Replies

‘I interviewed him and on all of the questions I asked him, he opposed abortion,’ St. Martin said. She told me that the group went on to support him in that election, and his record reinforced for her that their determination was correct.

I have a friend who was with Tennessee Right to Life and reported differently. Mr. Thompson told them that he wasn't going to take a position in the campaign and that people would just have to look at what he does when he's in the Senate.

While I strongly prefer Mr. Hunter to Mr. Thompson, I don't agree with the tone of the argument made in this thread. To say that Mr. Thompson supports murdering babies is at the least a gross distortion of statements that he may have made. The better way of describing the situation is that Mr. Thompson has never been a champion of the pro-life movement. He has made statements that leave his position in some doubt, but his voting record has been very good. The biggest blot on his voting record regarding abortion is his support of campaign finance reform which could prevent abortion opponents from supporting pro-life candidates.

Personally, I don't ask that a candidate be a great champion of the pro-life movement, but like many others on Free Republic, I'm frustrated at how people seem to be projecting their strong conservattism on a candidate who isn't that conservative. Fred Thompson has strengths and weaknesses and certainly doesn't have perfect conservative credentials. On abortion, I think he'd move the ball forward for our side, but I recognize that a good voting record as a legislator does not necessarily mean someone will be effective as an executive.

If I must choose between Mr. Thompson and Mr. Hunter, I'll choose Mr. Hunter. If I must choose between Mr. Thompson and Mr. Romney, I'll likely lean towards Mr. Romney. If the only viable candidates on my ballot are Mr. Thompson and Mr. Giuliani, I'll happily vote for Mr. Thompson.

Bill