Thompson: Overturning Roe v Wade is the goal

The Baltimore Sun ^ | November 12, 2007 | Rick Pearson

[2ndDivisionVet]

INDIANOLA, Iowa — Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson today defended his opposition to a federal constitutional amendment to ban abortion and contended it was more realistic to appoint conservative judges to outlaw abortion or let the states decide whether the procedure should be legal.

Thompson's comments, made during a swing through Iowa, where his campaign has languished in its early stages, also came on the eve of his candidacy's expected endorsement by the National Right to Life Committee.

"What I have concentrated on is a way to get to the same goal (to ban abortion) that's achievable. We could not get to first base on an amendment when we controlled both houses and the presidency," Thompson told reporters after a coffeehouse meet-and-greet.

"Now the question is, what do you do about that? Well I think the answer is to get better judges and to appoint people to the Supreme Court and hopefully someday Roe vs. Wade will be overturned. That's my goal. That's my priority," he said.

Thompson acknowledged that prior to the Supreme Court's landmark decision that allowed women to seek an abortion, the individual states had rights to outlaw or legalize the procedure.

"And as I like to say, sometimes states have a right to do things that even Fred Thompson disagrees with," the former Tennessee senator said.

During his stop in Indianola and an earlier visit to another café on the Oskaloosa town square, Thompson said the appointment of judges was second only to national security as a priority that Republicans should consider given the Democratic leadership of the House and Senate and the potential of a Democratic victory for the White House.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Hope this explains some of his positions.

[Tailgunner Joe]

Will he promise to subject candidates for the Supreme Court to a litmus test to be sure that they oppose Roe?

[2ndDivisionVet]

"Will he promise to subject candidates for the Supreme Court to a litmus test to be sure that they oppose Roe?"

Did Presidednts Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush or George W. Bush subject SCOTUS candidates to a litmus test?

[Tailgunner Joe]

1. Sandra Day O'Connor

2. David Souter

3. Harriet Miers

[ari-freedom]

no and that is why you can’t count on repealing Roe through the SC. The HLA is a way to bypass the SC but it is really best as a way to make abortion a national issue...part of winning “hearts and minds”
Vague promises about potential judges who may or may not repeal Roe won’t do that

[f150sound]

What can you expect from a paid lobbyist for abortionists?

Fred doesn't want a constitutional amendment because Fred thinks infanticide should be "up to the states."

[HerrBlucher]

Harriet Miers doesn’t sit on the SCOTUS LOL!

But yes, Bush blew it with that nomination although I don’t remember what her position on roe wade was, it was just a foolish nomination.

The bottom line is, no matter who gets in as prez there is no guarantee we will get good SCOTUS appointments.....they have to be approved and that gets messy. As you pointed out, everyone’s hero, Reagan, appointed a doozy in oconner, he blew it....oh well, other than that he was a great president.

Fred is our best shot at making progress on abortion, Romney is a double talker and cannot be trusted and Duncan is just not going to make it.

[2ndDivisionVet]

"1. Sandra Day O'Connor
2. David Souter
3. Harriet Miers"

1. John Roberts
2. Clarence Thomas
3. Samuel Alito
4. Antonin Scalia
5. Robert Bork

[Tailgunner Joe]

Exactly, furthermore, overturning Roe v. Wade can be undone later if the Supreme Court moves back to left. A Constitutional amendment would preclude that possibility and tie the court’s hands.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Here’s some information for you on your boy Huckabee:

Mike Huckabee. The Socialist From Arkansas. http://www.cofcc.org/?p=811

Mike Huckabee disses Americans, Mexicans, promotes illegal immigration
http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/005609.html

Christians Need To Beware Of Mike Huckabee
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20071102.html

While Gov. of Arkansas, Huckabee was AGAINST proving citizenship in order to register to vote. He called those who were in favor of this “racists”...
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050218/news_lz1e18perkins.html

Huckabee fought hard to kill an Arkansas bill which would have cut off social services for illegal aliens. Huckabee called the bill, “anti-Christian” and “un-American”...
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2005/01/28/News/316347.html

Huckabee supported in-state tuition for illegal aliens...
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2005/03/11/News/318458.html

Huck’s opposition to the illegal aliens bill:

http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/000718.html

[Tailgunner Joe]

I hate to point this out, but we are all still waiting to hear Roberts and Alito's views on the issue. We still don't know how they'll rule, precisely because the President refused to ask them. When they had a chance to join Scalia and Thomas' dissent in Gonzales v. Carhart, they didn't.

[Hostage]

Fred comes through LOUD AND CLEAR!

[supercat]

Exactly, furthermore, overturning Roe v. Wade can be undone later if the Supreme Court moves back to left. A Constitutional amendment would preclude that possibility and tie the court’s hands.

The legal fiction behind Roe vs. Wade predated 4D ultrasound machines. Inertia may keep it in place, but once it's dislodged I don't think it can ever be reinstated.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Alito aren’t conservative enough for you?! So, basically nothing will satisfy you. Okay, got it! LOL

[Ingtar]

You’d rather wait on an amendment to the Constitution that we have yet to get through the House or the Senate even when we were in charge over a method that, while not perfect, has a much better chance of success? Good luck with changing hearts and minds while the NEA controls the majority of what kids learn in this country. With their dominant position, they couldn’t even get the ERA through, even with the extended time. They used the “change the court” method and got it anyway.

[Tailgunner Joe]

W wanted to make his pro-choice wife happy by putting a woman on the court.

[ari-freedom]

well i can understand where he’s coming from. He wants an incremental approach.
But I argue that only works for liberals. Conservatives need big national campaigns. A contract with America vs Hastert’s muddiness, a flat tax vs lots of tiny tax cuts, the END of the evil empire and not just playing with detente for years. Americans need to hear it loud and clear, this is evil like slavery was and we cannot tolerate it anymore as a nation.

[Tailgunner Joe]

That remains to be seen. I’d love to know if they support overturning Roe v. Wade. They seemed to not have a problem assuring all the democrats that they’d stick to precedent. (Code for upholding Roe)

[ansel12]

NATIONAL REVIEW; “Waiting on Fred” Aug 27 2007

The Supreme Court, and judicial issues in general, are Thompson’s strong suit. Not only does he have the background-the Watergate investigation, the Senate Judiciary Committee, private practice, and the job of guiding John Roberts through his confirmation hearings-he also knows the conservative legal stars who would likely be candidates for the Court in coming years. But he won’t name names, beyond the men already there, “I like Roberts and Alito and Scalia and Thomas” he tells me. “We’re in a heck of a lot better shape because of Roberts and Alito, and one more gain would put us in even better shape.” Should he become president, Thompson would undoubtedly try to nominate that elusive fifth conservative.”

[restornu]

Bork is not on the Supreme Court!

Miers was pro life but not a constitutional lawyer or scholar.