Peanut brain can count to three
President Bush said he hadn't "paid attention to that, to this particular issue you're talking about," when asked about the South Dakota law making abortion illegal unless the mother's life is at stake. Everybody who isn't living camouflaged in a makeshift shelter in the woods pooping in a can and eating MRE's has heard of "this particular issue." Bush is two parts monkey -- hear and see no evil. Or in this case, anything at all.
Luckily, he hasn't learned to speak no evil, or we wouldn't have little gems of wisdom like this one:
"My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incests and the life of the mother." Would that include health of the mother? "No. I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
"Life," of course, is black and white. Just ask any "pro-lifer." Don't ask a biologist, however. "Health," on the other hand, is too difficult for our president to comprehend. It is vague and fluffy, kind of like his brain.
I have never understood the idea that a fetus is a person unless it is the result of rape or incest. Is it not a person, or are we considering the mother's mental health? I'm confused by that, but then I'm confused by all attempts to reduce this issue to concepts our president can understand. Which is why abortion should be a decision made by a woman with the guidance of her qualified medical practitioner, and hopefully a counselor as well. Not a politician with a "position" and an agenda. Why do politicians think they're qualified to make medical decisions? I personally think it's because doctors are smart, and that's scary. They might make a decision we don't like, and back it up with a lot of confusing concepts and long words.
Chuck sent along this editorial, which almost doesn't deserve a spot on Thing of Ugly, it's so pathetic. Ellis claims to be responding to email he's received, which is a convenient excuse for setting up a lot of floppy straw men and calling them names. He is also outright wrong in some of his statements. For example, the majority of Americans are pro-choice. Sorry, straw boy.
I have a long list of people who should be reborn as inner-city minority female incest victims, and this guy's earned a spot on it. Not Bush, though. He gets to be an eleven-year-old African girl sold into marriage to forgive her father's debt of a goat, impregnated and ripped apart by the delivery so her elimination processes never work properly again. Health, indeed. Suck it up, baby.
Luckily, he hasn't learned to speak no evil, or we wouldn't have little gems of wisdom like this one:
"My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incests and the life of the mother." Would that include health of the mother? "No. I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
"Life," of course, is black and white. Just ask any "pro-lifer." Don't ask a biologist, however. "Health," on the other hand, is too difficult for our president to comprehend. It is vague and fluffy, kind of like his brain.
I have never understood the idea that a fetus is a person unless it is the result of rape or incest. Is it not a person, or are we considering the mother's mental health? I'm confused by that, but then I'm confused by all attempts to reduce this issue to concepts our president can understand. Which is why abortion should be a decision made by a woman with the guidance of her qualified medical practitioner, and hopefully a counselor as well. Not a politician with a "position" and an agenda. Why do politicians think they're qualified to make medical decisions? I personally think it's because doctors are smart, and that's scary. They might make a decision we don't like, and back it up with a lot of confusing concepts and long words.
Chuck sent along this editorial, which almost doesn't deserve a spot on Thing of Ugly, it's so pathetic. Ellis claims to be responding to email he's received, which is a convenient excuse for setting up a lot of floppy straw men and calling them names. He is also outright wrong in some of his statements. For example, the majority of Americans are pro-choice. Sorry, straw boy.
I have a long list of people who should be reborn as inner-city minority female incest victims, and this guy's earned a spot on it. Not Bush, though. He gets to be an eleven-year-old African girl sold into marriage to forgive her father's debt of a goat, impregnated and ripped apart by the delivery so her elimination processes never work properly again. Health, indeed. Suck it up, baby.
posted by Maggie at 3/01/2006 08:25:00 AM
3 Comments:
I read about a paragraph of the "editorial" and had to stop. He definitely belongs on the rebirth list.
Ha - you are in rare form!
After reading Brian's review of the editorial, I decided to skip the beginning and read the end instead.
"...no one has demonstrated that children born of rape have extra limbs, missing limbs, or any other abnormal genetic deformity."
Interesting argument in favor of... uh... see, the thing is, I don't think anyone has *claimed* that lately, either. Not in this century, anyway. (I'm not thrilled that his statement implies that it would make a difference if the kids were deformed.)
I really love his closing statement, though:
"There's nothing wrong with with having a different opinion. But it should be based on the best facts available and grounded in truth wherever that can be found. Intellectual honesty dictates we should all found our arguments on substance, rather than emotionalism."
LOL!
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home