Posted on 07/24/2010 3:47:23 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
Below is a transcript of a portion of Fred Thompson's interview with Rich Galen on his radio show July 23, 2010 in which Thompson and Galen discuss the relative merits of Gingrich and Palin, as well as the likelihood that either or both will enter the GOP.
Galen is a former press Secretary to Gingrich, and he gives the back of his hand to Sarah Palin in the interview, calling her "a really interesting personalit[y]...but not necessarily ... qualified to be the nominee or be president." Incredibly, and to his discredit, Thompson laughingly agrees:
"THOMPSON: Uh huh...
GALEN: And uh, I don’t think Sarah Palin’s ever going to be the nominee. I don’t think she believes that she can be the nominee and I’m not sure she wants to get into that. I mean, I think she’s, uh...you know...she’s doing what she does and she’s doing what she does better than anybody we’ve seen in a long time.
THOMPSON: You know she may be in the first stages of Newtism, and that is, uh, being...being a real player and going around the country making lots of money. (Laughs)
GALEN: Yeah, and ...
THOMPSON: That’s what Newt’s done for a long time and maybe he’s ready...maybe he’s ready for the next stage and maybe, uh, you’re right. Maybe Sarah’s idea is that she’ll do this for a while and then her second stage will come along a little later."
As someone who supported Fred Thompson in 2007-8 both on this forum and financially, I am bitterly disappointed that, at a minimum, he did not correct Galen's outrageous statement that she is unqualified to be either the nominee or the President. I know Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin would have defended her because I have heard them both do it. In fact, Galen would never even have made such an outrageous statement in front of them because he would know it would draw a harsh refudiation from either El Rushbo or the Great One. (In fact, I heard Levin take Ann Coulter to task one time because she trashed Thompson).
Instead, he says "uh huh" and proceeds to amplify Galen's canard by citing the lamestream media/GOP Establishment wishful thinking-spin that she is too happy making money to run. Galen is a RINO "gun for hire" and former employee of Gingrich. He is not admirable, but he is doing what he is paid for. Fred Thompson has no such excuse. Shame on him.
The transcript of the entire segment on Newt and Palin is below:
"THOMPSON: Rich Galen, the founder of Mullings.com, the wit and wisdom of Rich Galen uh, if you want to check that out. Rich, you’ve been around here a long time, uh, you worked for Newt Gingrich, you worked for Dan Quayle and, uh, GOPAC and uh...
GALEN: And Fred Thompson..
THOMPSON: Yeah, I thank you much for that. We had a lot of fun on the campaign trail. They’re coming out of the woodwork now. Do you think Newt might be serious this time...?
GALEN: Yeah I do...
THOMPSON: You know Newt pretty well and Newt, this time of the year every four years you know, uh, says, “Well, I’m thinking about it, I’m thinking about it” and then he doesn’t. What do you think?
GALEN: Yeah, I think that, uh, that this time, unless there is some..something pops up between now and next February that says “don’t do it”, he’s...I think he’s disposed to do it. So I think he’s gonna be a candidate.
THOMPSON: Is that right? How do you think he figures...is it as clear as, you know, it seems to be, and that is that Obama is very unpopular and, uh, he can’t come back like Reagan did, uh, in his second two years and be re-elected?
GALEN: And Clinton did...
THOMPSON: And Clinton did...
GALEN: Yeah, you can’t..I don’t think you can project that far out. I think what Newt is...and I’m putting words in his mouth; I haven’t discussed this with him...I have discussed the first part with him, but not this part.
THOMPSON: Uh huh...
GALEN: The, uh, I think what Newt is looking at is A) the Republican competition, first of all. I mean, it doesn’t matter whether the incumbent can be defeated. If you’re not the nominee then it doesn’t make any difference. Um, and uh, I think he looks across the landscape, uh and he sees some really interesting personalities.
THOMPSON: (Loudly laughs) You’ve been in town too long Rich, you’re becoming too diplomatic. (Loudly laughs again)
GALEN: But not necessarily people who are qualified to be the nominee or be president.
THOMPSON: Uh huh...
GALEN: And uh, I don’t think Sarah Palin’s ever going to be the nominee. I don’t think she believes that she can be the nominee and I’m not sure she wants to get into that. I mean, I think she’s, uh...you know...she’s doing what she does and she’s doing what she does better than anybody we’ve seen in a long time.
THOMPSON: You know she may be in the first stages of Newtism, and that is, uh, being...being a real player and going around the country making lots of money. (Laughs)
GALEN: Yeah, and ...
THOMPSON: That’s what Newt’s done for a long time and maybe he’s ready...maybe he’s ready for the next stage and maybe, uh, you’re right. Maybe Sarah’s idea is that she’ll do this for a while and then her second stage will come along a little later.
GALEN: There’s no, uh, I mean there’s no advantage for somebody like Sarah Palin to absolutely do, uh, you know, do a, uh, what’s the statement that we always talk about?
THOMPSON: Sherman-like...
GALEN: A Sherman statement, you know, if nominated I will not run. If elected, I will not serve. I mean, it doesn’t do any good to take herself out of the running. It makes good sense for her to be among the mentioned and, uh, you know why get in the way of that? Next Spring, sometime, she’ll decide what she wants to do and everybody will react to it then. But uh,...
THOMPSON: Uh huh...
GALEN: Yeah, I think the threshold question is I think Newt is serious about it.
I am just someone who cares about my country and wants what is best for it. That is all. I don’t think you really care.
Ask Melas what he would do if the choice came down to Sarah and the Marxist.
(I already know his answer.)
Yeah, now that just makes a load of sense. I have 4 children and 3 grandchildren, and I don't care. Sure, I can see how that logically follows. I'll spell it out for you Sparky: I want her as far away from the oval office as possible, because I do have children, because I do have grandchildren, and because I want a bright future for them.
Me? He accused me of being on Journolist just because I'm not ga-ga over Palin. And that was the best he could do. It got worse from there.
Just so everyone knows, I'll answer it for you. If it comes down to that, I'm drinking on election day.
“I not sure about an Alinski trap”
What is it now? 20 unfounded lawsuits?
Please read Alinski’s Rules for Radicals!
“but it does appear that she resigned to prepare for a possible presidential run.”
Why do you think that?
What Sarah did is turn the tables on a Democrat onslaught to destroy her in place (the governors office) and use their tactics to turn the playing field in her favor. A smart and gutsy move in my opinion. You play chess?
What is your problem with Sarah Palin ?
Why do you not want her in the oval office ?
you have never provided a solid answer.
Not only did Newt cheat on his 1st wife while she was dying of cancer, he actually told her on her hospital bed while she was undergoing treatment that he wanted a divorce. With his 2nd wife, who was considerably younger than his 1st wife, he told her on Mother’s Day, 4 days after she had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, that he wanted a divorce. He had been cheating on her with a much younger Calista.
I can’t believe Newt’s running. Right now he’s trying to sell books. His complete lack of character will do him in, and his opponents will not let voters forget.
> “Guys like Newt and Thompson and Galen are rulers wanting their time to hold the reins on the rest of us. Every time a decision needs to be made to support our values, these guys have to consider if it’s worth giving up their ruling class membership. Gov. Palin understands what freedom is and wants to throw off those reins and allow each of us a chance to roam free. She will never be accepted by the ruling class,nor will she apply.” <
.
You “Get it!”
.
I am serious.
I can read and watch your opinions of Palin everyday on DU or on MSNBC. It is the same old crap. Have you ever wondered what is wrong with you when you sound like one of those liberal nuts ?
What is the end to which we want to apply scientifically-gained knowledge of nutrition and health or anything else, for that matter? That answered, what are the means we will employ?
In the broadest terms, is the end to be a state of knowledge in which the individual is able to understand the possible consequences of his behavior and is then free to choose according to his own desires and goals, the general state of society then an amalgam of informed individual choices? Or is the end to be a state of being in which the individual’s choices are limited by others to a range calculated by them most likely to result in that state of being, the general state of society then an expression of coerced individual actions?
The track record of authoritarianism has been excellent in terms of its persistence throughout history and across cultures but has been abysmal in terms of knowledge, in terms of human rights, and in terms of technological inventiveness.
The reason for this is that authoritarianism or statism doesn’t allow the freedom for the wide range of viewpoints necessary for generating and testing hypotheses, let alone the ad hoc experimentation and innovation by individuals for their own reasons that form the basis of a developing, knowledge-based, technological society. Discovery is not allowed to take one where it will--it must be restricted to the party line.
Given the complexity of life, the narrow range of understanding possessed by any particular group is guaranteed to fall short at some point. Given the concentration of power exercised under a centralized system, the failures are guaranteed to have widespread and crippling effects. By contrast, the multiplicity of successes and failures over a wide range of scale that appear so chaotic in a state of liberty have the benefit of limiting the damage and of spreading throughout society successes which can be emulated and modified to fit local conditions.
Why do you think that?
Because it's the right thing to do when one spends full time perparing for a presidential run.
“Anyone who thinks that understanding the complexity of the modern world is a requirement for being able to control it has already lost the intellectual battle”
.
For sure!
.
I’ve answered it many times. I don’t think she has the capacity to deal with the complex issues that a president has to face. I don’t think she’s stupid, but she is largely ignorant and not up to snuff. I want the best and brightest in leadership, not the low end of average.
I knew that but I didn't know she died. She was his HS teacher, wasn't she?
Just so everyone knows, I'll answer it for you. If it comes down to that, I'm drinking on election day.
Yes indeedy, that's what you said alright.
You are just wrong. I think she would be a powerful voice on the world stage. I don’t think she would be weak in the face of Russia, China or terrorism. And I do think she will cut government spending and change things.
“Obama knows human relationships, he is a masterful con man/manipulator”
.
Nonsense!
Obama is a sub-normal, but driven individual that captured the attention of powerful people due to his pliable and nearly empty mind.
.
Is she dead? ... magritte
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.