Posted on 04/11/2007 11:11:59 PM PDT by FairOpinion
On Abortion: "Government should stay out of it... The ultimate decision must be made by the women... Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own." -- Fred Thompson, July 1994
Are the Social Cons ignorant of Thompson's background?
Back in the early to mid-1990s, there was a raging battle in the Republican Party between the Moderates/Libertarians versus the Religious Right. On one side there was Ann Stone's Republicans For Choice, the Ripon Society, Log Cabin Clubs and the organization that I had founded in 1990 - the Republican Liberty Caucus. On the other side was the Religious Right.
Tennessee was right smack dab in the middle of it all.
The leader of the TN Anti-Religious Right forces at the time was Michael McCloskey.
During the same time, Fred Thompson was making noises of running for the US Senate. McCloskey was one of the ones who was influential in recruiting him to run. McCloskey saw him as a Celebrity counter-force to the Religious Right/Pro-Lifers that could win the GOP Nomination.
And the Religious Right, predictably came after Thompson. It was a bitterly fought primary. Thompson's opponent was Religious Rightist John Bakkes. In the end, Thompson's celebrity status carried him through, and he won with 62% to Bakkes's 37%. Many credited McCloskey and his "Young Republican brigades" with helping Thompson's win.
(Excerpt) Read more at libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com ...
False.
One supports conservatism when one defeats LIBERALS.
Do you know anyone who is pro-abortion who wants to overturn Roe vs. Wade?
WALLACE: As we said, perhaps the main reason that people are talking about you is this uneasy feeling among conservatives that there is not one of their own, a true conservative, in the field.
So let's do a lightning round — quick questions, quick answers, a variety of issues — to see where Fred Thompson stands.
THOMPSON: Um hmm.
WALLACE: Abortion.
THOMPSON: Pro-life.
WALLACE: Would you like to overturn Roe. ...
THOMPSON: You said lightning round, now. If you want ...
WALLACE: Well, let's go.
THOMPSON: ... more, give me another question. I'll work through it.
WALLACE: Do you want to overturn Roe vs. Wade?
THOMPSON: I think Roe vs. Wade was bad law and bad medical science. And the way to address that is through good judges. I don't think the court ought to wake up one day and make new social policy for the country. It's contrary to what it's been the past 200 years.
We have a process in this country to do that. Judges shouldn't be doing that. That's what happened in that case. I think it was wrong.
You mean a Rudyphile pulled a Fred quote out of context?
That's unbelievably naive.
One doesn't support conservatism by voting third-party or staying home when your choice is between a RINO and a Democrat.
This happened in the midterms and you've got the Speaker Of The House traipsing off to Syria and threatening to go to Iran to meet with Mr. Israel-Has-No-Right-To-Exist. You've got a Democrat-contolled Congress threatening to cut off funding for the troops in Iraq. You've got leftists chairing every Committee in the House!
Grow Up!
If the GOP nominates a pro-abortion, pro-gun candidate, they willfully forfeit the conservative vote. It is their choice.
I think you mean anti-gun.
Of course. Thank you.
Not only out of context, but like our Dem Governor here in WI who struck letters and words out of the state budget, he completely changed the meaning and the intent.
CORRECTION:
If the GOP nominates a pro-abortion, gungrabbing candidate, they willfully forfeit the conservative vote. It is their choice.
That’s the “collateral damage” of vicious Ruditude: pointing out the actual conservatives in the race.
One doesn't support conservatism by voting third-party or staying home when your choice is between a RINO and a Democrat.
Actually, it's not naive. It's entirely logical. It's also "big-picture" oriented.
Voting a liberal into office on a Republican ticket basically destroys the conservative option for government. When voters no longer have a choice between conservative and liberal the entire political landscape will shift radically left.
In the long run, the damage will be significantly greater to the conservative movement AND the country then a temporary democrat majority or president.
I'm a conservative. I have voted for Newt Gingrich, Saxby Chambliss, Alan Keyes, Phil Gramm and Johnny Isakson in general elections and primaries. I'm supporting Fred Thompson's candidacy (if he runs).
I will vote for Giuliani against any Democrat in the field, and so will many other conservatives.
Do you realize that this Democrat-controlled House and Senate have a vested interest in the United States Of America losing the War In Iraq?
Saw his interview with Cavudo yesterday, have to admit, this guy seems like a bit of a milquetoast.
Yes, I do. Try to understand what I'm saying about the long-term consequences of a liberal Republican party.
Oh, fer sure, I’m a Fred Head. Ping me all you like.
There’s only one thing that could make me change my mind.
If we lose the War In Iraq, it will be because the Democrats defunded it, betrayed the American people and their military branches and gave aid and comfort to the enemy by meeting with Fascists like Assad and The Ass Of Iran.
I am far more concerned with the long-term consequences of military defeat than I am with a four-year Giuliani presidency. Giuliani is wrong on many issues, but he's right on at least four: The War In Iraq, Support For Israel, Tax Cuts and The Budget. That will do for me in '08 if he's the nominee.
I think Fairopinion might have a mental problem... Or maybe he supports other Rudy positions; pro gay like Rudy, pro abortion like Rudy, anti gun like Rudy....
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.