Posted on 10/05/2007 11:16:43 PM PDT by Plutarch
Fred Thompson, appearing at the Americans for Prosperity event today, was supposed to give a press availability, which would have been his first big question-and-answer session with the national press corps in Washington. The availability never happened, and the campaign’s description for why has a decidedly, anti-Washington press corps bent – which probably won’t hurt him too much with key constituencies. (That is, outside the one with all those barrels of ink, television viewers and Web readers.)
Todd Harris, a campaign spokesman, said Mr. Thompson’s speaking engagement ran later than expected and “it came to a decision between doing a media availability or spending time with the Virginia delegation,’’ adding, “We opted to spend time with the delegates as opposed to the Washington press corps.”
For good measure, Mr. Harris added, “It’s not all about the D.C. press corps.” Though, he added, Mr. Thompson – whose performance on the stump has come under withering criticism that continued through his appearance at the Americans for Prosperity event – has held plenty of press availabilities out on the road.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
“Yeah, that’s sure hurting him in the polls, too. LOL”
Keep LOL but if he does something like that in a debate in front of millions, none of uses will be LOL then.
BTTT for a later read.
Gee. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone use the words “openly gay” so many times in a single post. Someone should alert the Guinness Book of Records.
The 1%ers frown on everything. That’s why they’re 1%ers.
You’ll have to pry my sarcasm from my cold, dead, hands.
Maybe if Duncan Hunter could afford to hire staff, some of them might be prompted to walk out too.
Must be nice having a candidate that is doing so poorly that you can sit on the sidelines and throw garbage at REAL campaigns for normal, everyday, activity. I hope you’re proud.
No, you wait a minute. And while you're at it, cut out the condescension. You may be under the misguided impression that you're someone more important than the rest of us, but here, you're just another FReeper. And a slimy one at that.
Does Thompson not know his press secretary is openly gay? If he does know, then what exactly was the point of that hiring?
Umm...because he wanted one of the best in the business, who formerly worked for Rick Santorum? Hmm??? How about maybe Fred doesn't give a rat's donkey what the guy does in his personal life?
Is the GOP not supposed to be a family values party?
And excluding a competent, and highly qualified person from a job because he was cruelly outed by a malicious blogger is supposed to be 'family values'? He's supposed to be thrown to the curb for that? If those are the 'values' in your family, I'm glad I'm not spending the holidays at your house.
Are the true conservatives going to get so invested in this guy that they will start ignoring rather loud warning sirens like this?
Your attitude is much more of a warning sign than hiring Robert Traynam could ever be. Hiring an individual is NOT endorsing an agenda. Not even close. To imply that it is, is simply disingenuous. But, after a search of your posts, I see that you're no stranger to that.
Now, let’s be sure we understand this . . . there is nothing illegal about putting openly gay employees on your senior campaign staff.
Wow. That's deep.
And there is nothing “wrong” with having signs of not being purely conservative.
Straw man alert! Put that thing away, before we scare all the crows away from this thread!
After all, Romney has such signs in his background, and certainly Guilliani has many liberal aspects.
Oh, sure! That makes total sense. Because Romney sought out to actually help the homosexual agenda in MA and openly courted and pandered to the Log Cabin Republicans, this somehow puts him on the same footing as Fred Thompson hiring a gay campaign staffer? Wow. Whoever sent you out here to argue with actual men really left you at a serious disadvantage.
But I don’t think there are any “openly gay” press secretaries on Romney’s senior campaign staff.
Yeah, they're really 'closed' about it and only get outed in airport restrooms.
This makes no sense.
That's the first intelligent thing you said. You're right. Your post is completely nonsensical. Next time, just skip to the last line and save us all the trouble.
One again, an anti-Frederalist has to resort to the Democrat Party house organ to try to cast dispersion on Fred.
And again, another anti-Frederalist chimes in with an irrelevant comment.
Ping me when your guy gets up to 5% (if ever)...
In other words Mr. Traynham is a security risk the same way as Mark Foley.
It is irrelevant how it came “out” it is out now and the electorate has an absolute right to question the types of staffers who will be associated with the Thompson campaign and potential administration.
The fact is Thompson has postulated absurd positions on the defense of marriage and leaving it to the state courts. It is revealed he has a communication director who is a homosexual. The position espoused by Thompson dovetails perfectly with the current course plotted by lamda legal and the “human” rights coalition homosexual group.
nuancing will not address the issue. It has to be met and the left wing positioning dumped.
Well, then, don't vote for Mr. Traynham and avoid a scandal.
You seem really obsessed with this issue. Do you like movies with gladiators?
and this was?
If you are refering to the recent “retired” around the time of Foley, suuuuuure he was just peachy.
I have a news flash for you: Homosexuals are entitled to hold jobs in the US. Homosexuals can be conservative. Homosexuals make contributions to society. If you want to hold it against Thompson that the political brain he hired is gay [but not a gay activist, as you imply], you do that. Just remember that your personal standard is just that—your personal standard.
like many voters i want my candidates FULLY vetted and examined. Senator Specter is not a RINO in a vacume, he has liberal staffers who support his views.
This is no different if a candidate talks conservative but hires all brady gun control staffers to work for him. We examine hillary’s staffers of poedesta and sandy berger and albright but we are not to examine thompsons staffers as part of the litmust tests of examinine a candate? don’t think so.
ok then now lets talk about the Fair Tax or the Paulists or seond amendment or abortion or healthcare...
political leaders can not make and know all they rely on their staffers.
A communication director will guide what the candidate hears and states. Fortunatly it seems the supermajorit of voters agree on the issue of marriage and candidates who seek to alter marriage.
Notice how even the democrats weaseled on thier answers regarding marriage.
since when was anyone “entitled” to a job?
perhaps you are confusing the US constitution with “right to work” of the EU or USSR constitutions.
Ever been in a Turkish prison?
“I think he’s brilliant to go to the people on his own.”
Hey, it worked for the Kennedy’s...
“I am sure that many FDT fans will applaud Fred for sticking it to the Washington Press corp”
Yes. I will applaud that all day long.
“I got an idea, why don’t you go over with the evangelicals and the Ron Paul contingent and make sure that the democrats win the White House in ‘08.”
I am an evangelical. I am voting for Fred because Trudy is not acceptable under ANY circumstances.
Oh, please— now you’re playing word games. Childish. Keep it up. Everyone can see what you’re doing.
This is no different if a candidate talks conservative but hires all brady gun control staffers to work for him.
So, are you saying that all of Fred Thompson's staff is gay?
Do you ever stick around the gym after school?
The rest of your post doesn't make much sense to me.
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.