Comments on: Constitution Party of Massachusetts candidate for Congress tackles Tom Brady

by: bostonbean

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:48:24 +0000

Hey uh jesus dude, GFY

by: Joshua D.

Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:04:12 +0000

Edit (left out a “not,” resulting in a sentence completely contrary to what was intended):
“But it’s supposed THIRD PARTY voters who are criticizing him for not being more political!”

by: Joshua D.

Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:02:22 +0000

“..this move, for political gain or not, isn’t going to motivate Massachussetts voters to vote for Kevin Thompson at all.”

Don’t you think Thompson realizes that? And yet he said it anyway. That speaks volumes about the kind of guy he is: He’ll say what he believes regardless of the political implication. He’s not out to BS or flip-flop for political gain.

It amazes me… no, it saddens me… that people would complain about “politics as usual,” and then when we have a guy who’s willing to speak his mind without concern for political gain, folks jump down his throat. What’s particularly amazing is it’s not even as though it’s just the folks who walk the party line. But it’s supposed THIRD PARTY voters who are criticizing him for being more political!

Disagree with his view of Brady if you like; that’s fine. But don’t attack him for not being more political—which is exactly what comments like the quote above amount to.

by: Ghoststrider

Thu, 31 May 2007 18:14:41 +0000

Look, what goes on between two consenting adults is their business, nobody else’s. You got a problem with that? Tough crap. If you persist, then you clearly show yourself to be religious nutjobs, or communists. Or just plain assholes, take your pick.

You want to show some maturity and responsibility? Take your noses out of other people’s lives.

by: Chris Fluharty

Thu, 31 May 2007 02:47:44 +0000

What war? Last I checked there was never a congressional declaration.

All that aside if you do not like the protection of those who cannot protect themselves, the protection of the family, and the protection of decency as important then keep voting the same way everyone else has. We have a “war” because we have no moral compass to say it is wrong. Wake up to Folgers in your cup.

by: Anthony Distler

Thu, 31 May 2007 02:03:25 +0000

Until we bring the troops home from Iraq and stop sending billions of dollars to stand in the middle of a civil war, I don’t care about abortion, gay marriage, forinification, or any of that other crap that the CP is against.

Stop the war. Then set policies.

by: Cody Quirk

Thu, 31 May 2007 00:07:01 +0000

Tom Brady is the most popular person in Massachusetts. His personal life is followed closely in New England and the rest of the sports world.

Attacking him doesn’t seem to be the smartest move in the world considering his hero status in the state

=Exactely, just because Tom is living a sinner’s life doesn’t mean his is going to benifit Kevin’s candidacy.

=New England is the most liberal region of the US (the West Coast is second), this move, for political gain or not, isn’t going to motivate Massachussetts voters to vote for Kevin Thompson at all.

by: Trent Hill

Wed, 30 May 2007 20:38:46 +0000

For the record:

He didnt say government should do sometihng. He said it was a bad example.
I dont disagree…just think it was stupid.

by: Joseph

Wed, 30 May 2007 18:50:31 +0000

Yes, let’s send members of the Consitution Party to Congress – we can’t have these athletes out there foricating. Government should DO something. Never mind all of those trivial issues like the loss of freedom, the building of empire, and wars of agrression – we got fornicating going on! GO KEVIN - GET those dirty fornicators!

by: Timm Knibbs

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:14:28 +0000

Many of the problems in this country stem from broken homes. Not only is it immoral it is irresponsible to have children out or wedlock. Some it seems are suggesting that Brady get a free pass because he is a popular athlete. That makes no sense. He should be made an example of because people know who he is. To take a stand against someone or something that most would not shows courage. Way to go Kevin. We need more people with courage in DC. Right now there is only one, Ron Paul.

by: SovereignMN

Wed, 30 May 2007 15:15:24 +0000

“What is manly or praise-worthy of a man hopping from supermodel to supermodel and forcing a woman to raise her child without a loving, present, father? Sorry, Tom, but money and part-time fathering can never fully replace the atmosphere that two-loving parents (loving each other and their baby) can provide a child. ”

This is the main point that Kevin makes and I agree with it.

by: globalist_elitist

Wed, 30 May 2007 11:31:51 +0000

This IS what the CP IS, people. Open your eyes.

by: Trent Hill

Wed, 30 May 2007 04:10:43 +0000

Matt,

Actually. I disagree. Mind you, I think it is political desperation—and therefor dumb.

BUT. It is definetly not against the Bill of Rights. Tom Brady put his own personal life out there…anyone is free to say anything about it.

by: matt

Wed, 30 May 2007 03:50:52 +0000

Kevin,
You are not merely some publicity hungry blogger, commenting on whatever interests you. You are now a candidate. A candidate suggests a course of action for public policy. If you think Tom Brady’s family habits are a public policy issue, you are standing in grave contradiction to the Bill of Rights.

by: Kevin Thompson

Wed, 30 May 2007 03:31:55 +0000

Sorry, I forgot to finish that last comment.

These women, who disagree with me on most other political issues, are giving me support because they see me standing up for them. They see in this stance what “compassionate conservatism” really ought to mean.

I have no regrets for posting that article. Will it be a major part of my campaign? No. But I do believe it was worth commenting on.