No he isn't. He wants states to be allowed to continue the killing of the innocent unborn. That is not "federalism." It is a refutation of the foundational American principles of the unalienable, God-given, right to life and liberty. IOW, the very things that hold this republic together as a nation.
The perfect candidate is out there. His name is Duncan Hunter.
Unfortunately he isn’t doing very well at this point and the only acceptable alternative - even if marginally - is Thompson. The rest can pack it in.
I intend to vote for Hunter in the Primary and Thompson in the General Election if he gets there. If not, Americans deserve Hillary because that is what they will be getting.
Sorry, but we disagree there, and that difference ain't gonna be resolved any time soon.
BTW, Even with his ‘Federalist’ stance, the National Right to Life and other Pro-Life organizations have given him a 100% score and NARAL has given him a 0%.
Also, you should really judge based on his actual record (including votes):
Roe v. Wade was bad law and bad science. (Jun 2007)
Appoint strict constructionist judges. (Jun 2007)
Has never been pro-choice despite 1994 news reports. (Jun 2007)
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)
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Abortion
No he doesn’t... this is a COMPLETE misrepresentation of Fred’s position, shamefully so!
Fred wants Roe vs. Wade overturned on the basis of faulty law, rightfully so.
That alone would return the issue of abortion to the states, no longer would it be a “constitutionally protected right”.
Fred has stated his anti-abortion stance repeatedly. He has NEVER stated that he wanted the states to authorize abortion, as your wrongly assert here.
This is exactly the kind of crap that should not be tolerated on any conservative blog! You are a liar my friend...
You should not be allowed to post here. Conservatives are NOT interested in lies!
EV! Now there you go again.
Post, please, where FDT has said he supports state laws allowing abortions to continue. You can’t because what he said was that abortion laws, like the death penalty, should have never been a Federal issue and should have been left up to the states. He, like the rest of us possessed of more than 2 brain cells, knows that most state legislatures would ban abortion in an instant, given the chance.
Now get out of the sun, son. The heat has obviously addled ya.
Or, you can look at it as he being the most pro-life most electable guy on the horizon. If the goal is making abortion harder to get, then we’re fine.
If you want to stand up and scream fire and brimstone because he doesn’t bomb abortion clinics, then you can destroy him and elect Hillary...who will certainly NOT be helpful to our common goals on abortion or other issues.
You're confusing Fred with Rudy...
Even assuming Thompson isn't more pro-life than he was when he first ran for the Senate, he still has consistently opposed Roe vs. Wade. I have no doubt he supports judges that would overturn it.
That's all one can ask out of President -- the appointment of judges that would overturn Roe. The rest would be up to pro-lifers at the state level.
With Ghouliani or Hillary, there is no chance judges would be appointed that would overturn Roe.