May 31, 2007
Fred Thompson to the Rescue? (Bill Press)
He hears a cry of distress. He steps into a phone booth. He dons his red cape. He leaps into action … It’s a bird. It’s a plane. It’s Fred Thompson!
Yes, in what many Republicans hope will be a repeat of 1980, another actor is flying to the rescue of the beleaguered GOP. According to Politico.com, Fred Thompson will file papers forming a campaign committee in early June, and officially announce his candidacy for president over the July 4 holiday.
Granted, it doesn’t take much to excite members of the Washington punditocracy. Nevertheless, Fred Thompson’s belated entry into the race has left even veteran reporters positively orgasmic — with little apparent reason.
No one can deny that, with the exception of Ron Paul, the current Republican field is decidedly unimpressive. Neither the Mayor nor the Senator nor the Used Car Salesman is setting the world on fire. But what makes Fred Thompson better than the other 10 candidates already in the race? And what does Thompson stand for? Does anybody really know?
Actually, it’s hard to tell. He’s a big supporter of Bush’s war in Iraq, but not of Bush’s immigration plan. In the Senate, he voted yes on drilling for oil in Alaska, but no on background checks on handguns purchased at gun shows. He voted yes on amending the Constitution to prevent flag-burning and yes on banning gay marriage, but no on raising the minimum wage.
In other words, there’s little apparent difference, on the issues, between Fred Thompson and all the other candidates — except that he’s not one of them. He’s not John McCain. He’s not Mitt Romney. He’s not Rudy Giuliani. And that is his singular appeal. But, surely, it’ll take a lot more than that to win the White House.
Thompson supporters — who gleefully call themselves “Fred-heads” — worship the actor-turned-senator-turned actor as the Second Coming of Ronald Reagan. Indeed, several former top Reagan aides, led by Michael Deaver, are helping Thompson shape his campaign. Like the Man from General Electric, they insist, Thompson is not only an actor. He’s folksy, likeable, articulate and, best of all, an outsider.
But, even with Deaver’s help, it’s going to be hard to sell Fred Thompson as the next Ronald Reagan. For one thing, he’s no Washington outsider. He came to Washington in 1973, as chief counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee, and has been there, in one capacity or another, ever since. From 1975 to 1992, he worked as a lobbyist, representing Westinghouse, GE, the Tennessee Savings and Loan League, and other clients. Elected to the Senate in 1994 to serve out the last two years of Al Gore’s term, he was reelected in 1996 and retired in 2002. Thompson’s an inside-the-Beltway fixture. He’s spent more time in Washington than he has in Tennessee.
Nor does Thompson win any awards for public speaking. Like Reagan, he’s good at reading a script. But, unlike Reagan, he’s not that good off the cuff. In fact, Thompson’s maiden 2008 campaign speech, before the Lincoln Club of Orange County, Calif. — whose members are credited with persuading Reagan to run for governor of California — left his audience underwhelmed. “No red meat.” “Too low key.” “It was not Reaganesque.” Those were just some of the post-speech comments reported by columnist Bob Novak.
The worst rap against Thompson is that he’s lazy. He quit the Senate because he preferred the much easier schedule of an actor. Sure, he’d like to be president, but does Thompson have the “fire in his belly” necessary to fight for and win the Republican nomination? If so, it’s not always obvious.
In March, I attended a talk radio seminar in Los Angeles. There in the crowd all weekend, as a contributor to ABC Radio, was the former senator from Tennessee, making no speech, just sitting in on panels, meals, and discussion groups, like all the rest of us. Meanwhile, the national media was buzzing with “breaking news” that Fred Thompson was actively considering jumping into the presidential race. I couldn’t help but think: “Doesn’t look like somebody who’s about to run for president to me!”
It’s a sign of how desperate Republicans have become that Fred Thompson’s campaign is even taken seriously. At the same time, remember Ronald Reagan, Clint Eastwood and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Democrats must beware of writing former actors off too easily.
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post
Share this post
What's This 22 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Fred is kidding himself if he think he can "act" his way into the White House. He is a joke. He is not Arthur Branch, but guarantee he will try and paint himself as such. He has no executive experience and frankly is not qualified to be POUTS!
Rudy Giuliani is the real deal. All otehrs are cheap immitation!
Comment by Jim Robinson — May 31, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
Please, all of this talk about Thompson's record are sure to make Igor go limp! SuperFred is flying in to save them, let's not pull too hard on his cape!
Seriously, aside from his less than inspiring record, his late entrance and deficit in campaign funds will make the going pretty rough for him, even if he discovers that "fire".
Comment by Derek D. — May 31, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
Bill Press:
Do you ever have something good to say about anybody.
You are one of the head muckrackers of the modern day Democrat Party. You people need to get a better plan than just running everybody and every idea down.
Last time I checked we still live in America and we are guaranteed certain rights. One of those are to run for President if you want. So let him. Or are you now more affraid of him then you are of Rudy ?
Comment by David Hamlin — May 31, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Well we could ask him about all that but he refuses to talk to anyone, even his supporters. I guess he can only read from a script. Imagine that.
Heres your sign….
Comment by Jim Robinson — May 31, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
Derek, no amount of this silly talk can make me limp. I feel strong and potent like Bubba on a double dose of Viagra and Cialis with Monica by his side wearing her best beret.
Fred has a magical appeal for the Republican party because he reflects it's core values and he can actually explain things to people in a coherent style. He is running against a field full of flawed candidates. I personally just love the depth of his thinking and his fundamental approach to problems as opposed to always trying to deal with the symptoms in the most politically expedient way possible. Plus I just know (yes, I AM distantly related to Nostradamus in spite of your doubts Derek) that he has the subconsious appeal that is necessary to be "the father of the country". And with the Democratic field full of people who you wouldn't want to sell you a used car, he is sure to win.
Comment by Igor R. — May 31, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Name one democratic presidential candidate who isn't a communist in the making.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 31, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
Another recycled reactionary joins the Republican rat-race for sacrificial scapegoat loser in 2008. Just what the sycophant stenographers of the Kept Korporate Kommintariat need to fill up slow news days: yet one more bedraggled and undistinguished Republlican rodent to hopefully make a "horse race" out of a predictable blowout.
Like with the now-long-detested Iraq-Nam quagmire, the public has already made up its collective mind about what disasters Republicans bring with them whenever they meddle in the nation's politics and government. Even Democratic Party "donkeys" look like thoroughbreds compared to this ridiculous Republican rabble. So yes, by all means, add one more mouse.
"And they're off!" Way too early. When even Rupert Murdoch starts throwing big bucks at the Democrat he wants to think will "win" (reason enough for me not to vote for her) the miniscule Republican mice that squeek ought to just pack it in and save us all the boredom they represent.
Comment by Michael Murry — May 31, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
So Fred appears slow and lazy?
Don't forget the race between the tortoise and the hare.
Comment by Henny — May 31, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
Jim R. you are so right. Rudy can bring confidence and optimism back to the country.
Comment by Cheryl O — May 31, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
Fred Thompson has a resume showing 17 years as a lobbyist? Oh boy, a lobbyist right off K Street? Just what we need. Give me a break.
Is Jack Abramoff going to run for the GOP nomination? How about Tom Delay; is he going to run for the GOP nomination?
If Delay did run, the media would give him a 'pass' as some down-home, innocent, country bumpkin. Just like Fred Thompson, the innocent, 17 year lobbyist. Yea right!
Geeezzz, these people make me sick. Filthy, rotten, no good, SOB's, neocon's, and brownshirts seemingly everywhere.
Comment by Chris in NM — June 1, 2007 @ 1:37 am
Yes, his long history as a lobbyist probably won't go over too well Chris, but anybody that can make the wingnuts as high as Limbaugh after a bottle of Oxycontin (at least until you start to talk about his record) should be in the race for the chance of added entertanment value. Of course, as Jim suggests, it all depends on the script he gets…
Comment by Derek D. — June 1, 2007 @ 9:46 am
Derek, come on, he's demonstrated plenty of times he can think for himself. He doesn't need any scripts.
Comment by Igor R. — June 1, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
Which episode was that, Igor?
Comment by Derek D. — June 1, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
Derek, that was a cute reply, but it's his multiple articles. Just google him. I wrote about some of them here several times.
Comment by Igor R. — June 1, 2007 @ 7:43 pm
I wonder what some Republicans will think of Ol' Fred once it comes to light that he was instrumental in impeaching Nixon? Add to that his swimming with the lobbying sharks on K Street and his tepid record as Senator from Tennessee. The long knives will be unsheathed by the other GOP candidates the minute he officially announces and they will shred him to ribbons.
As far as Rudy is concerned, once you get past the stench of corruption (see Bernie Kerik); the burning anger of the NYC cops and firefighters at his failure to protect the Ground Zero workers after 9/11; his bumbling as mayor pre-9/11; his tendency to rule as a dauphin (see his record as new York mayor); his lack of knowledge in foreign affairs; his endorsement of Bush's failure in Iraq; his boring and self-aggrandizing speeches; his divorcing his wife at a press conference; his penchant for dressing up like a woman, and you have the winning GOP candidate for 2008.
Sure, just like the Pope endorses twice-divorced men as good Catholics.
Comment by RS Janes — June 2, 2007 @ 7:10 am
I'm sure that they're riveting Igor, but I'll wait for the book to come out. Thanks for acknowledging my joke, at least. Hehehe, this is going to be SO much fun!
Nixon wasn't impeached RS, he was just forced to leave office in disgrace. I wonder what ol' SuperFred did, exactly, as chief counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee?
Comment by Derek D. — June 2, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
Derek, you just ignore what you may not like, and so you're blissful in dismissing him out of hand. He is a much more strategic thinker than any of the currently running bunch.
RS Janes, I've come across Fred's lobbyist record and Nixon impeachment involvement mentioned at least 10 times in the last two months, I don't think these are deep dark secrets.
Comment by Igor R. — June 2, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
Derek, you're absolutely right; Nixon quit before he could be impeached. I should have said that he was instrumental in investigating Nixon; at the time, as I remember, he was working with Tennessee Sen. Howard Baker and prepared questions for Baker to ask at the Senate hearings, as well as work as the GOP's chief counsel on the Seante Watergate panel. He also worked with Watergate investigators on assembling the information for the panel.
I don't know, Igor; two Republicans I've talked to were completely unaware that he had been involved with Watergate, or than he had been a lobbyist. They may not be secrets, but that doesn't mean Republican voters know much about his past prior to his days in the Senate.
If he does run, it might make for some interesting questions in the debates.
Comment by RS Janes — June 3, 2007 @ 6:55 am
After reading several articles about Fred (as suggested by Igoe), I've come to the conclusion Fred is an accomplished lobbyist. He would make a great president if we want to use 'earmarks' to appropriate our funds and enforce our system justice. Seems to be the perfect formula to foster more corruption. Thanks for the tip Igoe.
Comment by Chris in NM — June 3, 2007 @ 11:26 am
Who's ignoring? I'm loving it! If he does have a more strategically sound mind than the others, then he should be their nominee. It would be a great change of pace for the Republican Party.
Comment by Derek D. — June 3, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
Derek, well you sounded awfully sarcastic in dismissing him as just and actor.
Chris, I don't know why you took to spelling my name as Igoe. I also suggested to read articles by Fred, not about him, but I think all the mind-altering drugs you're taking have interfered with your cognitive processes.
Comment by Igor R. — June 4, 2007 @ 1:07 am
Dismissing? Who's dismissing? Didn't you read Mr. Press' last paragraph? There will be no dismissals here! I was suggesting that his career prior to his becoming an actor might be problematic, but don't worry about it.
Comment by Derek D. — June 5, 2007 @ 6:48 pm