SPINNING PRO-RUDY BLOGGER: Fred Thompson in 1994: Let The Woman Decide [Thompson is 100% pro-life]

American Spectator BLOG ^ | 4/9/07

[Mr. Silverback]

By the same logic, Rudy saying that he is personally opposed to abortion, that he doesn't like it, in fact, he hates it, and would advise women to have an adoption rather than abortion, doesn't make him pro-life in your book, does it?

No, not even remotely.

If I wear my helmet every time I ride my motorcycle, but oppose helmet laws, does that make me pro-helmet law?

If I wouldn't own a slave, and encourage friends to free their slaves, but call slavery good law and expect abolitionists to support it with their tax dollars, does that make me an abolitionist?

If I say something is bad, but that the ruling decriminalizing it is "good constitutional law" and that people who oppose it should have to pay for it, what am I?

Rudy is a pro-abort, and is an extremist on the pro-abortion issue. Playing semantic games will not change that, and will not change Fred Thompson into a pro-abort.

[Mr. Silverback]

Really? Could you point out how since the late 1970s, and under 18 years of GOP presidential watch - including the Reagan administration - federal funding was eliminated for abortions in cases of rape, incest, and the health of the mother? In fact, the Hyde Amendment explicitly allows for financial support for abortions in those cases.

Rudy's in favor of the Hyde Amendment, and that's the only funding he's talking about? Well then, why all the tap dancing? And what does he mean by "If it would deprive someone of a constitutional right" if he only wants funding for rape, incest and life of the mother? The Constitutional right he supports (he called it "good constitutional law," remember?) covers any time for any reason. Therefore, by his very definition, any woman too poor to afford an abortion on demand should be able to get money from the public dole.

If you're going to act like one statement (that may not even be real) 13 years ago means Thompson is a pro-abort, then you should meet your own standard and get a grip on the fact that Rudy wants funding for abortions for the poor. If not, he shouldn't be saying it.

[Mr. Silverback]

I said it was a lib tactic. Reading is fundamental.

[Mr. Silverback]

Your boy is pro-choice, no matter how you spin it.

So let's review:

The 1994 quote is the only evidence you have. From it you say that Thompson is a prochoicer, no matter how it's "spun."

Therefore, you're saying it is absolutely impossible that he was misquoted, or changed his mind. His record doesn't matter. His statement since then that he doesn't remember making any pro-choice statements doesn't matter.

Oh, but you're not spinning! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Mr. Silverback]

Hate is such an awful thing and it usually corrodes the heart of those who harbor it. That's not the case with me.

You are supporting a liberal for the nomination of the GOP. You are doing so by attacking one of his potential opponents with bizarre half-truths based on one (possibly made up) quote reported by one reporter 13 years ago.

You are acting as a liberal, whether you think so or not...and liberals get to wear the chains of tyranny.

Sorry, but Petronski's completely within bounds here. You don't like being called a lib, don't back a lib and act like a lib.

[Petronski]

I thought she was referring for my hate for liberal policies like abortion-on-demand and gun control.

You mean she was twisting my post into hatred of her? Seriously?

That’s pathetic.

[Mr. Silverback]

Let's just say they reach this point pretty quick, FRiend:

[Luis Gonzalez]

I have his words.

That’s enough.

[Victoria Delsoul]

You mean she was twisting my post into hatred of her? Seriously?

That’s pathetic.

What's pathetic is that you would believe that.

And more pathetic still is that you don't have the guts to ping me when you reply to a misrepresentation of one of my posts.

[Victoria Delsoul]

You are silly man. Grow up already!