to turn it off.
The thing is, there hasn't been any negative campaigning against Thompson.
He is exquisitely vulnerable to that kind of attack. Hillary has been
attacked constantly for a decade, so we've already heard everything they
have on her. I don't think he can win.
There is some validity to this I think I even mentioned that in my e-mail. When he starts getting attacked, we will see how he handles that.
>
> I don't hold lobbying against anyone, who is more of a problem, those
> who lobby or those who are paid off by the lobbying?
They essentially are criminal conspirators. I hold both accountable.
It's like illegal immigrants and the people who hire them, or prostitutes
and johns, or drug dealers and drug purchasers.
OK, then in your world, no Senator or Representative should be allowed to run for President. Who does that leave then? Lobbying is something that happens in Washington and until it is made illegal it is going to continue to happen. Obama, Hillary, McCain, and even Romney have all be lobbyed at one time or another.
> I also am not in the least worried about his involvement with the S&L
> crisis.
What kinds of crimes would he have to commit before you would not vote for
him? I'll bet he could shoot someone in the face and you'd be fine with
it, but if he lied about having sex with someone, then you wouldn't vote
for him. Did I get it?
What crimes? He committed no crimes, he lobbyed to have the S&Ls deregulated, something that a democratic congress was inclined to do anyway and something that both a democratic and republican president stood behind and signed into law. I do not see where he has committed a crime. You might say that he helped to empower the S&Ls to commit crime, but isn't that something we do everyday? Isn't that what we call freedom?
Obviously you did not get it, despite how smart you think you are, you are incapable of getting it because no matter what, if he is a republican, he is bad, if he is a democrat he is good. You are clearly a waste of time to try and talk to.
>> If you want to manipulate the feelings of the American people for
>> profit -- call Fred Thompson, he'll help. When you look at him and
>> here his voice, don't you get a feeling that he is solid and
>> trustworthy? He's pretty good at what he does: Scamming people.
>
> Who me one presidential candidate in the race today that is not scamming
> people, Obama? Hillary? Do you actually believe in their sincerity?
Your excuse for electing corrupt conmen is that you think other people are
also corrupt conmen even though you can present no evidence of that. In
your alternative reality, everything is what you want it to be.
And Thompson has shown he is corrupt? How so? Because he lobbyed for the S&Ls in the 80s? We know that Hillary has been involved in more than her share of corruption, but where has the Thompson corruption been? The minute the S&L attack comes down on Thompson, the same attack comes down squarely on Hillary. This is why you will never see Thompson attacked on being a lobbyist in the 80s.
> Actually, I look at this guy and I do believe in him. When I look at
> Hillary, I see the years and years of lies that she has been involved in
> telling. Obama, while I think he is a decent guy and cannot say he is
> lieing, I am so far away from his politics that I cannot possibly
> support him.
>
> Guiliani? McCain? There is no one out there that I can support for
> President other than Fred Thompson and for the first time in my life, I
> am actually going to volunteer in a presidential campaign, once he
> announces he is going to run.
Because you've seen Thompson's face on TV? (Thompson is a lame character
actor who has never had a leading role in anything on film or TV.) Or was
it his failure as a Senator to do anything that mattered? Was it the 20
years lobbying for big corporations? Or was it that he leaked information
to the criminal Nixon administration while he was working for the
prosecution back in 1973? Or did you actually like the S&L scandal?
None of the above. I have seen the guy's voting record, I have read about his stance on issues. I have done the same on all of the other front running candidates including Hilary and Obama. If all of them are to be believed, democrat and republican, then there are two candidates that I think are deserving of my support based on the issues that I care the most about.
What is it about Fred Thompson that you like? Seriously, are you joking?
You have not said a single good thing about this guy.
Vern -- if you "look at this guy and ... believe in him" it just might be
because he is good at what he does -- conning people. I haven't heard yet
a single good thing about this guy. Everything coming to me via TV, web
and radio is saying that he has "the right look." All you are saying is
that he has the right look. Looks are *nothing*!
It is not about look for me, if we are to believe what he says, and that is all we have to go on for any candidate, then I like a number of things he claims he stands for. I read his BLOG every chance I get and I agree with what he says in those BLOGs, is he only saying that stuff to get elected? Well he only knows, but since all the other candidates are doing the same thing, then we have to make our decisions on what we know, not what we THINK we know.
I would be interested in who you think is the "trustworthy" candidate that you would vote in. Obama is about the only one that would be "trustworthy" on the democratic side, and I am sorry I am too opposed to his politics to vote for him.
Tell us Mike, who is the saviour that you are looking to see elected?
Home | FAQ | Server | Presentations | Mailing Lists/Archives | Member Tools | Links | Sponsors | Contact