FRC DC Briefing: Thompson Describes How His Heart Met His Head

His head hunched and his voice dry and cracking, Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson told evangelical activists today that the death of one daughter and the birth of another reconciled his heart with his head about abortion.

"My political record and my head were always there, always has been there, but I must say that it took life's experiences for me to absorb the real importance of it all. I had been blessed early in my life when I was young...and I have been blessed when I was not so young. I've had the
the ultimate tragedy that a father can have and the ultimate blessing that a father can gave.
With regard to Ms. Hayden, I can only say that after the first time in my life, seeing the sonogram of my own child. I will never think exactly the same again. I will never feel exactly the same again. Because my heart now is fully engaged with my head."

Later, to a standing ovation, Thompson said that in the first hour of his administration, "I would go into the Oval Office and close the door and pray for the wisdom to do what is right."

Here are his applause lines:

"We've been together for a long time, We've not always agreed on perhaps the right approach to everything, but the goal has been the same."

"Our basic rights come from God, and not from any government."

"Our people have shed more blood than any nation in the history of the world."

"I'm proud to have been a consistent conservative, cutting taxes, balancing the budget, reducing regulation, promoting welfare reform, fighting for good conservative judges with a100 percent pro-life voting record, and I'm proud of that record."

He also:

** Had praise for John Roberts and Sam Alito

** Described his proposed constitutional amendment to prevent judges in one state from recognizing another state's same-sex marriage laws.

** Called entitlement reform a moral issue

** Predicted that the "struggle against radical Islam" would be "long" and arduous.

Comments

Described his proposed constitutional amendment to prevent judges in one state from recognizing another state's same-sex marriage laws.

What a creative interpretation of "federalism"! Or you could call it "anti-federalism".

Posted by goethean | October 19, 2007 11:40 AM

>> Described his proposed constitutional amendment
>> to prevent judges in one state from recognizing
>> another state's same-sex marriage laws.

> What a creative interpretation of "federalism"! Or
> you could call it "anti-federalism".

Why are you surprised? Fred is a Fraud.

Posted by acme | October 19, 2007 11:56 AM

I find it funny that these people worship a religion that excoriates a 'holier than thou' attitude, and then flaunt a 'holier than thou' attitude by applauding every urging from their candidates that they would pray for guidance as though it's some needle towards those "godless" Democrats.

Posted by james | October 19, 2007 1:05 PM

Hey, you didn't cover Ron Paul's Speech!
What gives?

Posted by Bjorn | October 19, 2007 1:26 PM

If it has 46 chromosomes and it has taken form in a woman's womb, it will sure damn develop and she has nothing to say about the ethical implications of equating the zygote's importance with her.

"Our people have shed more blood than any nation in the history of the world."

Russia's on the phone, Churchill...

""Our basic rights come from God, and not from any government."

I can agree on the "not government" part, but I will never accept an individual claiming that god is the end-all of human rights as president.

Yuck, just yuck. I hope his dreams turn to ashes.

Posted by Xel | October 19, 2007 1:44 PM

"Our people have shed more blood than any nation in the history of the world."

In the cause of promoting freedom and liberty!

Posted by Bill | October 19, 2007 1:52 PM

Xel,

You don't believe our basic rights come from god?

Did you ever read my Declaration of Independence. Do you think I am unqualified to be President.

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.

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

Posted by Thomas Jefferson | October 19, 2007 4:16 PM

If your rights don't come from God then they come from nothing other than might of man. In which case there is no morality, no right and wrong. I'm not going to bother trying to convice you there is a God, but take some time to consider what the "godless" countries are actually like.
Read much about Russia or China lately?

Posted by newagegop | October 19, 2007 4:19 PM

Newage, why do you think Russia and China are "Godless"? Because they don't worship your God?

Posted by Heraldblog | October 19, 2007 4:42 PM

newagegop - ever hear of Sweden, Finland, Norway and the rest of Northern Europe? They have the highest rates of atheism in the world, the lowest crime rates and the lowest public corruption. They also rate very high in happiness surveys.

It's easy to be happy when you know you control your own destiny and relationship to the world without having to follow some incomprehensible book allegedly dictated by a scary old man in the sky.

Posted by Derek Scruggs | October 19, 2007 6:14 PM

Scandinavian countries have the world's highest suicide rates. They do not have the lowest crime rates, maybe murder but not crime. Property crime rates are lower in the US than anywhere in Europe.

Also, The basis of the US is that our rights come from god and can not be taken away by any mortal, such as a King or President. See the Declaration of Independence quoted above. This is not a right wing Christian idea.

Posted by correction | October 19, 2007 6:20 PM

Actually, "correction," the rights of which all here are speaking are assigned in the Declaration to "all men," not Americans.

Jefferson would say that the "basis of the US" -- i.e., the direct cause of its existence as an independent sovereignty -- is that the British government became destructive of those rights in America, and so the People in America, as was their right, "alter[ed] or abolish[ed]" the British government's rule over them.

Just saying.

Posted by DGJ | October 19, 2007 9:35 PM

"In which case there is no morality, no right and wrong."

It's *precisely* because morality can only be derived from Mankind itself that morals are so Ironcast! Human life depends on doing what you feel is needed, right? If you feel hungry, you must eat, if you feel that making a net prepares you for future hunger, you create a net and improve it! If you feel that you want happiness and you need currency, you improve your nets until people buy them from you! In short, not only human sustenance, but human improvement is derived from egoism, your own drive for happiness.

So, you do the things you feel are good and you improve your life. YOU say that this means I can do whatever I want as long as it makes me happy, right? WRONG! See, any other human is a perfect representaive of myself! Everything that applies to me applies to my neighbour! So if I say I can steal his possession I am saying that he or someone else can steal my possession in return! My free will would in this case hinder itself, and instead I am locked to the same golden rule that Jesus preached!

Also, as for the notion that godliness is so important for a good society, I would like to point out that social problems are more widespread in US states more suffused with religion. Also, red states take more money from budgets, while blue states pay more than they get back in taxes.

So, nyah. Religion is just a cognitive schemata you get from the environment. A purely material thing.

Posted by xel | October 20, 2007 8:07 AM

"Our people have shed more blood than any nation in the history of the world."

Moron. This kind of ignorance is more than embarrassing; it should disqualify anyone from occupying the White House. Consider the staggering ignorance it implies about just one major nation, Russia. Consider

Deaths from war, famine, epidemic, state violence in Russia during the Civil War and Lenin's early years: ~10m (5m due to faimine, 2m to epidemics, 3m war casualties)

Deaths in Russia under Stalin: ~20m

Deaths in Russia during the war: ~20m.

Total violent deaths in Russia due to war, state-induced famine, or edidemics: ~50m out of a 1937 population of 164m =30% of the population.

One-third of Russia's population perished due to war, famine, state violence or edpidemic in the last century. Which btw is roughly the same percentage of Germany's population estimated by historians to have similarly perished during the Thirty Years' War of the 17c.

How can our politicians be such ignorant-- insultingly, smugly, crassly ignorant-- of basic facts of world history? Where do we get these people?

Posted by thibaud | October 22, 2007 1:20 AM