12.27.07
More Blatant Media Smearing Of Fred Thompson?
I know a media smear tactic when I see one, but sometimes you don’t need to look very hard to see just how transparent the media’s intentions are when it comes to screwing somebody over who’s doesn’t fit their predetermined agenda.
Fred Thompson is quoted as saying:
“there is no woman on the horizon that ought to be president next year.”
Makes perfect sense to me. He was taking a shot at Senator Clinton, since she is obviously then only major female candidate in the Presidential race and the only one who has a shot at being president next year.
However, let’s look at some of the headlines this morning:
- Thompson says no woman ought to be president next year (WVLT-TV Knoxville)
- Thompson: ‘No Woman Ought To Be President Next Year’ (KCCI 8 Des Moines)
- Thompson says no woman ought to be president next year (WMCTV Memphis)
Sounds a little slanted, doesn’t it? They even misquoted him in the headlines, since he did not in fact say that “no woman ought to be…” even though the headlines project to the readers that those were his words.
Lies.
It’s sickening to say the least. To the average reader who didn’t dig far enough in to find Thompson’s exact quote and context, he is portrayed as a sexist pig. Has all objectivity and fairness been drummed out of the mainstream media these days?
I guess if you’re not anointed as a media favorite, you’re doomed to this sort of media slander. I’m appalled and disgusted.
WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance
bgbest said,
December 27, 2007 at 10:02 am
Agree completely, the MSM has done a good job misleading folks about Fred. It’s a shame most people are so disgusted with politics in general, or hate the current adminstration so much that they take most of the headlines at face value. The only way I know to combat this is donate at fred08.com, I made my donation this morning. Although I was hoping to put off donating until my States primary was a little closer, it is needed now. SUPPORT FRED THOMPSON!!
micky2 said,
December 27, 2007 at 1:20 pm
I exposed the aedia for the same tactics in my blog.
One of the biggesr examples was the ” Mission Accomplished” banner.
That story still to this day is being slanted and construed and put ever other way possible other than what really happened.
I had to dig pretty hard to find out that not only wasnt it Bushs idea to put it up, it was the ships commanders idea.
““During the speech in May, Bush said, “The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11, 2001, and still goes on.”Cmdr. Conrad Chun, a Navy spokesman, defended the president’s assertion.“The banner was a Navy idea, the ship’s idea,” Chun said.“The banner signified the successful completion of the ship’s deployment,” he said, noting the Abraham Lincoln was deployed 290 days, longer than any other nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in history.
Does anyone really believe that Bush was telling us the war was over ? What it meant was that the Iraqi Government had been overthrown, that was the mission ! And that major combat engagement in itself was over. Instead of offering support, morons like John Kerry took it as an opportunity to only bolster his perceived righteousness and campaign platform. And the media was only too happy to run with it.
———————————————————————-
The lib media was only too happy to put Kerrys statement all over creation;
“Landing on an aircraft carrier and saying ‘mission accomplished’ didn’t end a war, and standing in the Rose Garden and stating that ‘Iraq is a dangerous place’ does nothing to make American troops safer,” Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said in a written statement Tuesday.
wickle said,
December 27, 2007 at 6:44 pm
I’ll agree with you on that one … Thompson clearly said nothing about women in general. He stepped into a trap there, but it’s pretty clear what he meant from what he said.
I wouldn’t worry too much about it, though … the only people likely to believe the story are the ones who would never consider voting for Sen. Thompson, anyway. It’s just a nuisance and distraction from matters worth discussing — which is exactly what those behind the smear have in mind.
Holly said,
December 27, 2007 at 7:18 pm
I have two words that sum up 50% of why I support Fred:
Flat Tax.
micky2 said,
December 27, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Wickle,
The problem I see with this bullshit reporting and dishonest media is that it does effect those who would of considerd Thompson.
I’m talking about the fence sitters whom are mostly uninformed impressionable youths who are so naive and unsavy when it comes to the media that believe just about anything they here.
Its mostly our youth that is running around spreading all this disegenuous crap you here today. The bloated conspiracy theories, the lies about our president, and the percieved injustices we are supposedly commiting all over the world.
I believe its more than a distraction as you called it.
Its a play.
micky2 said,
December 27, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Sorry about the literary dickslexia. I always type here” when I mean “hear”
FRedStates.com said,
December 27, 2007 at 10:15 pm
Take heart… you are correct about the msm smear… but… generally speaking… the sheep who rely on MSM reports to do their candidate research are not engaged enough in the process to actually get out and vote. Sure… they may be there to answer the phone and tell a pollster they really love Huckabee but when it comes time to actually leave the house and go vote… will they be able to pull themselves away from reruns of Friends?
As a Fred Thompson supporter I have noticed the incredible bias Fox News shows against him… and how they continue to push Rudy down our throats… the latest example… Thompson’s polling 3rd in Iowa in front of McCain and Giuliani… and while Huckabee’s support is “soft” (to be kind) Campaign Carl did his recap of Iowa… he didn’t even mention Thompson…
Google “Roger Ailes Rudy Giuliani”
Faultline USA said,
December 27, 2007 at 11:45 pm
There’s absolutely no doubt that the media (even Fox to some extent) is icing out Thompson. There have been lots of reasons: He doesn’t fit the image. He was too late deciding to get in. He’s lazy. He’s just Hollywood . . . you name it. All phony spin.
The real reason is that he’s the biggest threat to the left of all the Republican candidates.
Chris said,
December 28, 2007 at 2:50 am
This is exactly how “lazy”, “no fire in the belly”, the “unaware” of the Schiavo case all got started…it’s all spin and agenda games.
They went over every page in the man’s record and spin is all they could come up with. The truly pathetic thing is that the American voter let the MSM get away with it. It’s the only reason why he’s where he is in the polls right now.
Are we going to let them get away with this??
mpinkeyes said,
December 28, 2007 at 5:09 am
When you see this type of mis-representation of the facts, you have to believe it’s intentional. They can’t be that incompetant, so they must be pushing their agenda.
Do they fear Fred Thompson in the general election? There has to be a reason for this journalist malpractice.
Oink said,
December 28, 2007 at 7:44 am
OF COURSE they fear Fred in the general election! It’s quite obvious to me that Fred’s the only candidate that can give Hillary Clinton a run for her money on the issues.
How much fun is it going to be if someone like Rudy or Mitt get the GOP nomination and they debate Hillary and she says “you had the same position I did “x” years ago, but you changed your views for politican gain.” That’ll be a shot in the arm for the DIMS and a major downer for the GOP!
beastof bourbon said,
December 28, 2007 at 9:25 am
come on………..Fred does not have a prayer in this election……..don’t fool yourself or waste your time on him , what he says or does ……..this country is sick of bush and any bush enabelers will go down in flames…..thats rooty , mitt , cementhead fred and huck………..self deluded people arguing about which loser is best.any dem will beat the best (sic) repub …………….
JustMe said,
December 28, 2007 at 9:53 am
I think Thompson is the most conservative of all the Republican candidates, which is why he’s my favorite. Romney’s a Mormon, which means he’s insane (Sorry, but anyone who believe he or she can eventually become a god and be greater than the God of the universe is a nut job.), Huckabee’s totally liberal on the illegal alien issue, and Giuliani is totally liberal on a multitude of issues. Oh, and don’t get me started on McCain. What a joke…
micky2 said,
December 28, 2007 at 10:28 am
Beast of bourbon huh ?
All you got is a Black man which the country is not ready for as president. And my 12 year old boy has better foriegn policy positions than him.
And then you have a woman running for president which the country is just as skeptical about, just because she is a woman. Thompson made a good point.
Shes got so much dirty laundry , all the Chinese laundramats in the world could not help her.
You want to talk about delusion ? Are you actually enthusiastic looking at your choices ?
Have another one !
delburd said,
December 28, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Give me a break he also said he knows his daughter will one day be president! all he said there was no woman on the Horizon(HILLARY) unless there is another female candidate running I wonder about Paul and Edward ?? this is so not news !! FRED THOMPSON 08 and beyond!!
Ross said,
December 28, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Of course they leave out the part when he went on to say that his daughter would be president….that he just didn’t want one “next year”.
Hacks
Infidel Granny said,
December 28, 2007 at 2:29 pm
The Fredheads should ban together to sue these publications for slander and defamation of character.
Kent Coleman, Ohio said,
December 28, 2007 at 2:34 pm
It seems the story has been updated on WVLT News, but after how many people viewed it. The title of the story and the first sentence quotes FT correctly. Power to the blogs andvoice of the internet!!
beastof bourbon said,
December 28, 2007 at 4:10 pm
“All you got is a Black man which the country is not ready for as president. And my 12 year old boy has better foriegn policy positions than him.
And then you have a woman running for president which the country is just as skeptical about, just because she is a woman.”
Well mickey2 , your fellow mouth breathers at your local tavern certainly feel the same way as you about a black man or woman being president…what you fail to understand ( and likely your 12 year old son does understand )is that the world has been changing and it’s not made up of gun toting , anti black, anti women people any more………..you think the country is as it was in the 50’s……….it’s not and you are in for a rude awakening. No sir , i’ll take my good Kentucky Bourbon Whisky over the grape kool aid you’ve been drinking………in the morning , I’ll be sober , but in the morning you will still be living in the past .
Delusion ? Any democrat knows more foreign policy than either Rooty or Mitt , not to mention cement head fred or huckster….the thing about foreign policy is a different approach is needed . Lets put it in terms you can relate to , if you read : take a Louis La Amour western , all your guys are the dumb gunslingers who don’t use their heads , just push into a fight , we need someone with a cool head , not blinded by anger and fear . Kapeesh ?
alaskancamel said,
December 28, 2007 at 4:46 pm
I think the problem is that all of the Dems are socialists and fascists, and most of the republicans are very close to that abyss. I think Fred has some good views on a few things, but overall, he seems to be just another statist in conservative clothing. I still think I am going to have to lean towards Ron Paul. Please show me where I am wrong.
arclightzero said,
December 28, 2007 at 5:11 pm
beastof bourbon, you’re arguments are typical of any democrat who can’t see past the nose on their own face.
Wile you obviously feel the need to degrade yourself to petty insults and name calling, let’s look at the facts here.
America is ready for a woman or a black man for president. The argument here isn’t we shouldn’t or can’t, rather that neither Clinton nor Obama are the ones to propel America into this fabled “next phase.”
Obama is as inexperienced as he is arrogant and his plainly anti-American sentiment is aimed to catching the vote of the “America is the world’s enemy” radical left more so than the moderate democrat voter.
Clinton has recognized the mistake of going too far left, but her lack of any spine or conviction in her relentless pandering paints her as a terrible choice for any sort of position of authority. A vote for Clinton would not be a vote for the first woman president. It would be a vote for for a spineless chameleon.
While I agree that a new approach to foreign policy is necessary for our future, I disagree that any of the dems out there will do the right thing. Their views of global collectivism and a world without borders is not good foreign policy. I haven’t seen a single democrat out there who acts with America’s best interest in mind.
The dems are motivated by the politics of envy and the desire to punish success. Is this the path that we want to take as a nation?
righttruthdebbie said,
December 28, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Clearly Fred being misquoted and even Fox News seems to be slanted against him. I don’t get it.
orlandocajun said,
December 28, 2007 at 5:24 pm
I agree…unless Margaret Thatcher, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingrham or Michelle Malking want to run for President, no woman should be President next year.
BYW, I don’t care if the media is quoting him directly or not. I agree with the media headlines.
If conservatives don’t vote for Fred, they’ll get the RINO, or Democrat, they deserve.
arclightzero said,
December 28, 2007 at 5:31 pm
alaskancamel, you’re right on two points there. the dems have gone so far to the left that they have more resemblance to socialists than democrats these days. This is left a vacuum in the moderate middle that sadly the Republicans have tried to fill. While they are still to the right of the dems, they are woefully distant from any sort of true conservatism any longer.
As for Ron Paul, I do like him and feel that he is a fine choice. I am a little iffy on his foreign policy and I don’t think he is as clear on policy as he could be, which is why I am endorsing Fred so heavily. I also think that Fred has the best opinions on government reform, which is something that I feel very strongly about.
An outstanding look at Fred’s policies can be found here:
http://www.nationalplatforms.com/candidates/fred_thompson.html
I would not deter anybody from choosing Ron Paul as he is certainly on the right path when it comes to the current Republican candidates, but I would urge you to consider Fred as a viable candidate.
Kaycee said,
December 28, 2007 at 6:14 pm
Just announced that Fred Thompson will be on Fox News Sunday.
arclightzero said,
December 28, 2007 at 7:11 pm
It will be interesting to see how they treat him since he has called them out before for being biased and loading “analyses” in their own favor…
micky2 said,
December 28, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Bourbon.
I have no problem with a black man or a woman being president, if they were a decent candidate.
For you too imply that I am biased for some reason because I am supposed to be living in the 50s is just plain ignorance on your part.
Unfortunatley it seems you drink cheap rot gut bourbon.
Its known to produce some mean detox hallucinations.
I put the bottle down 15 years ago, and turned into a conservative at almost the same time. I grew up, and I soberd up.
What your candy coated world doesnt tell you is that racism and bigotry are alive and well in America as you have so well displayed.
This is the reason I said what I said. Not because I personally feel that race or gender makes a difference in intelligent decision making.
Joe Biden has more experience than Obama and Clinton put together. The least the left could do is put a candidate up front that at least has some knowledge of what goes on in this world and has some experience in our government. And those two would not be Clinton or Obama, period !
Clinton has never even run a koolaide stand in her life. But shes real good at giving it away, like everything else she has promised everyone from free health care to 401Ks to tuitions and even a nice chunk of cash for anyone who has a baby.
Obabmas foriegn policy experience could be written on the front of your forehead. He already said he would bomb our allies and have tea with our enemies.
They’re both idiots.
As an expert in the field of alcohol, drugs and addiction . I can tell you that you need at least 30 days to get the major effects of alcohol out of your system. Overall effects take 8 years to get completely out of your system only because it soaks ionto your bones, And it takes 8 years for a bone to regenerate itself completely.
I have a feeling the bone in your head is slightly thicker than any other in your body.
KAPEESH !?
ChenZhen said,
December 28, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Stupid question…but why the heck didn’t he just say Clinton?
Sure, the headlines mislead somewhat, but I took the quote as a tad chauvinistic regardless.
alaskancamel said,
December 28, 2007 at 9:36 pm
I am researching Fred as we speak. I will compare them both and see what the fall out is.
connecticut said,
December 29, 2007 at 1:39 pm
As evidenced by some of the comments here many people are brain washed by the mainstream media, also know as the “democrat elites”. Hopefully the Internet will continue to expose them for what they are.
The fact that some candidates appear to “not have a prayer”, is what this American political system is all about.
Express your personal opinion by supporting and voting for the candidate whose positions you agree with and believe are best for the country as a whole.
This idea created by the Media that you can only vote for the candidate that “they” say has the best chance of winning, otherwise you are wasting your vote, is complete rubbish, and goes against every concept that our forefathers instilled in this great American experiment.
I would like to see a Fred and Rudy ticket, and if elected have Rudy the Vice-president appointed head of Homeland Security. jmho
arclightzero said,
December 30, 2007 at 9:38 am
The media is trying to run this campaign, which they are making painfully obvious to those of us who don’t buy into their garbage “journalism.”
If the media had any objectivity, they would simply report on the fact and promote candidates based on their policies and aptitudes. They wouldn’t be catering to a select few while dogging the others - who are more often than not much better choices than the media puppets.
alaskancamel said,
January 11, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I was watching the google interviews with most of the candidates. What I found interesting was the amount of hits each candidate received. Ron Paul had almost 500,000 views, the next highest was Clinton with 72,000. It seems to me that even though the media is shunning people like Fred and Ron, they still are getting momentum.
We often hear “I would vote for “X” but they have no chance”. If every person said that voted who they thought would best run the country, their candidate may just have a chance.
arclightzero said,
January 11, 2008 at 2:32 pm
I don’t know if you read my post today, but I sort of tried to address this problem with Fred and Ron Paul… Take a read and let me know what you think.
http://arclightzero.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/why-the-gop-is-failing-fred/