Thompson finance chair signs on with McCain (McC hopes to get endorsement from Fred)

Austin American Statesman ^ | Jan. 24, 2008 | Ken Herman

[SuziQ]

He has already endorsed McCain

Different election, and irrelevant to this one.

[SuziQ]

Please quit yelling; no one appreciates it.

[SuziQ]

Lynn Cheney was not on Fred’s campaign; that was LIZ Cheney, their daughter.

[SuziQ]

Fred to endorse McCain?

Hasn't done it, though McCain would LOVE it!

[flat]

RIGHT ON THE BULLSEYE MAG.....

AUUU RAH

SEMPER FI

[dixiechick2000]

Another excellent post by you!

I don’t know about you, but I’m having a hard time moving on from Fred.

I don’t like the candidates we have, but it is what it is.
So, I’ll choose the one I think is best.
Thankfully, my primary isn’t until May, so I have time.

[Just A Nobody]

As Fred himself acknowledged when it finally saw the light of day, after Fred had left the Senate.

Oh, for the love of GOD!!! Stop the lies! If you are to continue pimping this guy, at least get the facts straight.

April 2, 2001
THOMPSON LAUDS PASSAGE OF McCAIN-FEINGOLD CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM LEGISLATION

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN) today lauded Senate passage of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation, which passed the Senate by a 59-41 vote. .....“This is a good day for the United States Senate. It demonstrates once again that this body can respond to a demonstrated public need,” said Thompson, an original co-sponsor of the McCain- Feingold bill and a supporter of the legislation since 1995.

On April 2nd, Senator Thompson voted to pass McCain-Feingold, after the Republican Senator's filibuster had been shut down. In March of 2002, the House version of McCain-Feingold returned to the Senate and Senator Thompson voted to pass the bill out of the Congress.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 27, 2002

President Signs Campaign Finance Reform Act
Statement by the President

Today I have signed into law H.R. 2356, the "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002."

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Fred Dalton Thompson
United States Senator from Tennessee
In office December 2, 1994 – January 3, 2003

___________________________________________________________________________________________

AFTER passage, your hero defended his baby in the SCOTUS.

The stooge was sent in to accomplish a mission. Immediately upon succeeding he dropped out of the race. Perhaps now y'all can quit lying about him.

[SuziQ]

The stooge was sent in to accomplish a mission. Immediately upon succeeding he dropped out of the race. Perhaps now y'all can quit lying about him.

Can YOU prove that Fred got into it to help McCain win the race? Doesn't look like Fred's dropping out has helped McCain one bit. So who's doing the lying?

[Just A Nobody]

Can YOU prove that Fred got into it to help McCain win the race?

Why the hell would I PROVE something like that?
Who the hell is talking about MeInsane? Not me!

[Kurt Evans]

“The race will be between McCain and Romney and the winner will depend on how the conservatives and Evangelicals break. Doubt many conservatives will go with McCain. Guess it’s up to the Evangelicals.”

I’ve been conducting an informal poll of some of my evangelical friends. Most believe Governor Huckabee will stay in at least through Super Tuesday and say they’ll vote for him regardless of whether they believe he can win. If he withdrew, most say Governor Romney would be their second choice based on McCain-Feingold alone, even though they don’t necessarily believe he’d govern as a Reagan conservative, socially or economically.

My gut feeling is that if Senator McCain lost decisively in Florida, most of his moderate and liberal supporters nationwide might migrate to Governor Romney, which would make many supporters of Governor Huckabee (like me) feel more comfortable expressing our doubts about Governor Romney.

[Brandie]

"Romney, a registered independent until 1993 Likes it both ways. Not Commander in Chief material"

SoCalPol, Ronald Reagan was a democrat as Gov. in Calif. before he changed to Republican. I bet there are a lot of people on here that used to be Democrats before they changed too. Why are you so hard on that fact about Romney just curious. I am not showing disrespect for your opinion just an honest question.

I was for Hunter, then Fred Thonmpson, both are gone now, so my husband and I are going to vote for Romney.

I can't and won't vote for McCain because of what he did about the blocking the release of classified POW/MIA documents, a lot of my family - my Uncles all served in Vietnam) and because of MCCain's Amnesty bill and a ton of other reasons.

Huckabee disgusts me and gives me the creeps.LOL

So that leaves Romney to vote for.

[flaglady47]

“Maybe they’re looking for a leader rather than a constitutional encyclopedia.”

LOL! That’s funny.

[SuziQ]

The stooge was sent in to accomplish a mission. Immediately upon succeeding he dropped out of the race.

YOU made that accusation, then accused FredHeads of lying about his record. Since you so helpfully provided 'proof' of Fred's record, I'd just like to see some proof of your accusation about why Fred got into the race. Otherwise, why do you continue the accusation, except for YOUR own gratification?

[Just A Nobody]

Okay Suzi, let's start from the beginning and follow this through to completion. No more moving the goal posts, K?

9. Fred did endorse McCain in 2000
17. And worked ever so closely with him on the McCain-Feingold-Thompson bill.
61. Suzi expounds on the RNC talking points re: Fred and CFR.
66. That may be true but McCain-Feingold was a vast over kill.
84. As Fred himself acknowledged when it finally saw the light of day, after Fred had left the Senate.

Which brought us to my post 167 with FACTUAL evidence destroying your revisionist history on McCain-Feingold-Thompson not seeing the "light of day" until "after Fred had left the senate."

At the conclusion of my evidentiary post, I said;
The stooge was sent in to accomplish a mission. Immediately upon succeeding he dropped out of the race.

Without uttering a single syllable about the proof I posted, you launched into an attack on me over my personal comment.

168. Can YOU prove that Fred got into it to help McCain win the race? Doesn't look like Fred's dropping out has helped McCain one bit. So who's doing the lying?

Having no idea what you were babbling about, other than calling me a liar, I responded with post...

169. Why the hell would I PROVE something like that?
Who the hell is talking about MeInsane? Not me!

Not being one to have your dreams shattered you come back with post...

173. YOU made that accusation, then accused FredHeads of lying about his record. Since you so helpfully provided 'proof' of Fred's record, I'd just like to see some proof of your accusation about why Fred got into the race. Otherwise, why do you continue the accusation, except for YOUR own gratification?

For ease in deciphering this mess, let's take it one sentence at a time, shall we?

YOU made that accusation, then accused FredHeads of lying about his record.

To be fair, I did not THEN accuse FredHeads of lying.
I clearly, unequivocally told YOU to stop the lies and I did it FIRST, not THEN.

I did NOT make an accusation, I simply stated my opinion.

Since you so helpfully provided 'proof' of Fred's record,

I'm glad you considered the FACTS helpful. Is there something I provided that you dispute? Is that why the 'proof' reference???

I'd just like to see some proof of your accusation about why Fred got into the race.

See, here you moved the goal posts. In post 168 you originally said:
Can YOU prove that Fred got into it to help McCain win the race?

Since I made no reference to McCain whatsoever, and most definitely was NOT referring to him, I had no idea what I was supposed to prove.

NOW you want proof of my personal opinion, not an accusation, on why Fred got into the race. LOL!!!

With the amount of distortion, misinformation and blatant lies that have been perpetuated about that man's record over the past 10 months, I owe no proof of anything to anyone, least of all on my PERSONAL OPINION, not an accusation.

And finally...
Otherwise, why do you continue the accusation, except for YOUR own gratification?

Suzi...Suzi...Suzi. I have NOT continued anything. I made a statement, my PERSONAL OPINION, not an accusation, ONCE...ONE TIME...UNO...understand???

Why do YOU continue to post misinformation, distortion and lies, except for YOUR own gratification?

One factual item I left out of my post 167, regarding your comment 84. As Fred himself acknowledged... What Fred allegedly 'acknowledged' was in regard to issue ads, not the entire CFR bill.

During an interview with Laura Ingram, when asked "Would you today tell us that you made a mistake in supporting campaign finance reform?" He gave no coherent answer, so Laura tried again asking; "What about the issue ads?"

Eventually he got around to saying; "Now, they added on something that was a mistake and that is the issue ads that you were talking about and I voted for all of it. So I support the first part but I don't support that."

The FACT (those things have a nasty habit of popping up) is Fred not only supported “that”, but was instrumental in guiding it through the process. If you would like, I will be happy to supply you with the actual arguments ol' Fred made on the floor of the senate in full support of the Snowe-Jeffords amendment, aka as issue ads, and squashing DeWine's amendment to remove the Snowe-Jeffords amendment from the CFR bill.

Just let me know if YOU would like that PROOF for YOUR own records and gratification.

[Just A Nobody]

Ooooops, should have pinged you to post above.

[SuziQ]

Whatever

[Just A Nobody]

Whatever

ROTFLOL!