Fred Thompson For President!!!

Hyperlinking issues. Please remove.

[edit on 5/18/2007 by bjshobbes]

Originally posted by grover


Face it you guys are going down next year and you are going to down hard... and you deserve to lose. You've done it to yourselves with your heavy handed grab for total power. Excuse me while i wipe away my crocodile tears.

[edit on 5-5-2007 by grover]

grover

Anybody Republican running against Mrs. Bill Clinton has a great chance. You could even run Jeb Bush and he would beat Mrs. Bill Clinton.

Just because I don't like any of the Republican candidates now, doesn't mean I won't support them against Mrs. Bill Clinton.

The Republican nomination will be between Newt and Thompson. Mark it down!

You don't get it do you? The Republican majority has made such a mess of things the Democrats could run a sock puppet with its stuffings coming out and it would still beat whoever the Republicans run. Serves you right too. The hard right idea of establishing a permanent Republican majority to block the Democrats of any practical involvement in actual governing, creating essentially a one party state is one of the most unamerican, indeed treasonous ideas you guys have ever come up with. And you have the nerve to impinge our patriotism.

Originally posted by grover
You don't get it do you? The Republican majority has made such a mess of things the Democrats could run a sock puppet with its stuffings coming out and it would still beat whoever the Republicans run. Serves you right too. The hard right idea of establishing a permanent Republican majority to block the Democrats of any practical involvement in actual governing, creating essentially a one party state is one of the most unamerican, indeed treasonous ideas you guys have ever come up with. And you have the nerve to impinge our patriotism.

There's always going to be a majority. There's nothing you can do.

Better Republicans than Democrats, really.

thats not what the hard right attempted though... traditionally we have swung back and forth between parties and conservative/liberal leanings, What Grover Norquist and Rick Santerum, Trent Lott and Karl Rove, the Hertiage foundation and the funnymentalists attempted is to permanently disenfranchise the left and Democrats. Its easy enough to find out too, they made no attempt to hide it.

I'd try to get rid of people who didn't agree with what I wanted, too. It's politics. And honestly, I have no sympathy for Democrats at all.

Originally posted by grover
You don't get it do you? The Republican majority has made such a mess of things the Democrats could run a sock puppet with its stuffings coming out and it would still beat whoever the Republicans run. Serves you right too. The hard right idea of establishing a permanent Republican majority to block the Democrats of any practical involvement in actual governing, creating essentially a one party state is one of the most unamerican, indeed treasonous ideas you guys have ever come up with. And you have the nerve to impinge our patriotism.

Sock puppets don't have stuffings. While I may partially agree about the Republicans mess, the Dems weren't exactly helpful. George Bush let the drunkin, philandering, murderer Ted Kennedy write an education bill, that flopped, in a show of bipartisanship. Most the GOP's failures came because of their reaching out to the Dems. If the GOP would've stood their ground, and not caved in to the liberal minority, they would've been alot more successful. George Bush didn't exactly act like a Republican. That was his downfall. The liberal mainstream media, with it's liberal agenda, twisting the truth every chance they get doesn't help either.

[edit on 5/18/2007 by bjshobbes]

[edit on 5/18/2007 by bjshobbes]

Originally posted by Johnmike
I like Ron Paul, to he honest, he represents everything America was founded to be.

I agree but since he won't get any coverage on the media that itself is wrong. As I said before its up to us not the media on who we vote for. I'm voting Ron Paul.

Jeb Bush oh please? Chesie Clinton oh please? No No No.. No more Bush's and no more Clinton's please. Its time for a new face.

[edit on 5/19/2007 by Leyla]

posted by Leyla

posted by Johnmike
I like Ron Paul, to he honest, he represents everything America was founded to be.

I agree but since he won't get any coverage on the media that itself is wrong. As I said before its up to us not the media on who we vote for. I'm voting Ron Paul. Jeb Bush oh please? [Edited by Don W]

I moved to FL in '03, so my background here is limited. Jeb Bush - James Earl I think - was the first outgoing governor NOT to receive an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from UF - Gainesville, in memory. No one has explained why. But not everyone here liked him although Charlie Crist ran on a pro-Bush campaign and won the governorship by 10% points over the Dems.

In theory, we the people own the airwaves. It is accepted we the people also have the power to regulate cable. Why don't we the people demand the FCC require all license holders as a condition of receiving the license, to "donate" 1 hour per week during the campaign to each candidate who can produce 50,000 genuine signatures of supporters on a petition? Perhaps require each signer to pay $5 to cover the cost of verification. In state and local elections, a lesser number of signatures would be required. Then people like Ron Paul who has a small cadre of real devoted fans, could get his message out. If it resonates, then he might pull it off. Without national exposure, it is a zero to none chance. Same goes for Fred Thompson, the subject of this thread. And etc.

[edit on 5/19/2007 by donwhite]

The whole tripe about how its the liberal media's fault gets boring... THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA drowning out conservative voices... if anything its the other way around but if you admitted that, you'd lose your whipping boy wouldn't you?

Face it you guys screwed up bad, real bad with your high handedness and arrogance and hubris and a president who not only can't think, can't shoot straight or admit he's ever wrong. Its going on 7 years of republican control of the white house, and before Nov. of last year, 12 of Republican control of congress.... face it you have nobody to blame but yourselves.

You guys are going to fall next year and going to fall bad and its all your own fault but you guys simply don't have the constituitional fortitude (balls) to ever admit of face up to your faults.

... isn't it a pity... isn't it a shame? HELL NO.

[edit on 19-5-2007 by grover]

Originally posted by donwhite
In theory, we the people own the airwaves. It is accepted we the people also have the power to regulate cable. Why don't we the people demand the FCC require all license holders as a condition of receiving the license, to "donate" 1 hour per week during the campaign to each candidate who can produce 50,000 genuine signatures of supporters on a petition? Perhaps require each signer to pay $5 to cover the cost of verification. In state and local elections, a lesser number of signatures would be required. Then people like Ron Paul who has a small cadre of real devoted fans, could get his message out. If it resonates, then he might pull it off. Without national exposure, it is a zero to none chance. Same goes for Fred Thompson, the subject of this thread. And etc.

That would pave the way to a fascist, government-regulated media. The FCC does too much already. We the people own the airwaves, but the business owners own the media companies. This isn't communism.

grover

You don't get it.

We are talking about Mrs Bill Clinton. She is the most hated woman in America. All the Republican candidate has to do is show up, and he has a great chance of winning.

Also in 2008 the Republicans take back both houses of Congress. With a 29% approval rating for Congress (much lower than Bush's approval rating), it's not a stretch to see a Republican President, and a Republican controlled House and Senate.

As far as Fred Thompson...right now I am supporting no one running right now for the Republicans. I am waiting for Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich to announce their candidacies, then I will pick between the two.

I'd support Thompson, for what little I know about him. Above Paul, though, I'm not sure.

Originally posted by RRconservative
grover

You don't get it.

We are talking about Mrs Bill Clinton. She is the most hated woman in America. All the Republican candidate has to do is show up, and he has a great chance of winning.

I don't know man... Sure Hillary is not as popular as the media is making her out to be. But, personally, I think the only way to keep a Democrat out of office is to get a true conservative running for the GOP. Someone that can actually say with a straight face that he is thinking of the 'people' first and foremost. That person is Dr. Paul.

posted by Johnmike

posted by donwhite
In theory, we the people own the airwaves. Why not we the people insist the FCC require all license holders as a condition of receiving the license, to "donate" 1 hour per week during the campaign to each candidate who produces 50,000 genuine signatures? People like Ron Paul could get his message out. Without national exposure, his is a zero to none chance. The same goes for Fred Thompson and etc. [Edited by Don W]

That would pave the way to a fascist government regulated media. The FCC does too much already. We the people own the airwaves, but the business owners own the media companies. This isn't communism.

Hmm? Is that supposed to be logical? Or have I missed the argument of the missing middle?

Q. What does the FCC do anyway?

Is it like FEMA? Sort of a GOP version of the star gazer's black hole?

[edit on 5/19/2007 by donwhite]

No you don't get it rr... Hillary is only hated by the right wing, there are plenty who, if not love her back her, then there are those like me who don;t think she should run for the very reasons you cited... that it would polarize the left and energize the right... even so right now as it stands the election is going to be about the war, and other than Ron Paul the rest of the GOP hopefuls are on the wrong side of this issue (same with most of the Republicans in congress) from the rest of the population... it is you guys who don't get it, the Democrats may not be well loved, but right now, the Republicans, especially those allied with bush minor, are despised.

Originally posted by donwhite
Hmm? Is that supposed to be logical? Or have I missed the argument of the missing middle?

Q. What does the FCC do anyway?

Is it like FEMA? Sort of a GOP version of the star gazer's black hole?

en.wikipedia.org...

posted by Grover

No, you don't get it RR . . the Republicans, especially those allied with Bush minor, are despised. [Edited by Don W]

I formerly thought RR Con was a GOP plant, a paid board distractor, but since the 2006 vote, he has fallen strangely silent on his unquestioning support of the Bush and Gonzales Texas death squad. 154 dead men in 6 years. A record. The Oberfuhrer, Herr Rumsfeld, got too hot to handle and finally got the pointy toed boot. Paul Wolfowitz, that GOP political genius who along with Richard Pearle, VP Cheney and yes, Bush43 himself - he plays dumb but he's a Neo Con from birth - got us into the worst military fiasco since the Romans ate too much lead and went silly.

[edit on 5/19/2007 by donwhite]

Is there a reason for your post, or did you just use it as an opportunity to personally attack a member of the board?

It's hard to understand with your distorted English. Is it your first language?

There's new news...

www.politico.com...

The comments at the end of page two are an interesting study in how ferocious a group of people can be that have no idea what they're talking about. -sorry about going off topic though.

Run Fred, RUN!