Skip to comments.GROUP HUG (Fred Thompson meets with the Arlington Group)
Posted on 09/29/2007 5:32:04 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Earlier this week, former Sen. Fred Thompson met privately in Washington, D.C. with senior members of the Arlington Group, a coalition of social and religious conservatives. The meeting, according to Arlington Group members present, included members who had previously met with Thompson at a private meeting in the spring, prior to Thompson's speech before the Council on National Policy.
At the meeting this week Thompson answered questions and discussed his views on social issues, as well as his own faith, for more than an hour.
"He's impressive, and a number of us want to help him," says a member of the Arlington Group who was present. "The group itself can't endorse, but I sense that a majority of the major players here will help Senator Thompson. From a social conservative's perspective, he's the most electable of the bunch, and he made it clear that he would not disappoint us if he were elected. He'll work with us to accomplish our goals."
Most critical to the members, according to an Arlington Group staffer present, was Thompson's more in-depth explanation of his position supporting a Constitutional amendment barring gay marriage, but not the one most members of the Arlington Group have been supporting.
"It doesn't go as far as many of us would like, but it goes a lot further than Rudy Giuliani, and he's got a much more solid record on the issue than Mitt Romney. It gets us closer to where we need to be. I am satisfied," says another religious leader at the meeting.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I agree completely. Well said.
Well...no elections have been held yet. If he is the nominee, I hope he wins.
True that! There are still several months before the first primary!
Brother, you said a mouthful!
It looks like our chances of keeping Rudy and Hillary out of the White House, keep improving.
If true, we will know if after a couple of debates. Until then, I’ll withhold judgment.
No, I don't agree. Nor do I agree with Voltaire: It is "good 'nuff" that is the enemy of good.
Nor would they want to be responsible for what is not in line with their principles.
But if they decided to stay home out of 'principle', they'll get a Democrat in the White House, which is even worse than any Republican they might reject out of principle. In a less precarious world, that might be ok, but there's WAY too much at stake. It's not abortion or homosexual marriage that is the major problem, it's standing virtually defenseless in the face of Islamic fundamentalism.
It is the Republican RINOs currently in office that are responsible (not complicit, but responsible) for shamnesty, for Treaty of the Seas, and for the NAU. How can one say that the Democrats are "even worse"? Even if one could plausibly consider anything "worse" than loss of sovereignty, rewarding these bastards with election will only encourage them.
The only faction not complicit, indeed, the only faction in opposition even before the outcry of the people were the far right Conservatives. to support any other is to invite more of the same.
How soon we forget.
You have got to be joking or smoking some premium Jamaican weed.
Give me a break. If Mitt's nominated, the Democrats will do to him what Republicans did to John Kerry in 2004. I can already see the videos and voice-overs, juxtaposing Romney's face with one of his positions. How much more money is Romney going to loan his campaign?