Skip to comments.
Fred Thompson Takes First Step in Presidential Run, Opposes Abortion
LifeNews.com ^
| May 30, 2007
| Steven Ertelt
Posted on 05/30/2007 12:12:08 PM PDT by gpapa
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 161-178 next last
To: Politicalmom
I've read his comments and they are interesting. I would hope the one thing he has learned from his CFR "mistake" is that trying to limit political contributions is not a solution. It merely takes away a citizen's right to participate as one wishes in the political process.
The true solution to CFR is to reduce the amount of money available to the Congress. No money to play with will reduce the amount of soft and hard money spent on contributions quicker than any byzantine maze of artificial campaign restraints.
If Fred wants to grab we fiscal conservatives, he needs to annoumce specific cuts in the federal budget, ala the Contract With America. This may help with his total lack of experience in the executive branch.
81
posted on
05/30/2007 9:05:23 PM PDT
by
jonathanmo
(No tag available at this time.)
To: Politicalmom
My boy Newt, sure wish he had kept it in his pants and ran for President in 2000. He would have been a good one. Newt's been light on the "abortion should be illegal" comments. In all my time reading his stuff, he said it one time to my knowledge back when he was pimping/promoting "Winning the Future", something along the lines of abortion doctors should be the ones charged with crimes, not abortion seekers.
On Fred, I just want a clearly stated position, that's all. Duncan Hunter has no problem with it, nor does Sam Brownback, who are the two true conservatives in the race at this time.
My best to you!
82
posted on
05/30/2007 9:23:39 PM PDT
by
jonathanmo
(No tag available at this time.)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
It’s the first time I’ve mentioned it.
83
posted on
05/30/2007 9:35:16 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
To: jonathanmo; Sturm Ruger
SR, did you ever locate a trancript of the second half of Fred’s interview on Hannity and Colmes on May 2, I believe?
Thanks. :)
84
posted on
05/30/2007 9:47:20 PM PDT
by
Politicalmom
("ARREST ILLEGALS AND SEND THEM BACK WHERE THEY CAME FROM" Fred Thompson)
To: gpapa
He’s got my vote!
Unless Duncan Hunter were to get the nomination, of course.
To: Politicalmom; Jim Robinson; MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; ...
Thompson says he thinks Roe v. Wade is bad law and should be overturned,
but he says he does not support a Human Life Amendment. - Stephen F. Hayes, The Weekly Standard, April 23, 2007 This is the first thing I've read that indicates to me that Fred Thompson might not be FULLY 100% Pro-Life. So now my first question to him would be about the rape and incest exceptions. Duncan Hunter & Tom Tancredo support a Human Life Amendment and are against the easily abused and unacceptable loopholes of rape and incest. Though I am aware of their current poll numbers.
Prior to Roe it was legal to abort to save the life of the mother, an exceptionally rare occurrence then and even more so with todays medical technology.
So as I now understand it, Fred Thompson is as Pro-Life as Justice Antonin Scalia, both are of the Federalist position. They think Roe v Wade should be overturned so the legality of abortion is decided on a State by State basis, BUT both oppose the federal government criminalizing abortion, meaning neither see the unborn as Constitutional persons that deserve equal protection under the law. That is not even close to a 100% Pro-Life position.
While overturning Roe v Wade is certainly an important step in the right direction, if left to the States 80+ % of abortions will continue. Leaving abortion up to the States is much the same as leaving slavery up to the States.
With the incremental approach in mind, abortion must eventually be illegal everywhere.
I have read what Politicalmom has posted in 59 and I believe it to be true. Fred Thompson is Pro-Lifebut not beyond overturning Roe. Still, I would like him to explain his positions in a more complete way.
Duncan Hunter would be my first choice, and even though its early it looks like he is a very long shot. So I am hoping Fred Thompson does run because the front three are unacceptable. I will wholeheartedly support him, but lets be completely honest about where he truly stands on the life and death issue of abortion.
86
posted on
05/31/2007 12:26:36 AM PDT
by
cpforlife.org
(A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at KnightsForLife.org)
To: cpforlife.org
The problem is, Duncan Hunter is not electable.
Therefore, I'll take the the less-than-100% pro-life positions of candidates who are, like Romney and Thompson.
87
posted on
05/31/2007 12:32:19 AM PDT
by
TAdams8591
(Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag! Mitt Romney for President '08)
To: Politicalmom; RichardMoore; All
88
posted on
05/31/2007 1:09:30 AM PDT
by
Anita1
(Hunter for President in '08!! Huckabee for VP!! A Winning Ticket!)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; cripplecreek
89
posted on
05/31/2007 1:20:13 AM PDT
by
Anita1
(Hunter for President in '08!! Huckabee for VP!! A Winning Ticket!)
To: gpapa
Thompson speech
90
posted on
05/31/2007 1:36:50 AM PDT
by
Blue Collar Republican
(2 wrongs don't make it right, but 3 rights make a left.)
To: TAdams8591
We are in a sorry state when Hillary and Obama are electable and someone of the caliber of Duncan Hunter is unelectable. If it’s all about winning then we can see why we ended up with Bush. Who we end up with this time?
91
posted on
05/31/2007 6:08:14 AM PDT
by
RichardMoore
(gohunter08.com)
To: rintense
Re your tagline
Me to!
read mine! :o)
92
posted on
05/31/2007 6:52:34 AM PDT
by
Pippin
(Run Fred Run!)
To: SheLion
Re #15
so am I!
Now I can get excited about the '08 election!
get 'em Fred!
93
posted on
05/31/2007 6:54:15 AM PDT
by
Pippin
(Run Fred Run!)
To: RichardMoore
How about either
Hunter/Thompson
or
Thompson/Hunter?
94
posted on
05/31/2007 7:00:06 AM PDT
by
Pippin
(Run Fred Run!)
To: cpforlife.org
This is the first thing I've read that indicates to me that Fred Thompson might not be FULLY 100% Pro-Life. OK, time to stop this train right here.
Opposing the Human Life Amendment doesn't make someone less than fully pro-life any more than opposing the flag burning amendment makes one a flag burner. Some people just believe that the HLA is a futile effort. I'm not one of them, but I recognize that those in the pro-life fold who differ with me on it are not any less pro-life than me, they're just advocating different tactics.
We had better be awfully bloody careful to avoid getting in a circular firing squad over this issue, or we will end up with nominee Giuliani followed by President Clinton.
95
posted on
05/31/2007 7:10:16 AM PDT
by
Mr. Silverback
(A pacifist sees no distinction between the arsonist and the fireman--Freeper ccmay)
To: jonathanmo
Isn't that the only true pro-life position? So, by that standard, an anti-abortion politician should vote no on a partial-birth abortion ban, simply because it is not the whole enchilada?
Returning the issue to the states means that abortion at least slows down throughout red state America. It makes it possible to enact reasonable restrictions even in the blue states. It puts power into the hands of the people of each state, rather than in the Hillary Clintons and the Ted Kennedys.
No, it ain't the whole enchilada, but it's progress.
96
posted on
05/31/2007 7:10:57 AM PDT
by
hunter112
(Change will happen when very good men are forced to do very bad things.)
To: hunter112
Hi Hunter112, thanks for the reply. I would think, if he was 100% pro-life, he would say "I believe abortion should be illegal, so Roe V. Wade should be overturned. I would then push for an amendment like the Human Rights Amendment to be ratified because I believe human life begins at conception. Until that amendment is passed, I would like to see each state ban abortions with an exception for saving the LIFE of the mother."
To me, that's the pro-life position and would solidify the conservative base. If he doesn't believe that, that's fine and he needs to just lay out his true position, whatever that may be.
Take care.
97
posted on
05/31/2007 7:27:34 AM PDT
by
jonathanmo
(No tag available at this time.)
To: jonathanmo
And that would guarantee that he wouldn't stand a chance of being elected to anything besides dog catcher. The lamestream media would shred him like meat for a taco. Incrementalism is the way that the great injustices of the past have been rectified, I see that applying here, too. Hopefully, the libertarian baby boom generation will come to its senses as they age, and see the folly of having snuffed out their grandchildren's generation.
Even Romney's new revised position on abortion is good enough for me, since I think he was really there all along, and just willing to lie to the voters in Massachusetts to get elected as their governor. What is completely unacceptable to me is Rudy Giuliani's decision to completely abandon the cause of people working to limit, or eliminate elective convenience abortion.
98
posted on
05/31/2007 7:36:32 AM PDT
by
hunter112
(Change will happen when very good men are forced to do very bad things.)
To: RichardMoore
I would agree with you. Winning however, in politics is most important. It’s not a football game. If we conservatives don’t win, we will be unable to promote anything from the conservative agenda, which will have disasterous consequences for our country.
99
posted on
05/31/2007 7:51:47 AM PDT
by
TAdams8591
(Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag! Mitt Romney for President '08)
To: Pippin
100
posted on
05/31/2007 8:56:38 AM PDT
by
rintense
(I'm 4 Thompson!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 161-178 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson