Thompson apologizes to Huckabee

[Avatar4321]

http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2007/fred-thompson-campaign-apologies/

I found this rather amusing.

 

[Annie]

http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2007/fred-thompson-campaign-apologies/

I found this rather amusing.

Me too:

Evening Briefing: 12.13.07 »
Fred Thompson Campaign Apologies
Posted on December 13th, 2007
By Sean Hackbarth in Taxes, Cuba, Immigration

From Karen Hanretty, Deputy Communications Director:

In light of Mike Huckabee’s heartfelt apology to Mitt Romney for making reference to Romney’s religion in the New York Times Magazine, we at the Thompson Campaign would like to offer Huckabee our own heartfelt apologies for some references we’ve made about his record as Governor of Arkansas.

We apologize for pointing out that as Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee offered in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. That’s something he’d probably just as soon no one talk about.

A recent Washington Post-ABC News Iowa poll of Iowans likely to vote in the Republican caucus stated illegal immigration as their top issue of concern, tied with the war in Iraq.

We apologize for pointing out that in 2002 Huckabee wrote Pres. Bush a letter asking him to lift the Cuban embargo. It’s easy to see how Huckabee might have missed the finer points of a 40-year embargo. While he obviously knew enough about the embargo to ask that it be lifted, Huckabee clearly didn’t know enough to ask that it not be lifted. So for that, we’re sorry.

In 2002, Governor Huckabee strongly advocated lifting the embargo against Cuba saying it “harm our own agricultural and business interests,” “has not helped the people of Cuba” and has “provided Castro with a convenient excuse for his own failed system of government.” (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 3/29/02)

We apologize for referencing that 47% tax increase Huckabee imposed on Arkansas taxpayers when he was governor. That must be really awkward for him, now that he’s running in a GOP primary election. We notice he never points it out to voters.

Average Arkansan’s tax burden increased by over 47% between 1997 and 2005 (or $933 per person). (Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 10/9/07)

We apologize for telling reporters that a BA in Biblical Studies from Ouachita Baptist University doesn’t, in fact, make Huckabee more qualified to fight the war on terror than say…Fred Thompson.

In an interview with CBNNews in November, Huckabee said “…I truly understand the nature of the war that we are in with Islamo fascism. These are people that want to kill us. … And I don’t know if anybody fully understands that. I’m the only guy on that stage with a theology degree.”

 

[hjmick]

Now, if only Fred could get some traction he'd be in business.

 

[mattskramer]

Oh, how silly. Here come the petty jibes, crocodile tears, and mud slinging. It will probably be more entertaining that watching pro-wrestling.

 

[Avatar4321]

Oh, how silly. Here come the petty jibes, crocodile tears, and mud slinging. It will probably be more entertaining that watching pro-wrestling.

is telling the truth really mud slinging? I always thought mudslinging was lying about others.

 

[mattskramer]

is telling the truth really mud slinging? I always thought mudslinging was lying about others.

As I understand it, mud slinging does not necessarily have to consist of lies. I define mud slinging to include negative campaigning – giving information about an opponent’s history in a “negative light”. I would like to see someone campaign by never commenting on an opponent’s history. It would be great if a candidate would simply talk about his own ideas. If people are curious about the campaigner’s opponent’s record, then it should not be difficult to find out such information and the reasons for why the opponent voted as he did. I find it more informative to get information directly from the horse’s mouth – not from some other person’s negative spin.

 

[Detmurds]

Well, Fred is my #1 choice, and has been even before he officially got in the race. This tactic is pretty smart and doesn't make him look foolish like Hillary does.

Pretty smart if one asks me!

 

[Alpha1]

As I understand it, mud slinging does not necessarily have to consist of lies. I define mud slinging to include negative campaigning – giving information about an opponent’s history in a “negative light”. I would like to see someone campaign by never commenting on an opponent’s history. It would be great if a candidate would simply talk about his own ideas. If people are curious about the campaigner’s opponent’s record, then it should not be difficult to find out such information and the reasons for why the opponent voted as he did. I find it more informative to get information directly from the horse’s mouth – not from some other person’s negative spin.

Following this reasoning, you have the fine makings of an ignorant, ill-informed voter....
I don't say that be disrespectful, but thats what it amounts to....

If someone runs on cutting taxes, I want to know what his record is, and I don't mind his opposition pointing out the truth.
If he/she runs on civil rights, I want the opposition to point out if the candidate is really anti-civil rights.
ETC.....
I see nothing at all wrong with negative campaigning, as long as its FACT....
I want all the help I can get to be made aware of all of their ideas and to compare their records with what any of them say now....
And if ones lies about the others records, even that certainly tells me quite a bit...
Petty crap about Obama's first grade goals, or Rudys love life, or the ages of Thomson's or Kucinich's wives is akin to mud-slinging and irrelevant to being president....and tells me more about the clown that brings that shit up than it does about the other candidates.....and I WANT to know those that stoop that low as to mention those things....

 

[mattskramer]

Following this reasoning, you have the fine makings of an ignorant, ill-informed voter....
I don't say that be disrespectful, but thats what it amounts to....

If someone runs on cutting taxes, I want to know what his record is, and I don't mind his opposition pointing out the truth.
If he/she runs on civil rights, I want the opposition to point out if the candidate is really anti-civil rights.
ETC.....

I disagree. One can be an informed voter without relying on what one candidate says about another candidate that you are interested in. If I want to know how candidate B voted on different issues and why he voted the way that he did, I would visit his website. I would call or write emails if I want more answers. I might turn to a relatively unbiased resource or web site if I were afraid that his team would lie to me. I would not count on his opponent to give me the absolute, clear, and unvarnished truth.

I see nothing at all wrong with negative campaigning, as long as its FACT....
I want all the help I can get to be made aware of all of their ideas and to compare their records with what any of them say now....

Suppose that an opponent said, “Bush Sr. lied when he said ‘No new taxes’. That’s all that you need to know. Don’t vote for him if you don’t want new taxes.” I would have several questions. Did he really lie? Under what circumstances did he give us new taxes? What about the good qualities about Bush Sr. that might overshadow this “tax” incident?

And if ones lies about the others records, even that certainly tells me quite a bit...
Petty crap about Obama's first grade goals, or Rudys love life, or the ages of Thomson's or Kucinich's wives is akin to mud-slinging and irrelevant to being president....and tells me more about the clown that brings that shit up than it does about the other candidates.....and I WANT to know those that stoop that low as to mention those things....

Oh well. At least negative campaigning is better than telling lies. I guess that we just put different degrees of importance on different strategies. I just contend that it is in poor taste to go negative and think that it would be great to see an all-positive campaign.

 

[Paulie]

is telling the truth really mud slinging? I always thought mudslinging was lying about others.

Nah, mudslinging is just negative attack ads, as I see it, whether true or not.

The question is, can anyone name the candidate right now who ISN'T slinging mud?

 

[Avatar4321]

Nah, mudslinging is just negative attack ads, as I see it, whether true or not.

The question is, can anyone name the candidate right now who ISN'T slinging mud?

Hunter maybe. I havent really seen him do much of anything.

 

[Paulie]

You've seen Ron Paul's campaign sling mud?

If so, could you show me an example? Because as I've seen it so far, he's the only one campaigning right now for why to vote for him, instead of why NOT to vote for someone else.