They are about the only two providing good, solid info, and I have read them. Most of the rest are too busy shooting off snide comments to bother with, and if you were being honest with yourself, you would admit it.
The reason you see ‘Fear the Fred’ and ‘FredPhobic’, etc. is because those in the know are tired of repeating the information over and over again to those that think they know something but are unknowingly clueless or incorrigible.
I am doing my homework on all of the candidates I consider acceptable. One thing I have learned about all of them is that the stuff posted about them is mostly crap, once you read the primary source material in context.
But that isn't the reason the same "Fear the Fred" chants are posted ad nauseum. The reason is because the posters of those shallow slogans are reactionary fans trying to shout down the opposing viewpoint of anyone who dares to criticize. They are no different in tactics than the sports fans who heckle the batters from behind home plate.
And it isn't just Thompson partisans who do this. Every camp on FR has, or have had, a similar goon squad. Rudy's all got bounced for behavior not too dissimilar.
Real, valid criticisms? I think not, I’ve seen them all and none of them are valid.
Every candidate has real, valid criticisms that can be laid out; none of them are perfect. The question becomes, are the flaws great enough to disqualify the candidate for support?
For example, it is a valid criticism of Thompson to point out his avid support of the unconstitutional "Campaign Finance Reform" laws, and that they were his major legislative accomplishment as a Senator. It is a valid criticism of Romney to point out his support of the federal "Assault Weapon Ban". It is a valid criticism of Hunter to point out his inability to gain voter support is an indication of his inability to do the same as a President or the GOP candidate. It is a valid criticism of Paul to point out that jet aircraft, ICBMs and terrorists don't stop at the Rio Grande, so dumping the CIA and FBI, even if they are flawed, might be stupid.
Politicalmom was the originator of ‘Fear the Fred’. It is a rally phrase and not a snide comment.
And you mentioned only one thing about Fred Thompson that you say has a valid criticism.
No it is not a valid criticism to say he was an avid supporter of CFR. He was against the restrictions on advertising and he was proud to have raised the amount that ordinary voters can donate to their candidates (hard money). He is also proud to have taken down the direct soft money contributions. This has the effect of curtailing the bribing and buying of politicians. That is a good thing which cannot be validly criticized.
Here are his own comments in the press:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1901007/posts?page=178
And his legislation is having the effect of having Hillary Clinton’s fundraising behavior examined in court with a highly possible FEC investigation to follow. That is a good thing.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1902749/posts
As I said I have seen all the criticisms of Fred Thompson and none of them are valid. The criticisms are frivolous and are expressed by people with an agenda.
The only thing that can be criticized about Fred Thompson’s legislation is that the government implemented it poorly and other members of the Senate voted on amendments that restricted advertising which the Supreme Court has since struck down. Fred Thompson was not responsible for any of that.
What else you got?
I think you have nothing.