Myths of the Embryofascists

Nobody likes abortion. And nobody wants to encourage reckless sex. Yet polls in South Dakota show that, given the chance, voters would reject the abortion ban passed recently by their own State Legislators. The public understands that a woman’s right to an abortion must be maintained, while conservative politicians prefer to posture and make law based on common superstitions rather than medical science and reason.

We can only hope that the FDA will soon allow pharmacies to sell the “morning after” contraceptive pill without a prescription. At least that would remove from the equation pharmacists who object to birth-control, since they won’t actually have to fill the prescription anymore.

In all the debate about stem-cell research, contraception and first-trimester abortion, nobody has made a convincing argument for why a tiny bundle of cells should have more rights than--or equal rights to--a grown woman.

The response to that question usually comes in theological terms, or in terms so vague and flimsy as to be meaningless.

We need to support a culture of life.

So why does the “life” of a bundle of cells take precedence over the life of a grown woman? Why isn’t supporting a woman's health and liberty included in supporting a culture of life? Are women not alive?

Abortion is murder.

Not according to law or common sense. Only a person can be murdered, and an embryo doesn’t come close to meeting the definition of personhood. In fact, my dog is more of a person than an embryo.

We need to uphold and protect the rights of the unborn.

But why should “the unborn” have greater rights than their already-born mothers? Shouldn't the rights of the born outweigh the rights of the unborn?

Nascent human life is equal to human life.

Then why do we have a different name and category for it? Clearly, nascent human life is not yet human life. So why should nascent human life have greater rights than the actual human mother carrying that life?

The Bible says abortion is wrong.

Not my bible. If your bible says it's wrong, don’t have one.

As long as radical religions focus on the quantity of life, rather than the quality of life, we will need to resist the bizarre, illogical and indefensible notion that small bundles of cells have some transcendent, magical value beyond the value of living, breathing, thinking, conscious women.

And just because we allow something doesn’t mean we encourage it.

Allowing abortion while encouraging responsible behavior requires more than a rigid, black-and-white worldview. It requires effort, tolerance and compassion. But too many fanatics want to spend their energy glorifying a small bundle of cells instead of doing the difficult work of understanding teen pregnancy, accepting human sexuality and tolerating a wide range of mores, values and liberties. Which is a far greater shame than the tragedy of abortion.

Tyranny of the Embryofascists

Before Republicans controlled all three branches of Government, remember the lip service given to States Rights? Every conservative pundit, radio host and politician couldn’t stop yammering about how the big, bad Federal Government was meddling in local issues, and how individual States were granted by the Constitution a right to self determination in the broadest sense.

Local voters, they claimed, should have the final say on matters of social import, and virtually every cause championed by Conservatives was linked to this Federalist principle. After all, so-called "activist judges" were forcing people to tolerate liberties (abortion, contraception, homosexuality, mixed marriage, integration, etc.) that their town or county might otherwise vote against.

It was all about little guys—the people put upon by the government—having greater control over their communities.

But five years into the Conservative Catastrophe, we see the issue of States Rights for what it really was and is—a big, fat lie.

Simply examine recent Republican-generated legislation to see the proof. States don’t get to determine who can assist pregnant teens—the Federal Government will. States won’t get to place special restrictions on automobile emissions or standards—only the Government can. States won’t get to designate who can or cannot get married—the Federal Government will. Similar examples are manifold.

Even in areas that have traditionally been the territory of Federal law, Conservatives are imposing their superstitions and mores in every way they can. The President recently declared that using frozen embryos for stem cell research (instead of throwing them away) was "murder". And despite the fact that most Americans disagree, he and his party remain eager to tell us all what we should and should not do.

When they were a minority party, Republicans played the self-determination card because it energized the voting base. But now that they control Congress, they have discarded States Rights and embraced their true agenda—restrictive Federal Legislation.

Conservatism, it turns out, has little to do with true liberty or democracy and everything to do with imposing a radical version of morality on the rest of us.

Fox Spews

On the recent Fox "News" segment Weekend Report, host Brian Wilson showed a clip of an interview with Florida Congressman Robert Wexler by Stephen Colbert of the Colbert Report. But Fox didn't tell viewers they had re-edited the interview to alter its context and paint Wexler in a bad light.

Here is an excellent YouTube diagnosis of the Fox smear. And here is the letter I shot off to Weekend Report:

Your editing of the Colbert Report's interview with Congressman Wexler was misleading and dishonest. You reported it as news, not as some kind of "wink, wink" joke. So now your smear of Wexler has infected the thinking of many of your viewers. Which is just what you probably set out to accomplish.

Some people know that the Colbert Report is fake news. But most of your viewers have yet to grasp that Fox is fake news. You don't need journalistic ethics because you're not journalists. You're an arm of the Republican Party and a mouthpiece for failed conservative policies. You're partisans pretending to be reporters.

Until your kind of disgraceful spin, distortion and dishonesty is taken off the air, America will remain polarized and misinformed.

What a shame that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Peace Can't Be Imposed

According to some observers, all strife and conflict in the Middle East can be traced to the subjugation of Palestine by Israel, even though many groups, including Hezbollah, may be using the “illegal occupation” of Palestine as a pretext to impose their vision of Islamic theocracy on a wider Arab populace.

The recent war between Israel and Hezbollah has a lot of people yearning for and talking about peace. And to be sure, finding a solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict would be an enormous step forward toward peace.

Unfortunately, all parties to the problem--including terrorists, states and occupiers--have forgotten the lessons of history.

Using violence to combat injustice never works. It undermines the morality of the victim and creates further injustice.

And using violence to impose peace never works. It creates suffering and resentment, which produces more violence in the form of revenge or retribution.

Among the Arabs and the Jews, where are the Gandhis? Among American Conservatives, where are the Martin Luther Kings?

Whatever became of non-violent protest?

History demonstrates that the non-violent protests of the Civil Rights Movement worked. The non-violent protests against Dictator Ferdinand Marcos ushered in a cultural revolution in the Philippines without a single shot being fired. Peaceful resistance delivered India from Colonialism.

By contrast, injustices in Northern Ireland were countered by violence and decades of brutality ensued. Injustices in Yugoslavia were countered by violence and a flood of death and human suffering ensued.

The legitimate injustices suffered by Arabs will remain overshadowed as long as terrorism is their culturally sanctioned response. The legitimate grievances of Israelis will be tarnished as long as the Israeli Military acts like an iron fist. The peaceful fantasies of the United States will remain frustrated as long as military force is our preferred strategy for conflict resolution.

Violence begets violence.

If peace is our aim, we must demonstrate peace. Dropping “smart bombs” is antithetical to peace.

If peace is the aim of Israelis, they must choose peace in spite of terrorism.

If peace is the aim of Arabs, they must choose peace in spite of injustice.

Any interpretation of religion (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) that advocates violence is a twisted desecration of all that is holy, both indefensible and illegitimate. Non-violent protest, on the other hand, is a supremely powerful spiritual expression.

Choosing non-violent protest takes far greater courage than picking up a gun. It also requires faith that the desired outcome is worth enormous risk and sacrifice.

Only when courageous people protest in a peaceful, persistent and dignified way will the conditions for true, lasting peace arise.

Presidential Posturing

It was a week of firsts for President Bush. Despite signing a non-stop flood of pork-filled spending bills and laws that he may or may not choose to follow, Bush issued the first veto of his Presidency, knocking down legislation aiming to use discarded embryos from fertility clinics to harvest additional stem cell lines for federally funded research.

According to Dubya, he will not endorse “murder.” Of course, he didn’t explain how his veto squared with the fact that the embryos will be destroyed anyway, and that we might as well get some benefit from them.

But logic, common sense and reason have never held sway over the religious superstitions of Bush and his radical right backers, or the need to posture and motivate the base in an election year.

Also, President Bush finally addressed the NAACP for the first time as President. It only took him five years.

Looking red-faced and embarrassed, Bush shouted his speech to the crowd as if his passion (anger) might overshadow the torrent of spin coming from his mouth.

He expressed sadness that “many African Americans distrust my political party.” But he didn’t mention all the good reasons for that distrust.

Instead, he extolled the virtues of his effort to increase home-ownership. Too bad those gains have been more-than-offset by stagnant wages, skyrocketing energy costs and ever-increasing property taxes.

He also touted his No Child Left Behind legislation as a gift to African Americans. He forgot to mention that he failed to fund it properly, and that educators across the nation consider it a disaster.

But Bush outdid himself by conjuring the ghost of fellow Republican Abraham Lincoln, as if the liberal Lincoln had anything in common with today’s Republican party or Bush's elitist policies. It’s a well known, if seldom mentioned, reality that the Republican Party is currently the party-of-choice for racists, rednecks, Klansmen and white supremacists in America, but I’m sure that little fact is not lost on the African American community.

The Bush visit was motivated not by an earnest desire to connect with people he wants to help, but rather to bolster his sagging poll numbers and help his crippled party in the November elections.

African Americans, like most other Americans, have been left behind by the Bush economy, which has created historic income disparities between the wealthy and the rest of us. And his “darn-it, why don’t you like me?” speech is unlikely to change his standing within that community.

People are sick of hearing Bush talk. They only care about what he does or, more commonly, fails to do.

Robert Novak's Faulty Memory

Robert Novak is either a liar or an idiot. You be the judge.

Journalist Novak penned the now-infamous 2003 article criticizing Joe Wilson and outing his CIA wife, Valerie Plame.

When asked in 2003 by Newsweek about the source of his story and the identity of Plame, Novak replied:

“I didn’t dig it out, it was given to me. They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.”

Later that year on Meet The Press, Novak clarified his statement to Tim Russert:

“What I meant was that the senior official had given me her name.”

This scenario was supplemented by CIA employee Bill Harlow, whose Grand Jury testimony was summed up by the Washington Post:

“[Harlow] warned Novak ... that Wilson’s wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed. Harlow said that after Novak’s call, he checked Plame’s status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame’s name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified.”

Now, three years later, Novak is denying it all. On the 7/16/06 telecast of Meet The Press, Novak said of his earlier statement to Newsweek:

“That was a misstatement on my part.”

And of his clearheaded response to Russert in 2003:

“Well, that, that was just—that’s just a misstatement on my part.”

And of Harlow’s testimony to the Grand Jury about what he said to Novak:

“He didn’t say that. He never said that. Now he may—he may, he may think he said it, but he, he never—he never said that to me.”

Novak wants us to believe that his earlier, sober responses to direct, unambiguous questions were entirely incorrect despite the fact that he had just printed the story and the material was fresh in his mind. He also wants us to believe that testimony--consistent with and confirming his original statements--was just flat wrong.

So now, Novak is right and everybody else is wrong.

Journalists live and die by the veracity of their stories, by their ability to get the details of a story right. But three years after the fact, Novak’s story has mysteriously taken a 180 degree turn.

He’s either a crappy journalist, or a down-and-dirty liar. Or both.

Ann Coulter's Pimps

Below is an email I wrote to MSNBC's Hardball last Thursday (via the address hardball@msnbc.com). If you are as disgusted as I am by pseudo-commentator Ann "Smearfest" Coulter, I encourage you to fire off an email everytime her smug, angry face invades your TV screen, and of course, change the channel...

Dear Softball,

I just turned the channel to CNN when I saw the face of Ann Coulter on your show.

She is an expert on nothing but anger, intolerance, sensationalism and spin. She is a first-class media whore, and you seem determined to be her pimp.

Stop putting an impostor on the air and start being journalists. We need real commentary on "news" channels, not her garbage. Disgusting...

JT Compton

Ed Rogers, Deluded GOP Hypocrite

Everything dishonest, hypocritical and disgusting about the Republican party seems embodied in Ed Rogers, GOP strategist and former presidential advisor.

On Hardball yesterday, Rogers claimed that Karl Rove, Scooter Libby and the Bush team were completely innocent of any wrongdoing in the Valerie Plame leak. “It‘s a kidney stone. It‘s just over. It‘s just over.”

The way Rogers sees it, “In this case, it has been proven affirmatively that no one disclosed any information that as a matter of law shouldn‘t be disclosed. And that‘s what this was about.”

No. Actually, Fitzgerald found insufficient evidence to indict Rove for perjury or obstruction of justice--after giving Rove five chances to get his story straight in front of a grand jury.

Rogers also stated, “It‘s now been proven that [illegal disclosure] didn‘t happen. Let‘s move on.”

Once again wrong. Nothing has been proven. Just because a prosecutor can’t indict doesn’t prove that nothing bad or illegal happened. No judge, jury or prosecutor has ever concluded that no wrongdoing occurred in any aspect of this case.

Rogers went on to say, “The whistleblower in this case, Ambassador Wilson who you‘re talking about, did not tell the truth.”

What crazy dope is Rogers smoking? Again, he ignores facts in favor of fantasy. It is an indisputable fact that Joe Wilson told the truth about the only relevant issue--there were no nuclear materials going from Niger to Iraq.

Recall that in the last two election cycles Republicans were screaming and shouting, “We are the party of values, we are the people of faith. We are going to restore ethics to Washington.” When it came to Bill Clinton, even though he was never found guilty of a crime Republicans whined and moaned that his tryst with Monica Lewinsky was immoral, unethical and disgraceful.

Now those very same whiners, represented by Ed Rogers, claim that because Rove will never be charged with a crime his lily-white hands are clean and pure as the driven snow. So much for restoring ethics to Washington.

Perhaps it doesn’t occur to Rogers and the GOP that the outing of Plame, while never leading to an arrest for illegal disclosure, is every bit as immoral, unethical and disgraceful as anything Bill Clinton ever did. And the evidence overwhelmingly confirms that the Bush team was responsible for the smear campaign that tarnished Joe Wilson and blew the cover of his CIA wife.

Did the White House break the letter of the law? We may never know. But we know enough to say that the conduct of Cheney, Rove, Libby and others was unethical, immoral and disgraceful. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the facts and discard reason, something Ed Rogers and his party seem happy to do.

Frist The Fool

Senator Bill Frist is about to unveil his GOP strategy for the November elections. Rather than focus on social issues like gay marriage, abortion and stem cells, Frist wants to tout the GOP's successes since 1994.

It's hard to imagine a better strategy for GOP failure.

His stroll down memory lane will highlight welfare reform, lower taxes and an "economic boom". But these items do much more to illustrate Republican incompetence and sloth than success.

Take welfare reform, something the GOP long desired. It occurred because Bill Clinton had the political vision to make it happen despite protests from his own party, not because of Republican savvy. And it happened a long time ago.

Lowering taxes (for the rich) might have been a good idea in peacetime, but it's a staggering mistake in the midst of a costly war, a massive deficit and a historic trade gap. We haven't begun to pay for this blunder yet, but it will hurt.

And the "economic boom" Frist flaunts has only touched wealthy CEOs, corporate executives and lobbyists. The rest of America has been battered by job losses and downscaling, stagnant wages, rising local taxes, towering medical expenses and soaring energy costs.

That these are the three main accomplishments of the GOP since 1994 is wildly shameful and indicates a party full of rhetoric but devoid of ability and empty of substance.

To be fair, Frist left out certain other GOP accomplishments like appointing radical judges, massively increasing faith-based government grants, staffing federal agencies with corporate lobbyists, filling legislation with irresponsible pork, gutting rules that protect the environment and keeping voting irregularities off the agenda. But those might make him and his party look bad.

Indeed, like the Presidency of George W. Bush, the GOP record is an utter disgrace and Frist's plan will do nothing but shine a bright light on it.

Democrats and Independents should be ecstatic.

Presidential Propaganda

In Chicago today, President Bush gave the same speech he’s given for the last five years, hoping to shift public sentiment about his Staying The Course of Failure policy in Iraq.

The central rationale for staying in Iraq, according to the President, is to keep the terrorists from pushing us out and using Iraq as a base for training and staging more terrorist acts.

But the President and his incompetent advisors fail to grasp that the terrorists want us to stay in Iraq because our occupation bolsters their central claim that we are trying to control the region’s oil reserves. This claim has been responsible for recruiting more suicide bombers than all other rationales combined.

The best thing we could do would be to withdraw completely, including closing our newly built mega-bases, thus removing the centerpiece of the terrorist grievance against us. Iraq will ultimately flush the foreign fighters from its midst.

Will Iraq keep itself from civil war? It’s already engaged in a civil war, and our troop strength and policy set is inadequate to stop it. So our presence there is no longer serving a purpose. It is, in fact, playing into the hands of terrorists.

The President also said that we have made progress in moving toward energy independence, calling it a "full blown strategy." Is he making some kind of grotesque joke? Apparently, he feels that mentioning something in a state of the union address means that the problem is solved.

Additional refinery capacity won't wean us from our addiction to oil, nor will throwing a few million dollars at new battery technology. Bush has still done nothing about mileage standards, nor put into place any large scale or comprehensive program to develop a revolutionary (as opposed to evolutionary) approach. His propaganda on this issue is shameful.

Bush finally declared, "You win elections by believing something. You win elections by having a policy that actually accomplishes something." But he didn't explain how a President wins by believing something that is false, wrongheaded, superstitous, dysfunctional or downright abhorrent.

Bush believes in torture, deception, unfettered wiretapping, government secrecy, preemptive war, selective leaking, corporate greed, helping the wealthy, no accountability, mixing religion with government and unchecked Presidential power.

By any reckoning, his administration has accomplished nothing positive (unless, of course, you are extremely wealthy). Our jobless recovery is built on a horrifying mountain of debt. Our prescription drug policy is a wasteful, deceptive sham. Our No Child Left Behind policy has been a disaster.

No amount of speechifying can overcome these failures. Indeed, every time Bush opens his mouth, he confirms what most Americans have concluded. That he is a failed President incapable of changing course.