They are not out to imprison women, but instead the butchers who perform these murderous acts.

wytammic on November 13, 2007 at 8:31 AM

And when exactly did Fred say that??? Before or after he took money from and lobbied for that abortion group? Before or after he filled out that questionnaire stating that abortions in the first trimester should be legal?

Now who is reading into the vacuum of what Fred didn’t say what they want to hear?

You need to grow up. Thompson stated that he does not want the mothers who murder their unborn children criminalized. Which is the exact stance of National Right to Life. They are not out to imprison women, but instead the butchers who perform these murderous acts.

wytammic on November 13, 2007 at 8:31 AM

As for the nutcase in this thread…

I am your favorite topic of conversation. You can’t even let someone else talk…frapping FREAK.

csdeven on November 12, 2007 at 11:37 PM

I’ve constantly shown what a hypocrite you are, and so you zero in on any comment regarding you I make, and ignore others if they’ve ever agreed with you. Being a crank, it’s obvious you need to keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. Especially when you change the topic a la Whoopi…

Logical. But you are willing to nominate a scumbag who gave legal advice to terrorists, lobbied for dictators and various other scumbags, funneled campaign cash to his son, and authored McCain/Feingold?

That makes no sense at all.

csdeven on November 13, 2007 at 9:34 AM

This whole thread is about Thompson and his views regarding abortion, and you go back to the same old sound bytes. You sound like a broken record, and no one wants to hear your contextless allegations.

right2bright on November 13, 2007 at 9:34 AM

Fred stated in 1994 that he was pro-choice. You can play word games all day long, but a pro-choice candidate is still a pro-choice candidate whether he is willing to admit it or not.

I am not willing to split the vote and hand the primary over to Guilani. Go Fred.

wytammic on November 13, 2007 at 8:31 AM

Logical. But you are willing to nominate a scumbag who gave legal advice to terrorists, lobbied for dictators and various other scumbags, funneled campaign cash to his son, and authored McCain/Feingold?

That makes no sense at all.

tommylotto on November 12, 2007 at 8:21 PM

Thanks for saying that you lied about what Fred said.

You are right he never said he was pro-choice. You should choose your words more carefully. People will actually think you are purposely twisting his words. His voting record stands for itself…100% pro-life, get over it. No one has a better record.
Tell me, how does it stack up against Mitt’s record? Oh, I see Mitt has been on both sides…as Teddy says Mitt isn’t pro-choice, he is multiple choice.
You can always go back to “Fred rented a red truck” defense. It works for the other haters.

And here is another fact: Mitt does not want to criminalize abortions (unless he has changed his position again). Nor Rudy, now what? None of them want it as Federal law.
Wise up, and read.

Want the link? Read my messages above, it has the link.

But he would not vote to make it a crime to murder a fetus. That which is not prohibited is permitted. He is pro-choice. (AND A LIAR)

You need to grow up. Thompson stated that he does not want the mothers who murder their unborn children criminalized. Which is the exact stance of National Right to Life. They are not out to imprison women, but instead the butchers who perform these murderous acts. Quit being such a drama queen. Sheesh.

Hunter is the best candidate out there. However, with National’s choice to endorse Thompson, that changes everything. I’m forced to support who they endorse because I am not willing to split the vote and hand the primary over to Guilani. Go Fred.

All candidates who are pro-life want to criminalize all abortions.
All candidates who do not want to criminalize all abortions are pro-choice.

Fred does not want to criminalize abortions.
Fred is pro-choice.

See Jane and Dick play. See Dick get Jane pregnant. See Jane get an abortion. See Fred say that’s not a crime.

Go Fred!

MadisonConservative on November 12, 2007 at 11:10 PM

I am your favorite topic of conversation. You can’t even let someone else talk about me without you making your fixation on me a main part of your comments. You are obviously the type who feels that if you can’t have me, no one else can.

You should seek psychological help. You are a frapping FREAK.

Fred did not say he was pro-choice. He lied. But if you listen real carefully to what he said last Sunday on MTP you will hear the following:
1) He will not support a constitutional amendment banning abortions, and
2) he is against criminalizing those who choose to have an abortion.

That is pro-choice.

So if someone is against a constitutional amendment protecting endangered species, they’re in favor of animal genocide?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_conclusion_from_a_negative_premise

Learn it. Realize you are basing your opinions on it, and take a logic class. Again, the kind of crap that the MSM pulls in its reporting. And again, I’m really thinking you’re a seminar poster.

Still fixating on me I see.
Just WHAT is your major malfunction? Do you love me? Do I remind you of some unrequited love you had? Are you jealous? Do you want to BE me?

Your penchant for stalking me seriously weird. Get help ASAP. Really.

csdeven on November 12, 2007 at 7:49 PM

Good job totally ignoring what I said, and who started it:

Csdeven head explodes in 5…4…3…2…1…

doriangrey on November 12, 2007 at 1:32 PM

You’re completely insane, and that’s why your ignoring that. Had I said the EXACT SAME THING, you would have been all over it. You. Are. Nuts.

Fred wants the question kept to the states so the states can choose whether to outlaw it. They’re both after the same long-term solution. What is so hard to understand about that?
MadisonConservative on November 12, 2007 at 4:48 PM

Actually, it’s the short-term solution that’s important now: overturning Roe v. Wade. Fred Thompson is by far the candidate with the strongest stance on conservative judicial appointments, while Rudy Guiliani has by far the weakest record of all the Republican candidates on that particular issue.

Once Roe is overturned, and then IF a state (for the first time in US history) actually ended up up passing a statute allowing recreational abortion, THEN we can split ranks over what to do next. But for the time being, it’s more than a little bit idiotic to argue about getting a Constitutional Amendment passed by TWO-THIRDS of BOTH houses of Congress and then ratified by three-fourths of the states.

I don’t think it’s any coincidence that this is the exact kind of twisted “logic” liberaltarians always use. You’d think the freaks could manage to team up with us on the Herculean task of backing up the American welfare state and THEN worry about how to dismantle the remainder of the federal government a little later. But their minds never seem to get a handle on that.

And by the same token, you have to wonder about the people who would gleefully canibalize the Republican Party over something like this. I mean if – as they claim – supporting Giuliani were really their goal, then they ought to just stick with the 9/11 cleanup shtick; that’s fair game. But what kind of retard would pick, of all candidates, Rudolph Giuliani based on THIS issue?

Where did he say he was pro-choice?
Put up tommylotto…
right2bright on November 12, 2007 at 6:08 PM

Fred did not say he was pro-choice. He lied. But if you listen real carefully to what he said last Sunday on MTP you will hear the following:
1) He will not support a constitutional amendment banning abortions, and
2) he is against criminalizing those who choose to have an abortion.

That is pro-choice. He says he has always “voted” pro-life, but he personally disagrees with their ultimate goal. He believes in states rights and it should be up to the states to set standards, restrictions, etc. But he would not vote to make it a crime to murder a fetus. That which is not prohibited is permitted. He is pro-choice. (AND A LIAR)

A true conservative can not be for Rudolfo.
MB4 on November 12, 2007 at 5:56 PM

I don’t think that is true. It is scared conservatives who are supporting Rudy. Scared that a socialist dem will get in the White House. We all know that Rudy is not a stalwart conservative. But right now the impression is that he is our best shot at beating Hillary.

My opinion is that conservatives should be pragmatic about this. Rudy is way better than any dem EVEN if we do lose ground on some social issues. It will we may less ground than any dem will take away from us. It sure would be nice if Hunter was getting traction, but he isn’t.

MadisonConservative on November 12, 2007 at 3:40 PM

Still fixating on me I see.
Just WHAT is your major malfunction? Do you love me? Do I remind you of some unrequited love you had? Are you jealous? Do you want to BE me?

Your penchant for stalking me seriously weird. Get help ASAP. Really.

Don’t forget the red truck…can’t forget the red truck.

right2bright on November 12, 2007 at 6:09 PM

I believe he rents the truck out. See, even being the bloatedly rich Senator feeding from the public trough, he won’t even buy his own transportation.

He rented that gold cart too, and those Gucci loafers probably aren’t his either.

:-D

According to Politico, they will do this tomorrow:
Fred Thompson will pick up the support of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) tomorrow, according to two Republicans familar with the decision.
For a candidate who came up empty-handed last wee…

BKennedy on November 12, 2007 at 4:54 PM

Don’t forget the red truck…can’t forget the red truck.

tommylotto on November 12, 2007 at 3:58 PM

Where did he say he was pro-choice? He actually said he was pro-choice, or did he say he believes that that is a states right to determine that.
States rights, something you don’t hear often enough.
Give us the quote where he said “I am pro-choice”…as you so solidly state.

Just last Sunday Fred admitted that he was pro-choice…

Put up tommylotto…

Why do I get the impression that Tommylotto is really Rudy ['s madre].

Buzzy on November 12, 2007 at 4:24 PM

I have thought for some time now that tommylotto is Rudolfo’s madre, but you may be right, cut out the middle man woman madre He may also be Vincente Fox.

spiff on November 12, 2007 at 5:09 PM

At least be honest in your analysis. Like the two goose eggs in the 105th was for his vote on McCain Feingold. Where was the abortion item in that bill? He would have 100% on abortion bills, if not for McCain-Feingold…not exactly Roe vs. Wade.
I don’t have time to analyze the rest, but I am sure it will be similar.
Nice try though…I am sure a few will fall for your shell game. And others will laugh at your attempt…
Bwahhhhahhhhhhhaaa