I say kudos to Fred for once again putting his commitment to
federalism above political expediency. Like most conservatives, I
found the Schiavo case to be a tragedy and thought that the Florida
courts should have erred on the side of life. But I also thought
that the federal government had absolutely zero role in the matter.
And I'm glad that Fred did not feel the need to pander on this
one.
Did this mean that contrary to the lion share of social
conservative activists he thinks Congress should NOT have
intervened? Or was he just uninformed on one of the most publicized
and emotional issues of the last few years for social conservatives
in the state he was visiting?
By the all caps treatment of "NOT" am I supposed to assume that
you, Jennifer, supported federal intervention in this case? Or are
you saying that if he were a better politician Thompson would have
known to pander on this issue to appeal to social conservatives? I
have the sense that if Thompson had been well informed and come out
on the other side of this issue you would have attacked him for
abandoning his federalist principles.
Also, as Ryan Sager
pointed out, "Rudy Giuliani didn't do the
hottest job answering this question back in April." You may not
be a FredHead Jennifer, but it doesn't seem fair to hold him to an
entirely different standard by criticizing him for stumbles on
which other candidates get a free pass.