Fred’s #2 in S. Carolina, says Rasmussen:

Fred Thompson’s lagging campaign finds solace in the latest Rasmussen poll in South Carolina which shows he is TIED with Huckabee and Romney for SECOND.

His campaign launched a new ad in South Carolina on the heels of the good news.

Like Avis a long time ago, he’s trying harder?  This site has his new ad, in which he says things (briefly) that in our hearts we know are right — and that we know no Dem would be caught dead saying.  In him we have a choice not an echo?

Fred Thompson is gaining in S. Carolina, Huckabee is losing, says Rasmussen:

Over the past several days, the only real movement in South Carolina’s Republican Presidential Primary has been a four-point gain for Fred Thompson and a five-point decline for Mike Huckabee.

It’s

McCain at 28%, Huckabee at 19%, Mitt Romney at 17%, and Fred Thompson at 16%. Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul are tied with 5% support.

This guy picks Fred Thompson for November, emphasizing (guess what?) defense, the ever-present Dem weak point:

Why will he win? Because there are only three candidates who are strong on defense yet do not offend many Republicans: Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson. Of these three, Giuliani seems to be stumbling badly and Romney is stumbling badly enough to give an opening to Thompson.

Robert Frost said it ironically, but fences are important.

Barack Obama’s church:

A leading Democratic candidate for president attends an “Afrocentric” church that bestows awards on Louis Farrakhan and practically defines itself through race-baiting. Burt Prelutsky asks, why isn’t Barack Obama’s faith-based problem making national headlines and the nightly news?

He’s a uniter?

Update from Instapundit:

MICKEY KAUS: “It’s hard to believe that Obama’s Afrocentric church–with its troubling attack on ‘the pursuit of middeclassness’–isn’t going to be an issue in the campaign, soon.”

Meanwhile, Reader Bob urges me to attend this church some time, “sit through a service, introduce [my]self and . . . stay for the discussions after or join in some of their social service activities which truly benefit their community and backstop other communities’ churches without the resources that [this church] Trinity UCC has. Seriously, it is an incredible house of worship with good Christians.”

Maybe I will (but first get these leg-long casts off: they prohibit my kneeling, for worship or anything else).  I did that at St. Sabina once, listening to Al Sharpton give a political speech disguised as a a sermon.  Trouble is, would I hear the Gospel of Afrocentrism?

Instapundit hears this:

THE NEW YORK TIMES reports [cited below] that Fred Thompson is surging in South Carolina. And I just got an email from a journalist who says that crowds at Thompson events are suddenly over-capacity. Is it a tipping point for Thompson, or just a blip? Stay tuned.

I intend to.

Obama’s people, including Ill. State Senator and president of the senate Emil Jones are saying O. is not to be criticized because he’s black, argues this fellow, convincingly:

Obama needs to distance himself from this crap, and fast, or he will risk losing my support (and I bet I’m not the only one). The prospect of having a president who will allow his surrogates to cry “racism” whenever anyone criticizes him — about anything, no matter how unrelated to race — is not something I want to deal with for four or eight years.

This is a principled defense of the Clintons, if you can believe it.

Fred T. makes the radar screen at NYT:

“But then last night — we hadn’t even been thinking about him — all of a sudden it was clear he was the one,” said Mr. Berenberk, a retired teacher [who had just watched the recent SC debate]. “The bluntness, the forcefulness. He was really impressive.”

Whether this was a new Fred Thompson, or just a sign of mirage-inducing campaign fatigue among voters, many people attending Mr. Thompson’s campaign rallies here on the day after the debate reported having similar revelations.

The wise campaign watcher will keep eyeballs peeled for this lawman from Tennessee.

Update:

A reader comments below on Fred’s lymphoma, telling how bad it is, but not reporting what his doc said last April:

About Thompson’s consideration of a possible presidential bid, [Dr. Bruce D.] Cheson said: “I would strongly encourage him, if this is what he wants to do, to go ahead with it. His disease and eventual treatment for this disease should not impact on his ability to perform this job.”

Some 22 percent of people with the disease have the type of lymphoma that typically follows a benign course, Lichtenfeld said.

Thompson appears to have that type, suggesting that “his outlook is, in fact, excellent,” he said.

Still, he added, “Nobody’s saying it won’t come back.”

It’s old news indeed, and self-refuting at that.  And speaking as one who recently left a Green Line train in fine fettle and now celebrates his fifth week of double-casting thanks to a fall from the grace of sprightly step, there breathes no man or woman who by thinking can add one cubit to his stature.  (Thus Matthew.  See also Luke.)

Another update: Reader D. offers some medical site items:

+ According to Associated Press releases (August 2000), U.S. Senator and war hero John McCain has been found to have a dangerous form of skin cancer, melanoma, for the second time. The senator who was a prisoner of war in North Vietnam may now be in for the battle of his life. Melanoma is the most dangerous form of skin cancer . . .
+ In 2000 the press had: Mayor Giuliani embarked on the fight of his life yesterday as he told the city he has prostate cancer. Standing alone at a podium . . . the mayor confirmed he had been diagnosed with the disease that killed his father in 1981 and has now thrown his Senate campaign into question.
+Barack is prone to Sickle Cell Anemia, no?
+Hillary, on the other hand, will do quite well if she continues to drink from the caldron containing eye of newt, bat wings, a wild onion and heifer blood.

I found the last observation especially noteworthy.

NYT politics writer Matt Bai has a point I brought up about Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.’s describing the Obama campaign in movement terms.  It has to do with O’s huge crowds, including older folks who had no chance to ask qq in a recent New H. appearance, and his reliance on the under-40 vote.  However persuasive the argument, and Bai is blessedly tentative about this (which you are allowed to be in a blog, where this appears), he says Obama

does seem to be entering a perilous moment where his well-funded campaign could easily become this year’s “cause” or “movement,” rather than a candidacy with the kind of broad support you need to get you through to the convention. Liberal causes built on beautiful speeches and campus rallies never really win the nomination; they just fade into noble lore, fondly remembered by that breed of Democrat who seems to view losing as a kind of moral validation.