Who was the reporter? Name her!
Well said, Fred.
That “fire in the belly” thing scares the crap out of me.
Bill Clinton got it when he shook hands with Pres. Kennedy at the age of 16. **shiver**
Fred’s gonna make a Great President. He’s not a vain stomper. He’s got the right stuff.
I love articles like this. Fred took the high road, quoted what he actually said and didn’t name the ‘journalist’ in question. Hope she chokes on it.
We need a President whom will confront the MSM!
FRED!
The Electoral College elected Washington unanimously in 1789... Washington took the oath of office as the first President under the Constitution for the United States of America on April 30, 1789 at Federal Hall in New York City although, at first, he had not wanted the position.Sound like anybody we know?... Washington, already wealthy, declined the salary, since he valued his image as a selfless public servant. At the urging of Congress, however, he ultimately accepted the payment. A dangerous precedent could have been set otherwise, as the founding fathers wanted future presidents to come from a large pool of potential candidates - not just those citizens that could afford to do the work for free.
Washington attended carefully to the pomp and ceremony of office, making sure that the titles and trappings were suitably republican and never emulated European royal courts. To that end, he preferred the title "Mr. President" to the more majestic names suggested.
... Washington reluctantly served a second term as president. He refused to run for a third, establishing the customary policy of a maximum of two terms for a president which later became law by the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.
I'm not saying that Fred is George Washington any more than that he is Ronald Reagan. I'm just saying, modesty is an appropriate value in a President -- over-ambition sucks.
I love straight talkers! The one thing that shows that he’s a fiscally conservative is when he started his campaign. Why waste all that money? The other players seem to want the power, I want someone that will lead and lead with principle. I don’t care how nice their hair looks, how many children they have, or their religion.
I hope he gets this one out to the people in Iowa.
Needless to say, not just that woman reporter but the whole MSM pulled this lie out of their rear ends right before the vote takes place.
The truth was there to see it the instant this lie was published. You just had to look at the transcript of Fred’s reply. But the MSM presumed that the truth wouldn’t get out until too late, and at the rate they are going now, they could care less if they were caught in another lie as long as it did the job.
Fake but effective might be their new motto.
Supporters of other candidates wasted no time trying to post the misinformation on this site.
Sound bites are almost always wrong. When the sound bite is read in full context; the meaning is almost always different.
The next 4 days, all kinds of garbage will be flying around.
He is running because he has pretty dyed hair!
LOL
That is what he said. The reporter was correct.
If this was a one-time slip, it could be overlooked, but he has been a long pattern of expressing this over and over again in his actions and words.
I listened to the press conference on the radio. He was speaking at around 50 words a second ('uhhh's don't count) and giving bad answers all around.
He compounded it today with what he said on Fox News in what sounded like a concession speech (he wants to spend more time with his grand kids).
Snotty lookin ain’t she.
Way back at the beginning, before anyone said anything about him, I was wishing Fred Thompson would get in the race. He doesn't seem to me to be someone who has been lusting for power since his earliest years. That's a principal fault of Clinton, Kerry, and Gore. The Presidency defines their being. It was all about them.
I want someone who takes on the mantle reluctantly but who also will be able to make clear for people what the United States was supposed to be about: a land of liberty where the federal government protects the people from foreign enemies and the Constitution protects the people from the federal government, leaving everything else up to the ingenuity, hard work, and voluntary associations of the citizenry.
We have now reached a place where a major party claims there really is no foreign enemy that is not of our own making and that the federal government has to protect the individual from himself. They appear to believe that people will truly be free when the federal government has defined in law the specifics of how every aspect of everyone's life should be and has constructed an enforcement apparatus to make it happen.
The thought that there could be hundreds of millions living whose future rests completely upon their own shoulders and how they choose to provide for themselves and their families either scares or outrages them, depending on whether they believe those people to be either misguided or arrogant. Therefore, they believe that the federal government, with themselves in the driver's seat, should help plan for the fools who can't do it themselves or put in their places the reckless ones who think they can.
They also appear to believe that anyone who opposes them, therefore, are the enemies of the people, and, because they have cast themselves as the voice of the people, enemies of themselves. You're either with them or you're an evil to be extirpated.
How in the world is this any different from the totalist politics of the Nazis or communists?
When I was in high school I read Jefferson's suggestion that a bloody rebellion every so often would be a good thing for the nation. My idea then was that he was saying, "Hey, if this whole Constitutional government idea we came up with doesn't work out, just toss it aside and try something else." I realize now, and I wish that more people did, that he meant, "If a system of government grows up that violates this Constitution and Declaration of Independence and starts to eat up the people's substance and to oppress the people, get rid of it, even if you have to use bloody force the same way we did against King George. You'll be doing it for the same reason. The federal government is not the United States. It's a means to an end and that end is liberty in peace. If the existing one can no longer serve as that means, scrap it and reconstitutionalize."
I'm hoping that Fred will be able to restore a little clarity to the historical perspective. For all those people in the past who yearned to be free, there are even more now, especially since the degree of oppression in the modern world far exceeds anything during the centuries that led to the American Revolution.
http://www.usatoday.com/community/profile.htm?UID=295801923a01d0e4
Looks like she's getting a pasting under 'My Messages'
Glad to see Fred fighting back. Fire, indeed!
Good response, Mr. Thompson.
"Listen to me now and hear me later - there is no fire in that belly! I heard it from the American media..."