Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

When Fred Met Tim: Evaluating Thompson on Meet The Press
The National Review ^ | Sunday, November 04, 2007 | Jim Geraghty

Posted on 11/04/2007 6:37:35 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet

I had said Fred Thompson could do him a lot of good if he passed “the Russert primary” with flying colors.

His campaign had been dismissing the Washington press corps, and implicitly running against the media, refusing to do the things candidates traditionally do (enter early, do five events a day, appear at the New Hampshire debate instead of the Tonight Show). But every once in a while a Washington media institution really does matter, and Meet the Press is one of them. Simply because Tim Russert, without commercial interruption, will throw hardballs and curveballs for a solid half hour, and standard delaying tactics won’t work. Also, his research staff can find every awkward quote from 1974 that every candidate dreads. Generally, a candidate who can handle Meet the Press well can handle just about any other live interview.

This morning I had caught a brief snippet – his discussion of Iraq - and thought he was striking out. I thought the reference to “generals we respect” was so odd, I wondered if he had forgotten David Petraeus’s name.

Having just watched it on the DVR, I thought it was a very, very solid performance. Ground rule double.

My initial shallow thought was that Thompson still looks a bit on the gaunt side. Then, during the interview:

“You’ve lost a lot of weight. Is it health related?”

“Coming from you, Tim, I’ll take that as a compliment.” Ouch. Thompson says no, it’s not health related, it’s just that his wife has him on a diet to watch his cholesterol. He says he had additional tests for his Lymphoma in September and was the results were all clear.

Every once in a while Thompson slipped up - I think he suggested that oil was selling at “nah-eight hundred dollars a barrel”, and I’m wary of his quoted statistic that car bombs in Iraq are down 80 percent – but overall, Thompson was measured, modest, serious, and completely at ease. After a couple of debates, it’s odd to watch a man not trying to squeeze his talking points into an answer, and instead speaking in paragraphs, conversational and informed.

Jen Rubin wrote, “He does not answer questions linearly with a direct answer to the question but rather talks about the subject matter. Some find this thoughtful and other think he is vamping and unfocused.” His talk on Iran was a perfect example, in that Thompson’s position isn’t terribly different from the rest of the field – he doesn’t want to use force, but he’ll keep that option open - but as he talks at length about the risks and benefits and factors that would go into a military strike, the audience, I think, will feel reassuring that if Thompson needs to face that decision, he will have weighed each option carefully.

That voice is fatherly, reassuring, calm. The contrast to Hillary couldn’t be sharper.

I’m going to say ‘well-briefed,’ but I know that will just spur one of the Thompson Associates to call me to tell me that’s not a sign of others briefing him, that’s a sign of Thompson’s own reading and study of the issues.

I was about to say that he was almost too conversational, that he could have used one quip or pithy summation at his views, and then, finally, at the tail end of his question on Schiavo, he summed up, “the less government, the better.”

I’m hearing that David Brody listened to the section on abortion and Thompson’s expression of federalism in this area, and has concluded, “all he needs now is to buy the gun that shoots him in the foot.” Look, if Fred Thompson isn’t pro-life enough for social conservatives, then nobody short of Mike Huckabee is. If Huckabee gets the nomination, great, I’d love to see Hillary Clinton go up against the Republican mirror-image of her husband’s rhetorical skills. But it feels like the past few months have been an escalating series of vetoes from various factions within the GOP. I’ve seen more amiable compromises on the United Nations Security Council.

Let me lay it out for every Republican primary voter. You support the guy you want, you rally for him, you write some checks, you vote in the primaries… and maybe your guy wins, maybe he loses. If the guy who beats your guy is half a loaf, you shrug your shoulders, hope your guy is his running mate, and get ready for the general. Life goes on.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections; US: Alabama; US: Tennessee; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: abortion; election; electionpresident; elections; fred; fredthompson; gop; religiousright; republicans; thompson; valuesvoters; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-359 next last
To: Gelato
I believe I already answered that question. Yes.

Well, she was not murdered. What happened to Terri can only be classified as manslaughter at most.

261 posted on 11/05/2007 10:29:53 AM PST by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Read post no. 218 to see how ridiculous this has become.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1921162/posts

262 posted on 11/05/2007 10:35:31 AM PST by Conservativegreatgrandma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
There are records of abortions being performed in China in 500 BC. China’s still around

If you want to use barbarism as the standard for "a nation," feel free.

But if you believe our nation will survive as we deny the premise on which it was founded--that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights--you are mistaken.

After our society crumbles and God removes His protection, perhaps it will resemble that beacon of perfection, China of 500 B.C.

I, for one, prefer civilized society rooted in respect for life, rather than aspire to such death-culture barbarism.

263 posted on 11/05/2007 10:41:47 AM PST by Gelato (... a liberal is a liberal is a liberal ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
We want to to everything Fred is saying, PLUS push the human life amendment

Then you have to take small steps so that peoples' hearts and minds will change on the subject, and they'll be willing to vote for the Amendment. Fred is just stating that we are not yet at that point.

264 posted on 11/05/2007 10:41:58 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: puroresu

Fred is simply saying that making HLA an iron clad requirement is the wrong way to approach the subject. If the country ever got to the point that it was willing to accept the unborn as persons, the HLA would have no trouble passing. We are many years away from that point, if we ever get there.


265 posted on 11/05/2007 10:44:15 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
See your post 234 and care to explain your logic with that one.

I'll be glad to explain it, emotiongirl. In fact, here it is in its entirety:

Just because a lot of people today are degenerates, doesn’t mean they always will be. You act as if women are forever doomed to be seen as nothing but tramps.

Abortion is an act of degeneracy and depravity. The practice of abortion degrades and demeans women, and attacks the very fabric of their womanhood. It takes the most beautiful aspect of God's creation, the unique female capacity to nurture life within them, and trashes it. It's based on the idea that women are tramps who are there for men to use whenever they feel like it, and not take any responsibility for their actions. Abortion isn't based on respect for women and their dignity, but on the idea that women are just a bunch of sleazy bimbos who can't be free human beings unless there's an abortion mill down on the corner, operated by some money grubbing pig who profiteers off women's bodies by ripping a human life out of the sanctity of their womb.

The reason men should be willing to give their life for women if necessary is because a woman's life is more valuable than a man's. But that value is lost in a society where abortion is normalized and sanctioned. Instead of being crucibles of life, women become degraded. Do you really think legal abortion leads to greater respect for women? You surely can't believe that.

Can't help it but you sounded a bit like the Taliban.

Oh, sure I did. (rolls eyes)

266 posted on 11/05/2007 10:44:16 AM PST by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

“Fred had no coherent answer on abortion.”

He had an answer. It was coherent. Perhaps you just couldn’t understand it?

Maybe get a transcript and ask for help.


267 posted on 11/05/2007 10:48:14 AM PST by getitright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

Man, you’ve really drunk the libertarian Kool-Aid! Well, I’m finished with the discussion, too. But I’ll be happy to return to it if you can cite an example of a country becoming less centralized, regulated, and socialistic after becoming socially liberal.


268 posted on 11/05/2007 10:49:06 AM PST by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: mission9
The reality is - a lackluster Republican will fail when pitted against a charismatic Democrat.

YOU may think Fred is lackluster; I don't. I think he has reasoned arguments for his positions, and can spell those out to the voters when the time comes. He's already doing that to Republicans; it's those who have rejected him from the get go, because they already had favorite candidates, who are the most vocal here. I don't confuse FR with the real world.

And if Fred is the Republican nominee with Her Heinous as the Democrat, I think Fred will wipe the floor with her. She is NOT dynamic, by any stretch of the imagination. Just having the two of them on a stage together speaking to the American people will show folks that they won't want to listen to her haranguing them for the next four years.

269 posted on 11/05/2007 10:49:11 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

Well, the HLA should stay in the platform. We have to have a goal to work towards.


270 posted on 11/05/2007 10:51:05 AM PST by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
Well, she was not murdered. What happened to Terri can only be classified as manslaughter at most.

While some in the episode may be judged by God as guilty of "manslaughter," the fact is that those complicit in helping Michael Schiavo carry out his first-degree murder acted in a premeditated fashion with the intent that she die by their actions.

The definition of murder.

Regardless, the point is that the federal government had the duty to intervene and save her life, since the governor would not.

271 posted on 11/05/2007 10:52:08 AM PST by Gelato (... a liberal is a liberal is a liberal ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

He didn’t say we weren’t at that point yet, he said he opposed that point.

But practically speaking, it doesn’t matter. We are heading down a road, and at this point EVERY republican candidate will take us further down that road than we are now. At some point we’ll need a stronger candidate to keep moving, but right now every democrat is behind us pulling us back, and every republican is forward pulling us the right direction.


272 posted on 11/05/2007 10:54:31 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

Then you must count yourself among the very liberal.


273 posted on 11/05/2007 11:01:07 AM PST by Gelato (... a liberal is a liberal is a liberal ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
I actually responded to the characterization of Fred’s statement rather then his statement. Now that I realize that he didn’t say what the poster claimed he said I can only respond with...”never mind”.
274 posted on 11/05/2007 11:25:23 AM PST by Durus ("Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." JFK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
The Republican platform is NOT the Ten Commandments. It’s a set of guidelines to direct party members and candidates.

A pity that Fred Thompson, a candidate, rejects those "guidelines."

275 posted on 11/05/2007 11:40:16 AM PST by Gelato (... a liberal is a liberal is a liberal ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
It is not only my opinion that Fred is lackluster. Any objective person watching him speak will come to that same conclusion, as many credible observers have. Have you ever seen Fred in person, on-stage, speaking in a format in which he can be compared to anyone else?
On FR conservative credentials are paramount, in the real world, charisma trumps conservatism. I don’t like this fact anymore than you do, however exhausting myself in a losing effort to retain my conservative bona fides is an exercise in futile vanity. That is why George Bush Sr. lost to Bill Clinton in 1992. Would you like to repeat that mistake again?
276 posted on 11/05/2007 11:46:24 AM PST by mission9 (Be a citizen worth living for, in a Nation worth dying for...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: mission9
That is why George Bush Sr. lost to Bill Clinton in 1992.

Despite his lackluster campaign, Bush would have easily defeated Clinton in 1992 if it had not been for Perot. Ditto for Dole in 1996.

Who's the "Ross Perot" this time around? Because that's the only way Hillary Clinton can win.

277 posted on 11/05/2007 11:49:08 AM PST by kevkrom (*** THIS SPACE FOR RENT ***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: puroresu

you call me emotiongirl and post that?

We disagree.


278 posted on 11/05/2007 11:58:48 AM PST by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
Legislation and judicial matters for areas where one person's actions directly deprive another person of their liberties are needed.

You mean like killing someone?

If you and other pro-lifers feel so strongly about this single-issue, where is your advocacy for adoption and for providing financial incentives to mothers of the unborn who contemplate abortion?

You make a lot of assumptions considering you don't know what I am an advocate of or for.

Where is the trumpeting of non-profit groups who seek to facilitate adoptions and minimize the rates of abortions? If there are such efforts and organizations in place, then why do I not see promotion of them in your tag-lines? Are you single-issue people all talk?

My biggest single issue is the 2nd amendment. Having it be illegal for women to kill their children just seems logical to me. Where your indignant, "enlightened" self-rightousness comes from is beyond me.

Why not defend the concept of liberty more and your public displays of outrage, piousness, and pitchfork wielding a little less?

Have you witnessed my supposed public displays of outrage or my "piousness"? Are you really even typing at me or some archetype you have created? Do you really think that allowing women to kill their children furthers the concept of liberty? Men and Women aren't free unless they don't have deal with the consequences of their actions? Women aren't free unless they can kill thier child because having it would be an big inconvienence? Liberty comes with responsibilty it isn't freedom from responsibilty.

How freedom to murder unborn babies became a basic tenent of liberty I'll never know. You would think they would have put that in the Federalist papers or something.
279 posted on 11/05/2007 11:59:55 AM PST by Durus ("Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." JFK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

Back to Fred. I had thought he looked sort of sickly after seeing clips on the news.

But he did well on Russert and there is something quite stable and sturdy about him. No great drama, no sense he is waffling and dodging, no packaging.

I think he is a good candidate and one who would wear well.


280 posted on 11/05/2007 12:03:15 PM PST by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-359 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson