Posted on 01/06/2008 7:16:08 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Fred Thompson today blasted the media for propagating a false rumor about his impending withdrawal, while bolstering the role he has created for himself as the candidate in this race who does not suffer unwelcome questions gladly.
Back in Iowa, Thompson famously refused to respond to the debate moderator/school marm's demand for a hand-show on global warming. Then this morning on Today, he declined to engage in horse-race speculation about his own prospects, then took the media to task for its propagation of that false rumor about his impending withdrawal. Weekend anchor Lester Holt interviewed the former Tennessee senator.
View video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Yes, FRed has principles. I guess that’s something to jeer at when one is a Ron Paul fan.
Another Carter or another Reagan?
What we have is a new struggle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party.
For me this is deja vu. I went thru this in the 1964 Republican Primaries.
I was a member of The College Young Republicans in California. The race between Governor Nelson Rockefeller and Senator Barry Goldwater was intense and in doubt until California. Where we were ultimately victorious.
The next generation will have to carry on the struggle anew.
This is all very elementary and I don't know why I'm bothering to discuss it.
Wow.
McFred has the stones to refuse to play the stupid "raise your hand for global warming" and to stand up to Lester on the media game of horse raise analysis.
Too bad that the personal attacks on Ron Paul and my support for him makes supporting McFred very difficult.
==> “...he just “principled” himself right out of the race by pissing off the media - smart move.” <==
This is not scolding, because I know that you don’t intend to demonstrate shallowness by your comment. But every one of us on this forum MUST know better than to let the media, the parties, and the campaign organizations shape our perception of the candidates.
This forum, and the uncountable number of information sources it taps to inform us about the candidates, gives us the ability to form our own opinions without the distortions and prevarications of the people and institutions that used to shape them.
Yes, of course many are still in thrall to those conduits of misinformation, but the declining popularity of the old media demonstrate that more people every day are Waking up from their complacency - and once they do, they will never go back.
McFred appears afraid to be challenged by not going on the Factor. Don’t pretend McFred can’t use the visibility. I’m a Paul supporter, but McFred doesn’t seem to have anything to be afraid of, or to lose, unless, his role isn’t really to win.
I disagree. There's nothing to be gained by appearing on The Factor.
As far as being challenged in a serious debate that's a joke, BO couldn't challenge himself out of a wet paper bag.
How many times have we witnessed Coulter giving the bloviator a thorough spanking? BO is a buffoon.
If you want to watch a serious interview with Fred see if you can google up the interview he had on the Charlie Rose show. It was great.
And too bad that a search of your posts by anyone interested will reveal a nasty, sniveling, shallow, little troll who likes to throw out disgusting barbs about Fred's appearance and his wife and anything other substance-free criticism you could find.
Too bad indeed.
he he
You mean you don’t believe that someone who used “NearlyDeadFred” for months might suddenly decide to support him?
You cynic, you.
Roger Simon, of Politico.COM made it up and published the first story. It's at least the tenth false story he's created slamming Fred. It's conceivable he has some "source," but it's likely his parakeet who whispers these things in his ear.
The rest of the media just started repeating what Simon said, then sheeple started repeating it on blogs, including folks who should know better.
And too bad that a search of your posts by anyone interested will reveal a nasty, sniveling, shallow, little troll who likes to throw out disgusting barbs about Fred's appearance and his wife and anything other substance-free criticism you could find.
Well, aside from no evidence to support your characterizaion of my posts, you kind of proved my point, didn't you?
You've been so kind as to provide plenty of evidence over the past 6 months or so of all the claims I made in my previous post. Thanks for playing. You can return to your retard revolution now.
Umm, no, the moniker I used for McFred was nearlydeadMcFred. It was a name that I coined to counter the kneejerk comparisons to Reagan just because they were both actors.
In any event, I guess there's not much in the way of redemption around here, since as you note, I quit using that moniker for McFred, on my own, some time ago.
And don't forget, that due to the big guy's endorsement of attacks on Ron Paul and his supporters, all you guys have to do is provoke us to get us banned.
It just seems that if the case against me is so easy, you would post them to make it easier for folks to join you in condemning me. That is unless, in reality, my posts were mild compared to the attack you just posted minutes ago.
"It sounds like McFred runs his campaign with the same dispassionate enthusiasm as his eight years as senator...and people are beginning to recognize it once they get past McFred's fake hair color, makeup and TV roles."
"Okay, so we have an actor whose head bobbing is amateurish, a “conservative” who wrote the unconstitutional McCain/Feingold/Thompson, but you’re supporting him anyway because...he’s plays a conservative on TV, but can’t act?"
"I came up with the name, "NearlydeadFred" when Fred zealots began comparing him with Reagan. Besides the fact that he's handsome as the ass-end of a bulldog, he looks like death warmed over without makeup on. NearlydeadMcFred isn't qualified to shine Reagan's shoes, let alone fill them, when it comes to conservative credentials. I added the "Mc" to point to the fact that NearlydeadMcFred has strong ties to the conservative betrayal known as McCain/Feingold. To be able to sum up NearlydeadMcFred's political future in a 16 letter nickname makes it all the more fun."
"Figures that you’d throw away your vote on NearlydeadMcFred. Obviously, the fact that his most notable achievements are co-chairing McCain’s presidential campaign, co-authoring McCain/Feingold and voting against impeaching Clinton. Congratulations, you’re supporting a loser who actually makes Hillary look pretty." "Tumor and all, Ron Paul's conservative record dwarfs NearlydeadMcFred's. Enjoy."
"I guess you're referring to NearlydeadMcFred's melodious voice? I guess you don't care much that NearlydeadMcFred thinks so little of the constitution that he bragged about co-authoring McCain/Feingold? Geez, your conservatism runs about as deep as the makeup on NearlydeadMcFred's face."
"It's actually a humorous name to use when critiquing a guy who is promoted as an "actor like Reagan" but who is really a very old worn out empty suit with a melodious voice who shares McCain's vision for America. I'm able to summarize all of that in one simple nickname - NearlydeadMcFred. Nice, huh?"
"Since playing a conservative on TV is all that many Republicans are requiring of the party's possible nominee, NearlydeadMcFred fans need to be reminded that he's not going to be quite so telegenic unless he's in makeup 24/7."
"NearlydeadMcFred will need to have makeup 24/7 to maintain the public image you seem to have bought into."
"NearlydeadMcFred plays a conservative on TV and you fell for it."
You wanted examples, you got em. Now, go play in your sandbox with the rest of the Ron Paul shortbussers.
Too bad the dates of those posts don't show how far you had to go back to dig them up, but they still don't show me attacking McFred supporters, either. Unless "zealot" is an attack?
By the way, rovian, enjoy nursing that grudge.
Heh, only in your paultard world, pal. Call us when the shuttle lands.
The media were just reporting something that they were hoping for. They couldn’t help believing it was true, even if they knew it was false.
When one makes such broad claims it is generally accepted that you must provide multiple links to show that you conducted actual research and aren’t talking out your a-hole. Without such links, you are not helping your credibility.
hey - I dont make the rules - I was just commenting on them
On the other hand, there is something both ironic and obvious about someone who’s done so much acting telling the media he owes them nothing.
I dont care how much polish they put on a turd.You cant put a shine on a turd/rino
You mean like he did in post 68 over an hour ago?
So, you want links now that I’ve provided the quotes? Too bad. Get em yourself. If you have questions about my ‘credibility’, I certainly won’t be losing any sleep over it.
“You wanted examples, you got em.”
Yeah - we got an example of your being an egomaniac jerk who thinks your words are so much more important than everyone else’s that you need to use obnoxious red blinking text, out of fear that you won’t be noticed.
You wanted attention? You got it. Obnoxious people usually garner lots of attention.
BTW Karl Rove severely damaged the cause of Conservatism and small government.
LOL...are you trying to get a rise out of me? Not likely to happen. You can go back to your little retard revolution now...bye!
It's about time the Ron Paul campaign spotlights the broad military support he has to combat the neo-con interventionist war boosters.
11 posted on 01/05/2008 12:49:03 PM PST by Nephi ( $100m ante is a symptom of the old media... the Ron Paul Revolution is the new media's choice.)
HEY DUDE WE are Neo COn War Boosters!
BTW he tanked my on that thread, fist time I have had a post zotted. Dishing it out and taking it two different things I guess.
Felt good though....
Finally, I've reached my goal!!! :D
I went from sexist bigot homophobe to warmonger. I never thought I'd reach NeoCon War Booster!
That decoder ring is gonna rock!!
“Oh, and by the way, if you’ve got a problem with blinking red text, take it up with the w3c.”
Sure, it exists. So does crack and heroin. Doesn’t mean you have to use it.
The < blink> tag is the most obnoxious that exists.
Don’t blame the W3C for your obsessively attention seeking, egomaniacal behavior.
These are the rules.
“Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.”
Nephi criticized a candidate. You called him names.
I didn’t call you names - I made an observation about your bizarre attention seeking behavior.
Giant blinking red text is the exception, not the norm. You used it because you think that your message was the most important on the thread and had a deep psychological need to be paid attention to.
Your dismissive post, after being “noticed.” is even funnier. You are a narcissist, just like Rove.
Hey! Don't leave out Warren Tompkins, he of the 2000 push poll in SC. Mitt has some real winners on his team.
YES!!!
LOL...yada yada yada.
In spite of the blinking text, one of your paultard buddies up there still didn’t manage to see it.
Perhaps I should have made the entire thing blinking red text, so you’d notice the multiple personal attacks on Fred Thompson supporters contained within the quotes.
“LOL...are you trying to get a rise out of me? Not likely to happen. “
Anyway, based on your obsessive need for attention, I have the sneaking suspicion that no one has been able to get a rise out of you without your taking a Vitamin V for a long, long time. I’m not that kinda guy, so go tap your foot under another stall.
“You can go back to your little retard revolution now...bye!”
I’m not a Paul supporter. I’m a Hunter supporter. However, I think that Paul is a hell of a lot better than most of the leading candidates. I’d take Paul over Rudy, Flipp Mitt, McQueeg, or Huckster any day.
Why?
Because socialism is the real biggest threat to us. The towelheads are bad, but the socialists (like Big Government Buddy Bust the Budget Karl Rove who never met an entitlement program he didn’t like) are the real biggest threat to this country right now.
You can call Paul a lot of things - a friend of socialism is not one of them, unlike Karl Rove and the other idiot politicians I mentioned.
“Perhaps I should have made the entire thing blinking red text, so you’d notice the multiple personal attacks on Fred Thompson supporters contained within the quotes.”
The only one I saw was the phrase “fred zealot,” and they do exist. There are zealots for every cause. That’s not a ‘personal attack.’
Please compare and contrast the phrases “Paultard” and “Fred Zealot.”
One implies that someone is mentally retarded. The other implies someone who supports Fred no matter what.
"Anyway, based on your obsessive need for attention, I have the sneaking suspicion that no one has been able to get a rise out of you without your taking a Vitamin V for a long, long time. I’m not that kinda guy, so go tap your foot under another stall."
Then, you have a reading comprehension problem. You must be a product of our public schools. That explains a great deal.
Are you planning on continuing this much longer? As much as I dislike folding laundry, doing so is far less tiresome than shooting the breeze with you.
On the other hand, there is something both ironic and obvious about someone who’s done so much acting telling the media he owes them nothing.
Statement by the founder of Free Republic:
In our continuing fight for freedom, for America and our constitution and against totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny, terrorism, etc., Free Republic stands firmly on the side of right, i.e., the conservative side. Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I'm trying to attract to FR) support the strategy of taking the fight to the enemy as opposed to allowing the enemy the luxury of conducting their attacks on us at home on their terms and on their schedule.
Therefore, we wholeheartedly support the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes on known terrorist states and organizations that are believed to present a clear threat to our freedom or national security. We support our military, our troops and our Commander-in-Chief and we oppose turning control of our government back over to the liberals and socialists who favor appeasement, weakness, and subserviency. We do not believe in surrendering to the terrorists as France, Germany, Russia and Spain have done and as Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton and the Democrats, et al, are proposing.
As you were saying....
“Then, you have a reading comprehension problem. You must be a product of our public schools. That explains a great deal.”
No reading comprehension problem. It just wasn’t there.
Post 2 other “personal attacks” he made, from the selection of quotes you provided.
I double dog dare you.
Good for Fred! The ONLY reason they interviewed him was to fuel the flames that he will be dropping out next. That jerk deserved NOTHING. Most Americans seeing that will think Fred can stand up for America to the world’s terrorists.
“While I’d just love to have a nice conversation with you about the evils of creeping socialism, I’m afraid I just don’t have the inclination to have such a discussion with someone who would actually type something as silly as this:”
I’ll call you Fredtard then, since adding ‘tard’ to a word isn’t a personal attack, in your book.
Relish and bask in the attention! How about some more red giant blinky text? Do enough and you might be able to get a rise out of yourself, who knows?
Not a bad nickname suggestion, since you’re named after Rove, and Rove is kinda like the Fredo (Godfather reference) of the GOP, and Fredo alliterates with Fredtard. Fredtard_Fredo_Storm! There ya go.
This is the kind of thing that Clarence Thomas says, he owes the liberals and the media nothing because of what they did to him during his confirmation hearings. Therefore Justice Thomas can be his own man when he makes decisions.
Whatever happens, Fred is setting things up so he owes no one in the media anything. It is possible to put others on that list as well.
Just in case anyone missed this interview! GO FRED!
http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2008/video-fred-thompson-on-fox-news-010608/
“Good for Fred! The ONLY reason they interviewed him was to fuel the flames that he will be dropping out next. That jerk deserved NOTHING. Most Americans seeing that will think Fred can stand up for America to the world’s terrorist”
I kinda like Fred but his campaign hasn’t picked up momentum. He isn’t raising money. He isn’t exciting anyone but a handfull of people on FR who are gaga over the guy, and go out of their way to insult the other candidates with a ‘go team!’ mentality, like they were rooting for the NBA finals or something.
I am looking forward to poking the people who spent the last few months dissing Hucksterby (who I will never vote for) or Rooty when they are the nominee, because they are “better than Hillary.”
I am not a Paul supporter but if it was Paul running as an independent vs McHuckaromniani vs Hillary - Paul gets my vote. I won’t vote for big-government nanny staters from ANY party. Socialism is a bigger threat than Islamists to us.
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.