Posted on 09/08/2007 8:32:15 PM PDT by finnman69
No one noticed the wince. If they did, no one wanted to talk about it, because Fred Thompson's campaign staff (which still exists, the fresh exodus of three top staffers aside) had set up his presidential launch on The Tonight Show so deftly. This was history, and when history's being made you can forgive Jay Leno's dying-man groping for punchlines or a 10-minute giggle-proof lead-in segment where burly housewives and shirtless yokels bumped, grinded and cross-dressed to Rihanna tunes. Sweat it out. You'll want to tell your grandkids about the night you watched Fred Thompson begin his quest for the White House. ------------------------- The rationale for Thompson's run has been refreshingly phony: It's all about his looks, his voice, his personality. His backers have confused all of that with leadership, and Thompson, like the worst actor, is starting to believe his reviews. That's a mistake. The point of Fred Thompson is that he was never serious.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Uhhhhhhh...
What?
Or very well thought out or from an unbiased source.
Looks like Fred scares the beejeezuz out of David Weigel-—the man is virtually incoherent.
So...the choices are shaping up to be a bad actress in the RAT camp who uniformly gets rave reviews from a fawning, lickspittle press and an actor from the Pubby side that will, no doubt, get uniformly bad reveiws.
Hmmmm...lessee...criminal traitor who is praised by the left, or lightweight establishment actor/pol that is offered as a counterpoint to the vacuous front runners and blackhorse wingnuts...what to do?
Although I voted for an actual Conservative (Tom McClintock) in the California recall election of 2003, we unfortunately elected a liberal actor (SchwartzenKennedy) who has since spent more than Davis wouldn't have imagined in his wildest wet dreams, and who now counsels Conservative Republicans to give up Conservatism and become "moderates" (=Democrats). We are in grave danger.
Jassah Jagson would be more coherent three days into a crack binge in a nitrous bottling plant.
I looked at a few more of Weigel’s articles. They’re all like that.
He’s just another 2004 grad in Journalism/PolySci major.
Here’s how Weigel voted in 2006:
David Weigel, Assistant Editor
Residence: Fairfax, Virginia
Registered party affiliation: None
How are you voting?
“For U.S. Senate: James Webb. It’s a choice between him and George Allen; what’s the dictionary’s definition of “no-brainer?” Webb is an honest-to-God renaissance man – novelist, historian, soldier, presidential advisor – who’d immediately balance out the Senate I.Q. scale that Barbara Boxer and Jeff Sessions have been tipping the wrong way since the 90s. He’s right on the war, right on gay marriage, and hideously wrong on taxes and trade, but I care most about that first issue. The thought of Webb sitting in the tall chairs at Armed Service Committee hearings, grilling Donald Rumsfeld until his glasses fog up, is a pleasant one. “
“For U.S. Congress: Democrat Andrew Hurst, who’s challenging Republican Tom Davis. Davis epitomizes the 1994 Republican freshman gone wrong – he’s gotten power-hungry and trivial, blocking development of housing in his district because he worried about Democrats moving in, and presiding over the idiotic baseball hearings. Hurst is a doctrinaire liberal who won’t win, so this is basically a protest vote.”
“For ballot initiatives and/or state constitutional amendments: I’m voting no on Ballot Question #1, the latest idiotic couples’ rights rollback masquerading as a gay marriage ban. It’s an abomination that’ll pass handily.”
“There’s no one else I can vote for, since Virginia holds state legislative elections in odd years. And beyond the Senate race Virginia isn’t seeing many close battles… Republicans have an outside chance of losing a House seat in Virginia Beach, but that’s it. I will definitely be watching my home turf of Delaware, to see if Joe Biden’s dashing son Beau wins the open Attorney General’s office.”
Weigel’s Website:
http://daveweigel.com/?page_id=1411
He's the only candidate who is talking about the Constitution other than Dr. Paul.
FDT fact of the day: while serving in the Senate, 'future president' Thompson passed three bills - mostly post office naming stuff. During this same time, McCain passed 17 pieces of legislature. The difference is leadership (even though McCain is an asshat I dislike and don't care for - he is a leader).
Now if he only understood it.
How much of his staff has he picked up now?
Talking about the Constitution isn’t good enough. He was instrumental in getting CFR through, he’s McCain without the insanity. Not voting for either if I can help it. It’s exceedingly looking like I’ll at least be sitting the primaries out. The GOP should feel shame, the entire crowd is pathetic, I’ll vote against the Dem candidate in the general but there really is nobody in this election worth outright voting for. Between the losers the loons and the scumsuckers this is just a lame election.
Usually I like Reason’s articles but this one stank. Thompson has put out more than enough general principles and policy statements and has acted upon them in the senate for a critique to be based on that.
This critique of image and how a guy who owns plaid shirts and a pickup can’t own gucci’s is lame, lame, lame.
It is unbelievable the shallowness and poorly thought out writing of the recent Fred bashing articles. They are so much in a panic to get the Fred bash out they are not even thinking straight and are publishing pure gibberish.
LOL!
Is that Fred Thompson dancing with Hillary?
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.