EARTH TO LAMAR: FRED THOMPSON LOOKING THE PART AIN'T ENOUGH (41-second video FLUB)

Hardball, YouTube ^ | 4.3.07 | Mia T

[Mia T]

EARTH TO LAMAR:
FRED LOOKING THE PART AIN'T ENOUGH (video)

by Mia T, 4.3.07

Lamar Alexander on Hardball, pushing Fred Thompson for president confirms the obvious: Fred's top asset is his stage presence, followed closely by his presidential and other executive experience... on film.

Fred's geography and ideology seal the deal for Lamar, the former being pure South and the latter, pure enough Right.

"The power of the harasser, the abuser, the rapist depends above all on the silence of women." (Ursula K. LeGuin)



VOTE SMART: A WARNING TO ALL WOMEN ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON

by Mia T, 3.11.07
A RESPONSE TO 'VOTE DIFFERENT'
(A Mashup of Obama-Apple 1984 Ad Mashup)

YouTube Views for VOTE SMART: 308,196

YouTube Honors for VOTE SMART:
#10 - Most Viewed (This Month) - News & Politics - All
#10 - Most Viewed (This Month) - News & Politics - English
#41 - Top Rated (This Month) - News & Politics - All
#39 - Top Rated (This Month) - News & Politics - English
#11 - Most Discussed (This Month) - News & Politics - All
#9 - Most Discussed (This Month) - News & Politics - English
#9 - Top Favorites (This Month) - News & Politics - All
#9 - Top Favorites (This Month) - News & Politics - English
#89 - Most Responded (Today) - All

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

 

[areafiftyone]

Fred has the experience and conservative credentials.

WHAT EXPERIENCE??? Being a Senator??? We have knocked down more Senators with more experience than Fred Thomopson when they wanted to run for president. Conservative credentials? No more than other Senators who have wanted to run. What is so special about him that makes a man who never governed in his life and was a Senator like all the others more qualified? Is it his TV personality or is there something else besides his voice and tallness that does it? Other Senators who wanted to run had just as much experience if not more than him and we knocked them down faster.

[Redcloak]

No, I'm afraid that he doesn't have any real experience; not the kind that being the liberal mayor of NYC gives a candidate.

</sarcasm>

[Fierce Allegiance]

We have knocked down more Senators with more experience than Fred Thomopson when they wanted to run for president.

If there is a better candidate. Rudy doesn't qualify in that vain. We need the most electable person, and right now, that's fred. I really don't need to get into Rudy's faults again, that make him not likeable once people are aware of his stnce on the issues and his record.

[SauronOfMordor]

I would rather the oval office be held by an inexperienced-but-good person than by an evil person with all the experience in the world

[Graymatter]

Ol’ Sparky wrote: “If you won’t oppose a morally-bankrupt, ethically-challenged LIBERAL in your own party that favors killing unborn children, believes homosexuality is good and normal that has cheated on his wife, it’s hard to take your attacks on the Clintons seriously.

“If one has to vote the Republican equivalent of the Clintons, one has no moral standing to bash them.”

“How can you rip the Clintons a new one on a regularly basis and support a man that is just as unprinciples, immoral and liberal...?”

“Do you view whether a candidate is conservative or not as relevant?”

Thank you, Ol’ Sparky. Eloquently stated.

[papasmurf]

"believes homosexuality is good and normal that has cheated on his wife, it’s hard to take your attacks on the Clintons seriously.

“If one has to vote the Republican equivalent of the Clintons, one has no moral standing to bash them.”

Amen!

Sen. John McCain (affair, divorce) former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (affair, divorce, affair, divorce former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (divorce, affair, nasty divorce

Together, they form the most maritally challenged crop of presidential hopefuls in American political history.

What message does this send about who we Republicans support to the masses? And to the world? when they are challenging two dem candidates who haven't had those experiences? (that we know of)

:O)

P

[Graymatter]

Can’t take credit for the comments, they came from Ol’ Sparky in post 94. One of the things I appreciate most about FR is how often someone will post comments I wish I’d thought of. They bring clarity to an issue when I’m still in the process of formulating a position. And then they state it better than I could have.
(God bless Free Republic!)

:)

[Politicalmom]

Fred is a professional politician? Gee, the whining around here has been that he’s a quitter because he went back into private life.

Fred is what the founders envisioned. Someone whose entire life doesn’t revolve around Washington DC.

[Mia T]

Citizen politicians: What the Founders envisioned were people of exceptional character, ability and achievement who would lend their expertise by serving a term or two and then return to their day jobs.

This isn't Fred Thompson.

Indeed, Thompson exempifies DC entrenched power and the revolving door.

• campaign manager for Senator Howard Baker's successful re-election campaign in 1972
• co-chief counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee in its investigation of the Watergate scandal, (1973-1974)
• 1975-1993 Thompson's eighteen year engagement as a lobbyist in D.C. He 'eventually represented clients including Westinghouse, General Electric (the current corporate owner of the NBC Universal-NBC television network), and the Tennessee Savings and Loan League '
• 'By 1982, Thompson worked the U.S. Congress membership as a lobbyist for passage of the Savings and Loan deregulation legislation desired by the Tennessee Savings and Loan League --- in this case, federal deregulation legislation allowing for additional government support of ailing S&Ls; giving U.S. thrifts the freedom to invest in potentially more profitable, but riskier, ventures; and eliminating interest-rate ceilings on new accounts to increase S&Ls' competitiveness. Enacted into law during in September 1982, the Senate bill pushed by Thompson was incorporated into the Garn - St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982. The Garn - St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 is widely credited with having laid the groundwork for the U.S. Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s.'
• November 8, 1994, Thompson was elected to the United States Senate. Thompson was re-elected in 1996.

[Hostage]

I disagree.

I suspect you have an ulterior motive. Who is your candidate? Guliani?

And by your description it wasn’t Thomas Jefferson either.

[Hostage]

It’s amazing how hopeful followers of other candidates are fearful of FDT.

FEAR THE FRED!

And you coined it!

[Hostage]

Jimmy Carter was a Governor.

[areafiftyone]

Then We are truly desperate. We are dying so hard for another Reagan that we look to TV to find one.

[SE Mom]

What is it? Go to The Corner at NRO and listen to all his pieces done on Paul Harvey the last couple of weeks.

Really listen.

[Mia T]

My bad. I had determined via YouTube stats that most people opening the thread weren’t playing the video. (I suspected they thought it was the entire 7- or 8-minute interview of Lamar by Matthews.)

So in a rush to underscore its 41-second length and without any thought, i whipped out that sensational title change,. ‘Fries’ was an unfortunate word choice. Will come up with a better, more precise word.

That said, I do believe Lamar, as Fred’s chief promoter, did Fred great harm, having inadvertently revealed that a somewhat empty suit is attached to that great voice and on-stage stature.

[Politicalmom]

I suppose you think Bill Lockyer (Rabid leftist gungrabber from CA) is a far better spokesperson. That’s who Giuliani has going to radio stations in CA.

[Mia T]

Are you saying you disagree that Fred is part of the DC power structure?

Look, the original point of this post wasn’t what I think.

It’s that Fred’s chief promoter portrayed his man as an empty suit. Stop for a minute and think about this. It is quite amazing.

And, yes, I do believe Lamar’s inadvertent revelation is important. Critically important.

After Bush, the voter will be looking for proven competence in 2008. We nominate at our own risk someone whose only executive experience is playing a president in film.

[Mia T]

clinton, too. ;)

But there is a difference between saying that all governors would make good presidents and that being a governor is relevant experience for the presidency.

What clinton and Carter counterexamples demonstrate to me: A lousy, corrupt governor makes a lousy, corrupt president.

[Mia T]

Your premise of equivalence is absurd.

The clintons are rapists and predators, have willfully ignored terrorism for their entire tenure, are seditiously corrupt, and are monstrous abusers of power.

[Hostage]

Abraham Lincoln was a Congressman for a term. He was not particularly powerful or influential. In fact he damaged his reputation early by a few ‘intemperate speeches’.

He was an exceptional lawyer like FDT who is a legal intellect of the highest order (no exaggeration, read to verify):

http://www.australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml

But Mia T, you are wasting your talent on such trivial characterizations. Sink your cerebral teeth into this (please) and let me know what you think:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198

To me this film addresses the real issue that ties the majority of all other issues together. Amd please don’t stop watching it, follow it to the end because it starts on a niche issue and expands to reveal connections you would never thought to have existed. Please don’t shun it to spite me if I have insulted you in any way. It is not my work, but it has definitely been absorbed into my psyche now. Put it this way, Hillary Clinton is but an ugly pimple on the butt of those that wield real power.