Friday, March 10, 2006

 

Creeps: Ralph Nader and Bill Napoli

I was battling insomnia last night and trolling the web when I came across this interesting post on Michael Bérubé’s site about Ralph Nader, and a story in the NY Times from 2000 called, “Nader Sees a Bright Side to a Bush Victory.” Huh? That can’t be right! Read on...
...[Nader] called the possibility that a court packed with Republican appointees could overturn Roe v. Wade a “scare tactic.” On Sunday, Mr. Nader said in a television interview that even if Roe v. Wade was overturned, the issue “would just revert to the states.” Just? [snip] He said he did not in any case believe for a moment that Mr. Bush would seek to overturn Roe v. Wade. “The first back alley death, and the Republican Party is in deep trouble and they know it,” he said. He described the party’s opposition to abortion as just for show, “just for Pat Robertson."
Bérubé:
The idea is that an actual abortion ban would go too far: the first back alley death, and the Republican Party is in deep trouble. Well, maybe and maybe not, folks. You might think, along similar lines, “the first hideous death by torture in the War on Terror, and the Republican Party is in deep trouble,” or “the first unconstitutional power grab by the executive branch, and the Republican Party is in deep trouble,” or “the first data-mining program of domestic spying, and the Republican Party is in deep trouble,” or “the first systemic corruption scandal involving Jack Abramoff and Duke Cunningham and Tom DeLay, and the Republican Party is in deep trouble,” and you’d be, ah, wrong, you know.
And, in some part thanks to Nader’s insistence that the two presidential candidates in 2000 were indistinguishable, we now have Bill Napoli, who, as I’m sure you know by now, said this in an interview:
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Napoli says most abortions are performed for what he calls "convenience." He insists that exceptions can be made for rape or incest under the provision that protects the mother's life. I asked him for a scenario in which an exception may be invoked. BILL NAPOLI: A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.
Now we have a creep with violent misogynist fantasies dictating what South Dakota women do with their wombs. He’s coming after your wombs, too. And he’s not stopping there. He wants to outlaw contraception. And then, who knows? Sky’s the limit. Ultimately, the loss of the 2000 election cannot be put solely on the shoulders of Nader. If Gore/Lieberman hadn’t taken a hard right after the primary, if black-robed partisans on the SCOTUS hadn’t halted a Florida vote count, if liberal supporters of Gore had reacted with fury and action, if the media hadn’t pushed a quick resolution on the country, if if if. But Nader was part of the problem and lured many to vote for him by spinning the illusion that there’s no difference between the two parties. Only now there’s a war in Iraq. Massive tax cuts for the wealthiest. Slashed public programs. Domestic spying. The Patriot Act. We’ve lost a war, a major city, and now we may have lost women’s reproductive rights. I have learned two lessons from this: ONE. Talk about splitting the Democratic party is nonsense. That would only ensure Republican dominance for the next...oh...generation? Two generations? Hello theocracy? Vote Democrat and vote often. TWO. Criticizing Democratic candidates for not chasing after the issues you’re interested in – choice, Iraq – is only talk. If you want the Dems to change the way they do things, you’ve got to become a Democrat. Join the party. Work on the campaigns of the people you agree with. If you’re an advocate of choice, make choice your “litmus test.” Support with financial help and time the candidates that support choice. Work against the candidates who are anti-abortion.
Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?