point of… Which candidate thus far appears to have the greatest proclivity for extremely long range planning and tactics and consistently employees underhanded and dirty tricks of this nature.

Ah. Hadn’t thought of that, but that seems as likely as anything. Help kill the baby in the crib so to speak. That could be it.

As Politico editor John Harris e-mailed me this afternoon, “I believe a blog item is different than a story — not in standards of accuracy or fairness — but in the ability to report and reveal a breaking story in real time: You write what you know when you know it.

Doesn’t reporting what you know when you know it indeed break the standards of accuracy and fairness?