The Campaign For DA


What? A Republican Actor For President? Oh ....Wait

Well, Fred Thompson finally announced today (while taping The Tonight Show) that he's running for President. Finally, the Republicans have their man. Barring some colossal screwup, I think he's a cinch for the nomination. And I'm not at all comfortable that Hillary or Obama can beat him either.

We'll know in 14 . . . sheesh . . . 14 months.


Crud Bonemeal said...

It's about time. This is my guy. I might even believe that he won't crater in to liberal pressure the way President Bush II has.

Anonymous said...

...---... ...---... NEWS FLASH

The only thing that will change in 14 months is that in 17 months we'll find out we've hired another pack of liars who are in politics for personal gain and could honestly give a rats ass what we think or care about.

It should be perfectly clear that it's impossible to vote in a group of people that will work for the good of those that voted for them.

It hasn't happened in any of our lifetimes so far.

wordkyle said...

The Democrat character- assassination machine is already in motion.....stay tuned.

Gator said...

I'm going be an optimist here and predict that Fred is going to win the election and I do believe him when he says he's wanting to shake things up in DC. I think he will do his best to change things for the better, unfortunately the mess that will be left for him after the Bush Admin is through will take at least half his term to fix.

Where do I sign up to work on his campaign?

Condoleesa said...

I am voting for him too. He ain't perfect but way better than the other options.

Anonymous said...

Well Nancy,........I don't remember....

Anonymous said...

Gator, I'm right behind you.

Anonymous said...

Careful Gators got some mean gas , don't get too close behind her .

Anonymous said...

What fun! Some people like to suggest Obama has a "lack of experience." Well just what "experience" does good ole Fred have? A couple of years as Senator from Tennessee. Counsel to a committee investigating Nixon? A supporting actor role as a DA on a TV program? Name some important legislation he was involved in. What's his substantive position on anything? C'mon, I waiting.

Anonymous said...

To quote an old Kingston Trio song--"and I don't like anybody very much"!

goober said...

All you have to do is look at his behavior while he was in the senate. He is a Cheney/Rove/Ginhgrich clone, and if he gets elected, it will most certainly spell the end of our constitution and our country as we know it. Churchill said it best,"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." Freddy is an absolute fanatic.

Anonymous said...

At least he has a young hot wife...

Anonymous said...

9:20 - you said it best.

As we think about which crook to elect, the next war is being planned at some world summit.

And we'll fund it or go to jail.

TXsharon said...

MERCY! Deliver us from evil!

Anonymous said...

At least he hasn't been pandering around for special interest money and has a high rating in the polls without spending a dime. He has made the other contenders look like a bunch of fools. I kinda like a guy who isn't for sale.

Anonymous said...

7:01 - Gee, I haven't been pandering for special interest money and I'm not for sale. I guess I should therefore be at the top of your list for president - if I get around to announcing.

Anonymous said...

Amen 9:20. It does not matter anymore, Republican or Democrat.
They don't give a "Rats-Ass". Congress has the lowest approval rating in history and they could care less. I truly believe when they talk about repairing health care and social security it's strictly said to make the tax payers feel better and they get to feel "warm and fuzzy". Think about it, if you're a Congressman or Senator you don't pay into Social Security and you have free Health Care. When they leave office, no matter how they leave, they get their paycheck for the rest of their lives. Who in the hell believes they truly care about something that doesn't effect them. Give me a break! I have voted Republican all my life but looking back, it doesn't matter. They're all there for the same reason, to line their pockets. Hell, they all sneak back into the "house" at 12:01 am and vote themselves a raise and that's been documented. And they want you to believe they are honest, upfront and forthright? I wonder what they would do if no one in this country paid their taxes until they began to truly care and demonstrated it. WAKE UP AMERICA!!

Anonymous said...

Best of the worst?

Think Frustrated said...

The only reason he does well in the polls without campaigning is because he's a C- list celebrity.

I think he's too much of a polarizing Republican. Our country is so divided, and now we've got this guy who is ultra conservative. I hope he's not elected.

That said, I don't really like Obama or Hillary, either.

Anonymous said...

7:01 You can't be serious!! This guy has been in Washington and Hollywood, he is not Billy Graham.

Why do Republicans voters like the western image for President? The voters are not looking at the man, but his image.

We get the government we deserve. If you want another George Bush, vote for the actor. If you keep doing the same thing, you are going to keep getting the same result.

He will just play a part...President of the United States.

It is going to take more than a Hollywood actor to solve all the problems our country is facing.

Republicans have their man and the conservative base is happy!

Anonymous said...

Gator, two years isn't going to fix all the problems because you are going to campaign for a man who is going to dig the hole deeper!

He is part of the problem; not the solution.

Young people are asking why we can't have good candidates to run for office. They should be concerned; because if the Republicans keep the White House, they are going to be fighting a war somewhere.

Bonemeal, you have identified your candidate as to the right of George Bush! Wow, that is just where we need to go. Further to the right. Your brain is full of bonemeal because it is not thinking!

Anonymous said...

I'm tired of Republicans. I just want a little break from Republicans. I vote for anyone but a Republican.

Anonymous said...

I'm amused at how txsharon keeps changing her picture in attempt to find one that makes her seem attractive. Keep looking . . .

Anonymous said...

Not for sale???

Hasn't Fred been a Wall Street lobbyist on the side for the last few years???


Isn't this the guy who takes a limo everywhere, except when it lets him off at his old red pickup in a parking lot a couple of blocks from his press conferences; who then drives the pickup to the press conference and back to the lot, to have the limo take him off to his next business meeting?

Isn't this the guy who other Senate Republicans quietly criticized for his laziness??

Oh yeah. Fred's the guy. You're right Barry. Given the declining intelligence of the American electorate, he's a shoe-in.

Anonymous said...

Fred's not an actor, but he plays one on tv.

Anonymous said...

And he did help stop those traitors from rescuing the drug lord with Bruce Willis ... oh wait, maybe that was a movie

Anonymous said...

The other Republican actor President wasn't too bad! Especially when you consider Bill Clinton or Dubya.

Anonymous said...

Deficit spending needs to stop!!!

I will vote for anyone who "promises" to stop spending the money we borrow from China.

Dubya wants to make his tax cuts, that benefit the richest Americans permanent, but he also won't stop spending, spending, spending money we do not have.

Who cares about the social issues- I want sound economic policy in this country. Stop deficit spending. Stop cutting taxes for the rich: “trickle down” does not work. Stop deficit spending. We are only creating a bigger burden for our children when we spend money we do not have.

wordkyle said...

Taxes were not cut for the rich. Tax rates were cut, which resulted in "the rich" paying more in taxes.

Gator said...

To Anonymous 8:30am:

I am a Republican and although that may not be something to brag about these days, I'm trying to stay true to my party. Yes, it has been hard and I have questioned my choices of party affiliation, but right, wrong or indifferent we should all be respected for the party we choose to stand behind. This country needs something different from the current administration and I just can't go with Billary or Obama - their both slimy snakes.

Personally, I see Fred Thompson as a Republican that stands apart from the rest of the politicians that are running right now. They're all dogs to some degree and I'm sure he isn't perfect, but he is the brightest spot we have right now.

Anonymous said...

WE WANT ROSS PEROT...WE WANT ROSS PEROT...WE WANT ROSS PEROT.......hahahahahahahahahahehehehehehhohohohoh

Anonymous said...

What is the mindset of a country that says (listen to Hillary) that we should take care of women and children in other countries.

We are not even coming close to doing that in America.

Anonymous said...

The Bush tax cuts have contributed to revenues dropping in 2004 to the lowest level as a share of the economy since 1950, and have been a major contributor to the dramatic shift from large projected budget surpluses to projected deficits as far as the eye can see.

The tax cuts have conferred the most benefits, by far, on the highest-income households — those least in need of additional resources — at a time when income already is exceptionally concentrated at the top of the income spectrum.

(From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.)

Anonymous said...

Tax cuts my ass.

Have you forgotten that there is this small thing called a WAR going on that has cost us around 7 trillion dollars so far?

Divide that by every person in the United States subtract this wonderful tax cut and tell what the benefit is when you get done.

Would you like some warm milk just before you go night night because you have been lulled to sleepytown by your Uncle Bush.

Anonymous said...

Let's see, Fred is against abortons, but his Lobying Co represented an abortion rights group. So if there is money involved he will pocket his is that different from what we have?

His explanation? "I didn't know."
Yep, he truly is like Reagan, but his alz has started before his term
Let's hope he doesn't forget where he put the little red phone.

Crud Bonemeal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Crud Bonemeal said...

First, I want to say to anonymous at 8:30 AM that name calling does not qualify as intelligent, well-reasoned argument.
Second, that Thompson appears to be to the right of President Bush is my point exactly. He needs to occupy the space vacated by President Bush as he has gradually capitulated to the liberal point of view on several issues, not the least of which are immigration, prematurely pulling troops from Iraq, and using federal tax money to make national charitable contributions to individuals, groups, and other countries.

Be that as it may, and as important an national elections are to our well-being, please pay attention to your local races. That is where Americans and Texans get hurt by losing money and liberty. Bad leaders at the local level can cause more harm than Washington can. These big elections serve as a diversion for bad candidates to get themselves elected because people know more about the President than who their state representative is, for example.

Crud Bonemeal said...


Crud Bonemeal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
wordkyle said...

"anon" 1:48 said:

“The Bush tax cuts have contributed to revenues dropping in 2004 to the lowest level as a share of the economy since 1950…”

The website you cited quotes (and does not dispute) the “Mid-Session Review” of the Office of Management and Budget’s statement: “[R]evenues will be slightly above their 30-year average in 2007, measured as a share of the economy." Once they were given time to take effect, the tax rate cuts increased revenue.

“The tax cuts have conferred the most benefits, by far, on the highest-income households — those least in need of additional resources — at a time when income already is exceptionally concentrated at the top of the income spectrum.”

Benefits there may be, but none of them is a reduction in taxes paid. The top 5% of wage earners paid 56.47% of all income taxes for tax year 2000 and 57.13% of all income taxes for tax year 2004. That’s an increase in the percent of all income taxes paid by “the highest-income households” since Bush’s tax rate cuts went into effect. (See numbers here.)

What you and other Liberal Democrats refuse to admit is that Bush's tax rate cuts increased revenue, just as they did for Harding and Coolidge in the 20's, JFK in the 60's and Reagan in the 80's.

TXsharon said...

To Wordy: Please get more fiber in your diet! You are dangerously full of it.

regardless of tax policy, tax revenues increase during economic expansions.

The Bush economy is a colossal failure and no matter how hard you try to convince us otherwise our pocketbooks are speaking louder than you ever will.

Anonymous said...

Bonemeal, your actor President is not going to do anything to keep big business from cheap labor! Sorry, the right wing and big business have been in bed together for a long time.

But, it will be used as the new wedge issue in the 2008 campaign.

Time to change to a Democrat for reasons other than immigration. No one is going to do anything about that!

You will hear promises that they never intend to deliver but isn't that what usually happens?

Gator, no one is going to shake up anything in Washington among the Republicans unless you work for Ron Paul. Why not check him out?

Saying the right things and he is from Texas.

Anonymous said...

I'll be campaigning with Gator. TxSharon shouldn't be pointing out "evil" with that eerily red picture of hers. I keep thinking it's the Devil and then, oops!, it's just TxSharon.

And it's only 2007 yet. This will be one helluva long year.

wordkyle said...

TS - Thanks for the clever retort. Your intellect is truly dazzling.

You claim that the increased revenue is due to economic expansion, then in the next breath claim the Bush economy is a colossal failure.

1) Could it be that the economic expansion is because of Bush's tax policies?

2) You claim that the increased revenue is due to economic expansion, yet the percentage of revenue is higher than the 30-year average. If it were due only to expansion, the percentqge would not change.

Make me the point of your argument all you want; my data is accurate.

TXsharon said...

Wordy: Our economy has grown on credit. The federal expenditures have far exceeded federal revenues. See, Bush cut taxes for the wealthy but he forgot something...


wordkyle said...

TS - Your speaking of the deficit, and government spending. I completely agree that Bush hasn't done enough to reduce spending.

However, my comments referred to revenues, not the deficit. Another falsehood about the tax rate cuts was being told -- and which you are trying to perpetuate by dissembling. The data indicate that revenues increased after Bush's tax rate cuts...which was to be expected, based on historical precedent, and which Liberal Democrats seem intent on ignoring.

Your final, all-caps conclusion is a statement, not a fact. It is accurate only when politicians want to cut the deficit. Regardless of party, politicans won't give up what they're power is based on. (And I'm all for cutting government spending.)

In the 90's, when Republicans tried to cut the rate of increase in spending -- not an actual cut at all, just slowing the increase -- Democrats claimed that Republicans wanted to starve children and kill the elderly.

The Bush tax rate cuts worked.

TXsharon said...

Wordy said: What you and other Liberal Democrats refuse to admit is that Bush's tax rate cuts increased revenue, just as they did for Harding and Coolidge in the 20's, JFK in the 60's and Reagan in the 80's.

First, even the super wealthy see that the tax burden in this country falls on the middle class and they are now admitting that situation cannot continue because it's unhealthy and will eventually have negative consequences for them as well.

What the uber conservative neocons fail to understand is that the Bush and Reagan economies were both failures.

The tax cuts did not work because the point was to strengthen the overall economy of the US and our economy is in the toilet.

If I take a job paying me $50,000 more each year that will only benefit me if I spend less than the increase. In the case of our economy, it matters not what the tax revenues were because we overspent and borrowed more than those increased revenues. It is so with Bu$h and it was so with Reagan.

Face it the Bathroom Blowjob Party cannot be trusted with the budget.

Now, I'm sure you will come back with some of your Alberto Gonzalez approved techniques for applying logic but I won't reply to you further. It doesn't matter what you say. U.S. Citizens are sick of the Bathroom Blowjob Party.

wordkyle said...

TS - Once again you change the subject to avoid admitting that I'm right.

My point is simple: The Bush tax cuts increased revenues. It shouldn't be surprising, as the same result has occurred before (as I mentioned in a previous post.)

You try to confuse the matter by mentioning government spending, which I agree is out of control. The Democrat congress overspent in the 80's, just as the Republican congress did more recently. The new Democrat congress shows the same propensity to recklessly spend our money and use our own money to control us (via earmarks and entitlement spending.)

One way to lessen their control is to reduce the amount of our money the politicians take away, and to increase our take-home pay...via tax cuts.

Denney Crane said...


You said, "If I take a job paying me $50,000 more each year that will only benefit me if I spend less than the increase."

I'm sorry to disagree with you but that money will afford me and my children a better standard of living, a safer automobile, possibly a safer area to live in, better insurance; not to mention a better education for my children and grandchildren.

You also said, "The Bush economy is a colossal failure and no matter how hard you try to convince us otherwise our pocketbooks are speaking louder than you ever will."

Once again, I disagree. I don't know where you get your information/propaganda, but our economy is based on business and business is good. After 9/11 it went to hell in a handbasket and the "Bush economy" rebounded from a devasting period. Say what you want, but free enterprise is frightened by the Democratic "share the wealth" strategy. Watch when the layoffs start...and they build more manufacturing plants in Mexico.

Your pocketbook at Target or the gas pump is not what this economy is based on. I'm sure it can't be doing too bad or you wouldn't have all this time to be on the internet...nor could you afford internet.

Lastly, when you say Reagan's economy was a failure, you truly have no regard for anyone or anything that is not a part of your Democratic party. (I am not Republican by the way)

You talk about the Bathroom Blowjob Party when everyone up in DC seems to be whoring, no matter what party. If you stop blowing us will we loose interest like when it's the real thing? Go
service your boy Edwards and take your pocketbook with you cause you will need it. What a dumbass!

Denney Crane said...

U. S. Citizens are sick of both party members and have lost almost all faith in them; can you not read?