Posted on 11/04/2007 4:46:14 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, November 4th, 2007
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Former President George H.W. Bush.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., Mark Penn, chief strategist for Sen. Hillary Clinton campaign.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : Mideast peace envoy and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair; Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Chris Dodd, D-Conn., Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
Not changing the subject at all ..... the following I typed from Tony Snow’s speech!!!
“Snip…
“..for months, the media avoided asking about progress in Iraq. Despite repeated reports from the field that Iraqis had turned against al Qaeda, the news seldom made it into newspapers, and almost never on front pages. Last week, the military reported that civilian deaths in Iraq had hit their lowest point since 2003. U.S. and Iraqi deaths and casualties similarly had declined. So what led the paper the next moring? Stories about Blackwater. The statistics that put the war in perspective were relegated to the back pages of the Washington Post and in some publications, to oblivion.”
any typing errors are mine!!!!!! because I could not copy it.
You know...As I was thinking about all these candidates that say what their handlers tell them to say, I thought back to George H.W. Bush’s “Read my lips” pledge not to raise taxes in the 1988 campaign. This was just a pledge that he was repeating that someone had told him. His principles, expressed in the 1980 campaign, were against supply side economics and tax cuts, and he referred to Reagan’s plans for a 30% across the board tax cut as “voodoo economics”. When the rubber met the road, his principles triumphed, he hiked taxes in 1991, and this led directly to Bill Clinton’s election and to another huge tax hike in 1994. (Top marginal rate went from 28% in 1988 to 31% in 1991 to 39.6% in 1994, all because the GOP primary voters believed the pledge and paid no attention to the principles)
I do not often agree with Jesse Jackson and I seldom quote him, but during the 1992 campaign when Bush was being savaged on all sides for breaking his pledge, Jackson came out with the following: “Don’t read his lips; Watch his hips”. I think in evaluating candidates, this is not a bad rule of thumb. Bedrock principles always trump election year pledges.
Richelieu: Thompson's Uneven Performance
Today, 1:13 PM • By RichelieuFred Thompson took his acid bath this morning on Meet the Press. Measured by the traditional standards of Sunday morning political theater, it was an uneven performance. Fred did well on international affairs and "stumbled" on domestic policy.
His answer on abortion in particular will come as an uncomfortable revelation to some of his more conservative supporters. I have a team of Jesuits attempting to unravel the yarn-balled logic of Fred's rambling answer, but it appears to boil down to this: "I'm 100 percent pro-life and have voted 100 percent pro-life. I hope one day Roe will be overturned and this issue will be sent back to the states and allow them to celebrate their wonderful diversity with an informed local decision. That local decision shouldn't include any crazy pro-life stuff that criminalizes anything that shouldn't be criminalized for doctors and young women. That's my firm pro-life record, which has always" - insert subliminal message about slick-talking-Yankee-Mormon feather merchants here - "been exactly the same. Glad I cleared that all up for you, Tim."
My team of Jesuits has just informed me that they have put out an emergency call to the Grand Rabbi of Jerusalem to assist in their efforts to comprehend Fred's answer. To my ear it sounds like a pro-life manifesto written by a joint committee of conservative constitutional lawyers and the board of NARAL. I suspect Fred will probably catch new trouble from social conservatives over this and his similar "Let the States be Fabulous" view on gay marriage. (Such is the true beauty of "federalism." It is the Swiss Army Knife of passing the buck on tricky questions. It always sounds pretty good until some state elects a Huey Long.)
The style enforcers in the office of Officially Required Candidate Behavior will bemoan these stumbles, as well as Thompson's way of thinking out loud while trying to wind his way around the exploding fragments of Grenadier Russert's tricky questions. Thompson's struggling campaign will probably take little comfort in today's performance. But I left the interview feeling entirely comfortable with the idea of Fred Thompson being president of the United States. He is informed, thoughtful, and struck me as a decent man trying to navigate the increasingly ridiculous idiom of American politics with all of its trapdoors, over-simplification, and litmus-mania. He resists buckling down and accepting the foolish rules of the presidential campaign game, which in itself is, at least to me, impressively presidential. Tim Russert had the grace to save to the end of the interview an obligatory question about this morning's breathless Washington Post story on a long-past drug charge against one of Thompson's friends. In his answer, Thompson was measured and sensible and seemed more interested in giving his friend a fair shake than in winning candidate performance points by instantly tossing a good pal's still breathing body to the media pack. Good for him.
This guy is in love with his own writing style. You don't suppose Richelieu is a pseudonym for Biden, do you? Bottom line it's a positive review with some of the "inside baseball" griping of the professional talking heads about Thompson. Basically they're pissed that he isn't genuflecting in front of them and wooing them as his primary base the way many others (think McCain) do.
I believe and trust what Fred said on MTP so there is no reason for me to pursue if futher. Obviously, you are more interested than I am. So I will leave it up to you to find more information.
People cannot demand states rights when it suits them and then demand a constitutional amendment limiting those very rights.
You’re right, there will be some who are not satisfied with the Thompson answer but I hope they eventually realize what they are demanding is worse than what they have now.
I do wonder how many of these people are the same ones who damned President Reagan while he was in office and now bow to his greatness?
And you would be right, imo. The more I have thought about how he handled himself this morning, the more I like what I heard.
You miss the point or the context of my reply to Snugs. We don’t need a “media product” to win in 2008. That shouldn’t be the criterion of whom we select as our nominee. Yes, Slick Willy got elected twice and look at his legacy.
My post wasn’t so much meant to disagree with what you said but instead to point out what I see as a bit of irony. Also, my personal experience from the Bush/Cheney rally runs contrary to the prevailing image of Bush as a speaker.
I’ve been on and off today. On too much, I’m afraid.
The upcoming election may be more interesting as time goes on. Hillary seems to implode and Fred seems to be coming out of his shell. Even though neither side has a winner the race is getting more interesting.
Rod, most of the time these comments should just be ignored. Getting hot under the collar at someone else’s comments and then reacting is what we shouldn’t do so much on this thread.
I hope the Jedi Council can be as calm as Master Windex. Say OHMMMMMM.
But #382 is yours, did you mean 383?
I'm doing a lot of calming exercizes today, not so much over particular comments, though I'm doing that too, but because I drew the honors for this week and we've had the busiest thread in quite some time. Thank goodness it seems to have slowed down a bit. The slow down seemed to line up with the start of the Colts/Patriots game, which is what I've been paying mor attention to the last few hours.
Ain’t love grand? Especially when applied to one’s own writing.
But this is not a simple issue and to simplify it for the sake of sound bites is wrong.
Also, Fred’s answer on the gotcha about his friend and the airplane was great.
Much more classy than a certain other candidate’s re-action about a certain footsie player.
Not watching that game. I’m for the Colts but I have to save my energy for the Cowboys tonight.
Legally, that is where it should be. Fred IS a lawyer.
Well, oops. Yes. That’s what I meant.
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.