Wednesday, January 02, 2008

Thompson to reporterette: "If I do not live up to the media's standard of sufficient fire in the belly..."

"That's their problem not mine." Thompson doing a good job rejecting the MSM's narrative of his campaign.

Why should he sit there and answer inane questions about process when what he wants to do is let the voters know that he is the conservative choice for president. If he didn't want the job, why the heck would he leave "Law and Order?" Why the heck would he spend most of December in Iowa? (Who in their right mind would go to Iowa in December?) Why would he sit through inane interviews and answer the same questions at every town hall meeting? Why would he spend one minute on the campaign trail? It would be mind-numbingly dull if he didn't have a goal in mind.

We are so hung up on process that we aren't thinking about substance and then when a candidate tries to talk about substance, everyone is hung up on when he got in the race and is he even interested in running and why isn't he campaigning like the other candidates and what happened when he first entered the race. Why don't we just focus on the issues? We say they're important but when the candidate tries to talk about the issues, he's rejected because people think he came too late to the game and not enough people will be able to hear the message and he doesn't have a shot at winning. He's not viable.

But they don't realize that he's more viable than the other candidates because he doesn't have to distance himself from his own record, it speaks for itself. Who do we want to run against a flip-flopping Clinton? A flip-flopping Romney? Who do we want to run against Clinton on the issue of amnesty? McCain? Who do we want to run against Clinton on the issue of abortion? Giuliani? Who do we want to run against Clinton on the issue of taxes? McCain? Who do we want to run against Clinton on the issue of Iran and foreign policy? Huckabee?

On all these issues, I would gladly match Clinton with Thompson because he represents a clear distinction. He would not just be mouthing a warmed over version of Democrat talking points. He would clearly articulate (albeit in maybe a more meandering way than a northern appreciates :-) the conservative position on many of the issues that will come up over the course of this elections.