Skip to comments.
Fred Thompson Blasts Mike Huckabee on Abortion, Constitution Comments
Life News ^
| 1/18/08
| Steven Ertelt
Posted on 01/18/2008 4:37:51 PM PST by wagglebee
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 last
To: ex-snook
If you read the article he gave you one reason to vote for him right there.
" am committed to appointing strict constructionist judges to the bench if I am elected President, strict constructionists who believe the Constitution has a fixed meaning that can be applied to cases that come before the courts today,"
I don't think you saw it because it was right in front of your face. Either that or you have swallowed some of the BS that Huckaboom is selling.
41
posted on
01/18/2008 8:13:39 PM PST
by
glaseatr
(Father of a Marine, Uncle of SGT Adam Estep. A Co. 2/5 Cav. KIA Thurs April 29, 2004 Baghdad Iraq)
To: wagglebee
We’ll find out tomorrow if my theory that democracy is doomed to failure is true or not.
If the voters in SC care about their country and read and hear the facts they will not vote for Huck.
If they actually value substance over style they will vote for Fred.
God, please don’t let people be stupid.
42
posted on
01/18/2008 8:26:19 PM PST
by
Eric Blair 2084
(Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shouldn't be a federal agency...it should be a convenience store.)
To: Vigilanteman
I don’t mean to quibble, but there are no social conservatives suporting Huckabee. The word you’re looking for is “sucker.” :-)
43
posted on
01/18/2008 9:13:12 PM PST
by
Mr. Silverback
(Support Scouting: Raising boys to be strong men and politically incorrect at the same time.)
To: wagglebee
Yes... because Mike Huckabee is the one projected to win in SC by the polls at this time. Come on, McCain is ahead at 29% and he’s going after 22% Huckabee? Things like this are what help feed the rumors that Thompson’s only trying to split the conservative vote to help McCain get the nomination.
44
posted on
01/18/2008 9:54:46 PM PST
by
COgamer
To: wagglebee
Fred's wrong on this. Fact is the constitution was set up with a mechanism to change it. To keep up with needs. To change it to fit technology. Or to change it because the people want it changed. I support the marriage ammendment, and a right to life ammendment. That's the way the system is suppose to work. And I commend Huckabee for taking that stand.
45
posted on
01/18/2008 9:58:07 PM PST
by
kjam22
(see me play the guitar here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noHy7Cuoucc)
To: ex-snook
Fred has been dicussing serious issues for the last six months while the Dope from Hope has been cowering behind a cross a little bitch. The only ideas the Dope from Hope has are those he has stolen from other candidates (he’s obiously too inbred, retarded, and illeterate to come up with anything of his own, and his record would make any REAL conservative recoil in horror).
46
posted on
01/19/2008 12:04:21 AM PST
by
lesser_satan
(READ MY LIPS: NO NEW RINOS | FRED THOMPSON - DUNCAN HUNTER '08)
To: wagglebee
47
posted on
01/19/2008 3:40:39 AM PST
by
8mmMauser
(Jezu ufam tobie...Jesus I trust in Thee)
To: wagglebee
Wasn’t changing the constitution a big winner for Republicans in 2000/2004. Gay Marriage Amendment come to mind. I will never vote for Huckter, but it sure looks like Republicans and even people on here are hypocrites! You were so happy to change the constitution in 2000...what happened? Flip Flopper????
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 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