Would I prefer a “funny” little video done by an actor, or a President who will take all the problems and serious issues our country is facing like terroism seriously, answer is obvious.
Would I want a President who like President Bush doesn’t make funny cute little videos in response to Chavez’s horrid comments about him and our country, or a President who’s “cute” (childish) response to a stupid comment defending his use of cuban cigars (which are illegal to use in this country) OR a President to act with dignity and one the terroists will take seriously?
it was a watershed moment all right,for voters to see the immature response to a stupid challenge that did not deserve the time of day let alone all the attention and press that Moore is now getting which is what Moore wanted to begin with, and Thompson took the bait, what would he do if and when another country challenges him to a war, what video will he make in response to that? Hopefully we will never have to find out.
Responding to the likes of Moore and taking his bait is not Presidential material!
A candidate can have a sense of humor and be a good president, too. Lighten up. He’s likable and that goes a long way in politics.
What would Ronnie do? I believe he would be all over the new media, Mr. Grumpy. :)
Oh my !
Dude, the reason we are winning the serious battles but losing the media war is because we don’t stoop to go nyaah nyaah nyaah when the enemy is askin’ for it.
Morale and communication is essential to victory. I love and pray for George W. Bush but Fred Thompson is a serious fella and he can bolster sagging morale and engage the MSM in this war with a good attitude and a quick wit.
It wasn't the President who did that. It was a former Senator from a southern state who may or may not be running for President. It was not only funny, but far more effective than either ignoring Moore or responding to him with any kind of gravity would have been.
OMG where have you been? It seems like every other televised public appearance by Bush is a candidate for America's Funniest Home Videos ;-)
Geez. Lighten up.
Imagine how well he will do in a debate with Hillary or Obama.
Oh, for goodness sake!
Hogwash. A sense of humor shows balance. One who has no sense of humor is unbalanced and dangerous.
I saw the video, Thompson did great with it. In all seriousness, he IS looking presidential in a lot of ways. A joke is a joke. A stodgy old man with no sense of humor or gravitas cannot win the White House. Instead we have a man with charisma, who is the center of attention without even declaring.........I for one want Fred as President. I think you should reconsider your position. There might be a good reason you are in the minority on this thread.
The truth is, all Republicans will be harried by liberals with microphones and old media, and have to be able to defend themselves. For example,"Mr. President, in talking about the continuing recession tonight, you have blamed mistakes of the past and you've blamed the Congress. Does any of the blame belong to you?" asked ABC White House Correspondent [i.e., a liberal with a microphone] Sam Donaldson.In responding to Moore, Thompson is simply auditioning for the job of responding to the jerks with microphones that every POTUS is faced with."Yes, because for many years I was a Democrat," replied Mr. Reagan. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/07/48hours/main621459.shtml
“I already know what I am going to say,” said Thompson.It is no accident that Thompson starts and ends the clip with his back to the camera. The message is perfectly clear; Michael Moore is dismissed. What else do you want?Two phone calls and one camera later, Thompson was ready to go. One “take” later -- with no script, no booking time in a studio and no opposition research or talking points -- Thompson was shot into cyberspace.
Maybe the answer is to say "yes I know you exist, whatever"
That is so wrong! The answer is not simply yes, it's H*ll yes!
I am so tired of seeing President Bush being hit or talked about and verbally beat around the head and shoulders without his making even ONE BIT of an effort to respond. It was "Presidential" for the first few years I guess, now it's the one of the reasons he got his backside handed to him in the last election.
In the absence of any reason not to, people believe what they are told. For years the President (and Republicans in general taking his lead) have allowed others to define them and what they are doing.
It's time time to speak out, speak up, and give us another view of the world that isn't simply be dismissed as 'talk radio' by those presently doing the defining.
Err, did you like President Reagan’s unfailing good humor and quick, pungent responses to his many critics? I enjoyed his humor and wish we had more candidates like Fred are not simply angry at most everything (Hitlery comes to mind).
I find the comment interesting. For starters, I cannot comprehend the sentiment that witty communication is mutually exclusive to serious thought. How sad it must be that you have evidently never experienced an engaging speaker on any serious topic.
If you compare recent rhetorical successes of presidencies, it would be hard to argue that BJ Bill wasn’t more successful than his immediate predecessor or successor. The reason? In great part because political “leadership” is determined by the ability to control and respond to messages.
BJ Bill had his 24/7 War Room which never let any verbal slight go unanswered, and never failed to get out in front with his spin. And just like ducks, the electorate is prey to imprinting. BJ Bill was glib and never stopped peddling his wares. That his wares were destructive is not relevant. We might think he was a bad man and failed President, but the nation at large would have kept on electing him for another several decades.
On the other hand Bush I and Bush II are perhaps the least articulate public persons in modern times, never responding to attacks no matter how false, destructive, or undermining of the USA, as being “beneath them.” And accusations left un-countered are accusations confirmed in the minds of the great masses, most of whom could not think their way out of a wet paper sack.
Moore is not an insignificant figure in the theater of political discourse. He may be a whack job and treasonous cur, but he also represents the views of a sizeable portion of the polity, and another sizeable portion could be persuaded that his view is accurate if it is not rebutted.
“W” may hold certain truths as being “self evident” which indicates he is completely clueless about the modern culture. Not responding to his critics and failing to continue selling his agenda has been his destruction IMHO, and he will probably go down in history as a throughly incompetent man, a sentiment echoed on both the Left and the Right.
Fred Thompson was demonstrating his keen insight into the nature of the popular culture, which is in practical terms the only culture we’ve got, and by pricking the balloon of the bombastic Stalinists.
Our current electorate places greater value on the ability to communicate than that which is actually being communicated. Any public enterprise ignores this sobering truth at its peril.
Got ‘gravitas’?
Jokes aside, consider that Voltaire said he made only one prayer, “God, make all my enemies ridiculous”. He complied.
The ridiculous need to be made the butt of jokes so that all can easily see past the posturing so that they can witness the “inner fool” of the Moore’s of the world.