But every thing that is negative about Fred Thompson is just a smear.
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada? Smear!
Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. SMEAR!
Voted NO on medical savings acounts. SMEAR!
Video documenting past support for abortion? SMEAR!
Lobbyist for clients like Toyota and Jean-Paul Aristide? A DAMN SMEAR!
First past-the-post backer of RINOs supreme Lamar Alexander and John McCain? SMEARARAMA!
Voted for minimum wage increasse? SMEARTASTIC!
Voted yes on funding the NEA? SMEARAJAMARAMA!
McCain-Feingold point man? SMEARALICIOUS!
It’s just so...so...AWFUL...that a proven, doctrinaire, constitutionalist, conservative like Fred can be SMEARED like this!
You’ve been had. Good luck with that. LOL
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1862148/posts
P.S. Ron Paul will NEVER be President of the United States.
He has the best looking wife and won't be afraid to drop bombs on the ragheads.
Works for me.
Look, a dishonest post that needs refutation.
I’ll go first. Fred Thompson voted for one of a slew of minimum wage increases. It was the only one that included business tax cuts to offset the increase.
He voted FOR medical savings accounts. (6/29/2001,Vote 216: S 1052: NO to motion to Table Craig Amdt. No. 851; To express the sense of the Senate regarding making medical savings accounts available to all Americans.)
I support Ron Paul because he supports al Qaeda.
I’m gonna call the “BFD” alarm here.
On the video that supposedly documents past support for abortion: are you referring to the one where he says he doesn’t want to criminalize young women for seeking abortions? If so, that does not equal support for abortion.
I have had many arguments here about the difference between decriminalization and legalization, in regards to another issue: the war on (some) drugs. I am in favor of decriminalizing drug use — i.e., stop sending SWAT teams to beat down the doors of the citizenry and shoot them or their dogs on mere suspicion of drug use, stop spending billions of taxpayer dollars to jail people for simple drug use, etc., etc. Get the feds out of it, and in my state make drug abuse a ticket/fine offense.
This argument invariably has people wrongly accusing me of supporting drug abuse. In accusing Thompson of supporting abortion because he didn’t or doesn’t believe women should go to prison for seeking an abortion, you are making the same mistake. That video said nothing about how he believes abortion doctors should be handled (just as my stance on decriminalizing drug use does not address the issue of how drug dealers should be handled). His statement merely addressed the tactical issue of appropriate punishment for women who seek abortions. Agree with him or not on the appropriate punishment for women seeking abortions, but don’t absurdly accuse him of supporting abortions themselves based on his tactical statement.
It is nauseating enough for me that Thompson DID deliberately lobby on behalf of Jean-Bertrand Aristide, one of the most murderous Marxist tyrants in the Western hemisphere. Combined with his fantastically ill-advised point-man cheerleading for the First-Amendment-shredding McCain-Feingold-Thompson Campaign Reform Act, it's enough to disqualify him in my mind.
But this "Family Planning Lobbyist" story simply does NOT have a leg to stand on without some public record documents supporting the allegations. Some "official minutes" from an alleged 1991 meeting provided by the accusing group itself? Puh-lease. Just type up some fake minutes and stuff them in the appropriate cabinet in the File Room, to be conveniently produced for LA Times reporters on demand.
For this story to walk, there needs to be a Lobbyist Registration filing (as there is for Thompson's work on behalf of Aristide), or a "check paid" record in the Family Planning group's Bank files, or a Thompson-signed billing invoice, or an "accounts payable" record in the group's 1991 Federal Tax filing... something, ANYTHING of public record to demonstrate that Thompson's services were contracted, services rendered, money paid -- that sort of thing. Without that, it's just "Take the Abortionist's word for it". Uh, yeah... O-kay.
Personally, I can't bring myself to support a candidate who would willfully lobby for a Marxist murderer and try to imprison our sacred Free Speech rights within a dungeon of good-ole-boy network Incumbent Protection regulations (some of which even threatened to shut down Free Republic for up to 60 days before an Election!). Nope, wouldn't be prudent.
But without some kind of public record backing up these allegations, this particular Thompson hit piece is just so much flimflammery.
As always, JMHO.
Yes, yes, and we all breathlessly await the innauguration of Ron Paul. He’ll beat Hillary like a drum.