A Rudy-Backer at the American Spectator Blog attempts to derail Fred's campaign. The first line sets the tone:
It was a cringe inducing day for Thompson in the MSM and blogosphere coverage.
Hooboy.
After some ditherwiddle about shoes and a golf-cart, the poster then quotes Thompson's response to a couple of questions.
"I think with regard to gay marriage you have a [ inaudible ] issue. I don't think one state ought to be able to pass a law requiring gay marriage or allowing gay marriage and have another state be required to follow along under full faith and credit. There’s some exceptions, exemptions for that. Hasn’t happened yet, but I think a federal court very well likely will go in that direction. And the constitutional amendment would cure that. I think Roe versus Wade was a bad decision. There were things that are bad law and bad medicine. You don't just get up one day and overturn the entire history of the country with regard major social policies without any action by Congress, without any action by the American people or a constitutional amendment. And that's what happened. Shouldn’t have happened. It ought to be reversed."
Here's what the RudyBlogger said about that response:
He then gave a remarkably muddled interview with John King, leading to guffaws at Campaign Spot and confusion about what he meant with this response to a question on abortion and gay marriage...
And her solution for this?
He needs to have crisp, understandable answers to standard press questions
In other words, "dumbed down" stuff--like what Rudy hands out.
The bloglodyte from the AmSpec has caught the Intellectualoid Fever. It's a common disease. People with this malady simply know that Americans cannot understand clear but lengthy responses to vexing questions.
Or maybe it's the pundits who cannot understand them.
I saw that interview, or a similar one on Fox. Seemed pretty straight forward to me. How can another "Republican" (see RINO) whom is supposed to hold the same ideals criticize a man for trying to make it clear that he doesn't believe in Judges legislating from the bench. This is a real easy one for Thompson. Ask Giuliani how HE feels about Roe v. Wade and abortion. That should get the base riled up. He is a true flip flopper on the topic and Lord knows Thompson could make him sweat in a debate over the issue. They can throw stones all they want, but Thompson would eat him alive with his quick wit and political savvy.
ReplyDeleteAnd here I thought the American Spectatorwas founded to confront the Intellectualoids? Don't tell me they've fallen for cosmopolitan Rudy. What happened to the magazine that was founded in Indiana? Have they gone Broadway Bound?
ReplyDeleteYes, Wiggy--that's precisely why I used the term 'Intellectualoids.'
ReplyDeleteIrony is fun!
To be fair, their blog-site has a variety of opinionators; the very next post offered a rational(!!) take on PJB's campaign and the populist sentiments of PJB and Gary Bauer.
Rational takes on populism are NOT favored by Pubbie operatives--nor by Dem operatives, either.
That would encourage actual real live men and women to put their greasy work-roughened hands on the Candidates and their Handlers in support of their platform, which would result in Bad Hair Days.
Can't have any of THAT stuff.
Actually, Dad29, Jennifer Rubin has been writing daily attack posts on Fred for weeks now.
ReplyDeleteHer Rudy-love and Fredophobia are so obvious that American Spectator has lost much of its former credibility.