Archive for Sunday, June 10, 2007

Anti-Washington

June 10, 2007

Advertisement

To the editor:

There is an easy road to the White House for former Sen. Fred Thompson if he chooses to run.

I say this as a registered Democrat: All he needs to do is run against Washington, D.C., against both parties and everything they have and haven't done these last seven years.

Because he left office voluntarily, he can run as an outsider and beat everyone who has declared for the office.

He doesn't even have to be for anything in particular. All he needs to do is run against both parties and he will win.

The average voter is disgusted with Washington in general. What they want most is to be able to vote against Washington in general.

E.G. Hickam,

Lawrence

Comments

Ragingbear 8 years, 1 month ago

If he left office early, then he's a flip-flopper. If he is democrat but doesn't follow all the tenets of the DNC, then he's wishy washy. If he's not focused on one set of things, then he's just floating. These are terms both sides will throw around. Add to that that I have no real idea who this guy is, other than some senator, who is just as bad as the rest of them.

KS 8 years ago

Ragingbear - If you are going to comment on this stuff, do some homework first and stop showing your intelligence level.

temperance 8 years ago

This letter made me laugh out load. Thompson is an "outsider?" He's a barely competent character actor with an undistinguished senate record and a long history as a lobbyist. According to a 1996 Washington Monthly article he's "another beltway bubba" who was "a high-paid Washington lobbyist for both foreign and domestic interests." When he wasn't in Hollywood he was in DC yeah, some "outsider." http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/archives/9612.cottle.html

The only thing that makes Thompson a tough outsider is that he play-acts one on TV. That's it folks.

He's got stunningly unoriginal foreign policy ideas. Here's this from Fox News Sunday last month: CHRIS WALLACE: What would you do now in Iraq? THOMPSON: I would do essentially what the president's doing. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258222,00.html

Here's Thompson conflating AQ/Saddam a la Cheney, and expressing the urgent need to bomb Uruguay: Thompson: Can we afford to appease Saddam, kick the can down the road? Thank goodness we have a president with the courage to protect our country. And when people ask what has Saddam done to us, I ask, what had the 9/11 hijackers done to us -- before 9/11? . . . THOMPSON: I think we should invade and bomb Uruguay. QUESTION: What has Uruguay done to us? THOMPSON: When people ask what has Uruguay done to us, I ask, what had the 9/11 hijackers done to us -- before 9/11? http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0303/01/smn.10.html

So, he's not an outsider & he has a Bush-Ultra foreign policy. What on earth makes you think he's qualified to be president?

Why are conservatives drawn to these empty symbols of masculinity? The psychology of modern conservatives is fascinating. It's so obvious that they're enamored by these Big Daddy archetypes, but why? They're projecting their own insecurities? Supporting these dim-witted, yet bullying, figures makes them feel better about all the times he-men kicked sand in their faces at the beach? So sad . . .

temperance 8 years ago

I meant to start with ". . . made me laugh out loud." It's now occurring to me that there's a reason to use "LOL."

Richard Heckler 8 years ago

Fred Thompson is a corporate america special interest funding favorite if you are paying attention to his influx of dollars recently. Now he wants back on big government super retirement plans. These guys don't change anything just warmed over legislation nothing new or creative.

The greatest threat to universal health care is the healthcare insurors and their margin of profit and speak the loudest against it. Then comes those politicians(greater majority) on their special interest campaign money payroll who weasel around the issue. Yet most industrialized nations have it you know the ones taking american jobs away courtesy of corporate america and special interest campaign money.

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/3363/1/159

Want green collar jobs,alternative energy, jobs back to america and healthcare for all? Fire 99% of all elected officials!

Why is it Americans cannot elect a representative instead of a name from corporate america? What is the romance? Why do americans fall over themselves for political media stars and fat cats? Have we not learned that these people NEVER make things better they just continue the corporate welfare and watch american jobs go abroad. It really stinks!

The news media and corporate america do NOT need to decide who OUR candidates should be for local,state or federal level representation.

The media takes in a ton of cash during our election periods and play a huge role in selecting candidates for all sides of the aisle. Then THEY decide who should participate in televised debates as if no one else matters to the voters. Yes they also seem to decide which issues are important to voters and many times miss the mark. The media has become a large part of the special interest takeover of our process as if they know what is best for all of us. Voters support this takeover by voting for those candidates who also spend the most money and the question is why?

Campaigns go too long,spend way too much money and do not necessarily provide the best available. It is up to us to stop the nonsense at the voting booths on the 2008 ballot. Not voting sends the wrong message and changes nothing.

Lets's demand a new system and vote in Fair Vote America : http://www.fairvote.org/irv/ Demand a change on the 2008 ballot.

The big money candidates are more beholden than ever to corporate special interests due to the very long nature of campaigns. How do they have time to do the job they were elected to do? We need public financing of campaigns. Citizens cannot afford special interest money campaigns for it is the citizens that get left out.

http://www.publicampaign.org/

Who would be against Public Funding? The special interest money providers and their bought and paid for politicians!

Jamesaust 8 years ago

Wait until the public takes a gander at his wife (not his first) who is younger than his own daughter. While she's honestly a smart cookie, its not her fault she looks like a waitress at Hooters. This isn't France and American voters will not consider his cradle-robbing to be a virtue. Do we really want insight into Thompson's character (or lack thereof), leaving his wife of 30 years - the one who worked to put him through law school - so that he could "cat around" Washington, self-admittedly getting "caught" by the various whores who chased him? Didn't we just finish with a serial philanderer last time?

"Outsider"? Thompson is the very definition of a government insider. His entire adult life is built around DC. Thompson's insider life begins on the Watergate Committee and continues right on up to his cozying up to that, now, convicted perjurer/felon, "Scooter" Libby. (Let Fred explain why the rule of law requires pardoning this well-documented liar.)

Besides, after the experience with a certain Texas outsider, why would anyone want a (genuine) outsider anyway. Isn't outsider just a Anglicized word for naif?

Ragingbear 8 years ago

KS, read what I wrote. Or go back to school and learn how to read. Apparently you don't have the slightest clue as to what I wrote.

mick 8 years ago

I'm not writing to alarm anyone but I wonder- there may not BE an election next year. On May 9 Bush signed a Presidential Directive which gives him "unitary executive" authority in the case of a "catastrophic emergency." This authority would suspend the Legislative and Judicial branches and could even be used to take over private companies. Since noting the signing of this thing the media has not reported a word on it. I don't trust the media, I don't trust our national leaders and I think that our having a "catastrophic emergency" is extremely likely.

Ragingbear 8 years ago

That may be true Mick. I wouldn't be surprised if we had a sudden terroristic surge in 9-11 style attacks right around election season, giving Darth Cheney absolute domination.

temperance 8 years ago

Thompson is also a member of the Advisory Board of the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Trust. He's also fond of the lie that Plame was not a covert agent: http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=ZDA3ODFkNTA4NDM3YWYzMzc0NWQ1NjY4ZjhkZjkwNDI

Jamesaust: "Wait until the public takes a gander at his wife." But . . . but according to the esteemed American Spectator, he's "pro-traditional-marriage."
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11177 "Pro traditional marriage!" Can you believe it? I think old men cavorting with the Barely Legal might be a "tradition" in certain circles, but I'm not sure that's what they mean.

Ragingbear 8 years ago

Take a lesson from Richard Pryor in his movie "Brewster's Millions" and vote for "None of the Above".

Godot 8 years ago

Actually, Libby was convicted of lying about someting that had nothing to do with outing Valerie Plame. Fitzgerald did not bring any charges that had anything, whatsoever, to do with anyone "outing" Plame, least of all Cheney and Rove. Plame could not have been outed, because was not under cover, and had not been for five years, at the time that Novak tagged her as the person who had sent her own political hack husband to Niger to determine whether the claim that Saddam was attempting to acquire yellow cake, and it was her political hack husband who lied to Congress about his findings.

The person who "outed" Plame was Richard Armitage, who was in the anti-Bush camp at the State Department. Armitage admitted this to Fitzgerald early on in the investigation, and Fitzgerald granted him immunity from prosecution. Then Fitzgerald continued his investigation, knowing that he was looking for something that did not happen, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars in a politically motivated fishing expedition that resulted in catching someone in a lie, not about the original made-up crime, but about process.

Jamesaust 8 years ago

"Fitzgerald continued his investigation, knowing that he was looking for something that did not happen, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars in a politically motivated fishing expedition that resulted in catching someone in a lie...."

And he did, didn't he? A high-placed individual in the inner-most ring of political power. One of the people we (you know, "we" as in "the people") have the most right to expect to tell the truth.

End of discussion on that topic.

drewdun 8 years ago

Also, Thompson was apparently one of the laziest congresscritters in Washington...

""I've been friendly with Thompson for years," Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund said on The Journal Editorial Report. In the Senate, Fund said, Thompson "had a reputation for being a little lazy."

And this from an article at that noted liberal website......

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/29/133920.shtml?s=al&promo_code=34AB-1

Also this...

"With eight years in the Senate, his legislative record was thin. Says a former adviser: "While the Senate is filled with ambitious men who aren't in a rush to get home at night, Senator Thompson kept a lean formal schedule, did the bare minimum to get by and then hightailed [it] to the Prime Rib or the Capital Grille."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1624881,00.html

Is this really the kind of guy we want in charge of our nation?

BTW, the Republican field for 2008 is so incredibly, undeniably weak that the Dems could run even Hillary and probably win. Not that I want her to win the nomination, just saying. And if Thompson is the only savior the GOP has waiting in the wings, man, the cupboard is totally bare over there.

Oracle_of_Rhode 8 years ago

Yeah right, Thompson should run against Washington and Hollywood, the two places he's spent the last forty years working as an insider.

Give me a break.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.