Via David Brody:
UPDATE: EFM thinks this is notable not so much because it shows he was pro-choice in the 1990s (we welcome converts), but because it shows recent statements that he can’t understand why anyone ever called him pro-choice are dishonest [see below].
CHARLES adds: Here, from Stephen F. Hayes’ recent Weekly Standard story, is the kind of quote that seems a bit, well, off in light of today’s YouTubery:
I have read these accounts and tried to think back 13 years ago as to what may have given rise to them. Although I don’t remember it, I must have said something to someone as I was getting my campaign started that led to a story. Apparently, another story was based upon that story, and then another was based upon that, concluding I was pro-choice.
Also, I want to backtrack a little. Nancy said above that EFM finds statements like that from Thompson to be “dishonest” given what he clearly said in the ’90s. I was the source of that word, and upon reflection, I’m not sure I want to use it at this point. I’d just say that recent revelations (see also here) cast considerable doubt on his professed innocence. It does not seem to be a matter of newspapers making stuff up.
NANCY adds: Perhaps “disingenuous” would be a better fit?