WaPo's Pearlstein: Fred Thompson a 'Joke,' and a 'Nothing-burger'

CBS: Cali Gay Marriage As 'Huge Victory for Equal Rights’

WaPo's Pearlstein: Fred Thompson a 'Joke,' and a 'Nothing-burger'

By Dan Gainor | October 10, 2007 - 11:51 ET

Never doubt the left-wing tilt of the Washington Post - even the Business section. Today's Steven Pearlstein column delivered the almost universal left-wing outlook on yesterday's GOP debate.

It was bad enough that moderator Chris Matthews didn't ask enough business/economy questions - choosing instead to dwell on capturing Osama or inside baseball about politics. But Pearlstein took a noxious outlook on the debate and blasted former Sen. Fred Thompson in a chat that followed.

"The truth is, when you compare Ron Paul to Fred Thompson on substance, Thompson comes across as a nothing-burger," Pearlstein said during the Post chat. Later on, he got even more mean-spirited.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

"Fred Thompson's candidacy is a total creation of the media. His performance yesterday ought to have been an embarrassment, not just to a former US Senator, but to the press, which spent so much time building up this guy. He's a joke, really. Almost nothing thoughful to say on economic or business issues. Not a serious candidate, in my opinion. But then again, I'm not part of the traveling press corps."

The column was a tad less severe, but the point was the same - "that the leading Republican candidates aren't serious about economic issues." Pearlstein got nastier, claiming "for two hours yesterday, the nine white men who would be president were each peddling the Big Lie that the only way to ensure economic growth is by cutting all the taxes ever created -- and when you're finished with that, cutting them some more."

The rest of the column was a lengthy laundry list of the liberal talking points from the debate and how Pearlstein doesn't think the GOP measures up. Right to form a union? "[N]ot one willing to acknowledge that that right no longer exists because of rampant employer intimidation," wrote Pearlstein.

Then he went on to defend Hillarycare, arguing that the candidates were "all eager to hurl the scurrilous charge of ‘government-run health care.'"

Former Mass. Gov Mitt Romney even received this love note from Pearlstein: "Romney, for example, issued a 23-point economic plan yesterday that, if you didn't know better, you might think was a parody written by Jon Stewart for ‘The Daily Show.'"

—Dan Gainor is director of the Business and Media Institute.

Topics:

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

What's so mean

October 10, 2007 - 12:10 ET by sarcasmo

About an opinion?? It's almost as if not-hating Ron Paul is some sort of a crime around here, even when the media bias against him is literally palpable in areas like health-care, where I'm informed it's supposedly "not media bias" not to ever question the only candidate who's a Doctor on stage, debate after debate...

But on a positive note, here's a neat graph-site. Maybe a bit more open-ness and a bit less whiny-ness would give other Republican campaigns more-positive results? And where the hell was Alan Keyes? Am I the only one around here to notice THAT, too?
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

Fred scares them

October 10, 2007 - 12:10 ET by nofate

"Fred Thompson's candidacy is a total creation of the media. His performance yesterday ought to have been an embarrassment, not just to a former US Senator, but to the press, which spent so much time building up this guy. He's a joke, really. Almost nothing thoughful to say on economic or business issues. Not a serious candidate, in my opinion. But then again, I'm not part of the traveling press corps."

Translation: "Fred is the real deal. He's no joke, he really is a consevative. He's a very serious candidate and he scares the hell out of us progressive socialist yet objective reporters. BTW if Duncan Hunter gets anywhere near being close to the front runner we're gonna deal with him the same way."

"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

If, as Perlman

October 10, 2007 - 13:07 ET by Chris Norman

If, as Perlman suggests, the media created Thompson (they didn't), then why are they already trying to destroy him?

They have to destroy Thompson because...

October 11, 2007 - 10:15 ET by nofate

"the nine white men who would be president were each peddling the Big Lie that the only way to ensure economic growth is by cutting all the taxes ever created -- and when you're finished with that, cutting them some more."

Obviously, Pearlstein and his media buds believe that the real way to ensure that the Big Lie is thwarted and ensure economic growth is to raise taxes on everything that people could possibly want or need, and when you've taxed everything imagineable, raise taxes some more. Besides, Thompson is the closest thing to a conservative (that appears to be a potential front runner) that they have. Just being conservative is a good enough reason.

"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

Pearlstein is an idiot

October 10, 2007 - 12:46 ET by BigSpoon65

BigSpoon65

Fred has clearly demonstrated that he is a top tier candidate. IMO he is the clear conservative choice in the GOP field. Pearlstein's opinion also clearly demonstrates his lack of knowledge of the candidates and reflects his left-wing-nut roots. Venom is good folks, means the liberals are scared of Fred.

Wonder why we don't see so much of their venom spewed at Rudy? Hmmm. That is surely something to ponder.

Target On Rudy's Chest

October 10, 2007 - 14:51 ET by NoMoreClintons

"Wonder why we don't see so much of their venom spewed at Rudy?"

HUH? You must be kidding. He's pretty much their main target these days, especially in the NYT.

Non Reader

October 10, 2007 - 23:04 ET by doug1950

I guess one would have to actually read the NYT to know that.

Pearlstein

October 10, 2007 - 14:23 ET by pocomoco

And the fear of Thompson grows as Lilliputians in the MSM, like Pearlstein, try to gang-tackle Fred with their sophomoric and curtsey jibes.

FOF (fear of Fred) is now the name of the game. It had been Giuliani, but the Clinton machine has decided that Thompson is more dangerous.

So, with their new marching orders in hand, the MSM dutifully generate as much negatives as the sycophants can muster against him.

To what end, I not sure. Since name recognition is paramount, especially in a presidential race, they are giving him a gold mine of publicity.

And if they think it will turn the voters against him it will, in fact, have the opposite effect. It will be the political version of Newton’s Law – for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

That is what I said during

October 10, 2007 - 16:59 ET by msh1973

That is what I said during the debate. Thompson is clearly a threat to the left.

After Thompson's good

October 10, 2007 - 17:02 ET by Free Stinker

After Thompson's good showing at the debate, the left is now fully aware of the threat he poses to Hillary

sexist and racist in one shot?!?

October 10, 2007 - 18:39 ET by TruthMonger

"the white men who would be president?"

...did she mean that in a negative way? Or am I taking her "out of context:)?"

wonder what o'reilly would think

A service of the new NB respect police

Journalists attacking Romney's Economic Credentials

October 10, 2007 - 17:29 ET by Daniel Baker

They never told me that Journalism school made you smarter than someone with a MBA.

_______________________________

Learn about "the best choice for people of faith" http://www.evangelic...

If Thompson is a

October 10, 2007 - 18:28 ET by Richard Romano

If Thompson is a 'nothing-burger' this jackass Pearlstein is a cheap-ass hamburger patty you buy at those 2nd hand supermarkets.

Well said.

October 10, 2007 - 18:35 ET by balboa

Well said.

Mickey D's

October 10, 2007 - 18:54 ET by tater

I thought you only got nothing-burgers at McDonalds...oh well. I didn't know much about Thompson even before the debate but once I saw the MSM attacking him I figured he'd be a good guy to look into. Turns out he supports many issues I support and will get my vote (assuming he's the GOP nominee).

What were you using...

October 11, 2007 - 01:54 ET by Keith

What were you people using to view the debate? Surely it wasn't your eyes ! FRED IS DEAD! Nobody who isn't a KOOL AID drinker would have looked at that piss poor performance and say it was "the real deal" HA! Fred Thompson looked like a half baked potato. The man is horribly un-photogenic and if you don't think that matters, you only have to look at Mitt (empty suit) Romney, to understand, it explains his entire candidacy. Thompson is a dud and it is no laughing matter. Perhaps, to be charitable, he doesn't give good speeches because he fears someone will say he's inauthentic, or "acting". I've known actors who felt a calling to the ministry who were similarly conflicted about giving "theatrical" sermons, some worked it out, but others just gave "intellectual" sermons that lacked emotion and moved nobody. This has to be the answer IMO because the man is such a consummate actor that you'd think he'd just "act it"! Anyhoo, for whatever reason this man is BORING, PHLEGMATIC and you would have a better time watching the fingernails grow on a corpse. FRED.....IS......DEAD....

( i say, "dead", metaphorically of course, as the writer wishes no ill intent upon Mr Thompson or his family)