You must be running really scared with your pathtic non-stop attacks on Thompson who hasn’t announced he’s running. When he does, kiss rudy’s @ss goodbye!
On the NRLC website, they archive their congressional ratings back to 1997, so they include six of his eight years in the Senate. Thompson took the pro-life position on every vote he cast on the abortion issue. The only reason he didn’t have a 100% rating is that, as Jim pointed out, the ratings also include votes on campaign finance reform, which he supported.
Even in 1994, THOMPSON BELIEVED ROE SHOULD BE OVERTURNED:
http://leadusforward.wordpress.com/2007/03/31/fred-thompsons-pro-life-position-examined/
Fred Thompson’s Pro-life Position Examined
In 1994, Fred Thompson ran as a candidate who believed states should make decisions regarding abortion, opposing Roe and he believed abortion should be prohibited or restricted in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters. His eight year voting record shows he was in complete agreement with pro-life groups on abortion funding, late-term abortions and judges. Over the course of 11 years, Fred Thompson now considers himself pro-life without any nuance to the position, meaning at some point he shifted to the right on first-trimester abortions.
The man sounds like a small government conservative.
PING!
Imagine if this was 1980 and the internet and Free Republic were up and thriving. Somebody - - maybe a Howard Baker, George H.W. Bush, or John Anderson troll - - would post a story with the headline:
"As California governor, Reagan in 1967 signed one of the most liberal abortion laws in the country"
People can change their minds and revise their positions after 13 years.
I believe Fred Thompson is an honest man and I will certainly give him the benefit of the doubt.
Most politicians mouth the pro life stance to appease the ardent pro lifers. But “oficially” they think government should stay out of the issue and leave it to the states, which is my position.
Fred Thompson on Abortion
Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Oops, Fred just ran counter to the Giuliani doctrine - abortion is a right, and so is public funding of abortion if the woman is poor.
Man, y'all should run away from the pro-life issue like scalded squirrels. It's killing Rudy.
Just a taste of what he’ll get if he runs. His fans here (and I am among them) should not expect anything less than the same vetting process Rudy is getting.
.
What on earth is your problem with Thompson? He's more conservative than Giuliani, he's a great communicator and he has a good track record in the Senate.
Why beat him up?
I'm going to vote Republican in '08, I don't care who the nominee is. That includes John McCain!
Stop beating the hell out of Republicans! Everybody! We have Democrats to defeat!
I believe that there are some trolls on this and other threads trying to divide the conservative and RINO wings of the party.
Ad hominems are the first sign. Attacking candidates without facts is another sign. I could go on, but I have been asked not to feed the trolls.
Fred Thompson believes Roe V wade is bad constitutional law, and the issue should return to the states.
Rudy Giuliani believes Roe v Wade is good constitutional law.
Fred Thompson was endorsed by a pro life group when he ran for the senate. He has a pro life voting record.
Rudy Giuliani spoke to NARAL and praised margaret (eugenics) sanger.
Then there's wagglebee, bringing some more clarity:
Thompson changed his mind on abortion, just like Reagan.
I would add George W. Bush, Jane Roe and Jane Doe (of Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton) to that list.
Frankly, I do not think that Mr. Thompson or Mr. Giuliani need to explain their views or apologize for them. Their views are out there, are not hidden, and are backed up by actions and statements while in office. Hizzoner the Mayor has even told us that we should feel free to vote our principles if we don't like his views. How many GOP or Dem pro-aborts have said that, instead of attacking pro-lifers as some sort of fanatics?
What I think needs to be explained is why Freepers who support the Mayor think being pro-choice is a great feature in their candidate, but any pro-choice expression at any time is proof of horrible hypocrisy in any other GOP candidate. Why is Fred's pro-choice statement an example of hypocrisy and pandering, but Rudy's "conversion" on guns isn't?
If people want to say "I back Rudy because I think he can win," that's fine with me, but if that's so we might as well nominate Obama. Backing a liberal in the primary is selling out.