Fred Thompson speaks

Fred Thompson...

 

0
Your rating: None

Comments

good stuff

this guy at Time thought it would be good for McCain to do something like this; a 2 minute direct address to Americans for one last "vote for me" push.

Only problem is that I thought the worst part was at the end. McCain is already doing the fear/negative attacks and it's not working, because a lot of people are already in a lot of trouble. Most have lost money, their homes, their healthcare, their jobs....it's already bad. It is also weakened slightly because because Republicans are always telling you not to vote for Democrats (same way Dems say it the other way). I also have a hard time thinking of people that admire Fred Thompson, hate the idea of an "extreme liberal agenda" and are still undecided.

The main positive I saw is that it brings up the good qualities in McCain that have been absent the past few weeks, and reminding people of those never hurts.

The Daily Show...

...that did the Thompson/Foghorn Leghorn comparison destroyed any ability I had to listen to Mr. Thompson without seeing Foghorn in my mind's eye.  And it's really, really hilarious to do that, too.  Just try it.  Listen to this video with your eyes closed, and envision Foghorn Leghorn speaking these words.

I don't mean to be flippant.  It's really an image I can't get out of my mind.  Here's the inspiration:  http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184085&title=John-McCain:-The-Person-He-Is  (sorry there's no direct clip, so you have to watch 3 min. of other Daily Show stuff before you get to it).

Definitely not Foghorn Leghorn

@ dean2:  I couldn't disagree more.  I picture Thompson as a talking bassett hound.

Fred as RNC Chair?

What do you all think--is it time to cast Fred Thompson in a new role, that of RNC Chair?

If not as RNC Chair, what type of role should he have in forming "The Next Right?"

Philosophy

I quite like Thompson's formulation of conservatism in this video:

"Responsible change is the essence of conservatism. We must change in order to preserve what's best about our country. We've always been able to accomodate change without turning our back on our first principles."

I find that element of conservatism--the more dispositional side of conservatism--to be underdiscussed and underemphasized, in the present day. It's a bit abstract, but I think that if the rapid change of an Obama Administration is met with disappointment, this type of view might have more of an audience.

With that in mind, if he were interested, I'd be happy to see Fred Thompson as RNC Chair. I don't know if he would want that kind of role.

One impression you don't get

One impression you don't get from FDT is that he puts in eighteen hour days.  The RNC Chair should be someone who does, because there is a lot of work to do.

Fred in 2012?

 As he was in his speech at the Convention, Fred was very effective and persuasive here.  Senator Thompson's popularity and gravitas remain intact and he should not be overlooked or underestimated for 2012.  Fred and Jeri want it really bad and they have a plan to get in earlier and are raise their profiles should there  be an opening.  However, I feel that if Palin decides that she wants the nomination, that Fred will stand down in 2012.  Palin has a very compelling claim to 2012 being 'her turn.'

Please be kidding

Palin has a very compelling claim to 2012 being 'her turn.'

 

First of all, this is very wrong.  If McCain loses, Palin will take a good amount of the blame.  She will not be well positioned for a 2012 run.  Who was the last failed VP candidate whose career actually advanced after the election?  And Palin is one of the most polarizing figure on the scene--possibly even more than Hillary Clinton.  That's not a compelling claim.

Secondly, the Republican commitment to letting somebody run because it's "their turn" is exactly why Dole lost, and why McCain probably will.

Third, while Fred would get my vote, I suspect that (if McCain loses) the next GOP candidate will be somebody whose image is one of youth and vigor.  At least, comparatively.

The anti-Palin crowd

are pretty much people who are Democrats or who are generically embarassed by the Republican party. since Dubya took office  Folks like Bill Weld and Colin Powell have been looking for the door for awhile, they just finally got around to walking out through it.

It's not Palin; it's her agenda. They would have used the same talking points if Mike Huckabee or Sam Brownback were the VP. (trust me; the media would have manufactured a gaffe or a scandal for them by now). 

Besides, name me a reasonably popular moderate Republican on the young side of 55? These people realise they have no horse to ride, so they are going to the other stable rather than work out their differences.

There may be a stronger 2012 alternative to Palin; but I can assure you he is unlikely to get the support of her biggest critics; and what support he would get would evaporate in the now inevitable "he is running a divisive, hard-line campaign" meme the handwringers use every October to justify their bailout.

Absolutely

Palin has finally rid us of many those useless RINOS.  This puts the lie that if the GOP moves to the left it will have more broad support.  McCain is supposedly their candidate, they have telling us so for the last 8 years, now their running awau from him.  Part of it has to do with Palin, because they hate what she represents and don't want her kind in positions of power in the party (average, everyday Americans).  That is why they are happy to jump ship and support Obama (who is an eltist just like them and who they think is going to win and they want to be invited to the DC-NY corridor cocktail parties).

"lose with dignity"

That seems to be what the media would like the Republican party to do every election cycle.  Like we are DA Hamilton Burger losing every week to Perry Mason.

I'm from CT and selfishingly I could say, jeez, we'd get a few more votes around here if Lieberman were running. It wouldn't flip CT and we'd be lucky to get enough folks for our rallies in rural MO and VA to fill a junior high gym, unlike Palin filling stadiums. But then again most of the critics are 30,000 feet over such places.  

Big Ben is right -- action does speak louder than words.

The appointment of Sarah Palin to the RNC's chairwoman's position will send an unmistakable message to the party's base; the party's leadership has heard their voices and intends to return to its traditional fiscal conservative roots for the 2010 Congressional elections.

ex animo

davidfarrar

 

May as well look at the history...

Who was the last failed VP candidate whose career actually advanced after the election?

Here are all the failed VP candidates since 1900:

1900 - Adlai Stevenson (the first one)

1904 - Henry G. Davis

1908 - John W. Kern

1912 - Nicholas Butler

1916 - Charles W. Fairbanks

1920 - FDR

1924 - Charles W. Bryan

1928 - Joseph Taylor Robinson

1932 - Charles Curtis

1936 - Frank Knox

1940 - Charles McNary

1944 - John Bricker

1948 - Earl Warren

1952 - John Sparkman

1956 - Estes Kefauver

1960 - Henry Cabot Lodge

1964 - William E. Miller

1968 - Edmund Muskie

1972 - Sargent Shriver

1976 - Bob Dole

1980 - Walter Mondale

1984 - Geraldine Ferraro

1988 - Lloyd Bentsen

1992 - Dan Quayle

1996 - Jack Kemp

2000 - Joe Lieberman

2004 - John Edwards

On that list, I count 1 president (FDR), and it took him 12 years to get back to the top of a ticket. Bob Dole got a top spot 20 years later. Mondale got the nod in 1984, but he had already been a sitting VP. We also have a prominent Cabinet guy (Frank Knox) and a future Supreme Court Chief Justice (Earl Warren) on the list of failed VP candidates.

A quick glance at the rest of the list indicates that it has never happened in the history of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party (going back to Jackson).

So, it hasn't been done. With that said, I don't know how much of that is intrinsic to being a losing VP candidate (it's probably at least part of it; parties like to move on from defeats), and I don't know if Ms. Palin may be more politically viable than those other candidates. I know of no VP nominee in history with a more explosive national debut than Palin, so that might make her more likely to break this kind of trend.

I wouldn't put it past Palin to win the nod in 2012. But I also don't like the idea of it being "her turn."

Why?

Fred absolutely flamed out; his time has past.  

A Conservative Video Campaign You Must See...

 Please help promote these videos.  I want conservatives to learn to use the Internet as a weapon laden with facts.


These come from the "Burning Down The House" video that was on Drudge.  

Here is the latest video.  It is incredible.  If only McCain did more videos like these...

http://windsofchange.thruhere.net

I think it could have viral qualities.

There are many other videos on this YouTube channel:

http://www.youtube.com/themouthpeace

Spread these videos and post them everywhere.  Think of it like this, with 10,000 committed people posting these in 10 places each day over 10 days, that is 1,000,000 postings.

If 10 people see each posting that is 10,000,000 views.  If only 1 in 10 send it to 10 people that is 20,000,000 views.

Now you are talking enough impact to change an election!  Let's do it!

 

Every time Fred speaks an angel

throws up in her mouth a little bit.

Gaffe Factory

The media does not manufacture gaffes, the candidates deliver them.  The McCain Palin choice has had a "Kick Me" sign on it's back since the beginning.  The media can't steer clear (exception Fox) of them.  It's a gaffe factory.

Thompson's "fear the enemies" "thirty years of experience" does not work in a post cold war globalized world.  McCain has thirty years of experience in a world that does not exist anymore. He does not have the mental elasticity to embrace what's happening in the world.  The party's ideals can be employed in the next election and beyond, but the party must cleave from the past (McCain and Thompson) and categorically avoid dancing with a popular zombie (Palin).  If she is the new guard, the party will face obliteration.   Likability must be accompanied by genuine competent knowledge of national and global issues.  It also needs to embrace basic English grammar if gaffes have anything to do with where the party finds itself today.