The "Evolving" Fred Thompson Saga
This may be the political version of Evolution. The New York Times is out this morning with a story about billing records that show Fred Thompson did indeed charge for his time while helping a pro-choice group. Details from the article below:
Billing records show that former Senator Fred Thompson spent nearly 20 hours working as a lobbyist on behalf of a group seeking to ease restrictive federal rules on abortion counseling in the 1990s, even though he recently said he did not recall doing any work for the organization.
According to records from Arent Fox, the law firm based in Washington where Mr. Thompson worked part-time from 1991 to 1994, he charged the organization, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, about $5,000 for work he did in 1991 and 1992. The records show that Mr. Thompson, a probable Republican candidate for president in 2008, spent much of that time in telephone conferences with the president of the group, and on three occasions he reported lobbying administration officials on its behalf.
Mr. Thompson's work for the family planning agency has become an issue because he is positioning himself as a faithful conservative who is opposed to abortion.
David Brody
I haven't been really paying attention to how Thompson has been positioning himself on abortion. Going on things he has said to Sean Hannity and others, I would say that anyone who characterizes him as pro-life is mistaken. If he is characterizing himself in that way, he is lying, one way or the other.
Billing records show that former Senator Fred Thompson spent nearly 20 hours working as a lobbyist on behalf of a group seeking to ease restrictive federal rules on abortion counseling in the 1990s, even though he recently said he did not recall doing any work for the organization.
According to records from Arent Fox, the law firm based in Washington where Mr. Thompson worked part-time from 1991 to 1994, he charged the organization, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, about $5,000 for work he did in 1991 and 1992. The records show that Mr. Thompson, a probable Republican candidate for president in 2008, spent much of that time in telephone conferences with the president of the group, and on three occasions he reported lobbying administration officials on its behalf.
Mr. Thompson's work for the family planning agency has become an issue because he is positioning himself as a faithful conservative who is opposed to abortion.
David Brody
I haven't been really paying attention to how Thompson has been positioning himself on abortion. Going on things he has said to Sean Hannity and others, I would say that anyone who characterizes him as pro-life is mistaken. If he is characterizing himself in that way, he is lying, one way or the other.
posted by Anonymous | 2:42 PM
5 Comments:
Why can't Thompson be considered pro-life??? I can see your point if Thompson is saying he has always been pro-life, but I don't see the problem if he is calling himself pro-life today.
Thompson has made pro-choice comments as recently as a month ago. His position on Roe v. Wade has always been based on a federalist approach, which is good. He believes abortion is a matter for the states. However, whenever he is asked directly, he states pretty clearly that he would not support a ban on abortion in his state. There is no possible way to spin that as a pro-life position.
This one of the biggest problems with American politics (outside of the two party system).Abortion is not really that big a deal. How many people actually have them? It's just made into a big deal by extremists on both sides of the issue who use it as a vote getting tool.
Thompson's view: that it should left up to the states, but that personally he doesn't support a complete ban in his state, is probably more in line with the majority of the American public than any hardcore position on the left or right.
"Abortion is not really that big a deal. How many people actually have them?"
Now there's some championship stupid for you.
How many people actually have them? Well, let's see, something close to 50 million since Roe v.Wade. Hardly anybody, right?
So tell me, Anonymous. How do you get from place to place with your head all the way up your ass?
Let's do some math, people.
50 million divided by the 30+ years since Roe v Wade = approximately 1.67 million yearly
There are nearly 300 million US residents 150 million of them female.
1.67 million / 150 million= .....oh yeah lots! less than a tenth of 1 percent of WOMEN in the US have had one. We really should all be so concerned!
Post a Comment
<< Home