HE'S FINALLY FREDDY FOR PRIME TIME

The New York Post ^ | December 21, 2007 | Charles Hurt

[2ndDivisionVet]

FRED THOMPSON'S disappointed fans have something to cheer about at last.

After sinking to single digits in the polls, the former "Law & Order" actor is making a comeback.

Over the past month, Thompson has walked away from several very strong performances in GOP debates. In the latest one, he held command over the entire field and won the day by refusing to play "hand shows" on stage at the direction of the moderator.

"I said, 'Nope,' and everybody pulled their hand down and looked around," Thompson later recalled.

"I just said to my buddies up there, 'How are you going to stand up to the leaders of Iran and North Korea if you can't stand up to an overbearing moderator?' "

Thompson also has quietly racked up scores of endorsements from anti-abortion chapters around the country. Those groups are some of the most effective vote herders the GOP has.

And earlier this week, he netted a surprise endorsement from Iowa Rep. Steve King, known in some GOP circles as "the Kingmaker."

After enduring months of criticism for sporadic and lackluster campaigning, Thompson is now going full-bore on a bus tour of 50 cities and towns around Iowa that his campaign says will reach some 75 percent of projected Republican caucus-goers before Jan. 3.

More than anything else, long-suffering supporters say their spirits have finally been lifted by Thompson's swagger and enthusiastic demeanor on the trail.

After someone suggested he might still be the conservative dark horse to ride to the White House, he quipped, "Saddle me up!"

[fabian]

steady Freddy at the ready!

[bray]

He is the King of the One Liner. Very Reaganesque.

Next he will be issuing a directive to wake him if there is a national emergency, even if he’s in a cabinet meeting.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[Gondring]

I have yet to see the evidence that he has always been strongly anti-illegal-immigration (in fact, on one of those threads, it was pointed out that he "saw the light" at 9/11..so which is it?), and I have yet to see the evidence that contradicts his answers on "Project Vote Smart" and the interview and debate* and survey** where he pushed for "womens' choice." Please, show me where these points are refuted. I am honestly hoping they have been, yet my support for Sen. Thompson isn't hinging on whether he's always been pro-life or has come to this position.

He has just said he doesn't remember them, and since they were from about the same timeframe, it seems reasonable that he held those positions and wasn't just giving them in error...that is, that he was against the Freedom of Choice Act, etc., but was uncomfortable on banning all abortions. Yet since then, he has become 100% pro-life. I also think that the historical record emphasizes even more that he pushed for federalism even back then.

And he has even said this issue has meant more to him since seeing the sonogram of his daughter.

So what's the crime in being glad that he's gotten more conservative on these issues?!?

*video

**"I believe that government should not interfere with individual convictions and actions in this area."

[Petronski]

He really needed to change those and now that he's done so, he's hitting them strong.

That's bullshit.

[Gondring]

Could people please just listen up when he talks?

He has some very good things to say, and if the American people are too ignorant of federalism to understand its importance, it doesn't mean he should drop the message. I do hope so much that it gets through to people.

If the US continues to vote on the basis of looks and a fast (but loose cannon) comeback, we deserve Huck or Hill, or Obama.

The public schools are making it harder and harder to elect a good candidate.

[Petronski]

1994: Fred Thompson endorsed by the National Right to Life Committee
2007: Fred Thompson endorsed by the National Right to Life Committee

[Petronski]

[Fred] definitely needs to fire some people... and perhaps a divorce.

What an asinine post.

[Gondring]

>>He really needed to change those and now that he's done so, he's hitting them strong.

>That's bullshit.

Post the whole relevant commentary. It was in reference to PERCEPTIONS that people had, and I was saying that he really needed to change them and was complimenting him on doing so.

BTW, in case peeps can't scroll upthread to read it, it was:

counterpunch>It’s going to take Fred some time to change the perceptions he’s allowed to build up.

And what criticism do I get for my observation? That there was a perception that he was not pro-life but that it has been changed. Gee...

[glmjr]

 

Giuliani  = Liberal

Has our Party gone the way of the dinosaurs?
Have we lost our values?

If we elect a man who supports gay rights and is pro-choice, we can no longer call ourselves conservative.  Have we sunk so low that we would elect a person who dresses in drag?  Marches in gay pride parades?   Giuliani is a liberal running as a conservative.  He's pro-amnesty, pro-gun control, and pro-gay.  He is intelligent and has governed New York City successfully, BUT he is not a true conservative by any measure.  Conservatives wake up?
God help us if we elect a liberal.

Giuliani in drag

 

 

Giuliani in drag

[Mensius]

The public schools are making it harder and harder to elect a good candidate

Give yourself some credit there too. You seem to be doing your level best to obfuscate.

[uglybiker]

...and the “You Fredheads are your candidate's worse enemy” posts.

Gee. And I thought it was the Paulistinians. ;-)

[grey_whiskers]

He definitely needs to fire some people... and perhaps a divorce.

Oh no you don't. His wife's MINE! ;-)

(I hope my wife didn't see me type that. ;-) )

Full Disclosure: The above was only for humorous intent.

Cheers!

...oh, and Merry Christmas.

[Gondring]

Give yourself some credit there too. You seem to be doing your level best to obfuscate.

You don't agree?

Then I'd say you haven't been in a public school lately.

[PeterPrinciple]

Do you think Freepers are being excluded from national pollers calling likely voters? Hmmmmm....

---

If most conservatives are like me, I don’t participate in polls...................

[lesser_satan]

Alright, enough of your bullsh!t. You come in these threads and claim to be a Thompson supporter and do nothing but bitch and moan about him. You are a troll and an agitator. GTFO our Fred threads you lousy troll.

[Blue Highway]

Hmmm. Fred waited to finally put in an effort between Christmas and New Year's, the time everyone stops paying attention. And then immediately after is the caucus. More bonehead "strategy" if you ask me. Fred has a bunch of fools for a campaign team. They've actually been keeping him away from the media, and keeping him in the dark. He definitely needs to fire some people... and perhaps a divorce.

You are always quick to put down Thompson, I must wonder why you come here. What is your motive? If/when Fred turns this around will you be claiming your undying support you've always had or will you concede you've been a naysayer all this time? I want honesty.

[airborne]

Considering the average Americans notoriously short memory and attention span, this strategy may very well succeed.

[Politicalmom]

Wanna' borrow this?

[Blue Highway]

I'm not sure it was ever true. I'm suspicious this was totally MSM driven, just as I'm suspicous that this so-called Huck surge wasn't MSM driven. All the MSM has to do is plant the seeds.

I agree 100% and I bet counterpunch will call you crazy for stating this. Therefor I can deduce counterpunch is:

1)One of the naive people that believe the bogus MSM polls/reports.

2)A paid shill that has a vested interest in seeing Fred lose.

3)Works for the NY Times.

4)Works for one of the liberal dying networks.

5)Is Dan Rather's caddy

6)The a$$ kissing intern for Catie Kouric.

[lesser_satan]

Thanks, I’ll have it ready next time he rears his ugly troll head.