A...He changed his position, as many do.
B...He was Pro Choice, and his choice was Life.
C...He voted Pro Life, each and every time.
D...Yup, that's the guy! LOL
:O)
P
Posted on 04/01/2007 9:13:44 PM PDT by SE Mom
In just three weeks, Fred Thompson has transformed the contest for the Republican presidential nomination. It is not merely that he has come from nowhere to double digits in polls. He is the talk of GOP political circles because he is filling the conservative void in the field.
Republican activists have complained for months that none of the Big Three -- Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney-- fits the conservative model of a conservative leader for a conservative party. The party faithful have been waiting for another Ronald Reagan. But in conversations with them the past year, nobody mentioned Thompson as the messiah until he appeared March 11 on "Fox News Sunday."
Thompson was surprised by the reaction to his statement that he was "giving some thought" to running. In the first Gallup Poll that listed Thompson (conducted March 23-25), he scored 12 percent -- amazing for someone out of public life for more than four years who has not campaigned. More important is his backing within the political community. Buyer's remorse is expressed by several House members who endorsed Romney, the former Massachusetts governor.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I wish I didn't have to agree with you, but I do. This place used to be more about conservatives debating issues. Now it's just like watching a bunch of rabid dogs trying to be the first one to chew up the Outsiders--and the Outsiders aren't just atheists but, increasingly, Catholics, and anyone not reciting the Loyalty Pledge to a strict religious orthodoxy. I never thought I'd think my days here are numbered--where else to hang out?
My2Cents wrote: "...this place has become an almost intolerable place to hang out in."
It's especially hard on DU-DU poseurs...
Well, I believe Jim R. started off anti-Bush, and I know I wasn't too thrilled about him, but I voted for him out of necessity.
I CAN'T vote for Giuliani.
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)
Thompson on the issue with Chris Wallace on FOX NEWS Sunday:
So let's do a lightning round — quick questions, quick answers, a variety of issues — to see where Fred Thompson stands.
THOMPSON: Um hmm.
WALLACE: Abortion.
THOMPSON: Pro-life.
WALLACE: Would you like to overturn Roe. ...
THOMPSON: You said lightning round, now. If you want ...
WALLACE: Well, let's go.
THOMPSON: ... more, give me another question. I'll work through it.
WALLACE: Do you want to overturn Roe vs. Wade?
THOMPSON: I think Roe vs. Wade was bad law and bad medical science. And the way to address that is through good judges. I don't think the court ought to wake up one day and make new social policy for the country. It's contrary to what it's been the past 200 years.
We have a process in this country to do that. Judges shouldn't be doing that. That's what happened in that case. I think it was wrong.
And the Libs are already shitting their drawers--that oughta tell us something.
Both [Thompson and Houston Gordon] also are basically pro-choice on abortion although Thompson has voted to bar federal funding of abortions. Both candidates said they would have voted to override Clinton’s veto of a bill this year that would have banned a controversial partial-birth abortion procedure. (Memphis Commercial Appeal, 11/4/96)
U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson says he seldom hears about abortion in campaign travels throughout Tennessee and hopes the issue is downplayed at the Republican National Convention. The Tennessee Republican, a pro-choice defender in a party with an anti-abortion tilt, is preparing for next week’s convention in San Diego. He said the party must avoid distracting issues and focus on electing Bob Dole as president. “We need to concentrate on what brings us together and not what divides us,” Thompson said in an interview with The Tennessean published Tuesday. Thompson said he opposes making early-term abortions a crime, as some Republicans would like to do with a constitutional amendment. “But I don’t think you should bolt on one issue. I’m still not convinced platforms are a good idea. We know what we believe in and I don’t think we need to write it all down in a document,” Thompson said. (AP, 8/6/96)
On abortion, both Thompson and Cooper are pro-choice. But Thompson favors parental notification, Cooper voted against it. (National Review, 6/27/94)
Though Thompson says he’s pro-choice, his voting record on abortion issues (which includes opposing fellow Tennessean Henry Foster’s nomination for surgeon general) has earned him high marks from both the Christian Coalition and the National Right to Life Committee. He has also won the backing of the tobacco industry and the NRA. (Washington Monthly, 12/1/96)
You people?
Sory RD, I think you're mistaken on this one.
So, he's flip-flopped on the issue in order to get elected.
Thompson ran as a pro-choice candidate.
I'm sure that he will explain that, and his support for McCain-Feingold to YOUR satisfaction.
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)
See, now I have to go back to defending Rudy.
He simply did not get to nominate judges in NYC. Any article which implies that he did is either deceitful, or mindlessly echoing the attack dogs. A committee of uber-liberals would submit three names of NYC judges, almost all of whom are going to be left-wing extremists, and Rudy has to pick from among those. I'll be impressed that Rudy was favoring liberals when I see the list of conservative judges nominated by the committee which Rudy failed to appoint. Until then, please don't be fooled by the scurrilous garbage.
He also voted "YES" on bringing more foreign workers into the nation, and "YES" on increasing the number of skilled visas issued yearly.
BREAKING NEWS: National Right to Life Committee on Thompson - Thursday, March 22, 2007 @ 5:37:50 PM
This morning, I cited reports being promoted by the pro-Romney blog Evangelicals for Mitt suggesting that Fred Thompson ran his two campaigns for Senate in Tennessee as a pro-choicer. Not so, National Right to Life executive co-director Darla St. Martin just told me.
St. Martin said that she went down to Tennessee in 1994 to speak with Thompson personally when he first ran for Senate, and that she determined he was against abortion.
"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.
"He has a consistent voting record that is pro-life," she said.
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.
I specifically pressed her on the 1994 National Review story that read: "On abortion, both Thompson and Cooper are pro-choice. But Thompson favors parental notification, Cooper voted against it." I also asked her about the 1996 AP story mentioning Thompson's opposition to a constitutional amendment banning abortion.
St. Martin said she was skeptical of such media reports, because they can be wrong as was her experience with stories in 2000 that George W. Bush had been pro-choice. She reiterated the fact that she knows Thompson opposed abortion because of her conversation with him, and that was reinforced by his subsequent voting record.
http://www.spectator.org/blogger.asp?BlogID=6017
Actually, I believe a big chunk of Giuliani's lead has been from the evangelical vote. In fact, from a conversation I had just today, I'm getting the idea that the average Christian doesn't even KNOW Giuliani's stance on abortion.
Personally, I don't see where religion has played much of a role in this at all. Mostly what I see, and especially on FR, is a dislike of Rudy's pro-gun control stance. That one...gee...just doesn't sit well with voters. I recall Gore not winning his own home state of Tennessee, for example.
For me, if Rudy convinces me he will do something about illegal immigration (which I consider a national crisis right now), I will be more inclined to consider him.
I'm interested- who is your idealogical choice and then, who would you choose that has a real chance to win?
Rudy worked a miracle in NYC. But he has many NYC values (pro-choice, gun control, gay rights) which are fine for NYC but not for the huge constituency that makes up America, especially salt-of-the-earth conservatives.
He'd be great anywhere on a ticket or in an administration with FDT.
He's an asset for sure.
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.