When Fred Met Tim: Evaluating Thompson on Meet The Press

The National Review ^ | Sunday, November 04, 2007 | Jim Geraghty

[seenenuf]

Post #148 needs to be reviewed on every page of this thread. Therein is a suggestion re the endless abortion issue, which could only be improved by telling freepers how to herd cats. Just think of the cost to FR for the bandwidth gobbled up by endless one-note posters.

[Gelato]

I think Fred is too close to women in his life and thereby doesn’t want to upset them by saying he would be willing to criminalize abortion.

That may be, but I believe true respect for women comes through honoring their womanhood.

It takes a hard heart for a woman to carry a baby she feels is disposable. The womb was designed as the safest of all places, and we certainly don't help women by pretending they have no responsibility to that life growing inside them.

I share your disappointment.

[Gelato]

We’re talking about murder, not seat belts.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Would that all FReepers who love their country would adopt this common-sense approach this election year."

Yeah.

My own similar philosophy:

The primaries are the time to vote for.

The general election is the time to vote against.

[Gelato]

Marginalize yourself all you want, but realize the people of this country had legal abortion forced upon them from the bench.

They did not choose it.

We have simply lacked the leadership to carry the torch for life that Reagan lit.

[RockinRight]

Marginalize yourself all you want, but realize the people of this country had legal abortion forced upon them from the bench.

They did, that is correct.

However...it's now entrenched in the minds of many voters. It will take time to change the hearts and minds.

[moehoward]

THANK YOU !!!!!

[LowCountryJoe]

You wrote the words “protecting life”. Why didn’t you use the word “murder”? Is it because you understand that murder is much more difficult to prove or was it for some other reason?

[cajungirl]

So if the constitution doesn’t allow the banning of guns on campus, take it to court. Fred did say there ought to be a way to have some on campus armed for the sake of safety. LIke in courthouses, public buildings etc.

[DocH]

"...back to the way the Founders intended it to be."

Given that the above was in my post, what do you THINK I meant?

It doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

[cajungirl]

I agree.

[Gelato]

It will take time to change the hearts and minds.

How many hearts and minds did Bush change?

How many will we change by electing someone who is a notch left of Bush?

In contrast, consider the number of hearts and minds Reagan changed with his Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation. Leadership like that is key, and we won't see it again if settle for less.

[SuziQ]

Fred has seen the damage done by the government fiat on abortion. He knows that people are frustrated that they can't even get simple restrictions on the procedure because the Supremes will always stand in the way, using Roe v Wade as a precedent. Unless peoples' hearts and minds go through an enormous change, a Human Life Amendment, has absolutely NO chance of passing the House AND Senate, then getting the needed State approvals. Overturning Roe is the quickest way to make a considerable impact on the number of abortions done in this country.

No, I don't like that we can't get HLA passed, but the issue is SO hot that it will be demagogued by the left as a way for theocracy to push itself into all our life decisions. You and I know that is a load of carp, but there are WAY too many voters who are paranoid enough about religion that they will swallow that, hook, line and sinker.

If a Republican is elected, who has stated that he will appoint Justices to the Supremes who are willing to overturn Roe, that will be a major step. When Roe is overturned, abortions will not be outlawed, the issue will just go back to status quo ante Jan, 22, 1973. There are some states in which abortion is already legal, but most will have restrictions on it. If citizens are given the chance to actually vote on the procedure, most will allow abortions for the hard cases, but those are, at most 2% of all abortions.

Unless there is a change of heart in this country, abortion will always be legal, but it will be restricted in most places. That is not the ideal situation, but I'd rather save MOST babies, than not be able to save ANY.

[Gelato]

Read my post. The context was murder.

Take your juvenile games elsewhere.

[cajungirl]

Please dont invite the Schiavo people over here for crying out loud.

[fabian]

yes, of course...and adoption is always there for young ladies. We will never be at peace as a country until abortion is stopped.

[SuziQ]

Tim will just have to have Fred on again, to cover the items he missed this time. It is a great venue for covering issues that need reasoned, thoughful answers. I suspect Tim will do just that.

[cajungirl]

We disagree. I think to elevate what is a moral issue to the level that it is, to the exclusion of a candidate who does not toe the line and agree with one on every point, is fanatical.

And to call people names, call them murderers as they seek to find common ground in a country where opinions are so varied is uncivil.

Nobody has a moral franchise to say that what they believe is the be all and the end all. This is grandiose.

[LowCountryJoe]

then maybe, our party will realize that it is DIFFERENTIATING OUR PARTY FROM THE LIBERAL DEMS, and NOT running some northeastern liberal with an "R" after his name... ~ post 161

"...back to the way the Founders intended it to be."

Given that the above was in my post, what do you THINK I meant?

It doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

Well, answer my question and clear up the very ambiguity that you are creating here...I'm not a genius nor am I a mind-reader.

[SuziQ]

Hillary is no Ronald Reagan.

True, she's Mondale on steroids!