How do the "other Presidential Candidates / both parties/ feel about Fred Thompson's missing the "debate" AND

Question

Receiving MILLIONS of dollars worth of FREE publisaty, FREE!!!!!! ON ALL - ALL OF THE NEWS MANAGEMENT NETWORKS ????
Did Fred out think and outclass them all???
Like him or not ( I have not made up my mind yet), He could not have gotten this much "Talk About", had he spent 15,000,000.00 dollars !!!!
As far as New Hampshire is conserned about FEELING left out, LOOK AT WHO YOU SENT TO REPRESENT YOU FOR THE PRESIDENTAL RACE IN 2004 !!!!!
NEW HAMPSHIRE, SUCK IT UP, YOU ARE MINISCULE IN THE SCHEME OF NATIONAL POLITICS !!!!!! Uncle Wil

Answer 1

Fred Thompson skipping the debate, BRILLIANT! As far as I can tell, Americans are looking for a President who speaks to ALL of us, and not just the partisans. By addressing the people directly, he has garnered a better position for himself and his views. He has stepped off the regular path and gone his own way. Leadership is not a beauty contest, it's about strength of character, positivity, and standing tall. Seems to be,that Fred has risen above the fray of the debate.

It was wonderful to see that the entire first segment os the debate was devoted to talking about Fred Thompson. Anyone who can say this isn't a brilliant strategy will come to regret those words on January 20, 2009, when his sworn in.

Answer 2

it extremely is already started with Adolph Giuliani: NYC firefighters are, with a view to communicate, torching him for his irresponsbility finest up, or maybe consisting of, 9/11, that's his sole declare to Presidential plausibility. Face it: If Giuliani had left workplace a 300 and sixty 5 days formerly, he could've been laughed out of the race as quickly as he have been given in. he's working fullyyt on what he did on 9/11, and that's a travesty. and that's basically the 1st reason to not vote for the guy, the 1st of many.

Answer 3

He's only a distraction to take away votes from Ron Paul. If he was serious, why is he not participating in the debates? Does he not want to express his views? Does he even have views? It's all theater, people are dumb enough to vote for an actor. Look at Arnold!

Answer 4

Rest assured needs to do his homework a little better Fred just turned 65 ... reagan was almost 70, many would be older.. nice mud slinging though

Answer 5

If you have your hopes pinned on Fred Thompson, I feel sorry for you.

Never mind the fact that he would be the oldest President ever if he won.

People will love that he is married to a domineering trophy wife:
Fred Thompson's 'trophy wife' runs the show

Even the Fundies don't like him:
James Dobson: 'Fred Thompson Worships Satan'

Police probably aren't lining up to support him:
Fred Thompson Opposed Bullet Proof Vests for Cops Hotlist

And what did Nixon think about him?

"Oh, s***! That kid? He's dumb as hell." -- Richard Nixon, on Watergate tapes, after being told Fred Thompson was hired as Republican counsel
I would like to close with the most damning thing against him.
He's a HORRIBLE actor

Answer 6

I think they were kind of ambivalent about it, like they didn't really care if he did or did not attend the debate last night.

Answer 7

Fred knows what he's doing!! Appears to be a smart guy thus far!

Answer 8

He's a pro when it comes to the media, and it shows.

Answer 9

Fred Thompson is not a real conservative.

Conservatives who look to Thompson for salvation need to pause and consider his record—a record that includes these votes:

♦ FOR restricting the rights of grassroots organizations to communicate with the public. See ACU’s vote 3, 1998.

♦ FOR allowing the IRS to require political and policy organizations to disclose their membership—a vote against the constitutional rights of free association and privacy. (The Clinton Administration used such IRS intimidation against conservative groups that opposed them.) See ACU’s vote 11, 2000.

♦ AGAINST impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, specifically the reappointment and reauthorization of managers (drawn from the Republican membership of the House Judiciary Committee) to conduct the impeachment trial in the Senate. See ACU’s vote 1, 1999.

♦ AGAINST an accelerated elimination of the “marriage penalty.” See ACU’s vote 10, 2001.

♦ FOR handouts to politicians, specifically taxpayer funding of presidential campaigns. See ACU’s vote 6, 1995.

♦ FOR handouts to politicians, specifically congressional perks such as postage and broadcast time funded by taxpayers. See ACU’s vote 13, 1996.

♦ AGAINST restraints on federal spending, specifically the Phil Gramm (R-TX) amendment to limit non-defense discretionary spending to the fiscal 1997 levels requested by President Clinton. See ACU’s vote 6, 1997.

♦ FOR affirmative action in federal contracts. See ACU’s vote 9, 1995.

♦ FOR the Legal Services Corporation, the perennial liberal boondoggle that provides political activism disguised as “legal services” to Democratic constituencies. See ACU’s vote 16, 1995, and vote 17, 1999.

♦ FOR an increase in the minimum wage, which, of course, increases unemployment among the young and poor. See ACU’s vote 16, 1996.

♦ FOR President Clinton’s nomination of Dr. David Satcher as U.S. Surgeon General. Among other things, Satcher opposed a full ban on partial-birth abortion. See ACU’s vote 1, 1998.

♦ FOR open-ended military commitments, specifically in regard to U.S. troops in Kosovo. See ACU’s vote 8, 2000.

♦ FOR corporate welfare, specifically the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). See ACU’s vote 23. 1999.

♦ AGAINST worker and shareholder rights, specifically the Hatch (R-UT) amendment to require unions and corporations to obtain permission from dues-paying members or shareholders before spending money on political activities. See ACU’s votes 4 and 5, 2001.

♦ AGAINST property rights and FOR unlimited presidential power, specifically by allowing President Clinton to implement the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which he established by executive order, without congressional approval. See ACU’s vote 20, 1997.

♦ FOR restricting the First Amendment (free speech) rights of independent groups. See ACU’s vote 23, 1997.

♦ FOR the trial lawyers lobby, and specifically against a bill that would put common-sense limitations on the medical malpractice suits that increase health costs for all of us. (Of course! He’s been a trial lawyer himself for some three decades.) See ACU’s vote 18, 2002.

And, last but not least:

♦ FOR limitations on campaign freedom of speech, by limiting contributions to national political parties to $2,000 and limiting the rights of individuals and groups to participate in the political process in the two months before elections. See ACU’s vote 7, 2002.

There you have it. The actor who talks like a tough conservative has, in his real political life, voted in all these ways to increase the power of the federal government, limit the rights of taxpayers and individual citizens, and shut grassroots activists out of the political process.

Ronald Reagan he is NOT!
http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/gw3/articles-latestnews/articles.php?CMSArticleID=1827&CMSCategoryID=19

Also he is too liberal on immigration.
Americans For Better Immigration rated his voting record with a "C" grade.
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html

Ron Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter all have more conservative voting records on immigration.
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop2.html

I will be voting for Ron Paul.

Answer 10

I think that it was cowardly, no matter what I think about his policies or him personally.