|
He should quit hiding behind that dumb yokel act and show himself as the converted yankee that he is. For a guy to be on the China commission, AEI, and CFR and then talk like a simple ignoramus is completely dishonest. Come on Fred, you have been involved in a lot of think tanks since you left the Senate, time to share with the people the knowledge that you attained. What do you have to hide? It is reprehensible when policy wonks such as himself act so aloof. I also think it is insulting to southerners. |
|
|
If you go onto bliptv you can hear Rudy's speech which was great. So was Romney's. Fred's wasn't nearly as good. Just my personal opinion. I'm not trying to take a whack at Fred. I'm voting for Hunter. |
|
The applause were not nearly as loud the response to Romney's speech.
first mr. koch, head of afp basically endorsed him. then Romney gave an electrifying speech.
Afterward, people swarmed the romney table donating money and signing up. I saw romney supporters putting romney stickers over thompson decals that people had becuase they asked them to do so. there were many who flipped who they were supporting after his speech.
the consensus of those I spoke with at the conference said the giuliani and romney did the best. |
|
Were you watching the same speech I saw on video? I heard loud applause at least a dozen times. (And, no, they weren't just joke lines. Most of the applause was for statements of substance.)
It is really great that we can listen (and watch) for ourselves instead of having to rely on the opinions of others.
|
|
|
I'm actually starting to feel sorry for him, because I think he is a good man who is just in over his head. I hope he flames out sooner than later, because if the social conservative vote splits between Romney and Fred, it will give Rudy the nomination. |
|
|
|
Another Lewis hit piece on Thompson comes as no surprise. Although his life sized poster of Mitt on the wall when he blogs must be distracting.
They called Reagan a lazy Hollywood dummy too. If my memeory serves me right Dutch did pretty well as Prez. |
|
What are you looking for in a president? You’d better find someone who understands the free enterprise system. And that’s Romney. If you’ve never been in business for yourself, I can see why you might support an actor, or a preacher, or a politician. But this country runs on business. And business needs to be good
I know, I know. Some of you are saying “there’s no business like show business,” and that’s why you’re supporting Fred. But Fred is an act. He’s all hat and no cattle. He may be a nice guy. He may be a good actor. He may have a pleasing personality. But he’s not presidential material. Why do I say that? Look at his long list of accomplishments. That’s right, it’s not only a short list. It’s a challenge to even make “a list.”
On the other hand, you have Romney who never held public office until after he was 50 years old. He solved problems, turned businesses around, cut budgets, made tough decisions, saved the Olympics from certain disaster. He’s not just gotten by. He’s excelled at everything he’s ever tried. Now, finally we have a chance for someone with some smarts, and good judgement. Let’s act like winners, instead of trying to make a winner out of an actor! |
|
|
Amen, Va.Patriot,......Hunter be the man,....Tanc. for V.P.! |
|
|
Brownback and Huckabee are amnesty friendly, that's a deal breaker for me. |
|
|
Freddies' membership in it disqualifies him for me! |
|
Mattie boy, you're all wet, quit your whining. Fred was his best yet. He actually is trying to Not be Fred, just a little. He was emphatic on many points, especially the economy and what to do and not to do.
MILITARY VETERANS are backing him big time at:
http://Vets4Fred.net
You sourpusses can sulk on the sidelines all you want. FRED IS THE MAN! |
|
Might want to reference the late 1700's in America, when the two party debate was between a group called the Federalists (lead by Hamilton and Madison) and the Anti-Federalists (led by Patrick Henry of 'give me liberty or death' fame). But remember, even the Federalists of that day would be considered State's Righters in our day, the question then was whether EVEN TO HAVE A UNION VIA CONSTITUTION.
As far as the central government FORCING the States to define marriage in one way or another, that would not even have been considered by either party. (see Federalist Papers for proof)
As for as James Dobson is concerned, Dr. Dobson's desire to have a top-down answer to moral problems in America, he doesn't realize how anti-constitutional and pro-consolidationist his ideas are. If Dobson wants all answers to come from Washington down to the peasants below, what will he do if Hillary is the one handing down the law?
Dobson told Sean Hannity that Federalism was the reason he could not support even a so-called top-tier guy like Fred Thompson because Thompson disfavors an amendment to the US Constitution defining marriage. Dobson should rethink his position concerning Federalism, State's Rights and the further consolidation of power in D.C. |
|
When asked about the economy Fred's response
We need to keep doing whats working and stop doing what not.
BRILLIANT! W couldn't have said it better. We need to wake up Fred is not the answer
Our choices are Tancredo, Hunter, Paul, Huckabee, and Brownback. The rest of these guys are liberals in disguise |
|
psychbuster writes: "What Republicans need is an inspiring speaker to forward and defend their policies."
Rudy Giuliani has been very inspiring, and that's why I am supporting him.
Rudy gets the blood flowing in nearly EVERY speech he gives before a crowd. The audience is totally with him. He sounds like a front-runner and he sounds like a winner.
And don't forget how quickly and forcefully Rudy responded to the Moveon.org Petraeus ad too.
GO RUDY!!!
PRESIDENT RUDY!!!
|
|
BG writes: "I also am not big on his federalist approach. I think it is a cop out on the hard issues."
What Fred and his supporters didn't realize till too late, was that federalism would actually prevent implementing the Christian evangelical "values" at the Federal level. For example, a Constitutional amendment on marriage, or the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, would actually violate the principle of federalism because it could end up overriding the marriage laws of liberal states.
Fred said as much in public and that's why James Dobson and his social conservatives have turned on him.
|
|
IMO, there is barely a single blogger who knows the difference between style and substance. Way too many want a verbal fire in the belly -- style -- that they can then generate an endlessly boring and vacuous blog entry about. Few want substance -- real meat on the bone, regardless of the snazz and pizzazz with which it is delivered.
We are all a Hollywood society, putting more emphasis on what is said or done (for example, Barack and his stupid lapel pin) publicly than on the real content of a message. And most likely, we will elect the president we deserve on that basis.
(And then there can be the four-year gnashing of teeth, as expected.) |
|
The Bush presidency has made it so apparent that
ability to speak is almost as important as the
policy expressed.
Note how well received Bill Clinton was and still is based on his ability to connect and articulate. This despite the utter bancrupcy of the policy.
What Republicans need is an inspiring speaker to
forward and defend their policies.
I'm afraid Fred Thompson is not that answer and I'm still not sure who is.
Max from TN |
|
I watched the Yankees lose. Dang it. Talk about issues. When is A-Rod going to show up for the play offs?
As far as our Republican Party.......we're done. We have no one that can compete with Hillary. They better find someone quick. I'm not impressed with any of my choices.
And if we don't watch it...the damn Red Sox are going to win the World Series again. And then where will the country be?????
This is a serious problem......ha! |
|
It's 2:00 am and I just got back to my room.
I don't know what everyone else is talking about.
There was no green room. Fred's speech was the same as all the other so called "front runners."
The only speech that was different than staying with the status quo was Ron Paul's. He was even suprised at the positive response he got. After talking with a few of his supporters he was wisked away to the press room where he was interviewed by all the major networks for about an hour and a half and then returned to the main hall to sign yard signs, banners, answer questions to people with video cameras and to pose for pictures with fans ranging in age from teens to people closer to his age.
The support here for Ron Paul was extrordinary.
I was even suprised. |
|
I just got back from this conference. heard the candidates. after romney speech at the main event, people came up to the romney table and started donating hundred of dollars saying they had found their candidate.
i saw people putting mitt stickers over their previously placed fred stickers literally.
I spoke with many who swithced tongiht from fred or rudy to mitt.
Very impressive speech! Thompson as usual on the other hand was full of generalities and 'ums' |
|
|
Yea, we'd like Hunter. How much did he rake in this quarter? |
|
|
It may be morphing into a Hillary clone, only with less hair ;-) |
|
|
No the Rep Party is not dead, it is just morphing into a Hillary killer. It has to go thru this process for a while. It will come to life early next year. |
|
but it just don't matter, folks.
Because the Republican Party is DEAD.
You all should change the name of your party to DOA.
peace |
|
I do not want to knock Fred right now. However, he is like a slowly deflating balloon. I don't think he will get the nomination and if he does somehow, Hillary will run rings around him. He looks so old and tired on the Youtube video. I also am not big on his federalist approach. I think it is a cop out on the hard issues.
I kind of like Fred and his good old boy style but he just is not the right candidate for this election. I can support him for VP. |
|
|
Said on Glenn Beck today, she wants Hunter, too. |
|
|
with a small ampule of smelling salts attached. |
|
|
green room. The candidate is a gaffe machine. |
|
|
|
|
What a shock. You people have nothing and no one for '08. Better start practicing now to say "Madame President." |
|
Those who compare Thompson to Reagan do not know Reagan. Ronnie had a long history of writing and speaking on conservative causes going back to the 60's. It's hard to imagine a RR giving a speech that didn't elicit either an applause or a tear.
FRED! was very slow to join the party and it becoming pretty clear why. FRED! is a decent actor and a good fill-in for Paul Harvey. But little more.
Peace be with y'all. |
|
|
Problem is this is a pattern. He didn't do well speaking in California to Republicans (http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/373628,CST-EDT-novak07.article) and has not drawn rave reviews at live events. I was in the room and the deliverance just wasn't that good. I spoke to a Fred Head and he said "he'll have to do better, this isn't Law and Order anymore." This is the audience he will have more and more and need more and more....and he didn't wow them. |
|
|
People in the South had a term for people like Thompson after the War for Southern Independence when a number of his type found themselves in the various state houses-- scalawag. This CFR globalist and lobbyist doesn't fool me for a second with phony cornpone nonsense. He is very much a part of DC establishment. |
|
|
Bruce Walker's pro-Fred article, and felt it a bit over the top. I have no idea where Mr. Walker is from, but did laugh at the notion of Fred pulling Dixie voters based on regional thinking. Being home grown in the "Heart of Dixie", if that were ever true, Jimmy Carter ended that insanity. We all know Fred as a Washington Lobbyist Insider, that hauls a red pick-up truck with him on the campaign trail for photo-ops!(Like a 21st century snake oil salesman.)....His historical voting record on immigration is right there with his "Ole Buddy" John McCain, and now he simply needs to "spin" it to get elected........As we say in Dixie, "That dog want hunt!" |
|
...Fred to Reagan. Hell, I'm a Hunter guy.
I just think this commentary on every little inflection (or lack thereof) and raised eyebrow has gotten more than a little ridiculous.
It's one speech.
|
|
You write: "Americans have been watching Fred for years now. They know what they're getting with this guy."
Yup. An actor. "I'm not a conservative, but I play one on TV." I guy who acts like an aw-shucks DC outsider who's actually been a lobbyist since leaving the senate.
More importantly, a guy who supported the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act.
And most importantly, a guy who, as a visiting fellow for the American Enterprise Institute, helped sell the American people on the urgent necessity for us to invade Iraq and depose its dictator.
Strike Four.
Go take a shower, Fred. |
|
|
Go ahead, but it ain't gonna do any good. The comparisons with Reagan are now becoming ridiculous. Reagan lit up a room every time. Come on Paddy. |
|
Hell, Reagan was a pretty low key guy too, but he had his "I'm paying for this microphone....!" and "Tear down this wall!" moments.
Americans have been watching Fred for years now. They know what they're getting with this guy.
He will have more fiery moments, I'm sure, and they seem all the more so for his calm demeanor now.
|
|
Nobody told me about the Green Room :-)
Seriously, everybody else made up for it. |
|
|
|
|
Since when does a standing ovation at the end of a speech equal "falling flat?" You won't get passion and anger from Thompson. Mary Katherine's quotes from Jim Geraghty say it best. His style is casual and conversational and he doesn't get angry. If all you want is fire, which seems to be what most national reports and bloggers want, then you will have to look elsewhere. But, if you look at the LOCAL coverage Thompson gets, it seems that a lot of average voters like what they hear. They "feel" a president emotionally as much, if not more, that respond to policy. Thompson seems to make those emotional connections well and you underestimate his ultimate appeal at your peril. |
|