CNN

lay off the fart bag fred you look silly trying to act like a tough guy....personaly you lost last week – it will take you a month to figure it out though.

all i can say is i just saw the romney add with him running and it dawned on me the freddie would not have made it around the curve lol i think its claer romney is still the run to beat he is the one workin the hardest!

Come check out my forum

<a href="http://www.fredthompsonforum.com/"Fred Thompson Forum for Neoconservatives

Thompson won't win, the only thing he has in common with Reagan is that they were both actors. Thompson doesn't have the charisma of Reagan, and he knows it.

I love this story and where Fred Thompson says that we MUST prevail in Iraq and face the challenges beyond...

While he didn't name the challenges beyond...any one knows that after Iraq we need to deal with Iran, Syria, and Venezuela to make the world safe for democracy!

GO FRED GO!

Discuss Fred Thompson at the BEST Fred Forum on the net!

Fred Thompson Forum

Take your ass back to Law and Order. The only roll you had there was political one liners.

Go Fred Go! What candidate wouldn't trade places with him? He's been rising in the polls for 6 months without officially entering the race. Saw him speak at a function in Chicago a few months ago (wasn't covered by the media) and he actually has a maverick side to him that doesn't buy into traditional solutions from Repubs or Dems.

I guess he has nothing better to do.

What a joke!

Too those who think Sen. Thompson is a good choice for president, then think again. Why? Because the man has lymphoma, mostly likey one that isn't curable. What we should be asking him, even in this early of a stage is, "Who are you going to pick as Vice-President?" since it will be that person most likely finishing Thompson's term.

To be a responsible voter you need to look beyond the brief media soundbytes and the persona of the candidates on television and actually look at the platforms of the candidates in quetion. Did anyone realize when they were voting for Presindent Bush that they were ushering in an administration full of neo-cons with potentially dramatic implications for our foreign policy? One might have seen it coming if one were to have looked at his platform prior to the election. The devil is in the details, and what you see in the media tells you perhaps 1 percent of what you need to know before making an informed vote in the general election. To understand how a Fred Thompson administration might function, look for that information as it becomes available.

Well its about time Thompson started running a real campaign instead of a "shadow" campaign to avoid campaign finance laws. But now that he is here it looks as if he just wants to take on the "role" of Reagan like its some acting job. We don't need another Reagan. We need someone with more skill than that. Reagan outspent the Russians and caused them to give up the arms race leaving us with a large deficit to pass on to the next guy. Right now with already have a large deficit and nothing to show for it.

What we need is a real problem solver, not another actor. Bush was a puppet for the neo-cons. None of the people on the Republican roster have the skills we need to resolve this crisis Bush has caused.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter

Dear anonymous,

Your defense of Ombama proves the entire case that I was making. You say that “if I had only read is specific ideas and platforms then I would change my mind.” Yet though proof you offer that Obama has more to say than meaningless empty sound bytes is “he has many great, specific ideas for change”

Well I am still waiting here what real changes he would actually make.
Like I said before all Obama has to offer is:

Obama: I have no experience what so ever, but I can say the phrase “I am for change” a hundred times without offering any hint to what changes I would make. (Unless of course if you think changing the color of the president’s skin is the sole type of change that can solve every problem form terrorism, Iraq, to health care, to social security failure, to poverty and the economy.)
Truth

People in the political discussions fall back on name calling because it provokes a reaction. It has nothing to do with a point.

Back to the subject at hand...Fred T., who cares?

when people can't support their position on an issue, they fall back on name-calling or changing the subject.

When people don't have a point, they fall back on two things:

1. name-calling

2. changing the subject

Fred who?........yawn.

I really hope a democrat gets office. I really hope that this person pulls out of Iraq soon. Then when the country falls and the terrorist take over the oil and our economy flops you idiots will see what we have been trying to tell you. Bush didn’t go to war by himself. Both parties saw the intel reports and both parties agreed to go to war. But I guess even then you’ll still want to blame Bush. I can’t believe you people, just pathetic!

Now lets see if this gets posted, Pro Bush post seem to get LOST.

Truth,

Maybe if you actually took a few minutes to research Obama and his specific ideas and platforms, you'd realize that he has many great, specific ideas for change...and that he isn't just using an empty, meaningless sound byte.

You talk about "truth" but it's pretty obvious that your opinions on Obama (as well as many of the other candidates) are purely formed by article headlines...or sound bytes or quotes that the media uses. If you are so concerned about the truth, take a little time to actually research the candidates and find out what their more detailed policies and dialogue consists of...rather than just base your opinions off of one-liner sound bytes and quotes that the media decides to use.

Truth,

Maybe if you actually took a few minutes to research Obama and his specific ideas and platforms, you'd realize that he has many great, specific ideas for change...and that he isn't just using an empty, meaningless sound byte.

You talk about "truth" but it's pretty obvious that your opinions on Obama (as well as many of the other candidates) are purely formed by article headlines...or sound bytes or quotes that the media uses. If you are so concerned about the truth, take a little time to actually research the candidates and find out what their more detailed policies and dialogue consists of...rather than just base your opinions off of one-liner sound bytes and quotes that the media decides to use.

WOW ! He's 6'6"? All i can say is I picture him standing next to Vladimir Putin or that little French guy Sarkozy. That should be good for a few votes.

The only people in Tennessee who take Thompson seriously are far Right wackos who still go around telling anyone who will listen that the Clintons' friend Vince Foster didn't kill himself, Hilray did it.

How about supersized? Like his fat gut! He's disgusting to look at.

It’s funny how the two most politicians most despised by the media are the only ones who are offering any ideas or making any attempt to figure out the truth for our it’s own sake.

Gingrich and Ron Paul are the only two political figures who have contributed in even the slightest meaningful way to the debate over what direction we need to take country and what the solutions are for getting there.

Here is what the rest have offered so far:

Fred Thompson:
Regan was actor and so I am. While Regan helped build and lead a country wide conservative movement before wining the presidency, I have always been the first out the door when 5:00 rolls around and its time go home after a long day of doing nothing in Senate. I have played a number of crooked politicians on TV; you should see me in distinguished gentleman with Eddie Murphy. If elected to the presidency I promise to play the part of that corrupt politician better than anyone else.

Mitt Romney: I am tall, I have a great smile, and most importantly I have the best hair of any politician in decades. Other than that I really don’t have much to offer. Though I am fully capable of reciting meaningless platitudes like “I am for success” and the ever powerful “I will support learning.” However I am a member of a cult, but even so, right wing religious types will still like me because my cult is very anti gay and anti abortion.

Rudy Giuliani: I am running for the republican nomination even though I favor many socialist big government solutions for governing. Republicans will still vote for me though because I am a hard core patriotic nationalist that promises mercilessly hammer down on anyone perceived to be criminal and I will never hesitate to inject our military might around the world.

That reminds me, who was that guy again who ran for about 50 years ago. At the time the country was bitterly divided between the hard core communists on the left and ultra conservatives on the right. The guy won the nomination by scooping up all the votes from folks in the middle that happened to like his socialist ideas but also admired his strong nationalist willingness to fight and never bow down to the soviets like many on the left were doing. If I remember correctly now, his political party was called the Nationalist Socialist Party, yep that was it. Though I guess it was more popularly know by its acronym the Nazis. Oh yea hitler, how could I forget.

Hillary: vote for me because my husband was president once. (Even though he has not been real husband for 20 years and I hardly know the man. Monica or Jenifer flowers may have had more luck picking up his presidential traits)

Obama: I have no experience what so ever, but I can say the phrase “I am for change” a hundred times without offering any hint to what changes I would make. (Unless of course if you think changing the color of the president’s skin is the sole type of change that can solve every problem form terrorism, Iraq, to health care, to social security failure, to poverty and the economy.)

The federal Government of the United States of America was created to insure safety and stability between other world nations of great power and between its own republican States.

The State governments were created to control the lifestyles and authorized to select the government method for its people allowing those of different faith, culture, and reason a place to seek comfort or leave in peace.

The legislative body was: what is now referred to as: the general electorate. Its purpose was to funnel the needs, wants, desires, innovations, inventions, topics, requirements, et cetera (and also) of the people in the legislature to the federal government so creating from the situation an option for possible State sponsorship or federal enactment. Being a member of the legislature did not mean one had to belong to a local board or committee; it was expected of all those literate and over the age of twenty-five. Females fought for involvement in this legislature, they should have just petitioned a topic and accepted they were part already.

In a democracy the people are allied to control the way in which government controls them, while the presidential role was that of a business leader. The president was to enact such bills or policies found presented from the Senate or Congress and to fulfill and create trade with other nations, and even in principle enact policies found abroad in other nations.

The Unites States started with the understanding that a united fleet was required to expand and protect trade to colonial and other world national powers to ensure its survival, and also, that enhancing control of trade by a government power would benefits its people directly by supplying them with work and foreign goods.

-

The presidential occupation is an office held by a person who can understand and control a massive corporation, yet the president is bound to what the people have petitioned in mass. While it is a presidential privilege that the president can use the power of the political position to negotiate his own ideas and ideologies before congress or even draft and enter a bill into action by an act of self will; it is not expected of the president to create these bills without the want or perceived need of the people.

This is a democracy so elect a business leader and direct the president’s actions yourselves as it is your right of citizenship. Elect a president who understands apportionment and the ideals behind an electorate legislative body.

Who's this guy?

Oy! ONE DAY into his campaign, and already Thompson faces fund raising questions:

http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/09/07/with-donors-like-these/

Okay, ONE DAY as an official candidate, and Fred Thompson already has a fund raising scandal to answer for. Hooray for politics:

http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/09/07/with-donors-like-these/

How can we support a candidate who clearly supports the continuation of the war and thus the continuation of the filling of rich republican pockets? Thompson has nothing new to say in the least to the American public. He talks tough on Terrorism – most of which we are spawning now with the war in Iraq.

Fred is a flop. He should have declared on July 4. Mr. Thompson, YOU LOSE. Nobody is taking him seriously anymore. Nor should they, does he really think the country wants another Bushite presidency? Gimme a break!