Posted on 11/13/2007 2:03:33 PM PST by pissant
The National Right to Life Committee endorsed Fred Thompson yesterday. The question I have is...why? There are other Republican candidates with better pro-life records. In fact, Duncan Hunter has a 100% lifetime rating from the NRLC and 0% from NARAL. Here is the theories and rebuttals for the endorsement:
Why did the National Right To Life committee and NRLC PAC decide to endorse Fred Thompson? We won't know until tomorrow's press conference, but here are some theories
(1) His record in the Senate. It's strong and solidly pro-life. Rebuttal: But other candidates -- John McCain, Duncan Hunter, have better records. ... And Thompson was just as much of a force behind McCain-Feingold as McCain... and he lobbied on behalf of pro-choice causes in the early 1990s...
(2) Political calculation -- Duncan Hunter can't win; Mike Huckabee is too independent and allegedly alienates fiscal conservatives; Mitt Romney is going to be beaten and the abortion policies of his Mass. health care plan are a problem; Thompson will win in the South. Thompson will owe the NRLC. Rebuttal: The NRLC isn't generally like that; more than almost any interest group, it's faithfully represented the interests of its 3000 chapters and hundreds of thousands of members. And so far as political calculations go, Thompson's standing in early state polls has been declining.
(3) Huckabee hatred: the one person in the race who doesn't have to pander to pro-life activists has aroused the ire of the Beltway establishment. Rebuttal: again, the NRLC prizes itself on its independence.
(4) They forgot McCain-Feingold: Remember, NRLC and its affiliates are as responsible as anyone for the fight against the issue ad provisions of BCRA. Thompson has backed away from his support of those provisions, but his support of the thrust and principles behind McCain-Feingold is undeniable. Rebuttal: ??
-----------
The statement from the president of the NRLC said this:
Since announcing his candidacy in September, Fred Thompson has run second only to pro-abortion candidate Rudy Giuliani for the Republican nomination in the overwhelming majority of national polls. As pro-lifers throughout the nation begin to unite behind his candidacy, he will be well positioned to win the nomination and the presidency.
It's obvious that 1, 2, & 4 of the above theories are correct.
Darn right. And, hopefully, Gov Huckabee will continue the tradition and he and his band will perform at the Free Republic Duncan Hunter (or Fred Thompson) Inaugural Balls I & II.
See you there. I’ll supply the kegs.
Boeing, Lockheed and Grumman did not invest in his concept of the DP-2 aircraft because they were skeptical of his ability to actually achieve success. Six years later, it appears the DP-2 program has accomplished very little.
And you ignored the testimony of expert witnesses, here are a few examples:
In summary, I wish to stress that the DP-2 proposal was summarily rejected by impartial engineers and scientists from government aeronautical laboratories of DOD and NASA repeatedly over the past twenty years, yet it was forcibly funded and undertaken at the insistence of congressional advocates, with no regard to the judgments of their own government laboratory experts. -Testimony By Mr. John Eney, Former Head, Aircraft Conceptual Design Group, Naval Air Development Center (NADC) and Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR)There are also Critical Design Reviews on that webpage for the last 20 years that all say the project is not feasible as designed and that DuPont does not have the expertise to make it work. In addition, there is this little tidbit in the Charter:With enough time, money, and application of state-of-the-art aerospace technology we can make almost anything fly. The real issues are whether or not the ultimate product is worth the investment and whether on not the Nation is willing to devote the resources to achieve the capability. In my opinion the DP-2 has failed both tests. duPont promises a product at an R&D price at least an order of magnitude below the multi-billions necessary to mature the concept, and the services say they don't need or want it even if can be built. - Testimony By Dr. William Scheuren, Former DARPA DP-2 Program Manager and former Harrier Test Pilot
While the DP-2 vertical-lift aircraft may be an interesting concept worth exploring, I do not believe the duPont company has the necessary technical expertise required for this project. While a flight control simulation model now exists, it has yet to be proven that it represents the real airplane. DuPont’s insistence in trying to fly the airplane within the current restrictions of the tethered area has resulted in several hard landings. - Testimony By Col. G. Warren Hall (ret.) NASA AMES Chief Test Pilot, Chairman, DP-2 Air Worthiness Review Panel
In addition to the serious safety issues that have been called into question regarding the management of the DP-2 program, the Subcommittee has learned that questions regarding duPont’s financial management of the program have also emerged. According to a 2004 Department of Defense audit of the company, duPont Aerospace attempted to misallocate at least some of the Congressional funding it has received. The audit found that duPont billed the government nearly $7,000 in unallowable costs, including $1,700 for polo-shirts with duPont’s logo imprinted on them, nearly $2,000 for an annual company picnic and more than $3,000 for a family vacation on a cruise ship.
You are just pissed because I outed him on this. Deal with it, the project is a total failure and deserved to be cut.
Re-read the 2001 testimony, toots. Then try to figure out who was in charge of your vaunted “congressional subcommittee”. None other than Brad Miller. You trust Miller more than Hunter. That is very very telling.
Do you think that 63 mil is alot for an R&D project of this scope?
Maybe your gal Fred should have cut some money loose from his global warming crusade?
Hunter said that {Duke} Cunningham took only a minor role in pushing for the contract {which is a lie, BTW}. He said that he and Cox – who he describes as “one of the smartest guys in Congress” – took the lead. Cox now says the funding for the aircraft should have been halted long ago. “What I supported was doing the testing to determine whether it could fly,” he told ABC News this week. “As soon as it failed to meet the test criteria, it should have been abandoned.”
Thanks for that information.
He who lives by trashing others shall end his candidacy by being outed with the truth.
And it was earmark funding at that. The recently formed Reagan 21 group has called for congresspersons to commit to no more earmarks, and calls earmarks an ethics problem.
Just like the banking scandals in congress, was that 1993? An ethics problem. As Fred says, congress should live by the same laws/rules as everyone else. Most businesses don’t get earmarks to stay afloat.
Might want to read this conversation between dingbat and I before you buy into her crap. This project has been very lightly funded and the prototype program was not approved until 1997. Its Brad Miller - leftwing democrat and the MSM versus Hunter and the guy in charge of the program.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1925210/posts?page=40#40
Start at #40 and work your way backwards.
read
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.