Monday, May 21, 2007
News The right said Fred
Posted by Andisheh Nouraee on Mon, May 21, 2007 at 1:39 PM
On Friday afternoon, I stopped by a bar adjacent to the Gwinnett Civic Center, site of last weekend's state GOP convention. I noticed a large number of red "Draft Fred Thompson" stickers affixed to bar-goer shirts.
I asked Erick Erickson of Peach Pundit, who was at the bar, too, whether the ubiquity of Thompson stickers at the bar was an anomaly, or representative of wider Georgia GOP sentiments. He says he thought it indicated the latter.
He was evidently right.
In a straw poll conducted at the convention, the former senator and star of Curly Sue garnered 44 percent of the vote. Coming in a distant second was Newt Gingrich, with 18 percent. Rudy Giuliani was third with 15 percent.
Assuming the poll is indeed indicative of state GOP sentiment, it seems Georgia Republicans simply aren't very fond of GOP front-runners Giuliani, McCain and Romney.
Comments (13)
Showing 1-13 of 13
Fred Thompson the average southern republican's wet dream: southern, conservative, and an actor: Reagan with an accent. The republicans try to define candidates like Obama and Edwards as style over substance, then they elect actors. Go figure.
like
dislike
If you're a Democrat, you have to be thinking "the more the merrier" when it comes to Fred Thompson's flavor-of-the-week appeal...
Only one actor was elected, not actors (pl) and he was a union president before becoming Governor of California (#7 largest economy in the world). No political substance there, huh?. Thompson has more government experience than Obama and Edwards combined. He is far more experienced and qualified than Hillary. Let's compare the records, shall we? Fred Thompson; 1973 - 1974 Co-Chief Counsel in the Watergate Investigation. Author of the famous "what did the President know and when did he know it" question asked by Howard Baker. Thompson asked Butterfield the question about listening devices in the Oval Office. 1977 - Attorney prosecuting a Parole Board case that brought down TN Governor. 1978 - 1992 lobbyist, registered in 1991 as a "registered foreign agent" due to lobbying for international interests 1994 - elected to finish Gore's term 1996 - re-elected 1997 - 2001 Chairman of Council for Governmental Affairs 2002 - did not run for re-election 2005 - Successfully guided John Roberts Supreme Court nomination 2005 - chair of the International Security Advisory Board Yep no substance there, just style. Hillary Clinton; 1973 - staff advisor on Watergate to House Judiciary Committee 1978 - 1990 First Lady of Arkansas 1993 - 2000 First Lady 2000 - 2007 US Senator Barack Obama 1997 - 2004 Illinois State Senator 2004 - 2007 US Senator John Edwards 1998 US Senator - one term, served on Judiciary and Intelligence committees 1999 deposed Monica Lewinsky and Vernon Jordan during Clinton impeachment Wow, you're right Thompson is all style next to those three giants of American politics. Keep on comparing Republican candidates like Rudy, McCain and Romney etc to Clinton, Edwards, Obama, etc and you will find that the Dems are all about how someone looks or sounds, NOT what they have actually accomplished in life. Does it bother any of the Dems that their most experienced (by far) Presidential candidate, being the feminist that she is, gained most of her political experience through her husbands accomplishments, not her own?
Dale, You break down Thompson's career like so: 1994 - elected to finish Gore’s term 1996 - re-elected But you break down Clinton's equally long Senate career like so: 2000 - 2007 You mention Thompson's career as a lobbyist(!!) as a important credential, but ignore Edwards' long legal career. I encourage you to separately list all of Thompson's movies, and seasons of Law and Order separately. You can get an even longer resume! Maybe asterisk the emmy nominated seasons!! Throw in the tough guy quotes from Diehard!!! You're VERY serious. I'm impressed by how unsuperficial you are.
Dale: Jim V. said "elect actors." He didn't qualify that to say "president." Arnold comes to mind. His resume? Peddling the value-less Hollywood violence that Republicans claim liberals are behind. Clint Eastwood. And that guy who was on Love Boat and ended up as congressman from Iowa. I suppose Ben "Cooter" Jones, who represented DeKalb County in Congress in the '80s, was elected on the Dem side.
The problem is getting worse. Presidential candidate Rep. Tom Tancredo got solid applause last week during the S.C. debate when he evoked '24' character Jack Bauer. Republican voters have graduated from actors to fictional characters. Harry Potter for President!
Jim V. I broke it down because I felt that the odd term length would neeed explaining. Why is Thompson a southern Republicans wet dream, all the other Rep actors were from Califirnia and Iowa. Or was that a slam at southerners? If so, it must be southern Dems, since they were the ones who elected "Cooter". Edwards law career is not directly government related as is Thompsons lobbying. Ambulance chasing trial lawyer does not equal registered foreign agent when it comes to government experience. Substance and experience was the discussion, corrrect? I appreciate your sarcasm re: breaking down Thompsons TV career...sorry I thought I was resonding to a serious poltiical comment and could expect a serious reply. My mistake.....I suppose I could break down the great accomplishments of the three Dem candidates.....oh wait, I already did that..... I responded to an ignorant statement about Republicans and "style over substance" compared to Democrats and this is the response? You only validate my point about liberal vs. not-liberal when it comes to style over substance. By dismissing a candidate, and their supporters, because the candidate is an actor, aren't you placing style over substance, as well? Ken - correct Jim V didn't limit his comment to President, but, since the conversation involved only Presidential candidates, I responded to that office. Eastwood was a mayor of a rinky dink artist colony in California and, although a registered Republican since 1951, calls himself a Libertarian. Since it was in Monterey, I doubt he was elected by conservative Republicans. HAHA Although you probably used him only as an example of an actor being elected, he is also very qualified, though, like Obama and Edwards, not for the Presidency. "Gopher" Gandy was a speech writer for a Congressman before winning four terms in Congress. During that time, in a Democratically controlled House, he served on committees for House Ways and Means, Agriculture, Standards of Official Conduct and Education and the Workforce. He won eight "Watchdog of the Treasury" awards. Even he is more qualified than Obama and Edwards. From what I have seen, most of the Republican actors elected (Reagan, Eastwood, Gandy and Thomspon) are very effective politicians. Perhaps we should elect more of them?
Barack "Mr Substance" Obama, asked to name three countryies that are US allies in the world....did he say UK? Australia? nope, he gave the EU. What is wrong with thatanswer? Besides the E is not a country and several members are actively anti-US? the depth is amazing.
In this voter's opinion, Obama and Thompson are equals. Baritones mistaken for presidents. That said, do tell which EU members are "actively anti-US".
Dale: First of all, I appreciate you putting so much research and effort into your dissertation on "GOP Actors as Politicians: How Best to Rationalize that They Were Actually Qualified for the Job." Your faculty committee would again like to point out the you left out the most obvious example (Arnold), who simply doesn't have the civic background you rationalized around for Eastwood, Thompson and Gandy. It should also be noted that your inflated resume of Thompson leaves out the fact that he's left a trail of folks (in the Senate particularly) who said he was unengaged and just plain lazy, which also speaks to Jim V.'s style-over-substance point. At the risk of mispeaking for Jim V., he didn't say actors weren't qualified -- just that Republicans do seem to have a fascination with them (especially when you consider their outrage at Hollywood's "values") and should be wary of throwing stones with claims that Dems aren't qualified. I think the GOP's odd penchant for actors is tied to a conservative romance for ostalgic myth. That doesn't mean all those folks will make bad leaders. But the danger is that getting swept away in fantay tends to simplify the world and has led our nation down some dangerous and self-destructive paths. Let's face it: In the real world, George W. Bush was a miserable failure (he drove two oil companies into the ground and was the family black sheep/drunk), but he had some temporary success as a politician because he PLAYED the part. The GOP nominated him based on the fantasy he evoked -- "compassionate conservative," just an ordinary cowpoke (never mind that he was born in Mass. and went to Andover prep), and the nation elected him ... at least, once. But reality has caught up with him. By any reasonable accounting, he's been a miserable failure as president. The gig is up. That's utterly and totally unsurprising — unless you, like many people, felt the role he was playing was actually the same thing as actual leadership. All that said, I agree that Obama and particularly Edwards have thin resumes for the presidency. JFK had a thin resume, but he had 12 years in Congress before the presidency and had been groomed for the job. Then, again resumes aren't everything. In my opinion, Arnold's been an effective governor. By the way: What is your rationalization for Sonny Bono's qualifications before being elected mayor of Palm Springs? I know, he was a musician (then again, Cher might say otherwise).
Andi - I am no fan of Thompson's either, only pointing out he is more qualified than the rock stars seeking the Dem nomination. Anti-US? Statements in the international press by government officials of France and Germany, among others. See Gerhard Schroeder, Dominique de Villepin and Jauques Chirac for a sampling. Feel free to explore lesser officials to you hearts content.
Finally, an intelligent response! My "research" was five minutes on Google. Information easily available to anyone wishing to educate themselves about candidates and avoid looking ignorant or foolish. The faculty committee should read more carefully my post to which they are responding. I explained why Arnold, Clint, Gopher, et al were left out. I will quote myself here "since the conversation involved only Presidential candidates, I responded to that office." The blog entry to which Jim V responded was about Presidential candidates and, because I have been accused of a CL columnist of starting new arguments, I stuck to the subject at hand. Even if Jim V. did not intend to limit to President, my response clearly did. I am unsure how I "inflated" Thompson's resume by pointing out specifically relevant government experience. The Dems here know Edwards, Obama and Clintons resumes becasue they are current candidates with recent careers in government about which these highly engaged and knowledgable Dems are surely aware. If you can't find other politicians to complain about a politician, that guy was not doing his job. Ruffles feathers are a sure sign that you stepped on toes getting things done. Please explain how I rationalized anything. I responded with facts about their backgrounds. I don't consider mayor of a small town to be significant. In the case of Gandy, the commentator tried to lampoon Republican choices and I pointed out his background and accomplishments as a Congressman. Besides, as I have stated, this is about Presidential candidates, not dog catcher. Jim V said Republicans "republicans try to define candidates like Obama and Edwards as style over substance, then they elect actors. Go figure". First, it doesn't take a lot of "trying" to define those two as what they actually are, candidates who have advanced on style over sybstance. I am curious what message could be taken from his derisive tone that actors are not qualified. Since he has not corrected that premise in his response, I believe it to be correct. GOP penchant for actors? One President, one Governor and three other minor players since 1984 is hardly a penchant. I consider the penchant for electing lawyers to be far more damaging. I agree there is a danger in getting swept away in fantasy, i.e. the fantasy of electing unqualified people just so they can be the first black or female President and are not Republicans. I have huge problems with larege parts of Bush's Presidency. I am Libertarian. "nation elected him … at least, once" Anytime I see this thought, I try to determine if the author is being humorous or stupid. I have read enough of you to know it was humor. You said, "JFK had a thin resume, but he had 12 years in Congress before the presidency and had been groomed for the job." That seems to be a contradictory statement to me. Either way it beats Governor or Senator from a Southern state. I don't consider JFK's resume thin, but he is the prototype of style over substance, or, at least, style enhancing substance. See Camelot...he's so handsome and she is so pretty.....our own Royal Family......Nixon debate, tv viewers thought Kennedy won, radio listeners thought Nixon won....hmmmm I will assume you are kidding about Bono.
Latest in Fresh Loaf
-
First Slice: 2/13/12 Beach Boys reunited, Whitney Houston remembered, Christopher Cain busted
Some Monday morning headlines to get your week started
-
5 things today: Goth Valentines, Vouched Books
Goth valentines, poets, Jewish films, and more
-
Pittsburgh rallies for Brandon White; hate crime legislation to be introduced 2
More than 150 people braved cold temperatures to show support for 20-year-old attack victim
- More »
Author Archives
-
What can we learn from the 9/11 anniversary? 37
Ten years later, a TV terrorpalooza rings hollow
- More »
