About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

CNN's Crowley called Thompson speech -- in which he decried illegal immigrants originally from Cuba -- "Reaganesque"

June 29, 2007 3:35 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

63 Comments

On June 28, the Associated Press reported that former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN), who has strongly indicated that he will seek the Republican presidential nomination, made a speech in South Carolina on June 27 in which he "expressed his opposition to the immigration bill in Congress and decried the flow of illegal immigrants from Cuba, saying: 'I don't imagine they're coming here to bring greetings from [Fidel] Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb.' " From Thompson's June 27 speech:

THOMPSON: You talk about national security, one of the biggest national security issues that we face is right here at home. We're having a big debate now with the immigration bill. They say it's dividing our party. I think to a certain extent, that's right, and I don't think it will always be that way. I think we have to have our honest disagreements and honest opinions and then move on. Some very good friends of mine is on the other - or, are on the other side from where I am. That's all right; we're adults. Let's air our views and decide what's best for this country.

The bottom line is not what's best for one party or another or who's going to get the most votes when the dust settles. The bottom line is what's best for the strength and the long-term endurance of this country, and this immigration bill is not it.

We're catching, over a period of years, thousands of illegal immigrants coming from southern borders that are non-fence-able. Many of them come from terrorist-related states. We were just talking earlier, and I remember the figure that stuck out to me -- in the year 2005, we apprehended over 1,000 folks that originally has come from Cuba. If they're coming from Cuba, where else are they coming from? And I don't imagine they're coming here to bring greetings from Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb. We can't be talking seriously about national security while that's going on. We're catching one for every three that we don't catch -- they say. That's our government's estimate, so you can imagine what the real ratio is.

So -- in 1986 we were offered a deal that we'll grant amnesty for a certain amount of people and we'll secure the border. Well now they're coming back and offering the same deal. And basically saying that we want -- we want you to deal with 12 million now, and this time we really mean it -- we'll secure the border. And the American people are saying, "Fool me twice, shame on me." And they say, "No, it's right here in the bill. I mean, we'll secure the border." And they're saying, "I don't care if it's in the bill -- secure the border."

On June 29, the Miami Herald reported the quote and that "Thompson said he was referring to Cuban spies, not legal immigrants." From the Herald article:

The video of Thompson's Castro-suitcase bomb remarks during a speech in South Carolina was posted on YouTube and circulated by Democratic operatives.

Thompson spokesman Burson Snyder said Thompson was expressing concerns about Castro sending spies from Mexico into the U.S. The former Tennessee senator and actor wrote Thursday on his blog: "We must oppose the illegal immigration of Castro's agents into the United States while welcoming the vast majority who immigrate legally and with legal intentions.''

Yet aside from the AP and Herald articles, no media report* on Thompson's speech has noted his suggestion that Cubans are "coming here" with a "suitcase bomb."

Reports on Thompson's appearance in South Carolina on CNN and Fox News, and by The New York Times, McClatchy Newspapers, and The State of Columbia, South Carolina, all failed to note Thompson's "suitcase bomb" comment. In fact, while reporting on the speech, CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley said: "His speech was what he hopes to be -- Reaganesque -- both optimistic and tough, calling for an America strong enough, patient enough to confront the new age of global terrorism." Since April 2007, ABC Radio Networks has featured a daily commentary from Thompson titled the "Fred Thompson Report."

From the June 28 edition of CNN's American Morning:

TOM FOREMAN (CNN correspondent): The campaign held hostage day 100, or at least that's how long it feels like we have been talking about Fred Thompson maybe getting into the Republican race.

[begin video clip]

FOREMAN: He's at it again in South Carolina, talking low taxes, a strong military, security.

THOMPSON: This is going to be not a war of bombs. This is going to be a war of will, a war of will that we have to win.

From the June 28 New York Times article:

Former Senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee delivered a pep talk to his fellow Republicans here Wednesday, reminding voters in this early primary state about what he called the virtue of conservative ideals.

Over lunch in a hotel ballroom, he paid homage to Ronald Reagan, low taxes and "the sanctity of life," while lamenting Congress's spending habits and government bureaucracy in general.

The speech, replete with folksy humor and anecdotes from Mr. Thompson's life as a Hollywood actor, was as much about the aspirations of the Republican Party as Mr. Thompson, who has yet to declare his candidacy for president officially but is expected to do so in the next few weeks.

At no point was Mr. Thompson, 64, so direct as to suggest that he was looking for support. Rather, his intentions were implied -- and judging by the crowd's reactions -- clearly understood.

"A lot of people think our party is on its heels right now, but we're not going to stay there long," he said, adding later: "I think we can be a magnet, form a new coalition. Let's come out the other end stronger and wiser than we were before."

From the June 28 article in The State:

Thompson, in his first visit to South Carolina, showed Wednesday he could fulfill the unmet hopes of the most conservative voters.

Stressing his conservative credentials, Thompson delivered a pro-military, anti-illegal immigration speech to a group of Republicans at the Clarion Townhouse downtown.

Some of the 300 supporters who greeted him during the luncheon -- dedicated to presidential politics and the party's commitment to holding the first primary in the South in 2008 -- agreed Thompson would do well among conservatives.

"He's the right guy," said Sen. Jim Ritchie, R-Spartanburg, who committed to Thompson three weeks ago.

Because Thompson approaches the race late in the game by 2008 standards, many of the state's political leaders already have committed to other GOP hopefuls, and some of the organizational talent available in the state also has been sucked up.

Thompson said he is undeterred.

"South Carolina is extremely important to this campaign," he said, adding, "It's too late to play by somebody else's rules."

Thompson lightheartedly said his late entry could save him $50 million. "They said you'd have to raise $100 million (to run), and without a dime, I'm in the pack."

From the 4 p.m. hour of the June 27 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

WOLF BLITZER (host): Like any good actor, Fred Thompson realizes it's good to know your audience. The former senator is in South Carolina today, his first trip to that key primary state since becoming a prospective presidential candidate. And he's playing up conservative themes that could be -- could be a ticket to victory.

Our senior political correspondent Candy Crowley is joining us from Columbia, South Carolina, right now. Candy, he's giving a speech there today. Tell our viewers what happened.

CROWLEY: Well, he came here for a fundraiser for the South Carolina party, but I can tell you, there were a lot of people in this event who want him to run. They already have signs made up. It looks very much like a campaign, Wolf, except for one thing -- the say-so of the candidate.

[begin video clip]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're glad you're here.

THOMPSON: Thank you very much. And I'm glad you're here.

CROWLEY: There he is, the un-candidate, campaigning -- sorry -- speaking at a South Carolina party fundraiser, hitting all the right conservative notes.

THOMPSON: The bottom line is what's best for the strength of the long-term endurance of this country. And this immigration bill is not it.

CROWLEY: His speech was what he hopes to be -- Reaganesque -- both optimistic and tough, calling for an America strong enough, patient enough, to confront the new age of global terrorism.

From the June 27 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:

BRIT HUME (host): Several hundred South Carolina Republicans today got what might be called the Thompson treatment. At a fundraiser for the state GOP, former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson talked about conservative issues and said maybe he could come back later in a different capacity.

Thompson has not yet announced he is running for president, but he is leading some national polls anyway. Tomorrow in New Hampshire, chief political correspondent Carl Cameron will have an exclusive interview with Thompson. And who knows, maybe he'll tell Carl what his plans are.

From the June 27 McClatchy Newspapers article:

After watching from offstage and seeing his poll numbers soar, actor and former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson on Wednesday made his first public appearance in a state that could help him star in a new role, as a presidential candidate.

The former Tennessee senator and star of TV's Law & Order spoke to more than 300 South Carolina Republicans at a Columbia hotel. Invoking Ronald Reagan and what he called his party's "underlying principles," he gave many what they came for.

*Terms used in a search of the Nexis database: "Fred Thompson" and "suitcase bomb" between 6/27/07 and 6/29/07 in News (All).

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by dave (June 29, 2007 3:44 pm ET)
         

      Reagan would have been proud of that speech, and I'm guessing since I didn't know him personally. Optimistic and tough are Reagan type speeches. This guy gets better daily. Where's the misinformation?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (June 29, 2007 4:47 pm ET)
           

        What worries me is if he picks Newt Gingrich or Ted Haggard for his running mate.

        Those would be awfully tough tickets to beat!

        Report Abuse
        • Author by djasper2761 (June 29, 2007 6:55 pm ET)
             

          even scarrier would be pat robertson as sec. of defense. We would be at war with everybody including California. How long would it take pat to execute all the gays, pot smokers, liberals, progressives, free thinkers, arabs, jews, scientologists etc.....

          Report Abuse
          • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (June 29, 2007 7:29 pm ET)
               

            djasper, if you guys go to war with California, can I be an insurgent?

            Report Abuse
      • Author by MoonbatYouBet (June 29, 2007 5:11 pm ET)
           

        Well, if one takes the term "Reaganesque" to mean delusional and devoid of any real meaning or practical application, then there is no misinformation at all.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (June 29, 2007 5:14 pm ET)
           

        Davey, the point, I think, is the fawning nature with which the press is calling this doofus "Reaganesque". Is there really objective observation going on here, or are they reading from the GOP script? You tell me.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by jawill11 (June 29, 2007 5:25 pm ET)
           

        I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that the misinformation lies in the omissions by the journalists of his moronic statement about Cuban refugees being Mexican spies for Castro.  This is big news that he is so stupid, and to not report on it is either republican misinformation or ignorance.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by leatherhelmet (June 29, 2007 6:58 pm ET)
           

        I think the word suitcase bothers mmfa. Probably are afraid they would be made of alligator and destroying alligators would be bad.  We know they wouldn't care about catching a terrorist, just making sure we let them go.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by juliajayne (June 29, 2007 7:17 pm ET)
             

          Uh, your guys let them go. Rememer "W" just doesn't think much about OBL speech?

          Report Abuse
        • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (June 29, 2007 7:30 pm ET)
             

          Leather, have you thought of applying for a writing job with the 1/2 hour news hour?

          Report Abuse
        • Author by worrierking (June 29, 2007 7:34 pm ET)
             

          I don't have a problem with alligator suitcase but I am concerned that Cruella DeCoulter has plans for a new puppy skin coat.

          That bothers me.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (June 29, 2007 7:36 pm ET)
             

          Hey Leather where's Osama? Remember him, he orchestrated the 9/11 attacks that killed over 2,900 innocent people.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (July 01, 2007 6:38 am ET)
             

          What we know is YOUR side cares a lot more about getting as many Americans killed as possible than doing anything about terrorism.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 01, 2007 6:36 am ET)
           

        I would say the hallmark of Raygun speeches were delusion and pulling nonsense out of his rectal database

        Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (June 29, 2007 3:45 pm ET)
         

      Thompson is way too lazy to be President, and if he harkens back to the time of Reagen, God help us all really. Apparently, people don't remember how low Reagan's ratings were when he left office, or in his second term.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (June 29, 2007 4:00 pm ET)
           

        Thompson's really winning me over, too. Now that he's simplified the Cuban deal down to 2 motives (Greetings from castro or suitcase bomb) I can stop thinking.

        Crowley's use of  "the Un-Candidate" is more of painting him as an outsider, or as a recent poster here put it," he was a Washington outsider even when he was in Washington."

        This speech could have been given by Reagan, just at some point between the senile and deceased stages .In other words, Reagan's prime.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (June 29, 2007 4:06 pm ET)
             

          I like the whole "folksy" approach that they're taking with this guy. He's about as "folksy" as George W. Bush is/was. Which means, he's not at all.

          I also love it how the right wingers decry and yell and scream about the so called Hollywood elite, and yet when someone from Hollywood runs on their ticket, they're all for it.

          Thompson, no substance whatsoever as far as I can tell, but he does have a good deep baritone drawl.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (June 29, 2007 4:49 pm ET)
             

          H.B,

          You're a national treasure!

          Report Abuse
      • Author by oscar the grouch (June 29, 2007 7:46 pm ET)
           

        MagLover, there have been posters here over time that have called the 50's the "Wonder Years" in the US. As I recall, Ike was labelled as Lazy (more interested in golf and long weekends than in governing).  Maybe we need a Fred to take us back to those glory days. (He also is follicaly challenged as was Ike, but none since) Bring back the good old days!!!!!

        Report Abuse
        • Author by mefirst (June 29, 2007 8:30 pm ET)
             

          on the other hand, he was cautious and did little harm.  he just sort of maintained the status quo.  i get the feeling he would have hated bush.  when he was asked during the race in 60 what was nixon's biggest accomplishment during his years as v.p., ike replied "give me a week and i'll think of something".   sort of a tacit endorsement of jfk.   

          Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (June 29, 2007 11:24 pm ET)
             

          But as always with history, people remember it fondly, but the 50's were far from the "wonder years" that people seem to remember, and that most republicans seem to want to take us back to. You know, in the 50's things were so great women were basically indentured to their husbands, black folks couldn't vote and were getting lynched throughout the US, we had a little conflict in Korea, and other things like that. Yeah, the 50's, great times. If you were white and middle class or higher.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by Old_Benjamin (June 29, 2007 3:58 pm ET)
         

      What about Cuban terrorists the US protects?

       

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (June 29, 2007 4:04 pm ET)
           

        Hey, that's different. That guy bombed people "we" didn't like, so it's OK then.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (June 29, 2007 4:06 pm ET)
         

      Some very good friends of mine is on the other - or, are on the other side from where I am. That's all right; we're adults. Let's air our views and decide what's best for this country.

      OK, with ya so far...

      The bottom line is not what's best for one party or another or who's going to get the most votes when the dust settles. The bottom line is what's best for the strength and the long-term endurance of this country

      Still approving of your overall message...

      We're catching, over a period of years, thousands of illegal immigrants coming from southern borders that are non-fence-able.

      Get that about the fence all?

      Many of them come from terrorist-related states.

      And I agree, it's possible, though considering where most terrorists come from, according to the illegal immigration figures these states are a) low in volume and b) not in mexico.

      And I don't imagine they're coming here to bring greetings from Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb.

      Screeeeeeech! What the heck does that mean? If they weren't terrorists, they'd be bringing greetings from Castro? He started out sensibly then all of a sudden took this wild tangent - but it is Reaganesque, as in later year Reagan. He didn't know what he was saying half the time either.

       

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by mefirst (June 30, 2007 7:12 am ET)
           

        since he is talking in that specific paragraph about cuba, i think he is using the unfenceable term to mean the gulf of mexico and atlantic.  which is true.  but that area is patrolled by the coast guard and we would have a constant flow of illegals, as has happened in the past with incidents like the mariel boatlift, if not for those patrols.   some make it through, but it is a trickle compared to what would happen if those cutters were not there.  other than that,  it's ridiculous to think that castro is going to allow or cooperate with any terrorists coming to this country from cuba.  he knows that would be the end of him.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (June 29, 2007 4:08 pm ET)
         

      And Reagan didn't do anything " heroic ". Outspendin the USSR is not the mark of heroism.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Old_Benjamin (June 29, 2007 4:10 pm ET)
           

        But he said "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" and lo they did and communisim was finished!

        Report Abuse
        • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (June 29, 2007 4:13 pm ET)
             

          I, for one, am tired of having the radical right-wing Hollywood agenda shoved down my throat.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Harlequin (June 29, 2007 4:16 pm ET)
             

          Yeah and I can say the sun will come up tomorrow.

          Lo and behold if it were not for Harlequin saying the sun will come up tomorrow, Hail to Harlequin.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (June 29, 2007 4:19 pm ET)
               

            and I'm 10 feet tall and can shoot thunderbolts out of my arse.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Harlequin (June 29, 2007 4:30 pm ET)
                 

              you sound Reaganesque

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (June 29, 2007 4:44 pm ET)
                   

                Oh yes, definitely "Reaganesque"...

                What is Thompson's plan for immigration?

                Sit around and watch Law and Order reruns, and try to stop himself from falling asleep?

                Run Freddy, Run!!

                Report Abuse
            • Author by juliajayne (June 29, 2007 5:28 pm ET)
                 

              Snoop, there must be a limerick there somewhere. Tell me more about shooting thunderbolts from one's arse. Would you be 10 stories tall as well? He, he. Or a lollicking lover like Freddy boy? I'm dyin' to write a limerick about this phenomenon.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by juliajayne (June 29, 2007 5:38 pm ET)
                   

                Sorry, Snoop. I didn't read very well. You already said you were 10 feet tall. Now my limerick:

                 

                Old Snoopy is ten feet plus tall

                He makes Freddy Thompson look small

                Those thunderbolts he's tootin'

                From his arse they are scootin' 

                Rivaling Regan's speech "tear down that wall" 

                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (June 29, 2007 8:11 pm ET)
                     

                  That was awesome! And ironically, I got my thunderbolts from Mel Gibson (braveheart!).

                  Report Abuse
        • Author by wolf kotenberg (June 29, 2007 6:21 pm ET)
             

          Gorbachev didn't tear down the wall as instructed. he just stopped preventing germans from doing so themselves.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by leatherhelmet (June 29, 2007 6:56 pm ET)
             

          I know seeing the USSR downfall breaks your little commie heart.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by worrierking (June 29, 2007 7:00 pm ET)
               

            Still seeing commies under the bed Leather?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (June 29, 2007 7:39 pm ET)
                 

              Listen, under the bed is the safest place to be. Didn't you get the memo there following us home, run and hide.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (June 29, 2007 5:12 pm ET)
           

        Waitaminnit....I thought it was the Democratic Congress that was responsible for Ronnie's huge deficits...

        Report Abuse
      • Author by leatherhelmet (June 29, 2007 7:05 pm ET)
           

        I guess you preferred Kennedy's method and start a war in Viet Nam.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (July 01, 2007 6:46 am ET)
             

          We were bombing Vietnam and sent in military advisors during Eisenhowers term.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by michael.franco3237 (June 29, 2007 5:22 pm ET)
         

      I hear these stupid congressman say that the american people have spoken and they have responded by turning down the immigration bill.  Well the american people have spoken about the Iraq war and how have they responded.  Here you go Mr. Bush, here is all the money you want.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (June 29, 2007 5:25 pm ET)
         

      I smell a repeat of 2000 and 2004 coming up. Thompson, like Bush, will get a pass from the "liberal media", while the Democratic Candidate will be crucified for every little inconsistency or gaff. Hide and watch.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by draftedin68 (June 29, 2007 5:45 pm ET)
         

      Lemme see...

      If the rest of Thompson's June 27 speech was like the part MMFA quoted, then I'd say that Thompson was indeed channeling Ronnie - twisted facts, partial facts and facts pulled right from his ass.

      Reaganesque indeed!

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by juliajayne (June 29, 2007 5:45 pm ET)
         

      Is Candy Crowley that 'um cough" lady that used to be paired with Ron Reagan Jr. on that Coast to Coast show? If so I wonder what RR jr. would think of that comparison. Maybe I'm thinking of anopther babe. There used to be some automaton type of babe in there somewhere too. So many cable blonds, so little ...................? The men and brunettes aren't any better.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by conleytgwinn (June 29, 2007 6:22 pm ET)
           

        That one was Monica: never saw the show ("Connected Coast To Coast") but Monica is more "babe" than Candy.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (June 29, 2007 6:50 pm ET)
             

          Candy looks a little like Babe Ruth.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by conleytgwinn (June 29, 2007 6:57 pm ET)
               

            HBL: that is sooo not PC (that I am laughing and choking on my pizza as I type.) You got a lotta nerve, to judge Candy on her looks - I mean - well!

            OK, I know she is not one of FoxLies' cheerleaders - errr, announcers - but she is every bit as anti-Dem as if she were! (so THERE!)

            Report Abuse
            • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (June 29, 2007 7:34 pm ET)
                 

              Maybe I think Babe Ruth was hot.I have been trying to stop the physical appearance remarks, so consider me properly scolded.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by juliajayne (June 29, 2007 7:50 pm ET)
                   

                I'll bet Babe Ruth's voice wasn't as deep as Candy's.

                Report Abuse
          • Author by jscott (June 29, 2007 7:57 pm ET)
               

            Or is that a "Baby Ruth"?

            Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (June 29, 2007 6:00 pm ET)
         

      The Regressives are so desperate for a return to their imaginary Golden Age of Reagan Conservatism (yeah, right)...they'll slap the label on the first candidate who can pretend not to be a halfwit in front of the camera. Golden Boy George has been such a disappointment for them, he makes my cat seem Reaganesque by comparison.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (June 29, 2007 7:03 pm ET)
         

      Fred needs that steel blue hair of Ronny's. Did it get buried with him? If unavaible, would stem cells help?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by redking75687 (June 29, 2007 9:11 pm ET)
         

      Good old American hatred for anyone who throws off the bonds of US imperalism. We've been hating Cuba for decades for telling us to get lost and to stop messing about in their independence....but we keep trying to force them to submit to our arrogant racist whims. We're so like the Romans in that respect. Only we have the right to be independent, all others must obey. The ideology of the thug.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by leatherhelmet (June 30, 2007 1:08 am ET)
           

        Communism is independence???

        Somehow I don't think the people are very independent!

        Report Abuse
        • Author by redking75687 (June 30, 2007 6:04 am ET)
             

          Cuba is an independent nation, not ruled by a foreign power, like Iraq is. The US used to keep a battleship in Havana harbour in the early part of the 20th, where the Cuban leaders got their offices and orders from the US ambassador. The Platt Amendment declared the US had the right to interfere in Cuban politics to ensure a pro-American ruler who behaved accordingly.

          In the 1950s, the Cuban people threw off a hated pro-American dictator and his US Mafia backers. The CIA proceeded to conduct a campaign of sabotage and TERRORISM inside Cuba. All because they wouldn't be the meek little colonial subjects of the Great White Psychopath to the north. Our country still harbours anti-Castro TERRORISTS and protects them from justice.

          So go back to drinking that cult kool-aid and putting more manacles on your mind. Just keep telling yourself that you're free and they're not and they can't be free until they are ruled by you and your cult of imperialism.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (July 01, 2007 6:48 am ET)
             

          Independence isnt about WHAT the choice is but that YOU make the choice. Cuba CHOSE to be communist so yes that IS independence. If its a mistake its THEIR mistake, still independence

          Report Abuse
    • Author by mcquaidla (June 29, 2007 10:44 pm ET)
         

      Well, it was Reaganesque in that it dealt with over-simplified characterizations of the issue coupled with inaccuracies and an incredibly willful misreading of the situation. 

      Totally Reaganesque...

      Report Abuse
    • Author by tman418 (June 29, 2007 10:53 pm ET)
         

      I don't think MMFA should take "Reaganesque" as a compliment. Reagan was our worst president before GWB.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by shelbysbest (July 01, 2007 3:17 pm ET)
         

      Fred has written about the cuban community with great concern as noted here: http://abcradionetworks.com/article.asp?id=423846&SPID=15663

      You decide!Here is the speech from South Carolina: http://tinyurl.com/2xbqy2 The comments in question are in the second video clip. Then Fred addressed it from his website here: http://fredfile.imwithfred.com/2007/a-good-day/#more-40"Anybody who knows my track record or has read some of the things I’ve written about the Cuban-American community knows where I stand. While the communist dictatorship has been a tragedy for Cuba, America has been in some ways, at least, the beneficiary." The Amercian people will decide for themselves who they trust, as they always do at the voting booths.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Jericho (July 02, 2007 8:39 am ET)
         

      You can be scared for illegal aliens all you want. I would trust any Cuban, Iranian, Indian, Brazilian, Mexican or Nigerian to be a better president of the US than all those losers who've been 'elected' until now.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.