Ann Coulter misses the mark RE: Fred Thompson

Leaning Straight Up ^ | October 11th, 2007 | Karl

[Josh Painter]

Those who read here often know I like Ann Coulter. She is frank and harsh but more often then not, right on the mark when she goes after the liberals in America.

But not infallible, as this piece shows. In this article she attacks people who dislike the front runners (Guliani and Romney) for not being conservative enough and are gravitating to Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson.

I admit that neither of these two are flashy and they are certainly not neo cons, but they are often solid and sensible, and do reflect conservative values. I think that she is missing that in her desire to promote a hardline conservative candidate.

And in Thompson's case, her dislike of him is centrally based on his vote in the Clinton impeachment, and in my opinion, she is cutting off her nose to spite her face...

And had they ALL voted for removal, it would have NOT made a difference, as they were no where close to reaching a 67 vote majority required.

I won't defend his vote, he made the choice as he saw fit. Let him answer to it or not.

But all this deep seated bitterness on her part is useless. So he cast his essentially wasted vote in line with his principles, not her principles. So what? The point had been made about Clinton and all they were going to get had been done. At best they would have failed with 55 votes which is still a failure...

She is playing the same game that Dobson is. If the candidate is not perfect, then run away. In this case Thompson is a viable candidate, and she is so enraged at his not voting to support what she considers the paramount legal issue of the century that she will villify him out of hand.

My exit question to her and Dobson is this: Who would you like LEAST in the Whitehouse? Hillary or Fred?

[Long Island Pete]

And if Thompson doesnt win the nomination and Rudy does, do you do what Dobson wants and vote third party? I dont think so. Conservatism aside, killing those who want to kill us is what is important. Rudy doesnt get conservative beliefs but he does understand the enemy. Nobody in the Democrat party does.

[MEGoody]

In this article she attacks people who dislike the front runners (Guliani and Romney) for not being conservative enough and are gravitating to Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson.

I admit that neither of these two are flashy and they are certainly not neo cons, but they are often solid and sensible, and do reflect conservative values. I think that she is missing that in her desire to promote a hardline conservative candidate.

Uh. . .what?

[daylilly]

Your post was good.

The thing I disliked the most was in an interview with Hannity recently, Coulter said conservatives needed “guidance” as to who to vote for in the primaries. I guess that is what Dobson is doing as well, giving “guidance.” Then in yesterdays column she used the concept of drifting aimlessly toward Thompson and Huckabee. I can think for myself and I’m not a mindless Democrat, she’s dissing conservative voters with this garbage. Give me a break.

Your point that we should not decide by listening to “experts” was a good one.

[Grunthor]

“I do want a good, proven, exceptional man.”

Like who?

[MEGoody]

If (and that is the key word) If Rudy wins the nomination, that shows a strength within the Republican party that may counter the "conservative" base.

Yes, it shows the strength of liberal cross overs trying to subvert the election process.

[redgirlinabluestate]

Ann called Thompson and Huckabee "empty vessels" on Fox & Friends this AM. I wish our more prominent GOPers would abstain from this kind of talk publicly. It was bad when Newt called them all "pygmies" and it was awful when Dan Bartlett recently called Fred a "dud." It's bad enough we all trash each other and our favorite candidates here on FR, but the comments of the media elites are far more damaging and could end up in a Hillary commercial one day.

It would probably be better if Ann just tells us all the wonderful reasons why she loves Hunter, but is going to pull the lever for Mitt.

[Tall_Texan]

What it really boils down to is who is going to offend conservatives least and yet has a realistic chance of beating Hillary. Reasonable minds can disagree. Giuliani is weak on social issues. Romney may or may not be weak on social issues (depending on how you feel about his time as Mass. governor) and has a disquieting federalist streak. Thompson appears weak on constitutional issues (CFR, impeachment) and may not be a reliable conservative or administrator. The rest of the field doesn’t appear electable. I have my problems with all of them.

My fear is that if Giuliani gets the nomination, some Christians will bolt (over his social liberalism). If Romney gets the nomination, some Christians will bolt (over his Mormonism). If Thompson gets the nomination, I think the Christians will stay in place even if he seems to be McCain Lite at times and I’d never vote for McCain.

The other question is the chick factor. Most women at FR are concerned about issues and most women on the Left are too if they are politically active but there is a great swath of women in the middle who vote because they feel it is their civic duty yet seem to choose as if they are picking their neighbors. They want a nice looking couple who will look good at official functions and often select on appearances. I wonder how they’d react to Mrs. Thompson if they feel she is a “trophy wife” (personally, I have no objection to trophy wives but I’m a guy)? Giuliani is a divorcee with a few ex-wife issues. I think shallow women will be attracted to the Romneys more than the other two and it could be enough to swing a few states.

One you get past the idea that you’ll be choosing a candidate that is beneath our expectations in terms of conservatism, who best can win the general election without destroying the party coalition? I’ve got to say Romney or Thompson but I still have misgivings about both. I just don’t see Giuliani drawing enough people from the middle to offset the social conservatives he is sure to lose for Republicans.

[SW6906]

Let’s just call him Dalton.... ;o)

[Reagan Man]

Giuliani understands one thing. Liberalism!

Never trust a liberal.

[MamaB]

Well, Rudy is not the person.

[AmericanMade1776]

jveritas wrote: We agree on a lot of things AM1776 but on this one we totally disagree. Are you really comparing a 6’4” well likable and strong character like Fred Thomspon to 5’1” screeching, mean, and nasty Hillary Clinton! How about putting these 2 in a picture together instead of 72 years old Bob Dole and a 53 years old Bill Clinton when this picture was taken.

I do not know where I compared Fred Thompson to Hillary Clinton, I went back and read my post and I didn't see it. I did compare Fred Thompson to Bob Dole. The point I was trying to make is I think Hillary would be easier to beat with someone who has more stamina than Fred Thomspon.

[TLI]

Bitch – Gripe – pizz – moan… GEEZ! Don't yall see what is going on here? OK here is a big fat bucket of ice water...

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society.”

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, for the few, and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

"We can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

"We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground."

"I certainly think the free market has failed."

"I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector [oil] in the entire economy, that they are being watched."

"What I want to do is take those profits and apply them to alternative energy."

"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president" -
- Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpeonaed documents.

"This vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for President"
-- Hillary Clinton

"I have to confess that it's crossed my mind that you could not be a Republican and a Christian."
- Hillary Clinton in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, 1997

"I can't worry about every under capatilized business"
-- Hillary Clinton, testifing before congress on the effects of Nationalized Health Care.

"The administration has undone so much of the success of the last eight years in less than eight months"
-- Hillary Clinton on George W. Bush's administration

"I have said that I'm not running and I'm having a great time being pres ? being a first-term senator"
-- Hillary Clinton

"If I want to knock a story off the front page, I just change my hairstyle"
-- Hillary Clinton



THAT IS WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST. A FULL BLOWN COMMUNIST THAT IS THE CENTER OF HER OWN LITTLE WORLD!

Ok, is everybody awake now?

She has the press and most of the stupid people in the U.S. behind her.

Here is what she will bring to this nation. Future dem voters. We all know who will be courting them, the ones FOR "immigration reform." Just where was RUDITH on the immigration reform issue? Well, he sees nothing wrong with this...


More future democrats...


Smiling L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, proud of his amigos




Now, here is a little something from just today... http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/republican_ideology

Rasmussen Reports’ Thursday, October 11, 2007

During Fred Thompson’s first month as a formal candidate for the Republican Presidential Nomination, Republican voters continue to see him as the most conservative candidate in the field. Fifty-one percent (51%) of Republican voters now see the former Tennessee Senator as politically conservative. That’s up from 48% a month ago.

Perceptions of Mitt Romney have moved in the opposite direction. Thirty-six percent (36%) now see him as politically conservative. That’s down from 42% a month ago and little changed from two months ago.

Just 30% of Republican voters see John McCain as politically conservative, down from 33% a month ago. Twenty-six percent (26%) hold that view of Giuliani, little changed over the past month.

Looked at from the other perspective, 68% see Giuliani as moderate or liberal while 56% of Republicans say the same of McCain. Romney is viewed as moderate or liberal by 42% of GOP voters and 35% say the same about Thompson.

So, is to becoming very clear where the numbers are going to go, FDT. Also, it is very clear why MSM is proclaiming Rudith the Republican leader! He is hillary light and I would not put it past that cross-dressing, gun-grabbing, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-2nd Amendment flip flopper to hop the fence and hand the election to hillary in 2012.

Fred can buy us enough time (2 terms) to get a little concrete around the constitution in the form of SC appointments to prevent the destruction of the Republic.

Plus, if we get the right VP pick in the game (Duncan) he could be a shoe-in for 2016 - 2024.

BUT the cat-fighting here needs to STOP. This thing is already shaping up to Fred and "Rudith." The numbers in several areas prove that, Also, I believe we can have a consisus of opinion that Rudi is a lying trash heap that will turn on his campaign "platform" like a Porch on a dime. Juan McCain? NO. He will bring us 38 million new voters in the blink of an eye. Problem is, they will vote for the socialists/communists, which is all they know being from mexico and all. Mitt? Everybody is catching on to him as well, "Thirty-six percent (36%) now see him as politically conservative. That’s down from 42% a month ago and little changed from two months ago. That is NOT going to beat hillary.

We ALL pushed in the same direction when the MSM was talking up "comprehensive immigration reform" and talk radio came alive with the very commentary we posted right here. We can do that very thing again as Free Republic has become such a powerhouse that even MSM can not deny it's influence. But what are visitors to the site seeing now? The continued existence of this nation is in the balance.

Political discussion is great, heck look where I am, right in the middle, but folks better start discussing who should be appointed to what cabinet post to put together a package Fred can present to the voters. Not pushing for snowballs.

So, time to come to Jesus. Will it be this?





Or this?

[bvw]

That’s a good question!

I’d say that Huckabee, Romney and Guiliani are proven as chief execs, by being being either Governor of a state or mayor of a large city, and in those roles performing well.

I can not count being a Senator for anything — it’s almost a negative, being a Senator either creates or attracts the overly arrogant, who in executive office are often a ruination.

Guiliani, Romney, McCain are all what I would call exceptional men. I do not know the others enough to speak to that aspect. It may be the others are — it is even likely, but it hasn’t shown itself yet imo.

Reagan was a exceptional man, a commanding presence.

By “good” I mean one that will uphold basic morality and return those parts of which our laws have become deficient in — respect for marriage, life, property.

[longtermmemmory]

Well youngster, puffing yourself up with your background does not change facts. Claiming you are a DOJ attorney hardly does you credit. In fact with few exceptions, in the court those attorneys hardly had a grasp of the law. They were far more comfortable trying theatrics rather than substantive law. We have all had law professors who have been dead wrong about the law. Considering how many law professors are really just refugees from the real world, it is hardly endering. In a related example, law professors are notorious for getting the second amendment wrong.

So you have been here since September 26, 2007 and all your posts have been about Thompson. We welcome, hope you lean a few things during your visit.

Thompson was a paid lobbyist, one of the issues was tompson’s consulting for abortion advcates regard procedure. For someone who spent time as a paid lobbyist about procedure you would think he would actually know about full faith and credit or equal protection.

Get a grip. we are in the primary and every candidate will be vetted and examined. I refuse to assume an inevitable winner. Otherwise we will be stuck with the useless Rhodham-Guiliani.

[FreeReign]

Its been quite some time since someone from the Northeast has been in the White House. Maybe it is just time.

GW was born in New Haven Connecticut. Bush Sr. was more somewhere in Massachusetts.

[Josh Painter]

AmericanMade1776 wrote: “Another election in the past, remember a wonderful conservative man, who ran against a corrupt democrat, and he lost because he just did not have that extra edge of vitality?”

Vitality didn’t have jack shiite to do with it. Americans weren’t about to elect some guy who always referred to himself in the third person...

[Josh Painter]

T.Smith wrote: “I voted for GWB and ended up getting screwed.”

Had Gore or Kerry won, you would have wound up getting brutally raped.

[roamer_1]

If Rubdy is the nominee, then Republicans did vote for him. So, don't say the base will abandon him. It was the base, who showed up during the primaries, and cast their ballot for him.

No, it will be those with an interest in politics that show up to vote for him in the primary. Folks on the right have very busy lives and tend not to become aware of the political stuff until well into the general election.

Those of us who do show up for primaries had best pick someone palatable to the base, or they will simply not show up to vote.

You are incorrect, BTW... Rudy's anti-2A and pro-choice stance is anathema. He will carry no state in the South, few in the Midwest, and no state in the Rocky Mountain West and Southwest.

A vote for Rudy is a vote to lose the general election.

[nicmarlo]

Who would you like LEAST in the Whitehouse? Hillary or Fred?

I would rather have neither a SOCIALIST nor a GLOBALIST in the White House.

That means, BOTH Shillary AND CFRed (Council on Foreign Relations Member) are automatically DISQUALIFIED from ANY vote from me.

[Kenny Bunk]

Now that Ann Couter has shot herself in the what rhymes with stick, and embarrassed us all who have supported her, with that incredibly stupid and insensitive remark, who gives a rat's patoot what she thinks about pretty much anything ... from the Chosen People to Fred Thompson?

She is not Dorothy Parker mouthing off at her table at the Algonquin Bar to 5 or 6 oh-so-incredibly-sophisticated New York friends. Hasn't this woman yet understood that whenever she burps, 10 million people have to say "excuse me?"