Fred Thompson addresses National Right to Life conference - Thurs. 10am Live on Townhall.com

Town Hall ^ | Thursday, July 03, 2008 | Jonathan Garthwaite

[arbee4bush]

Stay tuned to Townhall.com Thursday morning as Townhall Magazine contributor Fred Thompson addresses the National Right to Life conference live online at Townhall.com. Fred Thompson's speech is scheduled for 10:20am.

[arbee4bush]

Live streaming right now. Go Fred

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Wait....I thought a whole lot of FReepers told us that Fred was pro-choice, and that they couldn't possibly support him in the primaries (when it might have done some good and averted the present McCainwreck)?

Looks like they were wrong.

[lesser_satan]

Ping!

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>Wait....I thought a whole lot of FReepers told us that Fred was pro-choice..

Bold face lies!

FRed has received the endorsement of the National Right to Life Committee three times. Twice, in his two Senate 1994 and 1996, and of course last year when he ran for POTUS.

[arbee4bush]

Yes, they were wrong and now look what we have?

Makes me sick.

[arbee4bush]

introducing him now.....

100% record on voting for life issues....

[Reagan Man]

Fred calls Obama an abortionist of the first order.

Agreed!

[arbee4bush]

LOL-”a bantam rooster trying to belittle an American Eagle”...(talking about Obama vrs McCain on the tussle about McCains service in Vietnam

[chickpundit]

I didn’t know Fred was speaking today. Thanks for posting this or I would have missed it :)

[jellybean]

Fred Thompson addressed the National Right to Life conference Thursday morning live on Townhall.com. His prepared remarks are available here.

[MaryFromMichigan]

Hard for me to stomach candidates like Obama and McCain when we have Americans like Fred Thompson on the sidelines.
Politically speaking, Fred quitting the race was one of the most disappointing and painful moments of my adult life.

[Christian4Bush]

+1

[jellybean]

olitically speaking, Fred quitting the race was one of the most disappointing and painful moments of my adult life.

I still have my Fred '08 bumper sticker on my car, drink from my Fred mug and wear my Fred sweatshirt when it's chilly outside. I was soooo looking forward to voting for a candidate I believed in rather than holding my nose and voting against the other guy. Sad times...

[arbee4bush]

I did vote for Fred in the OH primaries. Told hubby that if I have to vote for McCain in Nov, then I refuse to vote for him twice..and it felt good to vote for Thompson.

*sigh*

[MaryFromMichigan]

It was just the opposite for me.
Even though I am on your Fred list, I’m just getting to the point where I can click on the threads.
He would make a great President.

Instead, I have to vote for McCain.
An aspect as appealing as a glass of warm spit.

[chickpundit]

Yep, I voted for Fred in the primary, and I feel good about it. I will hold my nose and do my duty in November, but at least I got an opportunity to vote for the man who should be president.

[ejonesie22]

Ya think...

[ejonesie22]

America is not ready for serious candidates yet, and I think Fred realized that. They are still distracted enough with a good economy and other delights from the Reagan era that they can afford vanity candidates, bright shiny objects and one issue battles.

Fred was the candidate for serious times, and the masses still don't realize we are there. That is changing rapidly. Fred's time in history seems to be sadly off, but one like him should be ready soon and they way things are going, with the return to the days of Carter, the masses may finally be ready.

[Cedar]

Thank you, Fred, and all other pro-life leaders and Congressmen (and of course, thanks to President Bush for his tremendous support always of pro-life issues....his greatest moments in office).

[dmz]

Wait....I thought a whole lot of FReepers told us that Fred was pro-choice, and that they couldn’t possibly support him in the primaries (when it might have done some good and averted the present McCainwreck)?
______

IIRC, the issue some conservatives took with Fred vis a vis the abortion issue was that he was looking at it with a Federalist eye. He (and again, this is just my recollection) was not for amending the Constitution on this issue, he wanted it handled by the several states.
As you well know, there is a pretty large contingent of freepers for whom that is effectively a prochoice position (wrong though they may be).

[ejonesie22]

Yes, they were wrong, and in some cases ironically so, since they would take firm Constitutional stands as well. The irony comes when one realizes that the whole intent of the Constitution and the government it formed was to leave such decisions to the many states so it could not fall prey to the whims of a single power...

Which, to add even more irony, is exactly what happened when we got Roe...

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

IIRC, the issue some conservatives took with Fred vis a vis the abortion issue was that he was looking at it with a Federalist eye. He (and again, this is just my recollection) was not for amending the Constitution on this issue, he wanted it handled by the several states. As you well know, there is a pretty large contingent of freepers for whom that is effectively a prochoice position (wrong though they may be).

Yes, I know, and it's a shame that there is a sizeable number of FReepers who can't see past their own nose on this issue to realise that their way (Constitutional amendment, etc.) has gained about zero traction and stands zero chance of happening anything this century.

[kevkrom]

This is the prevailing attitude of at least two "hard-line" single-issue camps I've seen here at FR: pro-life and illegal immigration. Essentially, they are "all or nothing" in their approach -- if someone proposes a step in the right direction, they're slammed for not going "all the way".

As such, these people seem content to stew in their own indignation while nothing gets accomplished.

The ironic thing is that I am on their "side" in both cases, in terms of long-term objectives. Pro-life and border security are two of my biggest issues, but I also realize that neither one can be solved overnight, and that prioritizing short-term objectives to eventually reach the long-term ones makes more sense than demanding everything at once and getting nothing in return.

[ejonesie22]

This too shall pass...

Things are not yet bad enough in the country for people to see past their single issues, their vanity candidates and the desire to not rock the boat, or all three in some cases...

Times they are a changin’...

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

This is the prevailing attitude of at least two "hard-line" single-issue camps I've seen here at FR: pro-life and illegal immigration. Essentially, they are "all or nothing" in their approach -- if someone proposes a step in the right direction, they're slammed for not going "all the way".

As such, these people seem content to stew in their own indignation while nothing gets accomplished.

I've noticed the same thing, and I attribute it in large part to laziness. It's just easier to sit on a high horse and yell at everyone else around you for not being pure enough, than it is to get into the trenches and take back turf one bill, one court case, one election at a time.

[kevkrom]

So again, irony. These people espousing (to the point of rabidness) conservative bellweather opinions are in turn shackled by their implicit acceptance of the culture of entitlement.

If it weren’t so sad, I’d laugh.

[FlashBack]

Thanks for the ping and the link!!
Fred’08 is still on my car.....no matter who wins in the fall it will be known that it wasn’t my fault!!

[The Pack Knight]

It's pretty pathetic, really. According to pretty much all the polls I've seen over the last several years, a strong majority of Americans think abortion ought to be legal in most, if not all, circumstances. Only about a third believe that it should be illegal in most or all circumstances, only a third of those being in the "all circumstances" category.

A Constitutional Amendment to ban even most abortions would be out of the question even if just over 50% of Americans agreed with it. We'd need more like 70%, with majorities in at least a couple states that are heavily pro-choice now. It just ain't gonna happen.

What's worse is, the only way for it to ever happen would be to convince a good 30% of the country who are currently pro-choice to change their minds. With the attitude of the "my 80% friend is my 100% enemy" crowd, that's never going to happen, either.

[The Pack Knight]

I should also point out that even in those unlikely circumstances the resulting Amendment would have to be more tailored to the “moderate” pro-life view, and would even then be unacceptable to the sort we’re talking about.

[I'm ALL Right!]

I totally agree. I feel like he didn’t fight very hard and he gave up rather too quickly. I was behind him 110%, but after such a weak campaign effort I have to wonder if he was just a detractor, splitting the super conservative vote so that the moderate could get the nomination. Flame away. I don’t know if I’m right or wrong.

[Uriah_lost]

A lot of people told a lot of lies and now we have nobody to blame but them for giving us McPain as the nominee. I’ll be holding a cookout on election day so all my friends and I can get drunk enough to go out a vote for the “lesser of two evils” one more time.

[Uriah_lost]

You and me both brother.

[Dawnsblood]

I wish he were the nominee. OMG... Best 2 u.