Posted on 07/19/2007 7:33:24 AM PDT by pissant
what can i say, i’m PMSing...; )
Not including his voting record is a misrepresentation.
I agree with you that Thompson opposes partial birth abortion, opposes human cloning and opposes government funding for abortion
And why would you not? That's how he voted.
Here is the prime effect of this story:
It establishes that Fred remains the most pro-choice of all the contenders. (He is being attacked by and with evidence provided by the pro-abortion crowd, and we are reminded of his pro-life voting record.)
It provides powerful help for the general election, because while he is solidly pro-life, he is not ardent about it, and seems to take moderating views when the abortion issue conflicts with free speech, and with Federalism.
That is a winning combination, as long as he is clear, and doesn’t dissemble about it.
David Brody’s article is critical of Thompson but it is based on solid fact. For days many Fred supporters were yelling that this story was simply something made up by the LA times. Fred allowed his spokesman to make statements indicating that he had never done any lobbying for this group. So, now that the billing records have been found at the law firm people are going to have to face the fact that Fred’s campaign was not honest about this situation.
Read Post 97.
I’m extremely wary of Fred’s infatuation with big government ideals as senator of Tennessee. Yes, he talks a good game but he voted for NAFTA and also was given an unimpressive grade of ‘C’ from the Americans for Better Immigration Reform. I think his his history as a Washington lobbyist places him in an untenable situation, if he ascends to the presidency. I don’t trust Fred to do whats right because he has been aligned with the system so long.
Of course that is how the argument has evolved. When the Times story first ran, and his campaign denied he ever did any work, the Fredheads called the LA Times liars (understandable, given the denials and LA Times history).
Then I pointed out that Fred’s subsequent statements on H&C and Powerline indicated to me that there was some truth to the Time’s story. Fredheads said no.
Now it appears that he has indeed done some work for the group, and the Fredheads argument now is “so what”.
Fine by me.
If he plays his cards right, you could be on to something.
Over here.
Do Billing Records = Lobbying?
Was Thompson ADVOCATING for his clients or performing legal work for them?
A lobbyist is an advocate.
*************
Yes, well, although it is unintentional, that's what I think too. Which is why I gave him some grief about it.
You post everything negative you can find on Fred and want people to think you’re not anti-Fred?
With friends like you, Duncan Hunter needs no enemies.
You’re not tweaking anything. You’re making me angry with Duncan Hunter. But I won’t have to do anything about that because he isn’t going to be on the ballot in my state.
“but as far as I know he still stands by statements he’s made that he wants abortion-on-demand to be legal in every state.”
You are either wrong, or a POS disgusting liar. Since I don’t know you, I’m going to give you what you won’t give Fred. The benefit of the doubt.
On Foxsnooze’ Hannity and (I’m not ugly)Colmes Show, Fred said that he wants Roe overturned. Once that happens, abortion goes back to the states. At that point, for those of us that feel passionately about it, we will carry the fight to our state legislatures. Where it belongs.
And why would you not agree that he's opposed banning abortion, when he's said as much repeatedly? It's a fact that Thompson has supported some restrictions on abortion (like banning partial birth abortion) but opposes a general ban on the practice. He's been clear on that.
:)
who hasn’t been? you think Romney is going to be some outsider come to town? i am a pragmatist and i live and work in DC. i think you are naive if you think romney would be any better on the things you mention.
we like pissant and are sorry to see him go so WRONG ; )
Good grief guys. This is an argument amongst conservatives for who we should nominate for CIC, not a debutante ball.
All this is already all over the MSM and the conservative MSM. Having freepers hash out its significance is not giving Hillary a thing.
Amanda75 wrote “WHAT in the hell does it matter what his position on abortion is????????? FOR pete sakes we need a good candidate and do any of you see one running right now, would you rather see the Clinton slime back in the WH???”
Amanda75, your argument is almost identical to the arguments which were made on behalf of Giuliani - arguments that we all rejected several months ago. We have to be willing to fight for what we believe in and risk losing power or we will never see any change in Washington.
If he and Hillary win their respective nominations, it would interesting to see if Hillary goes after him because of those “billing records”.
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.