Posted on 06/24/2007 7:54:42 AM PDT by rob21
We are holding Rudy and Mitt to the fire about their past on abortion. Lets not forget Fred Thompson.
Abortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy. Link
A very strong statement from Fred Thompson when he was running for congress.
Would it have been actually “binding” if it had allowed abortions in the case of the mother’s health, but not under any other circumstances? Or would it have been shot down after the fact due to the wording?
His record actually speaks for itself. He is obviously pro-life. I can’t imagine he would have done such a flip-flop if he thought the bill had a chance of surviving scrutiny the way it was originally written.
Please do be aware though that there are a few (small number really) Duncan Hunter supporters that constantly post the same propaganda that has been refuted literally hundreds of times on every Fred Thompson thread.
Then, these folks basically go off on the same ‘See, these Fred Supporters are mean!’ that you have tonight, if we say ANYTHING back about it.
Fred supporters don’t do that to Duncan Hunter threads and it’s not right for them to do it to us.
And hey, if you don’t like Fred supporters, the easiest way to stay away from them is to not click on Fred Thompson threads.
Funny thing. I very rarely click on Duncan threads, yet on Thompson threads, we’re always being treated to angry Hunterites taking us to task for something. Why is that?
I think that’s a pretty fair assessment of the thread.
I don’t really see many Thompson supporters that have a big problem with Duncan Hunter. I see people being provoked into attacking by others, which is admittedly childish on both sides.
I’d much prefer it if we could have a truce on the subject. The behavior of some, however, seems to be that they are attempting to convert people away from Fred Thompson threads by posting nastiness about him on his own threads. I don’t think that really wins any converts and only starts flame wars. If that weren’t going on, I’m confident that the overwhelming majority of Fred Thompson supporters would never utter another bad word about Duncan Hunter.
Good gravy...you’re looking for a conservative and you’re leaning toward Romney over Thompson? Pro-life values are importatn to you and you’re leaning toward Romeny over Thompson?
Go back in time to 2000, and Governor George W. Bush didn't have CONTEMPT for his base "as far as we knew".
Bush said he was against illegal immigration, opposed McCain-Feingold and wouldn't sign it into law, and that he was applauded by Washington's lack of fiscal discipline. And I took him at his word.
Now things might have been different if I looked at his RECORD on those issues. Bush did seem particularly eager to get the "Hispanic vote" in 2000, but it didn't set off alarms for most of us back then. Had I read into Bush's background more I would have realized just how wedded he was to the Atzlan agenda. But I can't think of a single freeper who realized that, aside from the Buchanan brigagers that were easily dismissible because they went around screaming Dick Cheney is a marxist, ranting about "NWO" conspiracy theories at Skull-and-bones, and said the biggest issue ever was Bush's snub of confedeate hertiage.
So yes, Fred Thompson, who's been out of office for several years and out of the political scene, doesn't have contempt for the conservative base "as far as we know" . Fred Thompson's "record" on abortion issues aliviates any fears I have about statements he made in 1994. Fred Thompson's "record" on immigration (D rating on preventing amnesties) does not. Fred said as recently as last year that deporting illegal aliens is "not going to happen" and they should be given "some aspirations of citizenship". If that doesn't raise red flags, what does? Based on his "record" for 12 years, I see no reason to believe Fred won't cave sometime down the line and sign into a law an mass amnesty for illegal aliens.
Exactly the same number who continue to lie about Fred Thompson and portray him as a pro-abortion candidate. ANY Freeper who spreads disinformation about ANY candidate should be drop-kicked.
Is this a dealbreaker for you re Thompson?
If you don’t like Thompson, bully for you. But there’s no reason that any of us should fall in line behind a guy who can’t run a national campaign, either. I jumped on Hunter’s wagon very early, but it appears it ain’t hitched to anything.
I would agree a truce would be best. To be fair, I have no idea who the major Hunter dissers are supporting, if anyone! And in response to another one of your posts to me, I think I will just stay off these Thompson threads. Heck, I might just hang it all up for awhile. I need a break from all this election crap.
Oh, and Hunter is so very competent...which is why he's an also ran. This guy should be on fire, instead he's in the basement, and we conservatives are supposed to trust a guy who can't organize a campaign to run the most powerful nation on Earth? Forgive me if I remain very skeptical.
I just returned from a self imposed weekend off. (well I made it to Sunday night...lol) It was beginning to negatively affect my moods, so I just stopped logging in.
All this stuff is too damn intense. Particularly with people that mostly agree on things arguing with each other! :)
The sad part is this: All of the above candidates, Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson, are pro-abortion in the most important and pertinent way possible; They think states have a right to keep abortion legal - therefore, even in their best case scenario, any one of them would do nothing to save the vast majority of babies that are being killed every day in America.
:) FRiends?
Definitely! :)
And YOUR idea will save NO babies, because you will take nothing but an immediate end to abortion, which won’t happen.
I’ll take saving as many babies as possible, over demanding something impossible.
What a total drama queen load.
The only thing any Fred supporter (or undecideds like me) want to silence is the ludicrous idea that Fred Thompson is a pro-abort. Hunter supporters keep making that charge, it keeps getting refuted, and when someone gets banned for their libelous behavior you all whine and act as if FR is anti-truth. It's the saem tactic the Rudybots used to use: Slander their opponents (especially Thompson) and then yell "'Elp, 'elp, I'm bein' oppressed!" And just like the Rudybots, after people like you poke Jimrob with a stick so many times he bans you, those of you left behind will be able to say stuff like "There aren't many Hunter fans left around here, but I won't talk about that because I might get banned."
This dishonest martyr complex behavior makes me sick. I've actually considered having my name taken off the Hunter ping list because of loser drama queens like you. Say all you want about Thompson, but quit defending people who lie about him. They besmirch two good men when they do that in Hunter's name.
Well, shut my mouth.
If you want stability you'd better go join the Rudybots, because Hunter isnt going to win anything unless he starts raising money and hauling butt right now.
Well, in your scenario, and that of Thompson, Romney and Giuliani, if babies are not persons with a God-given and unalienable right to life, there is not even any basis for overturning Roe to begin with, much less outlawing it in any of the several states.
However, if they are persons, as common sense, science, and morality dictate, then Roe goes, and so does every abortion in America, because those persons are persons as defined by the Fourteenth Amendment, as even the judges who decided Roe admitted in their infamous decision.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.