The Part of Slime Open Thread

Paul Begala thinks Pat Robertson and James Dobson are bad news for Reps because of the way Republican members of the House, Senate and President Bush have tripped over themselves to seek the approval of these two men. Robertson believes that women get breast cancer because they have abortions, and that we were attacked on 9/11 because we are too tolerant of gays. Dobson beleives that childrens cartoons send sublimal messages to convert children to a lifestyle of homosexuality and that embroyonic stem cell research is the equivelent of Nazi human experimentation. If all these elected Republican officals are tripping over themselves to support these two men, they and every Republican probably endorse all their talking points and the majority of Americans know that Dobson and Robertson are all full of s***.

(P.S. Begala never said these things. This is my way of showing that if you want to string together a set of thoughts and then relate them together for a partisan base, it's much easier to point out that people with power are in bed with exremists. I have no clue what Sheehan thinks, or know whether I agree with her policy proposals if she's actually made them but I fully support the right of a woman who has suffered tremendously to meet Bish and protest the war. I'm also a bit shocked to find that the people on the right get no bigger enjoyment than trying to beat the crap out of this woman.)

Tags: Republicans (all tags)

Comments

13 Comments

The latest episode in The Sliming of Cindy Sheehan
is that she is anti-Semitic, based on a statement she made that getting the US out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine would do more for stopping terrorism.

Drudge has it up as his banner headline.

by Quaoar 2005-08-14 09:43AM | 0 recs
Re: The latest episode in The Sliming of Cindy She
Actually, that does sound like a pretty anti-Semitic remark to me. And I'm sure that someone will call me a troll for this, but much as I hate Bush and love to see him squirm, the President can't see each and every casualty's mother. He wouldn't have time for anything else. Whoever wrote Bush's speech about her the other day (feel her sorrow, etc.) had it right. It just looks phoney coming out of the permanent smirk of his. What was smiling about?
by antiHyde 2005-08-14 03:28PM | 0 recs
Oh, for the love of blank!
How in the blue blazes is it anti-Semitic to point out the obvious?

Occupied. People. Fight. Back.

In Palestine, Iraq, Ireland, Chechnya, or anywhere else on this dismal godforsaken planet, the best way to get people hating you is to put your military in charge of them.

How on Earth is this anti-Semitic?

by catastrophile 2005-08-14 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, for the love of blank!
So where do the Jews find a homeland, if not in Israel? Weren't the Arabs "occupying" Israeli territory? Who was there first?
by antiHyde 2005-08-16 10:19AM | 0 recs
Sheesh!
That one's got whiskers.

A bunch of Europeans come in and say our holy book says this belongs to us, so you can all f@ck off, and you really expect people to gracefully pack their bags and leave land that's been home to their families for countless generations?

So, I suppose when Native American tribes come and demand that we all ship our Anglo @$$es off their land, you're all for that, right? Their claims are certainly more current than the one you're citing. Their whole religion is rooted in the land we took. Where's the love?

by catastrophile 2005-08-16 01:07PM | 0 recs
Pat Robertson is a domestic Taliban.
Think about the parallels in religious extremism.

Pat Robertson:

*Abortion causes breast cancer
*9-11 is punishment for homosexual tolerance
*Islam is evil

Taliban

*TV, radio, books, and magazines are evil
*Women caught with a leg uncovered can be stoned
*Christians are evil

The main thing they have in common is intolerance, the cornerstone of their belief systems.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-08-14 10:10AM | 0 recs
Oh forgot...
And Begala kicks ass.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-08-14 10:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh forgot...
Begala does kick ass, unfortunately he didn't say any of that. It was something I put together quickly as a response to the redstate piece.
by Kombiz Lavasany 2005-08-14 10:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh forgot...
I know, but Begala and Carville are my two favorite non-politian democrats.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-08-14 10:16AM | 0 recs
Stop the spin
Dobson said that some may see that good came out of the Nazi experiments.  The end results were even used by the U.S. after the war.  To what end I don't know, but the experimental results were important enough not to simply throw away.  He then said that human embryo experimentation may also yield results that benefit mankind.  In his mind Nazi experiments were immoral (well in anyones mind) and from his point of view human embryionic stem cell research is immoral.  Now Dobson is a nut, and I am an Agnostic so I don't give a rats patoot about the life of an embryo.  But his point is sound.  You can't do something evil and justify it by having an end result that benefits mankind. I know people are bent on attacking others anytime they use the word Nazi in a sentence, but it might be nice if the attack was justified.  I hate people that participate in partisan spin.  I usually see it from the other side.  Now if you want to go after him on Sponge Bob then have at it. I agree with the main point that these two individuals and the party's cow towing to them are potential weak points.
by jrflorida 2005-08-14 10:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop the spin
Here's what Dobson said, Media Matters has the audio to him saying it.
DOBSON: You know, the thing that means so much to me here on this issue [embryonic stem cell research] is that people talk about the potential for good that can come from destroying these little embryos and how we might be able to solve the problem of juvenile diabetes. There's no indication yet that they're gonna do that, but people say that, or spinal cord injuries or such things. But I have to ask this question: In World War II, the Nazis experimented on human beings in horrible ways in the concentration camps, and I imagine, if you wanted to take the time to read about it, there would have been some discoveries there that benefited mankind. You know, if you take a utilitarian approach, that if something results in good, then it is good. But that's obviously not true. We condemn what the Nazis did because there are some things that we always could do but we haven't done, because science always has to be guided by ethics and by morality. And you remove ethics and morality, and you get what happened in Nazi Germany. That's why to Senator [Senate Majority Leader Bill] Frist [R-TN] and the others who are saying, "Look what may be accomplished." Yeah, but there's another issue, there's a higher order of ethics here.
The best thing you could possibly say about the Dobson phrase is that its crude and facutally innacurate.

The moral differnce between a zygot, and a human being cut open alive in Nazi Germany are completely seperate classes. The fact that biologists work on embroyonic stem cells to find cures for millions of people, and Mengala and his ilk experimented on humans to ascertain what made the master race, and how some of their weapons affected a human being are in two entirely different classes of morality. Dobson feels he and Republicans benefit politically from marrying the two rhethorically, just as they felt marrying someone in a wheel chair, and Schaivo being married rhethorically were beneficial to their poltical power.

I'd feel pretty comfterable that if someone in a poll asked which is worse, using a zygot to find cures to dieseases on operating on living humans for research related to race, you'd get a pretty heavy response that the two are unrelated in people's view of what's a crime, and what's is not.

The point above is not just to ridicule Dobson, though if he wasn't an arm of the RNC I don't think I would ever bother. The truth is that he has enormous political power over most elected Republicans in the country. He's already formed a committee with Robertson, etc. to endorse a Republican candidate in the 2008 Republican primaries. He has a hand in promoting actual policy something that most figures on the left that are slimed by Republicans do not.

In my view that makes his crude at best remarks completely open to criticism, in fact I think his position demands criticism.

by Kombiz Lavasany 2005-08-14 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop the spin
His quote is factually accurate.  There is hope that all of these good things will happen. There is belief that all of these good things will happen.  But there is no proof that spinal cord injuries will be solved by stem cell research.  I personally believe it will happen.  But it doesn't make his statements less accurate.

"I'd feel pretty comfterable that if someone in a poll asked which is worse, using a zygot to find cures to dieseases on operating on living humans for research related to race, you'd get a pretty heavy response that the two are unrelated in people's view of what's a crime, and what's is not."

Of course you should feel comfortable that the poll would show that.  It would.  Most people don't equate the two and most support stem cell research.  But his point is still valid.  Assuming first that you see killing embryos as equal to killing a full grown adult then thw two are not so disimilar.  Certainly if you see the Nazi experiments as immoral and if you see stem cell research as immoral then you can handle the analogy.  If you want to nitpick every little thing that happened in those experiments in the Nazi era you're gonna find horrible things.  But to these people a death is a death and it doesn't matter how you get there from a moral perspective.  The sick thing here is that if anyone ever compares something to anything the Nazis ever did then people get up in arms and call them anti-semetic.  Thats just crap.  Are the two perfectly equal?  No, not in my eyes or clearly in yours.  Are there comparisons to be made?  Yes, if you first make some assumptions about the other persons point of view and certainly if you are talking in terms of is it right dto do a wrong in order to do a right. What people want out of this is to bash his remarks because they dared to compare something to what the horrible nasty Nazis did. How dare he!  He is clearly talking about the moral implications or doing wrong in order to do good.  He is not saying the two are equal (even your quote doesn't show this) and even if he did, whats the harm in that.  Does it somehow diminish what the Nazis did?  No.

Its okay to criticize his views but don't do it just because he used the word Nazi.  Talk about what he is talking about, does having something good come out of doing something wrong in any way justify the wrong?  Had he used any other comparison I doubt people would be so upset.  

Now you might argue that he is using a keyword to stir up interest in the religious right.  Fear mongering if you will in talking about the Nazi experiments.  But if you attack his statements the way they have been attacked recently all you do is make the right wingers look at you and shake their head.  They'll see clearly he didn't say the things being said about him and they will take his side.  He will win the argument and more over he will convince some more on the right that the left are filled with a bunch of nutcases.  

by jrflorida 2005-08-15 07:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop the spin
What people should be asking is why are the Dobsons of the world so upset about stem cell research when they never seemed to be all that upset about the fate of an embryo in labs/clinics prior to this controversy.  The embryo is going to be destroyed anyway.  No one on the right has offereed up their uterus to the best of my knowledge.  Anne Coulter certainly hasn't.  Not that it would be a better fate than death to have her as  a mother.  (Note use of the word death in the previous sentence does not imply that I believe an embryo to be alive in the first place) So where is the harm?  In the case of this moral comparison, the specific act of taking the stem cells does not change the end result of the embryo.  With or without the stem cells the embryo ends up in the waste can.  Had the Nazis not put people in concentration camps and tortured them would those people have suffered horrible deaths?  No.  In this case the embryos fate is the same regardless of stem cell research. So there is no "wrong" being done in this particular step of the process.  Hence, his analogy is incorrect.  Its not a case of someone doing wrong to make a right.  Its about salvaging what you can from an embryo in the hope that someday life may come of it.  Take the stance that its this chance at life in the form of helping others that is the best possible fate for that embryo from a realistic standpoint and then question why it is that Dobson is only just now stirring up controversy about the fate of the embryo.  Does he plan on turning the clock back on reproductive clinics once he is done with stem cell research?  Because if that is not his plan then he is a hypocrite.
by jrflorida 2005-08-15 08:11AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads