Fred Watch

[UPDATE]:

Fred Thompson is out.

Ironically enough, it's too late to take him off the ballot in Tennessee, where he's a shoe-in shoo-in. So, to whom will he release his delegates? Are we thinking John McCain?
-------------------------

Fred Thompson has lost some key GOP supporters to Mitt Romney and John McCain today; now word is out that he is bowing out of Thursday’s GOP debate, prompting speculation that he’ll soon announce the end of his presidential campaign.

Interestingly, from a human nature perspective, I’m seeing signs on the 'net of conservative anger directed at the candidate himself.

Things like this:

"His rivals would do more in a day than Fred would do in a month," said one disaffected Thompson insider. "He created the perception, fairly or not, that he was just going through the motions."

Ouch. A post at the conservative Townhall.com is headlined "Why I Never Drank The Fred Thompson Kool-Aid”. And in this post at RedState (which I linked to over the weekend), the anger is palpable:

We waited with bated breath, as expected announcement date after expected announcement date passed by, with little or no action on your part. As the summer wore on, and gave itself over to autumn, though, the game became a bit less enjoyable for the rest of us.

Like the townspeople who tired of hearing the young sheepherder cry "Wolf!" over and over again when there was no such threat to his flock, those who had supported you wholeheartedly at the beginning of this process began to waver in their commitment, and the field of "FredHeads," as so many of those enthusiastic supporters called themselves, began to dwindle.

[...]

Finally, in September, you made the announcement that so many had been dying to hear in April, in May, even in July. At that point, though, it was too late for any but the most dynamic of campaigners to make up the ground lost to the rest of the field in this longest primary election in my memory.

I find this all very interesting. Democratic voters don’t tend to blame their candidates when they don’t win primaries; at least, I don’t hear anyone blaming Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards for underperforming this primary season. I DO hear lots of criticism of the media for ignoring these two candidates, and barbs at the Obama and Clinton camps for some dirty politics.

I have to wonder what’s behind the Fred anger. It seems small at the moment (though his support was small), but if it spreads, it certainly won't help Thompson land the VP slot, if it should come to that.

Bye, Bye Fred?

Fighting for a distant third in the must-win South Carolina primary must be a disappointment for Fred Thompson, and McClatchey observed the former Senator sounds close to dropping out--though for the record, the campaign says it’s still moving forward:

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson didn't drop out of the Republican presidential field after his disappointing finish in Saturday's South Carolina primary — but he sounded close to it.

About an hour after the polls closed, Thompson addressed a ballroom in a college student union, an event that featured as many students enjoying free beer as it did hardcore Thompson supporters. He delivered a lengthy soliloquy, speaking in the past tense about "clear conservatism," the cornerstone of his campaign.

A surefire way to draw a crowd to your event is to stage it in a student union and offer free beer (and excuse me, but what university in South Carolina doesn’t have a no-alcohol rule?). Reminds me of the college rock band that named itself “Free Beer” to draw bigger crowds.

Anyway, despite what the campaign says, the folks at RedState have stuck a fork in Fred:

Though South Carolina may not even be the official final nail in the coffin of your candidacy, for those who took the realistic view -- unencumbered by their support of your bid for office -- the proverbial handwriting had long since been on the wall. After the third-place Iowa finish, there still may have been hope, even though your assured place among the frontrunners had been taken by another out-of-nowhere candidate, Mike Huckabee. However, after the abysmal performances in New Hampshire and Wyoming -- not to mention Michigan and, today, Nevada -- it became abundantly clear that any talk of Fred Thompson, Republican Nominee for President was, at best, a non-starter.

So, as the results come back in South Carolina, with exit polls showing it a McCain-Huckabee race with Thompson a nonfactor, it seems to be as good a time as any to thank you profusely for your time and for your ideas, to wish you luck in all of your future endeavors, and to turn out the lights once and for all on the Fred Thompson for President experiment.

Sorry, Tennessee Republicans. I know this is a huge disappointment to you. The folks at RedState blame the candidate himself:

Unfortunately, the campaign itself never came together. Despite the fact that it was built around the people's chosen White Knight candidate, and around the most solid slate of conservative ideas in the race, the Fred Thompson for President campaign suffered from being one of the most lackluster, disorganized, and uninspired electoral efforts that I can remember. For whatever reason, you as the candidate never quite took the ownership of your own campaign that was necessary to make it successful -- and, as a result, it foundered before ever really getting out of the harbor.

Indeed, this was the huge flaw in the Fred Thompson candidacy that gave liberals so much comedy gold from the beginning. Folks, when picking future GOP stars, make sure the candidate likes politics. Everyone knows Fred Thompson hates politics and hates campaigning--he’s made no secret of that since he was a Senator--and yet, for some reason felt he should be anointed POTUS anyway. You have to work for these things, Senator. No one hands you the reins of power on a silver platter.

Just as you can’t expect someone who doesn’t believe in government to govern well, you can’t expect someone who doesn’t like politics to run an effective campaign.

Anyway, I’m sure a lot of Tennessee conservatives are in mourning today, possibly even deep denial. As I posted last week, it's hard out there for a Fred Thompson supporter.

Sorry, folks. It's over. Stick a fork in him, he's done.

(For more on this, read Newscoma's excellent post.)

It's Hard Out There For A Fred

... A Fred Thompson supporter, that is! Near as I can tell, the only people still pushing for Fred Thompson are Tennessee Republicans and wingnut bloggers like Michelle Malkin and JimRob of the Freeper brigade.

Haven't you folks heard that "change" is the new buzzword? But with Mary Matalin and Liz Cheney on your campaign staff, good luck selling the "I stand for change" message. It's just more of the same.

(Thanks to Watertiger at Dependable Renegade for the pic!)

Leonard Who?

Poor Fred Thompson. Maybe he needs another nap.

When approached by an Iowa rancher about Native American issues, specifically disappointment about President Clinton’s failure to pardon Leonard Peltier and the poor conditions on Iowa’s Native American reservations, Thompson gave a pat, aw-shucks response:

Seeming a little overwhelmed by the breadth of the man's concerns, Thompson responded by saying he'd "look into" it: "You've raised my consciousness level on some things that I'll look into,” he said. “I can't give you a lot of answers to what you're talking about in old treaties and Leonard Peltier."

One little problem. As Michelle Cottle at TNR’s The Plank notes:

And, not to pick on poor ol' Fred, but I would expect him to have a smidge more info and be able to wing it better than most seeing as how he appeared in "Thunderheart," the 1992 fictionalized account of Peltier's saga.

Wait! Do we think this somehow means that Thompson's acting background doesn't qualify to run the country?! Next thing you're going to tell me is that Val Kilmer isn't fit to be head of the FBI.

Hilarious.

GOP apologists (cough*coughBillHobbscough*cough) note that Thompson appears briefly in the film, and it’s not an actual Peltier biopic. But for crying out loud, Thompson also appeared in Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee, and much more recently, too. That experience didn’t give him a modicum of understanding of Native American frustration with the U.S. government? No background on the Treaty of Fort Laramie?

I guess, as Kleinheider noted, Thompson isn’t “a method actor.”

Hell Week For GOP Candidates

It’s been a rough week for the GOP presidential candidates. Tom Tancredo (hey, he’s still running?) jumps the shark with this ridiculous scare’em ad that was so over the top, it prompted guffaws of laughter at our house.

Fred Thompson scores the coveted National Right To Life Committee endorsement, prompting outrage among Mitt Romney supporters. You know it’s bad when even a major right-to-life group won’t vote for a Mormon.

The endorsement is even stranger, considering National Right To Life General Counsel James Bopp Jr. is working for the Romney campaign. It was also a slap in the face to former Southern Baptist minister Mike Huckabee, now second in the Iowa polls. Some have speculated the Committee made a purely pragmatic choice, feeling Thompson was the most likely to beat pro-life Rudy Giuliani.

If that’s the case, they may regret the divisive decision, now that Giuliani has been rolled into the juicy Judith Regan-Bernard Kerik-News Corp. scandal:

Nov. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Publisher Judith Regan, fired last year from News Corp.'s HarperCollins unit, claims her dismissal was part of a “deliberate smear campaign'' aimed at protecting presidential candidate Rudolph Giuliani.

Regan, former president of HarperCollins' ReganBooks division, sued her former employer for defamation in state court in New York, seeking at least $100 million in damages. She claims in her complaint that News Corp. tried to destroy her reputation because she has information about former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik that would be harmful to ex-New York Mayor Giuliani and his presidential campaign.

“The smear campaign was necessary to advance News Corp.'s political agenda, which has long centered on protecting Rudy Giuliani's presidential ambitions,'' Regan said in the complaint filed yesterday.

As a sidebar, I’d like to point out that this is a perfect example of why deregulating media ownership is such a bad idea. Rupert Murdoch has far too much power as it is, and I don’t see the free hand of the market doing anything to rein that in. Now this whackadoodle Australian billionaire is picking our presidents?

According to the New York Times, Regan claims in her suit that a News Corp. “senior executive”...

... encouraged her to lie to federal investigators about her past affair with Bernard B. Kerik after he had been nominated to become homeland security secretary in late 2004.

[...]

One of Ms. Regan’s lawyers, Brian C. Kerr of the firm of Dreier L.L.P., said she had evidence to support her claim that she had been advised to lie to federal investigators who were vetting Mr. Kerik and who might have sought to question her about their romantic involvement. But Mr. Kerr declined to discuss the nature of the evidence.

Grab the popcornl this one’s going to be fun to watch.

No One Could Have Anticipated This

From the comments on my post about Thompson's drug dealer campaign co-chair, Blake writes:

I think there's a bit of difference between a guy that is 49 now and took care of his legal issues when he was 20-25 and Norman Hsu who has been on the lamb for the past 5 years.

I just don't think there are that many similarities, and if that's all the mud diggers can find, there must be some straw grasping going on.

Of course you do, Blake. I must say, a cocaine-dealing, felonious campaign co-chair sure beats a $400 haircut in the straw-grabbing department (cue sarcasm). And if you’re going to call pleading no contest to conspiracy and cocaine trafficking “taking care of one’s legal issues,” well, wake up and smell the hypocrisy.

Let’s see, Barack Obama attended an elementary school with a funny name when he was a child; it's OK to delve into Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis at Wellesley looking for hidden clues, or read her secret letters to her college pen pal. The Clintons 1978 land deal is torn apart looking for wrongdoing and John Kerry’s 1988 divorce papers arouse suspicion, but having your campaign co-chair be convicted of felony drug trafficking is A-OK!

Remember kids: ALL IS FORGIVEN--IF YOU'RE A REPUBLICAN!!!!

Criminal Past Of Thompson’s Co-Chair

Uh-oh. Fred Thompson’s campaign co-chair, longtime TN GOP moneybags Phillip Martin, has a criminal record, (guilty pleas for conspiracy, cocaine trafficking and marijuana trafficking), which the candidate denies knowing about, although they’ve been close friends for over 10 years. Heh.

I think we need to ask the TN GOPs new spokespeson about this. After all, Martin has been a close affiliate of the Tennessee Republican party for over a decade.

Meanwhile, Thompson Spokesbot Karen Hanretty says:

"Senator Thompson was unaware of the information until this afternoon. Phil Martin has been a friend of the senator since the mid-1990s and remains so today." Thompson communications director Todd Harris added that Martin was not subjected to the campaign's standard vetting process because "he's a longtime friend."

That’s so cute. In the good ol’ boys club of Washington politics, you don’t need to vet your wealthy friends and associates because as we all know, no one ever did anything wrong to get where they are. And everyone is always above-board and honest about their past. Isn’t that right, Bernie Kerik?

I’m remembering all of the handwringing and pearl-clutching over Hillary Clinton’s donations from Norman Hsu; she finally returned $800,000. I wonder if there will be the same shock and outrage over the cash infusion Thompson received from his close friend the drug dealer? A convicted drug dealer who owns a plane? (Not that I'm insinuating anything, of course).

Martin has been more than just a key fundraiser to Thompson, though. The use of his plane eases a major logistical burden stemming from the intense demands on presidential candidates this year for appearances in more than 20 states holding early primaries. It also may have saved the campaign at least $120,000, given that Federal Election Commission rules allowed Thompson to reimburse Martin for the use of the private jet at the commercial ticket rate until Congress changed the rules in September.

So. will Fred Thompson and the GOP return this money? Or is it another case of IOKIYAR?

Central Casting

Digby has a hilarious post up explaining why Fred Thompson is such a ratings dud on the campaign trail:

Thompson isn't leading man material, never has been. He's a character actor. He plays the avuncular southern lawyer or the ... avuncular southern politician. He has played the president or head of the CIA or whatnot from time to time, but they were all small featured parts. There's a reason for this --- he's not believable in the lead. He has the charisma of a number 2 pencil.

They should have consulted some of their successful show business friends about this before putting so much hope into their Ronald Reagan sequel. (I'm sure their A-list --- Shannon Doherty, Bo Derek and Patricia Heaton --- would have been happy to consult.) Note to GOP: if you are going to keep "casting" your presidents, hire a casting director.

Ouch.

Dobson Just Says No To Fred

Well, not that we didn’t see this one coming, but I must say I was surprised by James Dobson's brutal critique of Fred Thompson:

In a private e-mail obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, Dobson accuses the former Tennessee senator and actor of being weak on the campaign trail and wrong on issues dear to social conservatives.

"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?" Dobson wrote.

"He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!"

But don’t worry, FredHeads. As I mentioned in Tuesday’s post, I think the religious right is horribly out of touch with the country. People are sick of the so-called “culture wars,” they’re more worried about the economy and healthcare and other bread and butter issues than whether evolution is taught in Kansas schools or the 10 Commandments are posted in the courthouse.

So, Dobson’s disparaging opinion of the candidate that sends so many Tennessee GOPers’ hearts aflutter probably won’t amount to anything. In fact, it might be the best “endorsement” he gets.

(h/t, Volunteer Voters)

Watergate Tapes: Thompson Was Nixon’s Mole

... and Nixon didn’t return the favor, calling Fred Thompson ”dumb as hell.” That shouldn’t stop Republicans, we’ve been saying that about George W. Bush for years.

Anyway, the Associated Press has given a listen to the Watergate tapes in the National Archives and is reporting that a then-30-year-old Fred Thompson served as Nixon’s mole in the Watergate hearings, not the dedicated patriot committed to uncovering the truth as has been believed. According to the transcripts, Thompson informed Nixon that the Senate committee looking into the Watergate break-ins knew of the famed secret tapes--the same tapes that would eventually lead to Nixon’s downfall. Thompson also agreed to work with Nixon to discredit star witness John Dean. Read, weep:

Publicly, Baker and Thompson presented themselves as dedicated to uncovering the truth. But Baker had secret meetings and conversations with Nixon and his top aides, while Thompson worked cooperatively with the White House and accepted coaching from Nixon's lawyer, J. Fred Buzhardt, the tapes and transcripts show.

"We've got a pretty good rapport with Fred Thompson," Buzhardt told Nixon in an Oval Office meeting on June 6, 1973. The meeting included a discussion of former White House counsel John Dean's upcoming testimony before the committee.

Dean, the committee's star witness, had agreed to tell what he knew about the break-in and cover-up if he was granted immunity against anything incriminating he might say.

Nixon expressed concern that Thompson was not "very smart."

"Not extremely so," Buzhardt agreed.

"But he's friendly," Nixon said.

"But he's friendly," Buzhardt agreed. "We are hoping, though, to work with Thompson and prepare him, if Dean does appear next week, to do a very thorough cross-examination."

Count me not shocked. Republicans have been trying to present Thompson as “his own man,” a person who is far different from the rubber-stamp loyalists who have dominated the party for the past 15 years. But I’ve known all along that Soft-n-Safe® is just SOS: Same Old Shit. Who else hires rubber stamp loyalists like Mary Matalin, Liz Cheney and George P. Bush to be his advisors? Come on, wake up and smell the Kool-Aid.

Anyway, in a sane world the tanscripts themselves would be damning. Of course, we live in an insane world at the moment, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re calling Soft-n-Safe® Mr. President in January 2009.

Fred Thompson Underwhelms In N.H.

Maybe it was his famed laziness showing up, or maybe he had somewhere else to be, but when Fred Thomposon campaigned in New Hampshire yesterday, his nine-minute speech skirted the hot issues of the day. And that left Republicans at the $50/head event disappointed:

"It was short,'' said Richard Heitmiller of Nashua. "He's got a nice voice. But there was nothing there. He's for apple pie and motherhood. He's going to have to say what he's for.''

Heitmiller said he hadn't made up his mind about whom to support — way too early — and had come to learn more about this man he'd heard about but never seen.

"People want to get to know him. He hasn't been here, and he gives a nine-minute speech,'' he said dismissively. As Thompson exited, people started making their way to the doors midway through a reception.

"I told my wife we'd get home by 8. We'll get home a lot earlier than that,'' Heitmiller said.

"He looks good onstage, but I don't know if he has the gravitas,'' said Kathleen Williamson, a conservative Roman Catholic from North Weare.

"It seems like he's trying to win over conservatives, but I'm still not sure he has the credentials. I'm worried he's trying to get by on his celebrity.''

Ooops. Maybe Soft’n’Safe® is playing it a little too, well, soft and safe?

Damn That Liberal Media!

Bloggers have been wondering why ABC Radio Networks is continuing to use Fred Thompson as a "special program host and senior analyst” as well as running his daily podcast, "The Fred Thompson Report,” now that he’s quite obviously a candidate for president. The podcasts are pretty stupid; this week he takes on the death penalty, observing in that fake populist manner: “Smart kids have been telling us the death penalty doesn’t work. Common sense tells us that an executed murderer can’t kill anyone else.” I’m paraphrasing here, but news flash to Fred Thompson: incarcerated murderers can’t kill anyone else either, and an executed innocent man can’t be brought back to life. It’s always amazed me that the same people who think government shouldn’t be involved in things like Social Security and healthcare are perfectly fine with letting Uncle Sam decide who lives and dies. But I digress.

The thing that bugs me about the Fred Thompson Report is that it’s an obvious election ploy. The dang things only started on May 7! That’s eight weeks ago. Like he didn’t know he was running back then? Get real.

It’s sneaky. The podcasts are a forum for Thompson to attack Democrats--to actually campaign for president--that no one else is allowed to have. Imagine the pearl-clutching, the teeth-gnashing, if, say, John Edwards were given a daily podcast to discuss poverty in America, or Hillary Clinton were to discuss healthcare every day. IOKIYAR. When righties wonder what liberals mean when we say "the fairness doctrine," this is what we’re talking about.


Anyone else remembering National Review’s complaints about CNN’s “Clarkathon”, back when Gen. Wesley Clark served as a commentator for CNN before his run for the Democratic nomination? I don’t excuse Clark; candidates shouldn’t be serving as media analysts, even if their “official announcement” is months away. But the big difference is that Clark was covering the Iraq War; he didn’t have an open forum to express opinion about anything he wanted, which is what ABC News has given Thompson. To my knowledge, NRO hasn’t uttered a word about the Thompson podcasts. Again, IOKIYAR.

I’m remembering the conniption fits back in 2004 when liberal bloggers Markos Moulitsas and Jerome Armstrong were hired by Howard Dean’s campaign. Right-wingers complained that a liberal Democratic candidate was paying bloggers to write good things about him, which was completely untrue. They worked for his campaign; Armstrong didn’t blog while he was on the Dean payroll, and Moulitsas posted a disclosure about his campaign affiliation on his blog DailyKos.

I don’t entirely blame Fred Thompson for this, I mean, you can’t fault a candidate (or soon-to-be-candidate) for taking advantage of every opportunity thrown his way. But what the hell is ABC News thinking? Did they think we wouldn’t notice?

Here’s something else few people have noticed. Mitt Romney’s company Bain Capital now partially owns Clear Channel, which controls hundreds of radio and TV stations around the country. I’m sure that will come in handy as the primaries approach.

The media is not supposed to have an opinion on political races, they are supposed to be impartial observers. But when a major media conglomerate like ABC gives one candidate an open forum to express opinion that is not available to everyone else, I have to wonder what’s up.

This creeping of the boundary lines is scary.

Lorrie, Honey, Watch Your Back

A lot has been made of Lorrie Morgan’s statement that former beau Fred Thompson is “soft and safe,” as in:

"He’s a soft, safe place to be and that could be Fred’s ticket. Women love a soft place to lay and a strong pair of hands to hold us.”

Egads. “Soft and safe”? Sounds like toilet paper. Or maybe a feminine hygiene product. Definitely not a president. Definitely not your go-to guy on the “warren terra.”

Thompson advisor Mary Matalin must be ready to wring Lorrie Morgan’s throat (and if you’ve ever seen Mary Matalin, VP Dick Cheney’s advisor, you know she’s just scary enough to do it, too.) Liz Cheney, also on Thompson’s team, might be planning a hunting trip with dad Dick and Lorrie Morgan as we speak. Tim Griffin, Karl Rove’s former aide and another Thompson advisor, might be bugging Morgan’s phone. Or maybe he’s taking a page from his own 2004 election playbook and figuring out how to revoke her voting rights, you know, the way he disenfranchised 70,000 African American veterans and low-income folks in Arkansas.

Lorrie, honey, watch your back. Thompson advisor and presidential nephew George P. Bush might break into your bedroom in the middle of the night, as he did to his ex-girlfriend in 1994, and tear up your front lawn with his car.

Wait a minute. I just noticed something. There’s a lot of Bush-Cheney-Rove folks on the Thompson team. Wow. Imagine that. I thought Mr. Soft & Safe was supposed to be some kind of outsider?

Huh. Whaddya know?

Things I Did Not Know

Fred Thompson is on the Libby Legal Defense Trust Advisory Committee.

I’m sure that won’t be a problem for the Kool-Aid drinkers, that 30% who think that lying under oath and obstructing justice are only a problem if you’re a Democrat. But for that large chunk of the middle--that 69% who opposed a pardon for Libby in a CNN/Opinion Research poll taken in March, this might raise some eyebrows.

On top of which, Thompson apparently was a little loose with the facts before the uber-conservative Council For National Policy
in his May 12 speech there.

Hollywood Fred is looking more and more like a Bush Neocon. Good to know.