(1)While he declared himself “pro-choice” in 1994
BS. He and other prolifers such as I do not want federal government involvement. It is a States Rights issue. Roe vs. Wade must be overturned. FDT never ‘declared’ such a thing as you suggest, he stated he is against federal government involvement.
(2)Reagan was a great President who was misled into signing an amnesty for illegal aliens in 1986. He later regretted it and admitted his mistake. You will find no President that has not made mistakes. However, those that recognize their mistakes and correct them are worth voting for.
(3) This is a slander on FDT. His vote to acquit on perjury was correct and not because Clinton was innocent but because the Senate trial was for removing him from office, not for convicting him on criminality. You don’t remove a President for perjury in a personal manner, but you do allow courts to pursue the criminal charge which is what happened. You and your ‘good friend’ don’t understand that an impeachment is an indictment by Congress to be followed by a Senate trial to remove a President who may then face criminal changes in a ***Court of Law***. FDT layed out carefully why a President should not be removed for lies about a personal matter in which he used no powers of the Presidency to commit the crime. You would then understand why FDT threw the book at Clinton for obstruction where persons of the government were used to further the crime. You and your friend have attempted a lame smear on a legal intellect that you could never hope to match. Due diligence requires honest work, READ:
http://www.australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml
There is no “probably” in your ‘good friend’s’ unfair charge. He simply does not understand what he is talking about.
(4) Again you and your ‘good friend’ spin out of context the real voting record of FDT. Affirmative Action was never a bill by and of itself. It was always an amendment to a larger priority bill. FDT’s record speaks for itself, he is a solid conservative with principled views.
I agree that Murder (including abortion-murder) is a State's Issue (the Constitution leaves most issues of Common Law -- such as Murder, Theft, Fraud, etc. -- up to the several States to define and punish). However, all reports of FDT's 1994 campaign indicate that he did favor the legality of first-trimester Abortion:
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)
Like I said -- I agree that it is Constitutionally "enough" to seek the Repeal of Roe vs. Wade so that lawmaking concerning Abortion-Murder can be returned to the States, and at least those 30 or 35 States where Pro-Life Majorities hold sway can restrict or prohibit Abortion. That is MY position, that is Ron Paul's position, that is the position of "America's Only 100% Pro-Life Party (The Constitution Party), and I hope and believe that it is Fred Thompson's position.
But it's just not true to say that Thompson has always been 100% Pro-Life or has ever been a Pro-Life Leader. You said yourself, "those that recognize their mistakes and correct them are worth voting for", and that is to Thompson's credit on the Abortion issue; but he did NOT declare himself Pro-Life in '94. He was Pro-Choice in the First Trimester, with restrictions. That was his position.
I already stated my opinion, that it is no longer correct to define Fred Thompson's position as "Pro-Choice" -- I don't think that's accurate or fair given his current stance. But it's re-writing history to say that he was always "Pro-Life".