I get a kick out of this bizzare line of reasoning. He points to his service and how he was successful as a gay man, so why don't we allow openly gay people into the service? Well, first off, was he openly gay during his service? Yeah, I didn't think so. No difference from those officers that toed the line while active, but became very vocal about their disagreement with policies and decisions once their retirements were safe and they were out. Hypocritical cowards.

Well, Colonel, during your time in the military, how many of your fellow soldiers did you sodomize in violation of the UCMJ and lawful orders of your superiors?

Were you sexually attracted to any other soldiers?

Were any of them your subordinates?

Were any of them junior in rank (fraternization)?

Did you ever act on these attractions?

Were any of your advances rejected as unwelcome?

If the answers to any of these questions is yes, then you were not a very good soldier or leader.

I do not want to have to worry about a butt pirate every time I go to the latrine or take a shower. Since by far and large, the greatest percentage of HIV infected people are gay men, and recent surveys show they still do not practice safe sex, don't count on me giving you CPR or sticking my hands in your bloody stump to stop the bleeding if you are looking a little light in the loafers.

Incidentally, you can be a gay soldier in the military as long as you keep your mouth shut and abstain during your service.

Of all the Repub candidates, I expect the only ones to support gays serving openly would be Rudy and Mitt. I don't see Fred buying into this plan. On the Dem side, they all would. Especially Hillary.

CNN should just go ahead and change their name to DNN. Nobody can be so stupid as to hire a gay activist and pay for his travel expenses to come ask a Republican debate question without doing even a cursory google search of his name. He could be a registered sex offending pedophile from NAMBLA for all they knew. There are seven or eight others who asked questions who even the most casual research reveals are confirmed Dem candidate supporters. The lame excuse that the questions were still valid does not hold water. I don't think that question is on the minds of many potential voters, especially Republican voters. A 2nd Amendment question would have been more informative. Maybe the Dems, who were opposed to appearing on a FoxNews sponsored debate for concenrs about bias, should let us write the questions for their next debate....

"Well, how can you call yourselves Presidential candidates while opposing portions of the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution...Let's start with you, Senator Klinton...Should infringing rights guaranteed under the Constitution be a disqualifier for ANY public office?

TR

I specifically asked about Romney's plans on gays in the military before signing on to fundraise for him last December. His stance then, that has been consistent for years (and I don't see changing) is that he doesn't support any changes to the current policy of "don't ask, don't' tell." There are certainly some nuances to Romney's policy stands on gay rights but this is one he's been consistent on throughout his public life - I can find references back to 1994 where he says he supports that policy - and as 90% of his tweaking/flopping :D has been more toward the right, I seriously doubt he's suddenly going to pull a Hilary on us.

See also the following:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/09/us.../09romney.html

This may have some impact:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...108.guest.html

Rush does wield some influence among likely primary voters.

I would say that this ad from the "Log Cabin Republicans" will assist Romney, rather than it's intended purpose. I believe that, if the Gays in the Republican Party do not support him, it is a good indication of how they feel he is on Gay rights issues. I also believe their support of Rudy is probably not something Rudy's camp is thrilled about.:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j...-Et6AD8T7L2GG0

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican gay rights advocacy group accuses Mitt Romney of "Mitt-flops" in a new radio ad that criticizes the former Massachusetts governor on his tax record...

Romney spokesman Kevin Madden said it was no surprise that a gay rights group would oppose Romney because he has supported a federal amendment that would declare marriage to be between a man and a woman...

"This negative attack and gross distortion of the governor's record was launched and paid for by a group recognized as having Mayor (Rudy) Giuliani as their 'favorite' candidate," Madden said. Giuliani has had the support of some gay rights groups in the past and has backed limited legal recognition for same-sex couples.

I don't watch the Clinton News Network, so I missed this:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/pol...n.and.wife.cnn

This type of setting works well for Fred.

...wouldn't be suprised to see him make a few more appearances like this shortly before the first primary votes.

Saw it.

Fred's really hitting his stride.
I'll be interested to see how Fred will trend in the Rasmussen daily.
(his Iowa numbers will probably be better than the national ones)


Rasmussen daily:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...olling_history

Not much change on the big board...Rudy G slipped and McCain picked up a couple of points.

Date12/18/07
Republican Candidates
Giuliani 17%
Huckabee 23%
Thompson13%
Romney 15%
McCain 13%

Date 12/18/07
Democratic Candidates
Clinton 40%
Obama 24%
Edwards 14%

Well this is different.

All of the various candidates have put out Christmas campaign messages.

Here's Fred's Christmas message:

http://www.fred08.com/
-or-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeLIm_XVOhQ

If Fred gets elected, the border issue will get solved = I don't have to deal with blundering idiots who dream up nickel n dime schemes.

Fred's going to be on Fox News Sunday.
I missed the first showing.

Anybody catch it?

<edit>

Just found the transcript:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,319053,00.html

I'm suprised that this hasn't yet been linked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VblJq4j0_SE

Definitely not a 30 second soundbite.

Outstanding.

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/010608.jpg


Thought this was appropriate for this thread...

Let's get out the SC vote for Fred!

Phone for Fred

The more I hear him the more I like him. I think Fred kicked butt tonight in the debate. I think he turned it up a notch, and forced the other candidates to answer his questions.

The more I hear him the more I dislike him. If I didn't realize it before (which I did) Ron Paul truly showed what a nut he is. He scares the hell out of me!!!

From the debate tonight.

"We need to be a nation of high fences and wide gates...."


YUP!

He was the highlight of the debate, for me.

Combative Thompson
 

He's coming out swinging... and he needs to keep it up! I'm still crossing my fingers for a Thompson/Romney or Romney/Thompson ticket. :munchin

From MSNBC:
A combative Thompson sways voters
Republican candidate ditches laid back style at debate, gains attention

By Paul Vitello

updated 9:54 p.m. PT, Fri., Jan. 11, 2008
MYRTLE BEACH, S.C. - John and Ann Berenberk dutifully watched the umpteenth Republican presidential debate on television on Thursday night and had an epiphany. It was about the candidate they had previously referred to as the tall, silent one. Fred D. Thompson.

The last of the candidates to enter the race, Mr. Thompson, 65, a former Tennessee senator, has so far seemed to distinguish himself mainly by a laconic style that has made him almost invisible beside the others on the stage in past debates, the Berenberks said.

“But then last night — we hadn’t even been thinking about him — all of a sudden it was clear he was the one,” said Mr. Berenberk, a retired teacher. “The bluntness, the forcefulness. He was really impressive.”

Whether this was a new Fred Thompson, or just a sign of mirage-inducing campaign fatigue among voters, many people attending Mr. Thompson’s campaign rallies here on the day after the debate reported having similar revelations.

(for the rest of the article)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22619398/

As long as he keeps it up, he should at least increase his position in the rankings. He's finally starting to generate "buzz" like he did when he first entered the race.

IMO, he doesn't have to worry about fighting Clinton or Obama, he has to fight the negative way the media talks about him.

I don't mean to sound naive but given my location, and the fact I only have CNN and the BBC to refer to on the current election run, honestly, you don't see or hear much about Fred Thompson in the discussions or even getting any highlight on the news.

Does he have a strong following in the states and is he a popular choice among republicans?

I think so... It seems to me that the media has really focused on Romney and Huckabee, and McCain. I'm hoping after the last debate they give Fred Thompson more air time.

From: William B. Lacy, Friends of Fred Thompson
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:21 PM
Subject: $10 at Ten for Fred

Because of your generosity we are $29,711 away from reaching our $1 million goal. Some FredHeads on the blog thought of a great way to make sure we meet our mark. At 10:00 local time give $10 to Fred's campaign.

If 2971 FredHeads give only $10 we will reach this important milestone and give Fred the resources to continue spreading his consistent conservative message in South Carolina, Florida, and across the Super Tuesday states.

So when 10:00 comes around add $10 to the red truck. You will have done your part to meet our $1 million goal and help Fred win the Republican nomination.

Please help Fred out--and thank you!

Sincerely,

William B. Lacy
Campaign Manager

Fred takes a stand.

The silence from the other candidates is deafening.

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gameco...opposes_remand

You should have seen him on Fox News today. The guy asking him questions kept trying to bring up Huckabee's story about Thompson picking on him. Fred raised his voice and told the guy he wasn't there to talk about Huckabee's lies and that they were wasting time by not talking about the other issues. Every other question the interviewer kept bringing up Huckabee, Thompson wouldn't have it.

It was good stuff. Glad to see him starting to get more in the game.

I like what he stands for and his opinions on a vast arena of topics. He speaks with perfect common sense, doesn't have baggage and is very honest on his opinions.

He could be a good president. No. He would be a great president.

Greenwood Index Journal:

“Some people say the Reagan coalition is over and dead with,” Thompson said. “I say the opposite. I don’t think the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are outdated documents. Our founding fathers had it right in the very beginning. They knew our rights come not from government, but from God.”

The candidate said he supports an open market economy, rebuilding the military for self defense and taking a strong stand against illegal immigration.

“Those are the challenges of today that need to be answered by applying the principals of our founding fathers,” he said. “These are the positions I had then, these are the positions I have today, and these are the positions I will have tomorrow.”

Thompson questioned people who change their opinions under pressure.

“You have to wonder where they’ll be tomorrow,” he said.

Fred is withdrawing?
 

Just heard on Fox News Live that Fred is withdrawing??? Noooooo!
:(

Holly

Yep...He has made a half azz effort from the start...I did like him though.

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/...sidential-bid/

I just read about it on MSNBC. What do you think is going to happen now: Maybe VP bid under McCain? An Independant run? I really don't know what to think other than I am really disappointed. He was the only guy I was willing to vote FOR. Now I fear it is a vote against someone else, more than a vote for someone.

Any of the top four flip-flopping "moderate" Republicans (McCain, Romney, Giuliani, or Huck) will need a solid conservative VP to motivate fellow conservatives to even bother to vote.

I hope that one of them picks Fred to assist, or our Second Amendment rights, national security, foreign policy, and lower tax options are about to evaporate.

Agree that he should have gotten in earlier, and been more active sooner. The Iowa and SC blitzes would have been great when he was in second place, behind Giuliani.

He is the only candidate I have heard on either side articulate his positions in detail on most issues, even the contentious ones, and I agreed with almost all of them.

TR

I guess my support now goes to Huckabee.

Am swaying in that direction myself. Am not for sure just yet.

And also, I will not be influenced by Chuck...though Chuck is very cool...:lifter

Holly

Damn...:(

I'm clueless now. No way will I vote for Huckabee.... he is the worst flip flopper I have ever seen, and his newly found conservative bravado isn't working for me....

He bent over backward to accomodate illegal immigrants, but is now going to secure our borders. He raised taxes every chance he got, but now is a fiscal conservative. Dude will say anything to get elected.

“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe that it would be a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what what we need to do—to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

That quote takes him completely out of the race for me. I am not trying to engage in a religious debate, nor will I participate in one, but anyone who thinks that our country's most important document should be modified/aligned to their personal view of the bible will not get my vote. All I am saying about that.

I hoep we don't end up with a Clinton/McCain election.... In all honesty, based on what I have read, I would almost lean toward Hillary. As someone alse said, I hate her, but at least she has the courage of her convictions.

Too bad about Fred.... I'm seriously thinking that I might have to vote for Romney, especially since Ron Paul has hit the looney streak lately.

Me too, but it sure looks like it's headed in that direction.