Fred Thompson Lobbied for Abortion Rights

[KenH]

Oh well, the "knight in shining armor" that conservatives had hoped for ends up with nothing but dirty tin as armor.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070706/ap_on_el_pr/thompson_abortion_2

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

If you see the Boy Wonder sign up for his campaign, he will undoubtedly be the GOP nominee, regardless of this.

Regards,
BiR

 

[777]

This ain't so bad, I saw this in the L.A. Times first:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-thompson7jul07,0,54260.story?coll=la-home-center

Nobody even remembers this meeting, isn't consistent with his Senate voting record.

The nomination is his for the asking, there's other problems with FDT, as in this old vote:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d104:SP02525:

One of six to vote against it. But what's even worse is his McCain-Feingold vote.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Wow talk about reaching! Oh wait. did rush say that?

 

[TomVols]

This is ridiculously flimsy. People are just trying to attack the man who can do the most damage to the GOP establishment currently trying to win the nomination.

 

[KenH]

Huh? Fred Thompson is as much a member of the liberal, warmongering GOP Establishment as any of the rest of them. After all, he is a member of the American Enterprise Institute - the think tank locus of neo-conservatism in these United States.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Huh? Fred Thompson is as much a member of the liberal, warmongering GOP Establishment as any of the rest of them. After all, he is a member of the American Enterprise Institute - the think tank locus of neo-conservatism in these United States.

Ah, yes - The AEI.
Didn't they just hire Paul Wolfowitz?

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

This is ridiculously flimsy. People are just trying to attack the man who can do the most damage to the GOP establishment currently trying to win the nomination.

Yep! You got it. And the DOR's are first to jump on the bandwagon.

 

[TomVols]

Huh? Fred Thompson is as much a member of the liberal, warmongering GOP Establishment as any of the rest of them. After all, he is a member of the American Enterprise Institute - the think tank locus of neo-conservatism in these United States.

We wouldn't be poisoning the well, would we, Ken? :laugh: I know he's no lib, but he's no liberal either. Cut him some slack...there's only one Ron Paul

 

[KenH]

Come on, Tom. No one who advocates limited, constitutional government would be a member of AEI.

 

[TomVols]

Come on, Tom. No one who advocates limited, constitutional government would be a member of AEI.

Again, not willing to poison the well on this.

 

[KenH]

How is stating the fact that Fred Thompson is a member of AEI poisoning the well? Are his ties to organizations somehow irrelevant to who he is and what his views in general are?

 

[TomVols]

No, but when you paint with a broad brush and say that he cannot support the Constitution because he's a member of AEI is just fallacy. It's not like he's a member of NARAL and then trying to say he's Pro-Life. It's like trying to villify Ron Paul for his ties to pro-marijuana and pro-hemp groups.

 

[KenH]

It's like trying to villify Ron Paul for his ties to pro-marijuana and pro-hemp groups.

There's nothing villifying about that. Those ties are a part of the reason I support Ron Paul for president. I want to see the so-called "War on Drugs"(which is in actuality a war on our civil liberties) ended.

 

[TomVols]

You know what I'm referring to

 

[fromtheright]

Fred's got my vote!

I have no problem with his ties to AEI but I wonder if Ken has any specifics about objectionable AEI positions endorsed by Thompson? Or does the broad brush better serve the purpose?

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Fred's got my vote!

Hey!

Since I respect your opinion, please expound upon that point. Why does he have your vote?

Regards, PM me if you have a second so we can catch up,
BiR

 

[LadyEagle]

Hey, if FTR says he's okay, then he's okay. I have a lot of respect for FTR. He KNOWS important stuff. :thumbs:

Wonder what our old friend Pennsylvania Jim would think of him? Sure wish he'd stop by for a visit. Long time, no see.

 

[carpro]

Oh well, the "knight in shining armor" that conservatives had hoped for ends up with nothing but dirty tin as armor.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070706/ap_on_el_pr/thompson_abortion_2

Hardly anybody's "knight" that I know of.

But he is an attorney trained to represent the interests of his clients to the best of his ability and to counsel any attorneys he works with on such matters.

This story does illustrate one thing. Democrats are afraid of him. The slime patrol is digging hard.

 

[fromtheright]

And I have lots of respect for you, LE! And so many of my friends here at BB.

In answer to your question, BiR (and perhaps some of these are mistaken impressions of his positions):

--He is pro-life/anti-abortion (the LA Times thing seems very weak).
--He seems to be strongly in favor of tightening the southern border and against amnesty. In that regard, he doesn't seem to have a problem differing with a sitting Republican President which I respect (yes, President Bush can be and has often been wrong on issues).
--He has been strongly supportive of President Bush's efforts both in the war in Iraq and the GWOT.
--He is for a strong national defense.
--He seems to be against extending marriage or civil unions to homosexuals.
--He seems to be for picking strict constructionists for the Supreme Court (for many of the issues on which some may argue he can't have much impact as President, the power of appointment gives him that impact).
--As one with neoconservative leanings on foreign policy, I have no problems with whatever "ties" Thompson has to AEI.
--He seems to take a realist view of the threat from China and North Korea.
--In general, he seems to be a solid conservative (tho some of my friends here obviously disagree with that).