So is Thompson pro-abortion, which is a big Republican no no, or is he anti-abortion but willing to sell his morality to the highest bidder, which is considered a great Republican virtue?

So is Thompson pro-abortion, which is a big Republican no no, or is he anti-abortion but willing to sell his morality to the highest bidder, which is considered a great Republican virtue?

C: Thompson is an empty suit and no one in their right mind should take him seriously.

Rev,

In that case Thompson, otherwise known as Nixon's mole, will win the right wing nomination.

I wouldn't be at all surprised, Jimmy. They're desperate for a candidate that doesn't appear to be a part of the problem.

And, of course, Fred's really NOT part of the problem.



He's part of a whole DIFFERENT set of problems.

From the artcile:

If you need more proof that Fred Thompson worked as an abortion rights lobbyist in 1991, look no further than the answer he gave this weekend to a reporter's question. "I'd just say the flies get bigger in the summertime," Thompson said. "I guess the flies are buzzing."



Sounds like more Honky-Tonk redneck double-talk.

Such profound words.

I think he's trying to win the Nascar crowd with that babble. Remember, it was Thompson who played the head of Nascar in Days of Thunder who made some stupid analogy about lettuce rotting. I guess he feels the need to connect with his base. YEEEEEE-Huh?


The flies are buzzing Mr T? Are they? Really? Oh, that certainly answers the question.


When asked why he "cut and tun' from the Senate after 911, Mr T would only say this; "Why y'all smilin' like a goat in a briarpatch"

Republicans hafta nominate someone from the south. You wouldn't wanna have a beer with a New York dago wouldja?

No New York dagos!

How else would The South continue to rise again!?!

YYYYYEEEEEEHHHHAAAAWWWWW!!!!!

The reason why we end up with idiots in office is because we are idiots over these hot button, all or nothing issues.

Why does everyone have to come out and be either completely against abortion in all cases (including rape or impending death of the mother) or completely for abortion up until the time of birth?

What would happen to a politician who says something like "I don't think abortion is an all or nothing issue. I believe that in many situations it should be legal and in other situations it equates to killing an infant. In the unlikely event that abortion becomes relevant to my presidency, I will look at the facts and make decisions as best I can based on the specifics of the situation."?

It would be political suicide. It is an issue that the president will never have to address and promising to look at it sensibly should it come up would be suicide. That is why we are stuck with the shit we have in office now.

The flies are buzzing Mr T? Are they? Really? Oh, that certainly answers the question.

Oh, please!


Fred Thompson is NOT Mr. T.



Mr.T for president!

If Fred is the best that the right can do for a candidate, I would be really scared if I were a tighty righty.

I think Fred is not going anywhere, what about reviving that great idea from a year ago...Condi for president....hahahahahahahaha!
!!!
Some of the posters here were saying how great she would be against Hillary....gee where are their voices now????

Mr.T for president!

I pity the fool dat don't vote fah me!

It is an issue that the president will never have to address and promising to look at it sensibly should it come up would be suicide. That is why we are stuck with the shit we have in office now.

Ah, but the President DOES address it, every time a Supreme Court judge is nominated. That's why the President's views on abortion matter.

The President also gets to do things like enact gag rules on clinics that get federal funding. Which is precisely what Thompson was paid to lobby Bush Sr. to overturn.

The President does have to deal with abortion, and so we're stuck with the single-issue-voter problem.

So Rev,

given the fact, and I agree, that all pols are the problem, what can we do? There is not an honest candidate out there.

JM,

There are four possible solutions, and none of them is terribly appetizing:

1. Choose the least scum-like candidate. This can basically be equated to trying to slow-down the train using Fred Flintstone's brakes. It isn't going to work well and it'as going to hurt alot.

2. Take up arms against the government. Not advisable, perhaps mainly due to my pacifist nature.

3. Support a third, fourth, or eighth party. In the long-run, that's probably the best solution, but in the meantime, the partis are going to be going through some viscious birth-pains.

4. Abstain from voting and kiss the American Dream goodbye.

I work with a few lobbyists, and they will sell their souls (if they still had them) for a few bucks. That being said, if their heart isn't into what they are trying to sell, they don't stay employed very long.

"it appears that Thompson's another Republican who committed the cardinal sin of being a moderate in the past on the issue of abortion. Either that, or he just took the job for the money."

My guess is that it is a little of both.
My

Fred Thompson has explained himself on many occasions about abortion. He believes that most of these issues will never be solved. Thats why we have STATES. States rights FTW!!!

You all talk on this site, as if Thompson is the only lobbyist ever. Because on here, the DEMS NEVER do anything wrong.

"The President does have to deal with abortion, and so we're stuck with the single-issue-voter problem."

The examples you cited are correct. But it isn't as if the president's position on abortion automatically becomes law. Women can still get abortions with Bush in office.

All these one-issue voters accomplish is to force politicians to pretend to be extremists when it comes to abortion.

Fred Thompson has explained himself on many occasions about abortion. He believes that most of these issues will never be solved. Thats why we have STATES.

Do you really think that Thompson, when questioned about his position on abortion, will say that it's a matter for the states to decide?

GW is the best argument in favor of abortion that I have ever seen.

Sully: Every Republican President has been "anti abortion" since Roe v Wade. Can't think of many GOP congressman or senators any different, yet in 34 years virtually nothing has been done. Why not?
Republicans know the majority favors some form of abortion, so they're not going to swim upstream, but as long as the talibaptists are willing to shell out the dough and get nothing in return, they'll take it.

Flies buzzing Fred? Must have found some dead meat.

Do you really think that Thompson, when questioned about his position on abortion, will say that it's a matter for the states to decide?"

It's seems to be the Republican Mantra du jour.

Even Rudeboy Ghouliani sed he had no problem with having the issue decided on a state by state basis and he's allegedly pro-choice.

Why wouldn't Well Fed Fred toe that particular party line?

Cos of his past support as a lobbyist?

Ya think he's got scruples or sommat?

Yer funny!

Be Well.

""Sully: Every Republican President has been "anti abortion" since Roe v Wade.""

But Bush 1 had to flip flop Romney style to become REagan's VP.

Thompson is now saying he "doesn't recall" lobbying for this group. His spokesman says that lawyers "sometimes give advice to clients, even if they personally disagree with them".

But the former head of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association says she specifically remembers discussing Thompson's lobbying work with him in phone conversations and during meals at Washington restaurants.

and the links above, he also talks about Libby, guns, etc...

your welcome

Former - so if he took money to lobby Bush I to loosen Federal regulations on abortion, and called Colin Powell's 1996 pro-choice speech "close to perfection" that would make him what?

a. a liar
b. a flip-flopper
c. an opportunist
d. all of the above

go ahead, and watch, and learn.

I don't doubt that he's solid anti-abortion now. I doubt that his spokesman is telling the truth that he didn't lobby against the abortion gag rule.

My read on Thompson is that he didn't kick any fat cat lobbying client out of bed for eating crackers. I don't think he'll turn out to be the salvation of the theocratic wing of the GOP.

did you even watch?

"did you even watch?"

Yes, and I hear a man running for President saying what he thinks his base wants to hear.

I have no idea if he really believes what he's saying, but it doesn't exactly square with his relatively recent history, now does it?

And of course now he has lied and said he "doesn't recall" lobbying for a group he spend months working for, and met with numerous times.

"Sully: Every Republican President has been "anti abortion" since Roe v Wade. Can't think of many GOP congressman or senators any different, yet in 34 years virtually nothing has been done. Why not?
Republicans know the majority favors some form of abortion, so they're not going to swim upstream, but as long as the talibaptists are willing to shell out the dough and get nothing in return, they'll take it."

Good point. Extremists force politicians to lie because they only accept one unreasonable position on the issue(s). Then we wonder why our politicians are habitual liars.

I doubt every Democrat believes in allowing abortion up until the due date. "Partial-birth" abortion is basically just killing a baby. But "abortion rights" idiots leave no room for common sense just like the religious nuts don't. So we have candidates claiming that they'd like this procedure to be legal.

"Yes, and I hear a man running for President saying what he thinks his base wants to hear.

I have no idea if he really believes what he's saying, but it doesn't exactly square with his relatively recent history, now does it?

And of course now he has lied and said he "doesn't recall" lobbying for a group he spend months working for, and met with numerous times."

Posted by SanAntonioRogue

His base wants abortion left up to the states? Please pass the good stuff this way. "doesn't recall" sounds familiar, Hillary's testimony comes to mind, yet, she leads the polls for the Dem nomination. And the was TESTIFYING!!! He has no RECENT history fyi.

States rights... posted by FormerLib

Rethuglicans are only FOR states rights if it means they can outlaw abortion, prevent blacks from going to the same school with their white kids, or forcing schools to teach that the tooth fairy created the world in 6 days and that evolution is a myth.

But, they are AGAINST states rights if it means allowing Oregon citizens to decide when and how they will end their lives if they have a terminal illness, if California wants to adopt tougher emissions standards than the pathetic federal cafe standards or if Massachusetts wants to allow same sex couples to form a civil union.

Don't buy the "States Rights" bullcrap. It is so tired.

"His base wants abortion left up to the states?"

If he truly believes it should be up to the states why did he lobby Bush I to relax FEDERAL regulations?????

Hey Tard, the name suits you well.

Talking about "bullcrap" outlaw abortion, segregation, same sex, tooth fairy? boy you got all the bases covered don't you.

Yes, leave them up to the states, thats why we have them. Makes sense to me.

You talk to others who don't see eye to eye with you, as if we are morons...... please grow up, its obvious you need your mommy.

Dont forget that weed suddenly becomes a federal issue when a "states rights" wingnut court rules on it.

San,
According to the wonderous posters on here, the right wants abortion OUTLAWED, and NOT left up to the states. He wants states rights, on certain issues that will NEVER be solved. Abortion/civil unions, etc.

"According to the wonderous posters on here, the right wants abortion OUTLAWED, and NOT left up to the states"

The forced birth crowd wants the issues of gay rights and abortions stripped of federal protection and tossed down to the states where the hope is they can elimate both of them entirely in every state.

That is the game plan.

Are you suggesting the right haven't contributed millions to the GOPs coffers fer decades in order to make this happen?

Be Well.

Former - why don't you address the hypocracy of the "right" on the issue of states' rights? Repub pointed out several instances where states' rights are conveniently ignored by "your team" when they don't like the particular policy. In other words, they have no principles, just rhetoric about "states' rights" when its suits them.

GW is the best argument in favor of abortion that I have ever seen.


Posted by Corky
Que?
More like RETROACTIVE Abortion.

Monte, I have not heard ONE candidate address the issue of states rights. Thompson is the first to bring it up. And I like it, because being from the 'left' or 'right', doesn't matter, this issue will never be solved as long as we are alive. Yes, there have been instances where just 'rhetoric' is used on both sides of the coin, welcome to politics. I cannot talk for them, I can talk for myself.

Spudster,
I am not suggesting anything. If abortion is allowed in some states, and not in others, I am fine with that. If you or others are so worried about it, move to an "abortion" state. But since 99% of americans, never come across an instance where abortion is needed/not needed, etc...I see this as a non-issue. I'm serious too.

Abortion will not win this election. Taxes, immigration, and terrorism will.

I personally think most american are sick of the issue, and will not base thier 'vote' on abortion alone. Just my opinion.

I'm out.

Thompson was in favor of reproductive rights until he was against them. This is a typical Republican stance, and no skin off my back, but to the righties on the DR it is as valid as a cliche as "but Clinton get a blow job." herm

Formerlib,

I thought maybe you would care to tell me why the republicans always tout the term states rights, but as soon as a state enacts a law they don't like they use the full weight of the federal gov to suppress that law.

But, instead the diction on your post is so garbled I don't even know how to respond.

The recent attempts by the right-wing nutter-butters in MASS to overthrow the people's will in regards to Gay Marriage is a perfect example of their hatred of state's rights when it goes against their agenda.

Can you believe that there are still idiot right-wingers in MASS trying to get an amendment on the ballot to destroy three years of gay marriages?

Seriously. The people have spoken. And the courts. And the legislature. They want their Gay Marriage.

Someone outta tell the Right to pack their circus tents up and go back to the south.

Here in California, the courts have decided that there is no reason to discriminate against Gays in marriage. And the legislature has passed a pro-gay marriage bill TWICE only to be vetoed by the HOMOPHOBULATOR, Arnold.

He's holding the state republic hostage on this mattter. and the republican-turd eaters use their 'executive' powers to continue to abort states rights when it doesn't fit their agenda.

Once again, they oughtta roll up their circus tents and head back to the deep south.

Isn't there some anti-incest law they could be fighting?

Rep,

Your point about states rights has been one of my biggest frustrations with the GOP. I really am for states rights on most of the issues even when the states go in a way I don't agree with. That is the whole point of states rights. It bothers me that the official Republican Party does not see the hypocrisy of it.

Tao, Rep,

Sorry if you think my posts are garbled, I'm very busy most of the day, and don't really have time to sit down and compose a sonet. But anyways, I have not heard Rudy/Romney, and the others talk about states rights at all.

I, like Tao are for states rights, even though I don't agree with some of the decisions, thats why we have states. Why even have states if they don't have rights? I think Thompson is for real when he says that, I dunno, I just believe the guy.

Again, I am a conservative, but really don't give a shit about abortion. I think its gross and dispicable, and should only be allowed if rape/incest occured. But than again, I am for womens rights. Just my opinion. So there. Where do we go? Leave it up to the states, hell, put it on the ballot, for all I care.

Again, its amazing that ANYONE, left or right, would base thier vote squarely on the abortion issue.

Good night.

well former......it seems that there are leftists who are trying to make his good looking wife an issue so why wouldnt they want one thing to decide thier vote.....
they are talking about her age and her looks.....isnt that two kinds of decrimination and why isnt NAG out to get the libs who are bringing that up....

and if you havent seen her pic......well you should.....what a babe.....so he has to be doing something (or someone) right!!!!!

BLT,

Nice way off topic stupid comment its obvious you "flog the dolphin" to the wives of the GOP.

And also why his wife is not unattractive she isn't worth getting all worked up over unless the quality of your trim is so low.

formerLib,

you just don't turn everything nto a "states rights" issue. This is about ANY citizen's personal right to control their body. Completely a federal issue and about civil liberties. You don't let the average monkey vote on it.

As for "states rights" if basic civil rights were left up to the states I am quite sure Blacks would still be 2nd class citizens in many southern states

Again, its amazing that ANYONE, left or right, would base thier vote squarely on the abortion issue.

Good night.

Check out any of the moral majority folks, like James Dibson talking about Rudy Guiliani.
One Republican dissing the other over abortion. But "amazing" hardly describes how talibaptists vote.
"amazingly stupid " maybe...

Hitchens is against abortion.

"Check out any of the moral majority folks, like James Dibson talking about Rudy Guiliani.
One Republican dissing the other over abortion. But "amazing" hardly describes how talibaptists vote.
"amazingly stupid " maybe..."

Heyyyy...are you suggesting a test for qualification to vote? "Talibaptists aren't the ONLY "amazingly stupid" voters, you know. Up in Illinois Jesse Jackson rents buses and carts lots of people to the polls with instructions on how to vote. Lot o' women voted for JFK because they loved his hair. I might support YOU if you're proposing that someone should know who is the CURRENT VP before being allowed to vote. (BTW, I voted for Kennedy myself.)