Whom to Believe--Fred! or his Campaign?

So here's the transcript:

Yeah, the young lady's question is premised on if abortion becomes illegal. That presumes Roe versus Wade is overturned, which I think should be our number one focus right now. And that has to do with the kind of Supreme Court justices we put on the bench...That would mean that it goes back to the states, and then the states would have to outlaw it at an earlier stage than they outlaw it now. And then the question would be, who gets penalized and what should the penalty be? I think it should be fashioned along the same lines that it is now.

Most states have abortion laws that pertain -- that -- and -- and prohibit abortion after viability. And it goes to the doctor performing the abortion, not the girl or the young girl or her parents, whomever it might be

OK so far. Thompson's a Federalist, and that response comports with those principles.

But because there was some confusion (don't ask me how...) his campaign issued the following:

"In tonight's debate we saw once again that on abortion, Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice and Mitt Romney is multiple choice. I believe abortion should only be allowed in the instances of rape, incest and the life of the mother and penalties should be assessed against the abortion doctor and not the woman."

First time I ever saw that formulation from Fred. That's the Bush (1) formula, which is ridiculous on its face.

Fred's losing face here....

HT: American Spectator Blog