You mean this guy?
Yep, he does not look lazy at all. Eyes closed, totally focused on the job at hand. He appears to be vigorously selling out the citizens of this nation. He looks right at home with his communist buddies too.
Posted on 10/27/2007 5:08:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
So I come across this piece over at Real Clear Politics, which tries to sort out this whole "Thompson doesn't dazzle and therefore must go NOW" business, and I get to the money quote:
"If you have the intelligence to see which rules are real and which are fake, the respectfulness to follow the real rules, and the guts to break the fake rules - you can get ahead in this world. In fact, people will love you for breaking the fake rules."
I must admit up front that this follows a Bob Dylan reference about breaking fake rules in the 60's on the construction of songs, and I would add talking Bob Dylan and Fred Thompson in the same column just "feels" wrong, but the analogy sticks well just the same.
A lot of people seem worried that whatever political wisdom I do have might be fraying at the ends because I am perfectly content with Thompson's commitment to doing just whatever the heck he wants to as he goes about running for President. Even as they suggest they actually "like" Thompson, they abandon him for, what seems to me at least, trivial reasons. I fully accept that different people need different types of inspiration, but really now...with all this fuss about needing a change in Washington do we REALLY insist on there being no change in how one actually winds up there?
I have a great deal of respect for the analysts and the pundits. In fact, I even appreciate the critics (though follies such as trophy wives and marriage attempts seem a bit unrelated to the matter of policy and principle) because they force us to look at all angles and aspects of he (or she) who would be President. Having said that, however, do these guys really think they speak for all of us...or that only THEY understand this game? Further, since when did they get to call all the shots?
In quoting from an earlier Dick Morris rant (who by the way has LONG sought to whack Fred at every turn), RCP lists a couple things about the Thompson campaign that these so-called "experts" consider symptoms of the campaign's terminal illness:
He skipped and is skipping the first two debates of his presidential candidacy and said he was looking forward to attending the Oct. 14 New Hampshire debate -- the one that was cancelled weeks ago;
He is taking this week off from presidential campaigning;
He does not know enough about the details of the Terry Schiavo case to comment.;
He is also unfamiliar with the proposal to lower soaring insurance premiums Floridians must pay for home storm coverage since the hurricanes
Now, each of these have been addressed, and there are many others. The bigger question us dolts out here who actually "work" for a living might ask is this: Who cares? How many of us who will donate to a campaign or support any of these candidates knows any more than Thompson (or anyone else for that matter) about Florida insurance premiums [unless, of course we actually LIVE in Florida]? Same with the Schiavo case - do a "Jay Walking" episode and see how many people even know who she was. Yeah yeah..."but haystack, he's running for President! He MUST have answers to EVERY issue on any given day in any of a number of possible environments and scenarios!"
Ok. Look. Presidents must be sharp. They must be informed. They must be articulate, and they must have a grasp on the issues that affect America. Agreed. They must also be the leader of a team, and as such must have the right people around them to make sure they (and he) knows all angles of an issue before any action is taken. That means getting to the people, and determining the best approach to the problem at hand. They certainly don't need the media to take on these responsibilities; America's best interests are NOT directly equivalent to those of the media.
Again, from RCP:
"The media is the arbiter of the perpetual campaign. This is for good reason. Candidates like to keep the cost of the perpetual campaign low. The media offers advertisement to them - through news coverage, talk shows, debates, and so forth - that costs candidates no money. But, as nothing in life is free, the candidates pay a price. Everything they say and do is analyzed and categorized by the talking heads. So, the heads set the rules of the perpetual campaign. They tell us who does well and who does poorly, and why.
According to the heads, Thompson has done poorly because he is not doing what he is supposed to be doing. He is breaking too many of the rules."
Arbiters of the perpetual campaign indeed.
It is suggested there are two types of campaigns. "On the one hand, there is the perpetual campaign - which is reducible to each party's attempts to win the daily news cycle. On the other hand, there is what I have been calling the real campaign. This is the quest for votes during the few weeks before Election Day."
It seems to me Thompson never had a chance at winning the perpetual campaign - he wasn't in it from the beginning, and as any outsider will tell you (in any bloodsport), last guy in bleeds first. Fine. If you believe the numbers, Fred's got good reason to believe he'll be in the game when the real campaign is in full throttle...the "real" campaign - you know - when real people cast real votes? Yeah, that one:
"Fred Thompson hasn't dazzled many political professionals with his early stump appearances, yet when it comes to building a base of small campaign donors he's showing the potential to keep pace with better-funded rivals.
Thompson, 65, a former Tennessee senator who's running for the Republican nomination as a Ronald Reagan-style populist, tapped 74,217 individuals for an average gift of $125 between July 1 and Sept. 30, the first fundraising quarter of his presidential bid.
That's more than double the contributors Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani signed up during their first reporting periods. If Thompson keeps adding donors at this clip, he may be competitive in early primaries even though he trails Giuliani and Romney in cash raised."
The smart guys may not be dazzled, but more than a few of the rest of us are doing just fine thank you very much.
*************
If Clinton is your idol, I guess you won't be voting for a Republican.
I was stuck watching that con on Larry King and all Clinton did was lie and bullshit and of course King was eating it up.
People like Clinton and Kerry sit studying all sides of an issue because they have no core and are trying to figure out which conclusion hurts them least.
Huckabee is not only a bullshitter from Hope but I don't think he has the self preservation instincts like Clinton but more of a self righteous zealotry that he knows whats best for us, kinda like Hillary.
Fred has said repeatedly he's not interested in being VP.
McCain is running against another Senator who cannot fake her way through an election like Bill. She also has a record as 1st lady to scour and an awful legacy she and her husband built.
Fred Thompson is “smart” like a fox. Those media hounds that will run over anything in their way to get in front of a camera (McLame) live by the media and will die by the media. (McLame)
Meanwhile the ole “lazy” “sedate” “find me a pulse” gentleman from TN plods along and every other day drops a note of wisdom about the inane babbling of our moroninc congrecritters in action.
Read those 2 and 3 sentence notes. Everybody speaks of the ucommon common sense from a man that understands but is hidng (on purpose) the “fire in his belly.”
Oh the drive by media loves outbursts of emotion and ranting and raving .... Demoncraps have been doing that all their life ... forget the rant is flawed.
So Fred goes along winning people over in his own way, being who he is, not what the “toe sucker” wants him to be.....not what the intellectually challenged media cry for. And in doing so he builds a strong base that will not waiver.
Breaking the rules of fools .... there was an emperor that rode the streets naked .... how long will it take someone REAL to point it out. The pundits are to busy clamoring and to stupid to notice.
I find Mr. Thompson refreshing .... the rest are so much noise.
Well, I won’t be voting for back stabber McCain under any circumstance.
“Clinton could handle just about any topic thrown his way, in my opinion, this is necessary for a President”
Clinton handled most topics with good non-answers!
PravdABDNCBS wants HilaryCare desparately. She is the Establishment candidate.
Pray for W and Our Troops
I can understand an ardent pro life person not voting for Rudy or Romney if they get the nod, even though I disagree with them, but McCain?
He was right about the war and how to fight it. It doesn't mean Bush shouldn't have followed Rumsfeld but McCain was right. He has made a couple of big blunders but record wise he is pretty conservative.
He's not a nanny state type guy, he's pro life, he's pro WOT, he's anti spending and he is not a big taxer.
I will probably vote Fred or Duncan in the Texas primary but I would easily pull the lever for McCain should he win the nomination.
Can he spell immediately? If not he should drop out NOW!
j/k ;)
I am, I also don't get it either. Fred has accomplished far more than I have in my life and no one considers me lazy. Fred has likely accomplished far more in his life than virtually everyone who is calling him lazy.
Only morons call Fred lazy. The whole idea that a man of his background and accomplishemnets can be called lazy.....BY THE LESSERS THAT ARE CALLING HIM LAZY.....is a perfect example of how incredibly shallow and stupid the anti-Fred movement is.
You mean this guy?
Yep, he does not look lazy at all. Eyes closed, totally focused on the job at hand. He appears to be vigorously selling out the citizens of this nation. He looks right at home with his communist buddies too.
The one libs fear the most is the one they characterize as “dumb” or “uninformed” or “lazy.” It won’t work.
Sadly so do many Republicans. Why I do not know.
I want someone who will get the job done. And while comunication is an important part of that it is not the only thing.
Na, here is what they REALLY want...
Newt is a brilliant scholar agreed, but he is damaged goods and completely un-electable as POTUS.
And I still think that the majority of joe-six-pack voters are too shallow to vote for a person with a last name like Huckabee.
Fred is the man for the job.
Refreshing isn't is? :) Panties are wadded across America because FDT won't do the preen and strut for them. hysterical
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.