Pretty sad, Romney people
Evangelicals for Mitt- which interestingly has no mechanism for reader comments- has been repeating undocumented rumors that Fred Thompson was not completely pro-life during his campaigns for the Senate, despite his consistent- and in fact perfect- pro-life voting record there. Similar rumors- which proved to be false- were circulated about George W. Bush in 2000.
Here is a report of a conversation between Phillip Klein National Right to Life Executive Director Darla St. Martin about her discussion of the abortion issue with Fred Thompson in 1994, the year FDT first ran for the Senate. She found him "consistently pro-life."
Klein adds that at this point he has failed to find a single quote from Thompson at any point in his career in which he says- Romney-style- that he supports "a woman's right to choose."
One final note: Even were the Romney supporter's charges true, there could be question of Fred having been pro-choice throughout his political career- as Romney was- and then suddenly converting to the pro-life side when he decided to run for president. I briefly supported Romney myself, before FDT's announcement, and defended his right to change his mind on this matter and be counted as one of the good guys.
But believe me: a comparison between the records of FDT and Romney on this issue is not a matter the Romney camp should want to pursue, even should they succeed in locating actual evidence for their charge that FDT was pro-choice at any point in his career.
I'm not talking about reports and rumors. I think we have a right to demand a quotation- and a strongly documented one. Until one is forthcoming, Evangelicals for Mitt should, at the very least, qualify its undocumented charges.
That is, if they really want to be foolish enough to pursue this.
ADDENDUM: Looks like I was the foolish one.
Early in Thompson's career, he did briefly take a "libertarian" position on abortion, opposing Federal funding but also opposing the repeal of Roe. This was more than a decade ago, and is in no way comparable to Gov. Romney's public support of "a woman's right to choose" until just about the point when he began to be talked about as a presidential candidate.
I hasten to add that I do not believe the lateness of Gov. Romney's conversion to the cause should be held against him, a point I made long ago. But anyone inclined to raise an eyebrow over the recency of the Romney conversion still has no grounds for doing so with regard to Fred Thompson. The time frame is a major difference.
Still, I owe Evangelicals for Mitt an apology.
Here is a report of a conversation between Phillip Klein National Right to Life Executive Director Darla St. Martin about her discussion of the abortion issue with Fred Thompson in 1994, the year FDT first ran for the Senate. She found him "consistently pro-life."
Klein adds that at this point he has failed to find a single quote from Thompson at any point in his career in which he says- Romney-style- that he supports "a woman's right to choose."
One final note: Even were the Romney supporter's charges true, there could be question of Fred having been pro-choice throughout his political career- as Romney was- and then suddenly converting to the pro-life side when he decided to run for president. I briefly supported Romney myself, before FDT's announcement, and defended his right to change his mind on this matter and be counted as one of the good guys.
But believe me: a comparison between the records of FDT and Romney on this issue is not a matter the Romney camp should want to pursue, even should they succeed in locating actual evidence for their charge that FDT was pro-choice at any point in his career.
I'm not talking about reports and rumors. I think we have a right to demand a quotation- and a strongly documented one. Until one is forthcoming, Evangelicals for Mitt should, at the very least, qualify its undocumented charges.
That is, if they really want to be foolish enough to pursue this.
ADDENDUM: Looks like I was the foolish one.
Early in Thompson's career, he did briefly take a "libertarian" position on abortion, opposing Federal funding but also opposing the repeal of Roe. This was more than a decade ago, and is in no way comparable to Gov. Romney's public support of "a woman's right to choose" until just about the point when he began to be talked about as a presidential candidate.
I hasten to add that I do not believe the lateness of Gov. Romney's conversion to the cause should be held against him, a point I made long ago. But anyone inclined to raise an eyebrow over the recency of the Romney conversion still has no grounds for doing so with regard to Fred Thompson. The time frame is a major difference.
Still, I owe Evangelicals for Mitt an apology.
Comments