The Fred factor

The Economist ^ | Aug 30th 2007

[presidio9]

WHEN Michael Moore challenged Fred Thompson to a debate on health care, back in May, Mr Thompson declined the invitation but decided to have a bit of fun on YouTube instead. Sitting in a leather armchair and sucking on an unlit Cuban cigar, he lambasted Mr Moore, a conservative hate-figure if ever there was one, for his naive views on Cuba and its health-care system. Next time you're down in Cuba visiting your buddy Castro, he said, why not ask about another film-maker, Nicolás Guillén, who was put into a Cuban mental institution and subjected to devastating electric-shock treatment. “Mental institution, Michael. Might be something you ought to think about.”

Those were the glory days of Mr Thompson's campaign—or non-campaign—for the presidency. Republican activists, bitterly disappointed with their choice of candidates in the primaries, seized on Mr Thompson as the perfect alternative. A former senator from Tennessee who had earned national fame as an actor, particularly on the wildly popular “Law and Order”, an imposing man with a six-foot-six frame and deep bass voice, Mr Thompson was the sort of non-scary conservative who could rally the base without

[edcoil]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdAm6UY4xOE

[Jay777]

Blog Reaction Roundup on Announcement

[W04Man]

Bump! IT'S FRED TIME!!

http://Vets4Fred.net It's time for Vets to sign up!

http://FredForPresident.com

[RC2]

If I were President Thompson I would tell Moore....”you’re not worth my time”.

[VRWCmember]

Pretty lame column that rehashes a lot of the criticisms of Fred that have already been pretty thoroughly rebutted. Fred will announce soon and then we’ll see what happens.

[massgopguy]

Howie Carr said that Fred is supposed to announce at 4:30.

[VRWCmember]

He’s going to announce when his announcement will be.

[Nonstatist]

but none of the candidates has even begun to chart a new path. That is unlikely to change when and if the Republican Party's newest actor-politician joins the race.

If he goes with a Federalism theme that would be good with me. Frankly though, he just doesent seem to exude a lot of energy. At least if he declares it will show he has "intentions".

[tarheelswamprat]

Those were the glory days of Mr Thompson's campaign—or non-campaign—for the presidency.

This article is deliciously ironic in the sense that the one thing it demonstrates clearly is that it is the glory days of "The Economist" which are long past.

Disclaimer: I am not a Thompson supporter, merely a former reader and subscriber to "The Economist" who has witnessed its descent from objective, fact-based analysis and commentary into looney leftist advocacy.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I just tossed an invitation to subscribe in the round file.

[ImpBill]

"But Mr Thompson's chances depend on the weakness of the field rather than any outstanding qualities of his own."

Obviously the writer is totally full of himself, which is to say he is full of $//1T!

[lesser_satan]

I’ve never been a subscriber, but I used to buy it off the stand a lot. I noticed that most of the advertising appearing therein were ads from the UN and left-leaning NGO’s, mostly looking to hire people for various make-work positions with exorbitant salaries.

[tarheelswamprat]

“The Economist” has always been a leftist/globalist publication. It was started as the media mouthpiece for the RIIA (Royal Institute for International Affairs), which was the granddaddy for the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), which publishes “The Economist’s” sister publication “Foreign affairs”. Both are unabashedly globalist/one-worlder in their agendas.

However, for most of their history they both were at least honest and truthful, and based their discussions, arguments and policy recommendations on facts and logic. You might disagree with their conclusions or agendas, but they didn’t use disinformation, lies, rumors, smears, junk-science or fraudulent data to make their case.

In recent years, however, “The Economist”, and most of the rest of the British Establishment media, has fallen under the control of the looney hard-left. Their professional standards have been discarded and all pretense of honesty, objectivity and integrity has been abandoned.

[lesser_satan]

That’s too bad, it was an AWESOME publication when I used to read it. Like you said, I didn’t always agree with their conclusions, but it sure was interesting.

[Mr. Lucky]

I was a subscriber until a year or so ago. The Economist is a metaphor for British conservatism generally, in my opinion.

[SuziQ]

LOL! They’re kinda jumpin the gun with their negativity over Fred’s chances. His campaign hasn’t ever STARTED yet! I’ll have to bookmark this and re-read it in March or April of next year.

[tarheelswamprat]

The Economist is a metaphor for British conservatism generally, in my opinion.

The problem is that most British conservatives would be Democrats in America.../grin