New at Reason
Steve Chapman remembers the illustrious, sleepy Senate career of Fred Thompson and asks what it should tell us about his possible presidency.
Comments to "New at Reason":
Lost_In_Translation | October 4, 2007, 8:00am | #
He'd be the perfect candidate to lose to Hillary from what I've seen. No energy, monotone like speeches. I knew there was a reason his handlers were keeping him out of the debates and I have a feeling after the October 9th debate, his star will quickly fade. Of course that removes any chance of siphoning off Paul voters as he was the only one with even a glint of "shrinking the government" message (other than Tancredo)chancelikely | October 4, 2007, 8:19am | #
Honestly, "He might sleep through his term in office" is the best endorsement I've heard of a non-Paul presidential candidate I've heard on this site.Kingkull | October 4, 2007, 8:23am | #
The article may be a little disingenious. Almost any sane person's reaction to the Senate's plodding, backstabbing, cronyism, its procedural, posturing, anything but big idea atmosphere, would be the same as Thompson's.Isn't it also why any normal Joe can't understand why any sane person would become a politician in this age?
His reticence to play such a disgusting, pitiable game while ignoring any substantive, in-depth look at the horde of issues facing us today is in many ways a strength, not a weakness.
Agree with chancelikely and kingkrull. For all that we normally agitate about the silliness of senate deliberation, Chapman seemed off key here.
It seems to me that a politician who spends most of his time sleeping would be a marked improvement over the vast majority who insist on doing something.
Lost_In_Translation | October 4, 2007, 9:51am | #
I hope you guys are right and he'll be the most hands off president short of calvin coolidge, but I don't know if lazy translates that way.I also don't know if the American public would vote in a waffling, uncertain, vaguely uninterested man into the presidency.
While I agree that chancelikely and kingkrull - I think many people's images of the man are from Hunt for Red October and his later law and order tv shows than from his perceived 'sleepy' senate career. For me at least those images were quickly exorcised from my memory after seeing his "commercial" and some of his interviews. Once people see and experience more of him - he's done with.
scape | October 4, 2007, 10:53am | #
So, Thompson admits to becoming disillusioned after seeing how politics is played out on the Senate floor, doesn't like wasting time on irrelevant matters and might not be interested in a job with tedious obligations.Instead, we should vote for someone who does?
R C Dean | October 4, 2007, 1:21pm | #
I also don't know if the American public would vote in a waffling, uncertain, vaguely uninterested man into the presidency.You mean, not three times in a row?
disillusioned after seeing how politics is played out on the Senate floor, doesn't like wasting time on irrelevant matters and might not be interested in a job with tedious obligations.
I'm with scape. Why the hell would I vote for anyone who is such a gigantic tool that he isn't disillusioned by the Senate, enjoys wasting time on irrelevancies, and grooves on tedious obligations?
Lost_In_Translation | October 4, 2007, 1:37pm | #
RC,Does it make you feel any better if I admit you're right?
Joseph the Libertarian | October 4, 2007, 2:13pm | #
Yeah, keep making excuses for the pro-big government lobbyist, you're the TOOL! The man is the epitome of INSIDER! Ever watch one of his speeches? He often overly generalizes, he is boring, no stances on any position, he's just taking you for a bunch of fools!Ron Paul 2008!
whatA????????????? we need fred thomson to protect us and to nuke the middle east hehehe!!!! ron paul is too nice to be president and he needs to speak of individual liberty less!!!!!! it is not the time for individual liberty, we need to have a tyrant to fight for US.......... we must kill all arabs because they hate our freedom!!!!!!!!!
Joseph the Libertarian | October 4, 2007, 2:19pm | #
Ron Paul DOES believe in a right time to go to war, he believes in CONSTITUTIONAL WARS, when Congress (the representatives of the people) DECLARE IT! Not hand over authority to the President, that's unconstitutional. Dr. Ron Paul voted for Afghanistan, but Bush quickly abused it... we need a great man in the White House, Ron Paul!Gene | October 5, 2007, 6:10pm | #
The man is right on target. Most of what goes on in Washington is political hack theater, not worth the price of admission. Having spent time there years ago as a clerk, I found that 99% is B.S., and the other 1% is important about half the time, maybe, on a good day.Bob Dylan had it right. Politics is bullshit.
Government needs to do three things. Protect the shores, deliver the mail, and leave the rest of us alone.