I FRIGGIN AGREE WITH YOU! I have stated numerous times that his pro life voting record is commendable, but that some of his statements on abortion trouble me. What’s wrong with that? Why can’t I question the almighty Fred Thompson?
Who cares what he said? What he said back then is irrelevant. Even Ted Kennedy made pro-life statements. Did it influence his voting record and current support of abortion rights later on?
Thompson is firmly pro-life. There is no debate here. This isn't worth losing your FR membership over.
Because you are misrepresenting his position on abortion.
Fred has denied that he personally answered that questionnaire during his '94 campaign, a campaign worker filled it out and answered the abortion question as she thought his position would be, not as she knew it to be for certain. Does anyone believe that Thompson is dumb enough to have answered the question in that manner while running for office in the ultimate bible-belt state of Tennessee? As has been pointed out numerous times both here an on countless other threads, Fred was interviewed by a National Right to Life official during that same campaign, and based on that interview was given an A rating by the organization. Again, does anyone with a functional brain really believe that National Right to Life would grant an A rating and it's unqualified endorsement to a candidate who openly supported a “woman’s right to choose” as his enemies now claim he did at that time?
As has also been pointed out countless times, Fred’s voting record for the 7 years he served in the Senate was 100% pro-life. That in itself should be enough to convince any unbiased person of his opposition to legalized abortion, but the misleading accusations that are being made by disingenuous and frightened supporters of other candidates regarding that one erroneous answer to a routine questionnaire is being touted as the definitive answer to the question of his position on that issue. Even a seasoned politician lacking a conscience should be ashamed to use such a low tactic against an opponent, and IMHO an honorable and decent conservative such as Duncan Hunter would not personally condone such a disreputable tactic.
Just for the record, I have a high regard for Hunter and I could enthusiastically support him for any high office in the land. But my support combined with the support of you and the relative handful of other Duncan admirers would not be a drop in the bucket of support that he would need to even become a viable contender for the nomination, much less to win the nomination itself. But I am mistaken and he does become a truly viable candidate, I am not bound to any candidate at this time and I could easily become a Duncan supporter in that extremely unlikely eventuality. But if that should come to pass in spite of the overwhelming odds against it, I will not use misleading "information" against his opposition here on FR or any other public venue.