Fred Thompson Replies to Michael Moore's Debate Challenge

He doen't need to debate Moore right now. He'll be debating soon enough when he enters his candidacy.
It's all about tactics.
 
Then he could have said "I'll debate you later." (in a funny way if he prefers). As it is, if you read between the lines, he's simply chickening out.
 
I thought he was viable and give him credit for stating his views. Once I heard them though, anit-abortion and several others, well , I dislike him as a candidate.
 
This is just an actor playing the part of a tough politician and alot of people seem to be falling for it.
Click to expand...

Flash back to when Regan was a candidate there LOL . I havnt decided if i like Thompson or not yet .. but imho so far he is ahead of most of the rest of them .
 
but imho so far he is ahead of most of the rest of them
Click to expand...
That is just like saying "he is the prettiest pig at the fair."

That may be true but no matter how much lipstick you put on them they will still kiss like a pig.

The worst part for me is that when I see someone like him, that is obviously acting and INHO playing a part, I always wonder who is writing their lines and pulling their strings.
 
Umm ... acting isn't what made him famous. He was respected and well known long before he ever took an acting role. Think Watergate counsel and U.S. Senator.

Whether you agree with him on a particular issue or not, he'll tell you straight up where he stands. He doesn't toe dance around issues or look for answers he thinks you want to hear. That in itself is refreshing.

You may attack his stand on issues but to suggest by his current profession that he is somehow phoney is , I believe, misdirected. He's an honorable man and what you see is pretty much what you get.
 
Aren't most if not all politicians actors to some extent anyway?
We will never see an unscripted release from any politicain. The stakes are far too high to leave anything to chance. Even if one wanted to "wing it" their PR team would never allow it.

I don't see this as a cop out or chickening out on the part of Fred Thompson. It's a smart move to avoid a debate with an unprincipled, sensationalist hack who really has nothing to loose. Moore can make all of the off base unfounded assertions he wants and not worry about being called for it. If Thompson makes one mistake attempting to counter some off the wall claim all we'll read about for days afterward is how he failed. Moore needs to be marginalized and ignored, and that is what Thompson is attempting to do.
 
Ok, what is he lying about?
Click to expand...
So you do not question the motives of a politician that is trying to get your vote unless someone actually points out an active falsehood?

You do not scrutinize their words and actions and look at all possible angles for your own personal benefit?
 
MarkB said:
I don't see this as a cop out or chickening out on the part of Fred Thompson. It's a smart move to avoid a debate with an unprincipled, sensationalist hack who really has nothing to loose.
Click to expand...

+1 there!

Fred Thompson on the issues

  • Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
  • Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
  • Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
  • Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

I don't agree with all of his votes, nor all of his positions, but at least he seems to stand by his principles and articulates his position with (*gasp*) logic.
 
Enh.. given that debating Moore would be pretty much the very definition of casting pearls before swine, doesn't bother me really Thompson turned him down.

And it was cute. :)
 
I have to agree... a debate with moore would have been more like

"when you argue with an idiot... most people just see two idots arguing.....

I actually consider myself one of those liberal... pinkos... but Moore is an embarisment to 'our cause'. Thompson on the other hand looks like a stand up guy, regardless of whether I agree with his politics or not.... the only problem is he's a politician.
 
Thompson on the other hand looks like a stand up guy, regardless of whether I agree with his politics or not.... the only problem is he's a politician.
Click to expand...

And there's the rub, for those of you who haven't figured it out. Politicians run for senator, congressman president, not the corner gas station owner.


Edit: It amazes me to see people amazed that only politicians run for office.
 
Then he could have said "I'll debate you later." (in a funny way if he prefers). As it is, if you read between the lines, he's simply chickening out.
Click to expand...
I too don't see it as chickening out
I see it as pointing out that Moore is a nobody with no credibility to anyone but those Springer fans and is not worth his time

Does anybody here really disagree? Or should he also give debate time to Fonda and Sean Penn?
 
I think its great. When is the last time you ever saw a politician deal like this? He's definately attracting my vote, both for his honesty and for his voting record.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top