Posted on 10/07/2007 10:12:27 PM PDT by Doofer
In an unusual political season that seems to offer up a presidential debate every week or so, the Republican debate tomorrow is expected to offer something new: Fred D. Thompson.
Untested in debate against his opponents until now, Mr. Thompson, a late entrant to the race, chose to skip the last contest in favor of announcing his candidacy on “The Tonight Show” early last month — a decision for which he was roundly criticized. Many have been wondering how Mr. Thompson, a former senator from Tennessee, will do.
By his own admission he is “a bit rusty” when it comes to debating, and he has said he hopes he will be able to “hang in there” with the other candidates, including Rudolph W. Giuliani, the sharp-tongued former New York mayor, and Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, who is known for his polished delivery. A look at some of Mr. Thompson’s debates years ago offers a mixed picture, with the candidate mostly projecting calm and confidence against Representative Jim Cooper, his Democratic opponent for the Senate seat in 1994.
Mr. Thompson’s delivery back then was usually smooth and expressionless, not a monotone but not displaying much charisma, either. He sounded articulate, speaking in full, well-rounded sentences, but stopped short of eloquence.
Even when he was on the attack, or firing back at a rough question, he rarely lost his cool. Speaking of Mr. Cooper, he deadpanned, “There’s nothing more desperate than a career politician facing the prospect of having to get a real job for the first time in his life.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The story has already been written. Imo.
Of course, he came to acting long after he'd already had a career in law, but the MSM have some truly bizarre, elitist ideas about work. I've never been able to figure out how DeLay being a former exterminator was the subject of jokes. The MSM are a bunch of preppy wimps who like their workers downtrodden and far away from them. They don't LIKE the people they supposedly champion, and find the idea of non-journalistic or non-political work distasteful and suspicious.
I am reminded of John F. Kennedy, who supposedly won the debates in 1960. Those who watched on television swore Kennedy won, and those who listened to the radio thought Nixon had won. The media swooned over Kennedy and the rest is history.
Among other things, Kennedy moved us into Vietnam and Johnson moved in over 550,000 troops. The media remembers the debate, and forgets about what their spin bought us.
Whether Thompson does better in the debates or not, it is most important what his core beliefs are. And I’d say that of all the candidates. The debates are okay, but in the current format, they are essentially meaningless.
The left does their best to corner the Republican candidates on issues important to the left. Frankly I’d rather see the cancidates give a chance to make opening comments, then tear into each other at will.
It would be a lot more revealing.
How about if Thompson turns the tables and asks Mr. Softball about the unchallenged lies made on his show when Mugs Murtha condemned the Marines of Kilo Company?
I want to elect the best conservative to be POTUS.
Not the best debater.
Go Fred go!
Susan Marie Saulny, the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Stanley M. Saulny of New Orleans, was married there yesterday to Dr. James Burton Snyder Jr., a son of Mr. and Mrs. Snyder of Lindenhurst, N.Y. The Rev. Perry F. Henry performed the ceremony at Holy Name of Jesus Roman Catholic Church.
The bride, 27, will continue to use her name professionally. She is a reporter for The New York Times. She graduated from Yale. Her mother, Linda Saulny, is the school social worker at Marion Abramson High School in New Orleans. Her father, a pharmacist, retired as the manager of a Walgreens drugstore there.
The bridegroom, 36, is a psychiatrist and the founder and director of Long Island Psychiatric, an outpatient center in Roslyn, N.Y. He is also a clinical assistant professor at the New York University School of Medicine. He received bachelor’s and medical degrees from the State University at Stony Brook, N.Y. His father retired as a member of the crime-scene search unit of the Nassau County Police Department in Mineola, N.Y.
The couple met on Sept. 11, 2001, at ground zero, where Ms. Saulny was reporting for The Times and Dr. Snyder was giving medical aid.
Sounds like Fred Thompson scares the Hillary camp spitless. Of course, all of the GOP candidates I’ve seen so far are articulate, and capable of thinking on their feet (if you can call what Ron Paul does “thinking”). Which means that any one of them would destroy her Thighness in a real debate (no softballs, no pony tail guys and no Oprah clones). I like Thompson’s idea of meeting the presumptive Democrat nominee in a “Lincoln-Douglas” open forum debate, without the phony “impartial” moderator/interrogator. If Hillary had to participate in one such debate, with no one to feed her the questions and answers, she’d probably have a melt down, claim the GOP candidate had “verbally violated” her, and refuse to participate in any further debates.
The guy used to be a lawyer. Of course he can debate.
Yep, and Ronald Reagan was a B movie actor who could only star with a chimp.
I want to "measure" how he'd do against Hillary...a challenge not to be misunderestimated.
A blunder could take the legs right out from under his campaign. He'll need to prove he can hold his own in a debate against clinton.
I may sound harsh, but I expect performance and results from anyone I support.
If he doesn't cut it, I may have to reconsider.
We Freepers this last week have a question or two that I would like to see asked.
"It is not the critic who counts . . . the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena - Theodore RooseveltJournalists don't agree with that, because they are the ones who do nothing but talk - and who promote themselves by tearing down the "doers" with criticism and second guessing. Journalists promote big government, and simultaneously attack the police and the military mercilessly even though they are sine qua non for government. And the reason is that journalists can't stand for anyone to get credit for actually doing something. To them, the credit belongs only to the critic.
Exactly. And I fondly hope that someone prominent like Rush will make that challenge, and follow through with the "empty chair" debate when Hillary cowers in fear at the thought of spending hours in front of a live mike and a live opponent, without an "objective" moderator to protect her.
Pundits sit there and critique, and throw mud at those who have the nerve not to succeed. The only one who succeeds all the time is the one who never TRIES anything great--the critic.
I wouldn’t even it call it critique - for that is constructive and positive. The criticize. Criticism is cheap, easy, and at times cowardly.
They all seem to want to be Jon Stewart—i.e. someone who gets to say whatever he wants on TV every day before an adoring audience, and celebs love him.
I have to agree. Jon Stewart is the epitome of the criticizing coward.
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.