Thursday, July 12, 2007

From Right or Left, Fred Fails on the Facts

It doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum you're on these days to see that Thompson, even though he's is/isn't a lawyer anymore, can still mince his words like a criminal defense attorney. Whether its The Right's Field or TalkLeft, blogs are picking up on the Thompson Series of Spin about his lobbying he did for a Pro-Choice group. If at first you can't deny, try, try again, or lie, or say you can't recollect, or if that doesn't work try to blame it on being a lawyer. Great, at this point my head is starting to hurt - I can't keep track of where this is going, but then, that's probably what he's going for. But too bad there are people out there good enough to give us a little perspective:

"In the July 7 LAT story, Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo firmly rejected charges that Thompson had lobbied in support of the pro-choice group. 'Fred Thompson did not lobby for this group, period,' he said

In response to a Huffington Post inquiry today [[July 11]] however, Corallo was more equivocal: 'He said he has no recollection of doing any work and does not recall lobbying anyone on it.'"

What's coming next? We can only guess, but my money is his "don't judge a lawyer by his clients" defense won't hold up - but I'm not stopping until we find out "What did the Thompson know, and when did he know it."

And here's the Thompson audio from his Hannity interview shared on the Huffington Post just for fun and so you can hear flip actually flopping:

Friday, July 6, 2007

Well, well, well

Apparently I'm famous. Jim Geraghty who writes the "Campaign Spot" at National Review, and who previously wrote the same blog when it was called "Hillary Spot" and "Kerry Spot" and "TKS" and probably will change the name again very soon, caught wind of this blog earlier in the week. Here's what he said:

June 16, some anonymous critic of Fred Thompson sets up "The Anti-Fred" at (Knox Pooley was the name of the white supremacist villain who FDT played on Wiseguy a long while back; I thought only Los Angeles Times writers were dumb enough to mix up fiction and non-fiction.)

Har. And I thought National Review writers were too smart to mix up snark as commentary. Oh well.

If the Fred Thompson campaign implodes under the weight of the new facts about his Watergate record, or even under the weight of some interesting but so far unsubstantiated charges, then Knox Pooley can just go back to being a work of fiction.

But I strongly resent the implication that I am some kind of dirty trick. This blog does have to be anonymous. I can't say who I am because I know I couldn't blog without getting in trouble. A lot of bloggers are like that. This does not mean we are sneaky or suspicious. In fact there is more truth in anonymity because we are not constrained by having to answer for the truths we tell.

Well, here is a truth: The Republicans cannot simply nominate another good ol' boy charmer in 2008 and expect to win. Especially one whose best credential is pretending to be people with actual credentials. Has the GOP become a regional party? Sometimes I wonder.

And I won't take back my comment in the first psot about the top tier being "Rudy McRomney" but the truth is I would prefer someone with the proven competency of Romney to the unproven incompetency of Fred! Thompson. But that's not an endorsement of Romney. I am not for a moment convinced he is a real conservative. But nor is Fred.

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Not So Holy Moly

On good days the Boston Glob (Globe) is a cut-rate New York Slimes (Times) but if they can save us from nominating guaranteed loser Fred Thompson, I will thank them for this eye-opening story:

The day before Senate Watergate Committee minority counsel Fred Thompson made the inquiry that launched him into the national spotlight -- asking an aide to President Nixon whether there was a White House taping system -- he telephoned Nixon's lawyer.

Thompson tipped off the White House that the committee knew about the taping system and would be making the information public. In his all-but-forgotten Watergate memoir, "At That Point in Time," Thompson said he acted with "no authority" in divulging the committee's knowledge of the tapes, which provided the evidence that led to Nixon's resignation. It was one of many Thompson leaks to the Nixon team, according to a former investigator for Democrats on the committee, Scott Armstrong , who remains upset at Thompson's actions.

"Thompson was a mole for the White House," Armstrong said in an interview. "Fred was working hammer and tong to defeat the investigation of finding out what happened to authorize Watergate and find out what the role of the president was."

Nixon! Richard "We Are All Keynsians Now" Nixon! The man wasn't even a conservative. Not hardly. Remember the guaranteed income? That was Nixon's too. (It took a Democrat, Pat Moynihan, to stop that)

I am sure there are many more stories like this out there. And this one just came from Thompson's own book. What else is there that will take a big more digging? The sooner the better, please.

Friday, June 29, 2007

Three Reasons

I'm not sure I agree with this young man's mustache, but I do agree with some of these points about the worst decision the GOP could make this year:

I'm not necessarily a Ron Paul fan, myself. He says lots that makes sense, and he's the only Republican who seems to understand the folly of this war. Maybe Gilmore. But Thompson, boy, things are just going swimmingly, aren't they? Hey, maybe if he says it in that baritone enough times it really will be true. Or maybe he'll just have to start another war.

Monday, June 25, 2007

Countdown to Implosion

If the press is to be believed, then Fred Thompson is only days from making a huge embarrassment of himself, and we already know that so many once enamored with GWB will now be swinging for this particular fence, just because it's white-picket. But how well is it built?

I turn you over to Eunomia, who points out that Fred! just might be the luckiest man alive, next to Lou Gehrig:

Fred Thompson got out while the getting was good, before the full onslaught of the Bush Era, and so memories of his time in the Senate are a little more blurry and bound to be suffused with warm, nostalgic feelings for the good old days when real conservatives supposedly roamed the halls of the Senate. This obviously makes no sense. The reality is that Frist more naturally fills the “conservative gap” in the GOP presidential field than does Fred, but was so badly compromised by his time running the Senate under Bush and the subsequent loss of the Senate in ‘06 that he ceased to be viable. Thompson, had he remained in the Senate, would be in the exact same position politically. It is only because he happened to separate himself from the Senate GOP before it went careening to its doom that anyone takes him at all seriously. In terms of substance, he is actually a less compelling figure for conservatives in terms of his policy views than Bill Frist.

Maybe Fred Thompson is something the right just has to work out of its system. Then again, it took 6+ years to work past the "Bush" stage. If conservatism is going to move forward it can't go back to this good ol' boy southerner never meanin' no harm. The Republican party will lose with a retread, and that's just what Fred Thompson is.

Saturday, June 16, 2007

Fred Thompson is dangerous

Maybe he won't run. But he probably will, and if necessary, this blog will become more active in leading the fight against this unproven candidate, lackluster senator, mediocre actor, armchair neocon, basset hound-looking, trophy wife-marrying, abortion rights flip-flopping loser in waiting.

This blog comes from an old-line conservative perspective, but our friends on the Left may also contribute meaningfully. This blog is not aligned with any other candidate, but our position is he is Rudy McRomney with an IMDB entry. Think about it.

Until the time becomes necessary to lead the charge, please see these links:
Fred Thompson is not the ticket back to the White House. He's a ticket to irrelevance.