Posted on 09/11/2007 8:50:15 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
BOSTON - A spokesman for Republican Mitt Romney said Tuesday that the presidential candidate did not approve the creation of a Web site severely critical of the personal and political life of his GOP rival, Fred Thompson.
The Web site, PhoneyFred.org, was created by Wesley Donehue, a business partner of Warren Tompkins, a South Carolina political operative on the Romney payroll and Romney's top adviser in the early voting state.
The site was created without the knowledge of Tompkins or Romney, said Romney spokesman Kevin Madden. After the campaign received media inquiries about it, Romney aides traced the site to Donehue and complained.
"We made it clear that we did not approve of the site and asked for immediate action to make sure it was again in no way affiliated with the campaign," Madden said. "The person responsible is not an employee of ours, but we took immediate action to make sure it was clear the site was not affiliated with the campaign."
The Web site attacked Thompsons conservative credentials. It also labeled him Fancy Fred, Five O'Clock Fred, Flip-Flop Fred, McCain Fred, Moron Fred, Playboy Fred, Pro-Choice Fred, Son-of-a-Fred and Trial Lawyer Fred.
It asked, "Once a Pro-Choice Skirt Chaser, Now Standard Bearer of the Religious Right?"
Romney has said he welcomes Thompson to the race for the GOP presidential nomination, which the former Tennessee senator and actor joined last week. However, Romney has also questioned Thompson's leadership experience, and aides to the former Massachusetts governor have highlighted the Tennessean's lobbying record and his support for campaign finance reform legislation, as well as suggestions he lacked legislative accomplishments.
The site made light of Thompson's acting career, saying of the "Law and Order" star: "You're probably in the same boat: You can't get the theme to 'Law and Order' out of your head, but can you name one thing that Fred did during his eight years in the United States Senate?"
It went on to note that Thompson once provided legal services to a family planning group, and also served as a lobbyist.
The Web site was hosted by a company called bluehost.com, based in Orem, Utah. It had links to Under the Power Lines, Tompkins' political consulting firm.
Tompkins, a former executive director of the South Carolina Republican Party, is a veteran of Palmetto State politics. He served as President Bush's 2000 Southeast regional director at a time when Bush attacked then-rival Sen. John McCain and defeated him in the state's GOP primary.
Tompkins has been paid $12,000 monthly to guide Romney's effort in South Carolina, whose primary the campaign views as a pivotal test of strength of support among conservative voters. It follows the leadoff states of Iowa and New Hampshire, two other areas of concentration for Romney.
"Once we received inquiries about the site, we discovered it was created by an individual who works at an Internet firm who parked the site temporarily on the company server space of a firm whose financial partner is a consultant to the campaign — Mr. Tompkins," said Madden, who later identified the individual as Donehue. "Mr. Tompkins did not know about the development of the site."
I don't. Not once. I'll defend Fred on Fred threads but not once have I gone to a thread about Mitt or Hunter and trashed him, so your broad brush doesn't apply for all Fredheads. Indeed, it may not even apply for the majority and I think that's probably the case with Romney/Hunter supporters too.
Regardless, this isn't about Fredheads. It's about somebody tied (however loose the association) to Romney's campaign, their low-grade tactics and how they got caught.
Adamantly defending that solely on the basis of 1st Amendment Rights is side-stepping the main issue.
Gaaaaa!
Here, I'll spell it out for you: The guy who built the website was not doing it for the Romney campaign! He was not doing it for the "subcontractor". He was doing it for himself.
He did it on his own volition. It was his project, not one of the agency's and not one of the campaign's.
The dog food analogy is off the mark, because the dog food manufacturers and retailers were engaging in the activity for which they have been hired. That was precisely why there is a relationship among the parties at all!
Contrast that situation with the Romney campaign. This guy was not hired to create attack websites, he was not engaged in activity of which his partner or the campaign were even aware, let alone anything which had been approved.
Where the dog food situation involved a severe quality control issue, but which occurred in the course of the actual activity for which it was hired, the Thompson "attack" site guy was not engaged in any activity for which he had been hired, and the trouble is not one of quality control.
He did it on his own. He did it outside the boundaries of what his partner had been hired to do. That makes him outside the control of and outside the accountability of Mitt Romney.
Uh, huh. Now stop this drivel. You're cracking me up.
BWAHAAAAAAHAAAAAA!
I cannot reason with a kook.
Your first post to him was "Your criticisms are pathetic."
He responded that he bowed to your superior logic. You then reply "I cannot reason with a kook.
Just curious: How does making the statement "Your criticisms are pathetic" constitute reasoning with anyone?
I didn't try to reason with him. First, he blames Romney for accepting the endorsement from a US Senator who turned out to be a pervert criminal, as if this reflected on Romney. Second, he assumes that some over-zealous, stupid 27-year-old punk (hardly a business partner) who happened to work with firms in SC that also work for Romney (a firm which has worked for just about every R in the state) is also a failing of Romney.
This kind of crap happens in every campaign. It's not dissimilar from the Obama 'associate' who created the Apple-style Youtube video criticizing Hillary.
Really, if you want to reason with someone who has the intelligence of an autistic dog, be my guest.
I'll keep that in mind if I run into one.
This is much ado about nothing.
If even half as much attention (or any) was paid to the anti-Fred website associated with Brownback as is being spent all a twitter about this website, then you might have an argument. Until then, it is selective outrage and one has to wonder if it's all just about hatred and fear of Mitt.
Fred is jealous of the hair.
the point is Mr. Donehue was not asked to do this site for any campaign. and going after the consultants and mailing companies isn’t right. they didn’t ask him to make it. putting them out of business won’t stop individuals from making these sites.
the drive by media has pretty much lost the sequence of events to sell this story and chew our guys up. reporters inquire. the romney camp contacts the site—requesting the site disclose they are not associate with the romney campaign. the site goes down. this next part isn’t report except in the first washington post report.
the post notices that the page was linked to powerlines or something. and now it is a sensational scandal of dirty tricks and a cover up? no, this individual was not asked to make the site! and the Romney campaign reported what they found out and what actions they took. and it makes no sense for a professional campaign to make some amateur website—it wasn’t very good.
Washington Post got a hat-trick. the todd harris response was a real turnoff. lets unite the party and then he slams Romney with DNC talking points? these twenty something politicos are going to get us hammered this election with these antics.
So at first people assumed it was Tompkins who did this. In fact, there were ATTACK PIECES written about Tompkins yesterday, on the assumption that HE put this together.
Today we know that it was put together not by Tompkins, but by Wesley Donehue,
You can "believe" that Tompkins was involved, but you have no evidence of it, no facts to back you up. Meanwhile, we have the UNREFUTED testimony of Donehue, Tompkins, and Romney that neither Tompkins nor Romney had anything to do with, or knew in advance about, the web site.
You are free to believe these men are lying, but you have no evidence of it, so your opinion holds little power.
I NEVER asked Fred Thompson or his campaign to apologize. I said that the BlogsForFredThompson should apologize for their false accusation of Rudy Guiliani and his campaign staff. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Maybe I've made it clear now.
"Common perception" doesn't proof squat.
IF you believe a "story" prove anything, you never learned the lesson of Dan Rather and the National Guard papers.
Meanwhile, Romney's camp has issued a strong denouncement of the web site: "Romney spokesman Kevin Madden's response: "We had no knowledge of the development or administration of this site. We also disapprove of the site and have made it very clear that the site does not have an affiliation with our campaign."
The Thompson campaign has now overstepped, accusing Romney personally of things they have no evidence for, and making personal attacks on him when he has done no such thing to their candidate: "This latest episode only serves to prove what many voters are already figuring out: Mitt Romney will do anything, say anything, smear any opponent and flip flop on any position in order to win. The American people in general and the Republican Party in particular deserve better than this."
I was looking forward to Fred Thompson as a candidate I hoped would be different, would rise above, would have fresh faces on his campaign. Instead, he's showing every sign of being just like all the others in tactics. Of course, the important thing is policy positions and character. But he'd have done better leaving his statements of yesterday stand and simply accepting Romney's "non-apology" today. It would have made him look above the fray and statesmenlike.
Instead, the last comment from his campaign makes him look like a whiner who won't let it go.
Uh, huh. Now stop this drivel. You're cracking me up.
Got tired of trying to defend your assumptions?
There it's fixed.
Now we have this:
Below is what the Romney campaign tells The Brody File:
“The site was not affiliated with our campaign, but we did make it clear that we did not approve of the site, strongly disavowed it and made sure that it had absolutely no connection to our campaign whatsoever. We took immediate action once we were alerted to it.”
“But the deniability of this sleaze is no longer plausible.”
You assured me on another thread that “truth is an absolute defence” on these matters. So if this guy Wesley Donehue had a site about Fred Thompson that was truthful, can you fairly condemn it and call that ‘smearing’ and ‘sleaze’? What exactly did it say that was non-truthful that makes it ‘sleaze’?
Or do you have a double-standard?
(For the record, for others: I condemn this site and similar tactics and behaviors either by other candidates and campaigns or by posters on FR.)
The website is gone. I don’t answer hypotheticals like that.
“Should he apologize if he didn’t know about or approve the site? Is it somehow his fault then?”
AH, but you see, they’ve already tried, convicted and hung Romney on this. If he didn’t know about then ‘wink wink’ its a conspiracy. Conviction first, evidence second. ... and they just can’t have the man on the gallows explaining they’ve jumped the gun on this. Hang him now before he explains his innocence to the crowd!
Brody of CBN says:
“Romney’s campaign is clearly saying since they didn’t have any knowledge of its’ development, then it’s a non-issue. Plus the person who actually created the site doesn’t work for the campaign.”
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/229209.aspx
has mitt fired these goons yet?
You mean, has Mitt fired the guy who created the web site, who doesn't work for him? ...that guy?
The Romney campaign says they didn’t approve nor know about it ahead of time, and given the facts there is no reason to think otherwise (although the Mitt-bashers will make unfounded insinuations). The person doing it was never on their campaign and has only indirect connection. If the wanna-be consultant’s wanted to get paid for this bad idea, he should have contacted the Brownback campaign. ;-)
Below is what the Romney campaign tells The Brody File:
“The site was not affiliated with our campaign, but we did make it clear that we did not approve of the site, strongly disavowed it and made sure that it had absolutely no connection to our campaign whatsoever. We took immediate action once we were alerted to it.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.