Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thompson PAC Benefits Son More Than Republicans
Wall Street Journal ^ | 21 April 2007 | BRODY MULLINS

Posted on 04/21/2007 1:25:21 PM PDT by shrinkermd

Management Fees Exceed Political Donations From Tennessee Presidential Hopeful's Account

In the five years since Republican Fred Thompson left the Senate, he has maintained his political fund-raising account -- and it has paid more money to his son than it has contributed to help elect Republicans to Congress, records show.

Mr. Thompson, of Tennessee, announced that he would not seek re-election to the Senate in 2002. But since then, his political action committee has paid $244,000 in "management/consulting fees" to his son's consulting firm in Nashville, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.

During the same period, the Fred D. Thompson PAC donated a total of $225,000 to Republican candidates and party organizations, according to the reports.

...Mrs. Clinton's HILLPAC has paid about $2 million in salaries since 2002, while contributing $2 million to Democratic candidates for office. Mr. Edwards's PAC paid about $1 million in salaries while contributing $200,000 to Democrats when he used it during the 2002 and 2004 elections. Mr. Edwards primarily used his PAC to fund his political career, rather than to contribute to Democratic candidates. Mr. Obama, who only had a PAC for the 2006 election, paid about $500,000 in salaries and donated $770,000 to Democrats.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: electionpresident; elections; fairopinion; fairopinionzot; fred; fredthompson; pac; runfredrun; son; thompson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-219 next last
To: Jim Robinson

Only seconds after you zotted that DU-DU troll, the FReepathon went over the top! Lots of grateful people in FReeperland.

Thank you!


101 posted on 04/21/2007 4:24:04 PM PDT by Josh Painter (Draft Fred Thompson: the grassroots "surge that will transform the Republican race." - The Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

I hardly see how my post as “self-serving”, except in the banal way that every post serves to communicate the ideas of the person who posts it.

I would also disagree with your characterization of my post as “whiny”, but you certainly are entitled to your own opinion, even if I think it is daft.

But don’t pretend that people aren’t having “fun” when they make up names for others, and call them names. At least at first. Not fun in the sense of riding a rollercoaster or blowing out candles on a cake, but fun in the sense that it makes them feel better when they attack others personally.

However, since that concept attributes motives to people, and that was not my intent, I’ll say that I didn’t expect that comment to be controversial in any way, I was in fact noting that there were reasons people used personal name-calling.

But the reasons notwithstanding, substantive arguments are not advanced by namecalling, regardless of the purpose or reason a person might have for doing so.

But your suggestion, however implicit, that I somehow am imposing some rule on others by simply expressing my opinion on the efficacy of name-calling as a debating tactic grants me powers far beyond what I have been given in this forum.

Only if my words are persuasive can they have any effect on what you, or any other person, posts to this forum. And while it seems obvious that you have no intent to listen to my opinion on this matter, I hope that some will, and that this will become a more civil place to discuss things, regardless of the intent or purpose of the liberals and well-meaning but delusional rudy-supporters.

JR can certainly zot anybody he wants, it’s his place. I would not have zotted either Mia T. or FairOpinion for what they said at the time they were zotted, because to some degree zotting can look like we can’t answer them in battle and must therefore silence them, when nothing could be further from the truth.

I have no problem with zotting people though, especially for the body of their work — I’m just saying that my approach would differ from that taken by the owner of the forum.


102 posted on 04/21/2007 4:24:17 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
however, this seems self-serving and not an easy thing to justify.

I'd be somewhat skeptical of the reporting of a guy who appeared on Olbermann's show...

103 posted on 04/21/2007 4:24:50 PM PDT by an amused spectator (Gun Control, the Sequel: More and Morerer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Don’t try to justify it; it’s ugly.

What, no insults flung at me? Damn. I was hoping to be called a something-something.

104 posted on 04/21/2007 4:25:07 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ben Franklin, we tried but we couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom
Considering “Fair” Opinion also started a thread which stated that Thompson’s church had mormon roots, which was completely untrue, and then REFUSED to retract it, causing it to be deleted, I don’t trust him a bit.

I was one of the initial refuters of that claim, pointing out the difference between the Church of Christ and the link being cited by FO. But in this case, she listed her source and then did retract immedaitely after the source's claim was refuted. I can understand if many got frustrated with her refusing to back away from things that were already shot down, but that doesn't seem to be what happened here.

If a person becomes disruptive, I can understand the need to restrict that disruption, but other things equal, I prefer a forum where we can afford to face criticisms and have no fear of pointing out problems like a possible Clinton donation. Does that mean I don't want to participate in FR, though? Nope...I'm here, and recognize the editorial discretion of the site operators! :-)

105 posted on 04/21/2007 4:26:03 PM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; All
Why is he a troll?? He admitted to a mistake????
106 posted on 04/21/2007 4:26:56 PM PDT by KevinDavis (Man needs to reach higher and farther to accomplish the impossible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Why, so you could get me banned, too?


107 posted on 04/21/2007 4:29:27 PM PDT by Howlin (Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
He admitted to a mistake

Have you read her posts or threads leading up to this one?

108 posted on 04/21/2007 4:30:07 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ben Franklin, we tried but we couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; All

Yes.....


109 posted on 04/21/2007 4:31:59 PM PDT by KevinDavis (Man needs to reach higher and farther to accomplish the impossible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom; Reagan Man

Yes, I remember that one. I’m not going to defend FO against being zotted, I just am saying first that I wish everybody on both sides would be more civil to each other, and second that if I were king which I am not I wouldn’t take this approach — which isn’t saying I’m attacking the zots, just that it isn’t how I would handle things.

I’m pretty vocal on the Rudy threads, especially when the RUdy supporters attack other more conservative candidates. I think their approach is often uncivil. But I also believe we are uncivil to them. The question is whether they deserve it — or in my case, NOT whether they deserve it, which maybe they do, but whether it is helpful, which I think it is not.

But it’s just my opinion. As Reagan Man correctly said, I’m a guy that plays it down the middle when it comes to personal attacks on people posting. It isn’t my style, I don’t find it useful, and it detracts I believe from the substance of arguments to be made.

I believe at some point republicans, even bad non-conservative ones, have to get together to elect the republican candidate next november, and if we’ve called all the Rudy people evil lying troll liberals, they might not be so inclined to accept our invitation to vote for Duncan, or Fred, or Mitt, or whoever the non-Rudy candidate is. Maybe they wouldn’t anyway because we trashed their candidate, but I just don’t see why we have to trash them as well, other than to trash their arguments.

I’ve said all I’ll say on this matter here. FO is gone, and I can’t say I’ll miss her. People will be civil, or not, as they see fit, and at the moment I don’t sense my arguments carrying much weight. Maybe in time I’ll try again, and over time I’ll persuade some to agree with me.


110 posted on 04/21/2007 4:32:57 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Why, so you could get me banned, too?

Now why would I do something like that?

111 posted on 04/21/2007 4:36:35 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ben Franklin, we tried but we couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Because I don’t agree with you.


112 posted on 04/21/2007 4:37:54 PM PDT by Howlin (Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; FairOpinion
Of course FO’s credibility is damaged by this, because we see a smarter, less gullible person would have questioned why Fred Thompson gave money to Hillary, and would have approached the issue in a manner befitting that sound reasoning.

FO asked for futher research and confirmation in the post regarding the information on Open Secrets, which means to me that FO did question it. I don't see how bringing up something that indeed existed (the erroneous Open Secrets file) damages anyone's credibilty, and I don't think it suggests anything about FO's intelligence.

Why are people being so mean to FO over this? I don't understand.

113 posted on 04/21/2007 4:40:11 PM PDT by MonTinaGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
"this seems self-serving and not an easy thing to justify."

No, it isn't, for someone who wants to smear Fred.

BTW, who are YOU supporting?

:O)

P
Run, FRED, run!

114 posted on 04/21/2007 4:40:34 PM PDT by papasmurf (Name me one nation that taxed itself into prosperity. Run, FRED, run!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
FO has crossed the line. It’s one thing to be a liberal, but it’s another to post irresponsible garbage.

Opinions are one thing, but deliberately misleading posts are another. He/she earned the zot.

You may notice I defended Cincinnatus’ wife on posting pro-Rudy threads earlier today, but this stuff FO came up with is shameful, especially attacking Fred’s church.

115 posted on 04/21/2007 4:41:04 PM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
You don’t need to explain yourself. JimRob has always been more than patient and fair. I used to blast away at the Bushbots and establishment Republicans and never heard a discouraging word. I’ve been here a long time, even since before my registry date, which is actually a re-registration.

I’ve always thought of FO as a noxious liberal. There are plenty others of those that remain around here. I’ve been fighting with them for years. But they always kept the material they post and their opinions separate.

Don’t get a thin skin and don’t act like a smarmy liberal. You have to work pretty hard to get zotted.

116 posted on 04/21/2007 4:47:31 PM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

Oh, FGS, there is irresponsible garbage all over this site.


117 posted on 04/21/2007 4:52:26 PM PDT by Howlin (Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Someone should send a note to Open Secrets and have them make a correction, maybe I’ll send them an e-mail.

I think that would be a fine idea.... Lord, I almost fell off of my chair.

118 posted on 04/21/2007 4:53:55 PM PDT by liberty4alland4ever (I pledge to support the GOP nominee for President in 2008, whomever that is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
Can you provide a link to the actual document YOU posted, please?

William Vanderpool Hilleary, usually known as Van Hilleary is a Republican politician from Tennessee.

Hilleary was a candidate for the United States Senate seat then held by Senate Majority Leader Dr. Bill Frist.




Run, FRED, run!

119 posted on 04/21/2007 4:53:57 PM PDT by papasmurf (Name me one nation that taxed itself into prosperity. Run, FRED, run!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Your bloviation is noted.


120 posted on 04/21/2007 4:54:12 PM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-219 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson