Posted on 09/14/2007 10:13:22 PM PDT by Doofer
I want the truth as I see it. He gives me that.
Reagan was great. My Dad died in 1978 as a Democrat but always told me Reagan would make a Good President. Go Figure.
I watched the last debate and to tell you the truth I was a bit embarrassed for those 9 guys standing up there hoping the moderators would throw them a bone, especially the guys in the lower tier.
Good article. Thanks for the post!
I understand exactly what Fred is saying there and I expect most other folks do too.
These "debates" are to make the media look important and to give them sound bites for a few news cycles. They were never intended to assist the voting public or the candidates.
“Translation?”
President Thompson.
2) fer da lulz
Why not?
FredHead BUMP!
Who needs a translation? The sight of a bunch of candidates all standing behind podiums waiting to field questions DOES remind me of a bunch of seals waiting for fish.
I thought it was a hoot.
Let me put it this way. There are things about Romney and Guiliani that piss me off pretty badly. I liked Fred initially because he's neither of them. Right now he talks like a conservative. As time passes, we'll unravel all the truth about him and find out if there's anything that pisses me off about him as well.
And in the end, I'll select the candidate that pisses me off the least.
At least there's a choice. Unlike the Democrat "coronation" process. Obama is like one of those Aztec human sacrifices. All that yapping and running about until "the queen" decides to cut his heart out? Yikes...
Most people only watch the debates to see who will choke on the fish.
There are so many "debates" that they have lost their purpose.
Thompson is right on target.
Why Fred Thompson? Uh, he filled a complete and total vacuum of conservative character among the liberals and wackos running for the Republican nomination. There. I said it in one paragraph.
You honestly don’t understand what he said, or you are just joking?
I’ll take you at face value. Frankly, it just isn’t that hard to understand.
Translation: I’ll take part in a few debates to be a good sport and because it is expected of me, but I don’t plan to do many and I’m not doing one soon. Debates are mostly worthless and don’t give me an opportunity to share any meaningful, useful message. I’ll control how and when I deliver my message to the American voters, and I’m not going to get tricked into playing s media-controlled game that you hope will make me look foolish or catch me saying something my Democrat opponent can use against me.
You honestly didn’t understand that?
Thanks. Your version is very clear. I’ll bet hearing Fred say this was really funny.
On paper, it was hard to tell how he meant it - and then the writer implied that that was why he would make a great president.
Maybe - Aristotle said that a gift for metaphor is a sign of genius.
Reagan was once democrat too
And nobody (besides hardcore political junkies) was paying any attention, either.
Something interesting happened last night. My lady and I went out to have a few snacks and sip a few drinks at the home of one of her friends. This friend is a liberal (she's for Edwards) but when I answered her question about who I was for, she couldn't find a bad thing to say about Thompson. Another liberal friend there opined that "no Republican presidential candidate has a chance" in 2008, but I said that the eventual nominee would distance himself from Bush successfully, and she didn't dispute that.
One thing that I was really impressed by was that these two liberal New York women both detested Hillary. If it comes down to screeching Shrillary vs. folksy Fred, even liberal women who you'd figure are Hillary's base are not going to vote for her.
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.