Skip to comments.Fred Thompson Is Finished
Posted on 11/07/2007 7:41:35 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
On the matter of Terri Schiavos right to life, which occupied the attention of the media and Congress in 2005, Thompson called that a family decision, in consultation with their doctor, and the federal government should not be involved. Thompson added, the less government the better. ...
In the case of Terri Schiavo, a severely disabled person, there was a family dispute. Her estranged husband wanted her to die and he eventually succeeded in starving her to death. Her parents had wanted her to live. ...
There was no moral justification for killing Terri because she had an inherent right to life and there was no clear evidence that she wanted food and water withdrawn. The morally correct course of action would have been to let her family take care of her. Nobody would have been harmed by that.
Meet the Press host Tim Russert brought up the death of Thompsons daughter, who reportedly suffered a brain injury and a heart attack after an accidental overdose of prescription drugs. Apparently Thompson and members of his family made some decisions affecting her life and death. Thompson described it as an end-of-life issue.
Bobby Schindler says he doesnt know what the circumstances precisely were in that case and that he sympathizes with what Thompson went through. However, he says that it is not comparable at all to his sisters case.
What no one is recognizing, he told me, is that my sisters case was not an end-of-life issue. She was simply and merely disabled. Terri wasnt dying. She was only being sustained by food and water. She had no terminal illness. She wasnt on any machines. All she needed was a wheelchair and she could have been taken anywhere. She didnt even need to be confined to a bed.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
I’d take Romney over Rudy as well...but I can’t say Fred’s in “who cares” category if he’s still polling in second place nationally.
And tradesports showed Fred at the top in September.
Were they wrong then...or right? Are they right now...or wrong?
Your using of trade futures shows just how fickle those are.
I’m turning Fox off more and more. Don’t think much of Hannity and Colmes. They seem to work overtime being so fair amd balanced, that I want a straight answer out of someone. They also seem to feature subject matter that titilates, and then they can’t let go of it.
Think I’m suffering from politics fatigue.
And if voters elect a moral conservative for president who believes it’s the federal government’s job to protect human life, anyone who doesn’t like that can move to Europe where the state murder of crippled “useless eaters” is a tradition.
Fred is right.
Federalism means the federal government stays out of your life as much as possible, period. This issue was within the purview of the state of Florida and should have stayed there, no matter what.
Are we to bow to a tyrant merely because he bans abortions and doesn’t allow euthanization of humans? I don’t think that is a line we should cross.
Fred is a small gov, pro-life, pro-gun, pro national security, Federalist with enough integrity and honesty to keep my trusting him completely even through the few disagreements I have with him.
If Fred is finished the GOP is finished cuz its either him, a true conservative, or Rudy McRomney the three amigo's of rinoville. Fortunately for the GOP Fred is far far far from finished despite the rantings of the unhinged here at FR.
Yes... Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Paul, Clinton, Obama, and the rest of the Dims come to mind.
I dont think it is the business of the federal govt to get involved. I am sorry.
Another yawner by tailgunner.
You’d rather each state bow to a tyrant who murders babies and innocent handicapped women?
We need less drama and more reasoned thought if we are to prevent Rudy from becoming our nominee. Time is running out. Many are endorsing Rudy simply because they think his win is inevitable.
Fred is a solid conservative and even if he's not your first choice he would be, at very least, acceptable to most in our party. Let's get behind him and get this done before the only choice left to us is between Rudy and Hillary.
BTW, I really like your freeper page and agree with a lot of it. I just think you exaggerate some and end up fighting fiction in a few cases. That’s wasted energy.
You said — “I still think though...that it is quite possible that Gods intent was to take her in 1991.”
If that was God’s intent, He would have succeeded in taking her...
If Fred is the nominee then the GOP is finished! If the Republican party does not nominate someone who believes that the murder of innocent babies should be illegal, then a third party will! Nominating Fred is as good as voting for Hillary.
He’s finished with me, for sure...
You said — “I could not understand why the husband couldnt have just let the parents care for Teri. But he didnt.”
Well, wasn’t there an issue of money involved. And also, don’t you know that you “bury your mistakes”. You don’t let them live...
Bill O'Reilly is a buffoon who's outlived what little usefulness he ever had.
Well, only God really knows the answer to that. One thing I know for certain, is that God had every chance to end Terri's life and chose NOT to do so.
Somehow to believe that starvation and dehydration are God's "natural" ways to end a person's life, is to have faith in an entirely different kind of God that I know!
God has permitted medical so save many who would have died but a few short years ago.
When Jehovah's Witness followers or even the Amish refuse medical treatment for their family members, the heavy hand of Government steps in and overrides their "choice" to refuse medical help.
Why would the same Government elect to save someone whom their own family chose to let Heaven care for yet in another case, order starvation and dehydration of yet another?
Believe me this was all about money, not about "right to choose" on the part of the family.
That her parents and brother desired her life to continue until God elected to take her and only her greedy husband, who desired to have her out of his life so that he would be free to marry his lover and enjoy what monies he had left out of Terri's settlement, tells me that this was NOT an issue that had anything to do with "family and doctor" advice.
What?! Second place from bottom?
The Constitution authorizes the Federal government to guarantee a republican form of government in the states, and that is the only authority it has over their internal decisions. This includes the state's sovereign rights to regulate murder within the state. Whatever you can say about Florida's government, it is a republican form of government.
Wow!! Fred killed Terri??? Just Wow!!
Next time take the whole prozac....thank you.
Fred’s Federalism is the best way to save innocent babies, your way just guarantees endless years of status quo. Get real, get a life, get on the Fred train to true conservatism.
Check out tonights video DUmmy Funnies, Rush gets the same treatment from the moonbat left
Um...look around here. Unless you are willfully ignoring Fred’s poll numbers because your candidate is doing worse...
The point is I’d rather not bow to a tyrant just because he gives me what I want. That is a trait best reserved for leftists.
I may not always agree with what the citizens of a state may decide in these matters, nonetheless I can respect their decision and urge them to change their minds.
In order to get the money he had to kill the only witness. Just sayin
He’s not much acting like a candidate.
The 14th amendment forbids any state from enforcing any law which abridges the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. But then “state’s rights” confrederates aren’t big fans of the 14th amendment are they!?
There’s no doubt in my mind a lot of bad stuff went on...and if it’s true Michael will be dealt with by God anyway.
However...while some here want to believe Terri was actually somewhat coherent and knew what was going on, there’s just as much evidence that she was completely vegetative.
That’s the whole reason this is such a hard issue. I don’t think Fred or any other person deserves derision for their opinions on this issue.
“The excruciating, two-week murder of Terri Schiavo should have been stopped by Governor Jeb Bush.”
Either the Governor or the President had the power to pardon someone sentence to death by the courts. That power exists to give the executive branch the moral authority to intervene in order to prevent a miscarriage of justice.
That is exactly what Terri Sciavo’s case was.
You were saying — “I don’t disagree at all. Perhaps the state of Florida had an interest, but not the Feds, at least according to my copy of the Constitution.”
Well, with the Declaration of Independence stating that we have inalienable rights granted from God, our Creator —
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ... “
... and the Constitution is for protecting those rights, among other things — I would say protecting life is certainly a fundamental goal of the highest order for the Federal Government, given that it’s in the first few sentences of the founding of our country and government!
The government needs to intervene, in all cases, to preserve life, given that this is a right granted from our Creator God.
Sorry, but it’s against my religion to vote for pro-choice candidates. What goes for Rudy goes for Fred!
Bad photoshop. But nice try.
Bet you enjoyed sticking that pin in that bubble. :)
Thompson is right.
You are right. Jeb Bush should have stepped in and investigated the criminal actions of the judge in the case.
Everybody involved won, except Terri and her family.
ditto and bttt
And how do candidate's act? In the past they never came to the nominating convention or traveled to give speeches. They would give speeches from their own front porches, which is why it used to be called 'standing for election.'
You may want to read up on the predictive value of the online political futures market. Heres an article from The Street that explains why these markets are so unreliable (in a nutshell, their tiny population, the tiny sums that are wagered, and their susceptibility to manipulation make them not very good as a predictive tool):
Those Spurious Presidential Futures:
Here’s some more info:
The night before the Iowa Caucuses in 2004, investors thought Howard Dean had 45% chance of winning Iowa, Gephart had 25% chance, Kerry had 20% chance and Edwards had 8% chance.
At the same time Jan 18, 2004, Iowa Electronic Markets investors thought Dean had a 51% chance of winning the overall donk nomination, Wesley Clark had 21% chance, and Kerry had 13% chance.
The very next day, John Kerry won the Iowa caucuses with 37.6% of the vote, Edwards was second with 31.8%, Dean was a distant third with 18%, and Gephardt was fourth with 10.6%.
Get over it. She was a veg.
The rest is just detail.
How can any true conservative dispute this simple but clear tenet?
Your list of candidates is two then, a pro-life socialist (Huckabee) and Duncan Hunter. I'm curious who your dog is in this hunt that passes your pro-life test.
Thank you...we were wondering where you were!
Well, for one, a family has no right to murder someone. And then secondly, as far as Thompson is concerned, it does have to do with him being a candidate, in that I won’t be voting for him on that basis. So, it does figure into the “candidate equation”...
Well you go right ahead and support whoever you want to.
Who is that, BTW?
There is nothing in the Constitution which requires states to make murder a crime. If the state wanted to it could legalize murder, so long as everyone had the same right to murder. Of course it is extremely unlikely to happen, and it would be unjust, as was Florida’s treatment of Terri Schiavo.
Uh, let’s see here...
1. FRed was an unmarried very young expectant father, who did not cause his child to be aborted, as many did in that same situation.
2. His voting record is 100% Pro Life.
3. He has said, many, many times, “I have alwaysand thats been my position the entire time Ive been in politics. I thought Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided”
4. He said again on MTP...”I think Roe v. Wade hopefully one day will be overturned...to have a constitutional amendment to do that, I do not think would be the way to go.”
5. And again, “my legal record is there, and thats the way I would govern if I was president. I would take those same positions. No federal funding for abortion,”
6. “I think life begins at conception. I alwaysit was abstract to me before. I was a father earlier when I was very young. I was busy. I went about my way.”
So, now, why don’t YOU show where FRed said he was for abortion?