More on the NRLC (and $50.00 Abortions)
By Erick Posted in 2008 | Abortion | Fred Thompson — Comments (16) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
You can get a sense of things from the NRLC at these links:
http://www.nrlc.org/Election2008/111307POTUSEndorsement.pdf
http://www.nrlc.org/Election2008/111307FranzStatement.pdf
http://www.nrlc.org/Election2008/111307CrossStatement.pdf
Most notable, of course, is that the NRLC endorsement came not from Beltway Overlords, but from the grassroots leadership within the fifty states.
*If* Thompson plays his cards right, this should help him, particularly if he starts harping on the Executive Branch issue.
Also, several people have sent me this information, which I've not done anything with, but in talking to some of the folks involved and some of the folks getting last minute pressure, one of the things that shored up a few folks wavering on the Romney v. Fred issue was this "menu" of services under the Romney Healthcare Plan in Massachusetts that charges just $50.00 for an abortion ($100.00 under the "Low Premium Plan"). It's one thing to hear about it, but it's a whole different ball game to see it printed in stark black and white on a menu.
As several folks noted, Romney vetoed various parts of the Healthcare plan including parts dealing with the dental plan for people on medicaid, but he did not veto the $50.00 abortions for the general populace.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | What you should know about Fred's NRLC endorsement (with highlights!!) — Comments (49) »
More on the NRLC (and $50.00 Abortions) 16 Comments (0 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I clicked it to see it is Wanda Franz. My immediate thought was a major endorsement from the Becker908 household. :>)
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
...in the long run. Sure, Fred will get a little bounce out of it, I'm sure. And I have no problem with the NRLC endorsing Fred, but quite unfortunately an endorsement - even from one of the nation's most active and (personally) admired organizations - can't make Fred a better candidate.
I think that Fred would be a decent president (although I have grave concerns about his having absolutely no executive experience,) but he's just been an extremely lackluster candidate. I don't see that changing anytime soon, and I don't see this endorsement changing that.
He just doesn't seem to have a national presidential race in him. The way his campaign has been fumbling, I wonder if it even has a statewide race in Tennessee left in him.
I continually see the meme, Fred is lackluster... Fred doesn't seem to have the fire in the belly, whatever that is...
Fred is an adult. I know this characteristic is rarely seen these days, but he is measured, sober and contemplative in his answers. He doesn't speak in sound bites. But when he does speak, you know where he stands.
Fred isn't going to run out on stage and belt out Broadway show tunes, but he will let you know where he stands on important issues of the day.
And those views won't change based on where he is, or who he thinks is listening.
tunes...
Well, there's obviously a segment of the voting public to whom that would appeal.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
While it is not a requirement (and there are quite a few notable and successful exceptions) most of America's best companies are run by CEOs with energy and passion. That's in part because you often need a leader with energy and passion to inspire those qualities throughout the organization.
Fred has shown little energy or passion, and his flagging support is evidence that this is probably part of the reason that he hasn't been inspiring much energy or passion in the people who have been polled lately.
While I don't doubt that he is an adult, "bore" is not a synonym for "adult," and "energizing" is not a synonym for "not an adult" - which is what you seem to be implying that other candidates might not be.
You may be right, but I think people respect rational, steady confident leaders.
Fred is such a man.
Also, a "bore" isn't really the same as boring and I would argue that Fred is definately not a "bore". By the same token, I imagine if you sat down and had a lovely beverage with Fred, you probably wouldn't be bored by the conversation.
If I want to be energized, I'll go to a football game, or maybe a tent revival.
I'm sure that Fred would be an interesting guy to have a 1-on-1 conversation with. And I bet he's rather colorful off the record. That is clearly not translating to the campaign trail, however. And like it or not, the presidency is won on the campaign trail, not in sit downs with "lovely beverage(s)."
Your analogy to a football game is a good one. Modern American politics is policy as well as sport. Blood sport, one might argue. We need a leader with energy and passion as well as brains and fortitude to lead the Republican team to victory in November 2008.
I'm sorry, but I just don't think that Fred is the man who can do that. With Fred and McCain, I get Bob Dole flashbacks. It's frightening.
Of course people respect rational, steady, confident leaders. Fred is simply not the one with a monopoly on those virtues in the GOP primary.
I think Dole was poorly served by his campaign strategists. Had he been allowed to be himself, I think he'd have fared much better, imho.
Regarding Fred's traits, you may be right... that is, until you add, "consistent". There is no other candidate who hasn't "shaped" their message to fit a presidential campaign, except maybe for McCain.
Some have "shaped" their views a bit more than others.
I'll still take Fred over the lot.
Thanks for giving me something new to pray about. Getting rid of an unwanted child (in MA) is now about the price of a bag of weed. Great.
www.scottbomb.com
Click here to donate to the Fred Thompson campaign.
From the Romney Website:
MYTH: Under Governor Romney's Massachusetts Health Insurance Reform Plan, Abortion Services Are Offered As Part Of The Commonwealth Care Benefit Services Package.
FACT: The Commonwealth Care Benefit Services Package Was Developed By The Connector Authority – An Independent Authority Separate From The Governor's Office.
The Commonwealth Care Package Is Designed And Administered By The Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority. "The Connector administers two separate programs; Commonwealth Care and Commonwealth Choice. Commonwealth Care offers subsidized insurance to people whose annual incomes are up to 300% or the Federal Poverty Level." (Commonwealth Connector Official Website, www.mass.gov, Accessed 2/5/07)
The Commonwealth Heath Insurance Connector Authority Is An Independent Public Authority And Their Decisions Were Made Separate Of The Romney Administration. "The Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority is an independent public authority created to implement significant portions of the new landmark health care reform legislation. The Connector assists qualified Massachusetts adult residents with the purchase of affordable health care coverage if they don't already have it." (Commonwealth Connector Official Website, www.mass.gov, Accessed 2/5/07)
FACT: Under Massachusetts Law And Court Precedent, If The State Is Funding Health Care Benefits – As It Is With The Subsidized Commonwealth Care Products – It Cannot Refuse To Fund Abortions.
In 1981, The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Ruled That The Massachusetts Constitution Required Payment For Abortions For Medicaid-Eligible Women. (Moe v. Secretary of Admin & Finance, 1981)
· According To The Decision, When A State Subsidizes Medical Care, It Cannot Infringe On "The Exercise Of A Fundamental Right" Which The Court Interpreted As Access To Medically Necessary Abortion Services. (Moe v. Secretary of Admin & Finance, 1981)
In 1997, The Supreme Judicial Court Reaffirmed Its Position That A State-Subsidized Plan Must Offer "Medically Necessary Abortions." In Moe, "[W]e concluded that the State's failure to fund medically necessary abortions, while funding all other medically necessary procedures (including services in connection with childbirth), invaded a woman's constitutional right of choice to a degree that was not counterbalanced by the State's interest in the preservation of potential life." (Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, Inc. v. Attorney General, 1997)
Check out NRLC Political Director Karen Cross's Fred alert back in July:
http://race42008.com/2007/07/13/thompsons-trouble-with-abortion/#comment...
So it shouldn't be a major surprise that Fred has garnered this endorsement.
I am curious to know how endorsement was agreed upon. Was there a majority of state and local organizations that voted for Fred? Or was it primarily the decision of NRTL leaders like Franz and Cross?
For instance, the Michigan chapter hasn't endorsed anyone yet:
http://onemom.wordpress.com/2007/11/13/hardly-a-shake-up-from-nrlc/
Seriously, give it a rest. If you actually read the statement, it was a full vote by all the chapters. Why didn't you read the statement before jumping to defensive conclusions?
Tommy Oliver
www.race42008.com
I doesn't mean that Michigan's RTL voted for Thompson in the meeting, but got outvoted in the process.
Tommy Oliver
www.race42008.com
this could be big for Fred, and a blow to Mitt if the hand is played correctly!
Thanks for the info Erick.