The Deets

I received an email today from my good friends at the GOP (a friend of mine signed me up as a joke) about some misinformation the Dems have been spreading around.

Mr. Rexrode explains that the Dems have been spreading false claims about the rate of abortions over GWB’s time in office. This claim by the GOP is based on a FactCheck.org study published May 25th, 2005 (and modified on May 26th).

Notice below how Mr. Rexrode mentions that Howard Dean made this “false claim” as recently as this past Sunday. Now glance over at your calendar and note the date on Sunday (Okay, I’ll save you the work. It was the 22nd). How can one make false claims about something that was believed to be true until 3 days later?

By actually reading the factcheck.org column, it also becomes clear that Senators Kerry and Clinton were both relying on now discredited data.

So here’s the test. Now that new information has come to light, will Dems like Kerry, Dean, and Clinton continue to repeat the now debunked abortion statistics? I doubt it.

Compare that to the White House’s constant repetition of debunked information about WMDs, social security insolvency, or pollution, and you start to see where the real and truly damaging false claims are coming from.

Abortions rising under Bush? Not true. How that false claim came to be -and lives on.

“Recently, some Democrats are falsely claiming that abortions have increased during President Bush’s time in office. Not true. As this recent article from FactCheck.org points out, abortions have fallen under the Bush Administration.

FactCheck debunks the claim, made most recently by Howard Dean this past Sunday, and by Sens. Hillary Clinton and John Kerry in recent statements.

The report indicates those eager to criticize President Bush picked up on a claim based on incomplete and inaccurate data:

This claim is false. It’s based on an an opinion piece that used data from only 16 states. A study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute of 43 states found that abortions have actually decreased… The claim that abortions are rising again can be traced back to an opinion piece by Glen Harold Stassen, an ethics professor at Fuller Theological Seminary… Stassen’s broad conclusion wasn’t justified by the sketchy information he cited, however. Furthermore, a primary organization he cited specifically as a source for historical data now contradicts him, saying abortions have continued to decline since Bush took office.”

Wasn’t the justification for Bush’s wars basically, “We much destroy life in order to save it?” How is that different from stem cell research? Even as an apples to apples comparison, it looks hypocritical, but the average rational human would probably put more weight on the life of a living innocent human than embryonic cells (which happen to be killed every day by pro-life people using fertility clinics).

A little consistency would be nice.

Science, war and syntax“

No one can be confused about President Bush’s stand on government-sponsored stem-cell research, which he emphatically opposes. ‘I made it very clear to the Congress,’ he recently said, ‘that the use of federal money, taxpayers’ money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life is — I’m against that.’

And how does the president feel about using taxpayers’ money to promote war — an enterprise that undeniably destroys life? Didn’t he see the irony of his comment?

Stewart R. Perry, Wayzata”

Jackie Archbold does a great job breaking down the side-effects of coddling to people in the exurbs at the expense of the inner city in her May 22nd letter to the Editor.

A huge step backward

We have added yet another item to our ‘What Were They Thinking?’ list of Minnesota transportation issues: Drivers may not use the new toll lane on Interstate Hwy. 394 during nonrush hours.

So we’ve gone from an interstate system to a two-lane highway. This means longer drive times for those opposed to the sane lane being used as Lexus lanes, those unable to afford a transponder and those from out of town. It also means more emissions from congestion that had been eased by using the left lane at nonrush-hour times.

Add this to our list of other WWTT moments: hybrids not allowed to use the toll road without paying and the cutting of public transit routes.

We have taken a huge step backward. Aren’t people in charge even a bit embarrassed? I do applaud the few legislators who are trying to pass the hybrid measure (Rep. Frank Hornstein and Sen. Scott Dibble) and Sens. Gen Olson and Ann Rest for sponsoring a measure to reopen segments of I-394 to all traffic during off-peak hours. I only hope the rest will be embarrassed into following suit.

Jackie Archbold, Plymouth.”

Letters from readers: “Investing in families

In his commentary in the May 15 Star Tribune, Gov. Tim Pawlenty notes that ‘Minnesotans must spend nearly a third of the year working for the government before they start working for themselves and their families.’

His choice of words suggests that the time I spend ‘working for the government’ is of little benefit to me and my family. On the contrary, I view the taxes I pay as an investment in the community.

My family is better off for government services such as education, transportation, environmental protection, support systems for the needy, etc.

Of course I expect these services to be provided as efficiently as possible, but I make no distinction between what I get to keep and what I pay to support our community. I and my family benefit from both.

Doug Norris, Brooklyn Park.”

Well put:

The Top Ten Conservative Idiots, No. 197 - Democratic Underground: “George W. Bush lying lying lying warmongering warmongering warmongering
We mentioned this item in passing last week but it’s surely worth bringing up again - especially since most of the corporate media seem too scared to touch it. A secret British memo released last week reveals that George W. Bush was bending intelligence reports to fit his plan for invading Iraq, and also that the British and American leaders had already decided to invade, even while they were telling their governments and their public that they had not. Yes, according to Knight Ridder:

A highly classified British memo, leaked in the midst of Britain’s just-concluded election campaign, indicates that President Bush decided to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein by summer 2002 and was determined to ensure that U.S. intelligence data supported his policy.

The document, which summarizes a July 23, 2002, meeting of British Prime Minister Tony Blair with his top security advisers, reports on a visit to Washington by the head of Britain’s MI-6 intelligence service.

The visit took place while the Bush administration was still declaring to the American public that no decision had been made to go to war.

‘There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable,’ the MI-6 chief said at the meeting, according to the memo. ‘Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD,’ weapons of mass destruction.

The memo said ‘the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.’

So - lying to the American people? Lying to Congress? Sounds like an impeachable offense to me. Or maybe not - I mean, sure he lied to Congress, lied to the public, got us into a war which has killed almost 1600 American soldiers so far and countless thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, is bankrupting us with an unnecessary war and a military budget which will soon total more than the entire rest of the world combined, created thousands of new terrorists and turned Iraq into a breeding ground for more, and because of his lies and his policies, America is decidedly less safe…

…but hey - at least he didn’t get a blowjob, right?”

I wonder if Debbie Limke sees the irony in her statements now that they’re written down?

Minnesota Poll: Gas-tax support runs low: “‘I think gas prices are high enough the way it is,’ said Debbie Limke, 44, of Apple Valley, mother of three sons.

Higher pump prices have been especially tough on ‘people who have kids and are driving all over the place,’ Limke said. Roads do need improving, in her opinion, but ‘I think they should find another way to get the money.’”

Reid brings it to Bush, then apologizes? Come on. I suppose it wasn’t the most diplomatic thing to say, but it would have more political sting (and reinforce the direction of Bush’s polling numbers) if it wasn’t followed up with an immediate apology. He should have at least offered a clarification, “Oh did I say loser? I meant miseable failure.” Outside of the loser phrase, what’s not to like about his comments?

Friday, May 06, 2005
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

LESSON IN POLITICS: Reid calls president ‘loser’

By ERIN NEFF REVIEW-JOURNAL

In the course of a discussion on filibusters and Senate rules, Washington’s top Democrat gave the 60 juniors a lesson in partisan politics, particularly about the commander in chief. “The man’s father is a wonderful human being,” Reid said in response to a question about President Bush’s policies. “I think this guy is a loser.

“I think President Bush is doing a bad job,” he added to a handful of chuckles.

“He’s driving this country into bankruptcy,” Reid said, referring to the deficit. “He’s got us in this intractable war in Iraq where we now have about 1,600 American soldiers dead and another 15,000 injured.”

Republican National Communications Director Brian Jones issued a statement calling the senator’s comments “a sad development but not surprising from the leader of a party devoid of optimism, ideas or solutions to the issues people care about most.”

After the statement was released, Reid phoned the Review-Journal to acknowledge he thought he crossed the line.

“You know the president is in Europe, probably sleeping,” Reid said in an interview this afternoon. “But I called (Karl) Rove and apologized for what I said.”

It would be nice to see the FDA set their policies based on sound scientific evidence rather than bigoted policies like this:

CBS News | New Rules For Sperm Donors | May 6, 2005�02:31:33: “‘Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with HIV-positive prostitutes would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is not OK unless he’s been celibate for five years,’ said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in Alameda, California, that seeks gay sperm donors. “

Thank you, Father Dennis Dease, for clearly differentiating between a controvesial opinion that encourages debate of the issues of the day, and the hateful vile Ann Coulter spews.

Father Dease: Coulter talk tests controversial issues statement: “Perspectives differ, and as I stated earlier, to a certain extent we must leave the answer “to the eye of the beholder.â€? But the reports I have heard from people whose views I respect suggest that her performance went far beyond the bounds of what is commonly accepted as civil discourse. Although her presentation may have been meant as an “actâ€? or “shtickâ€? to entertain by provoking those who disagree, such behavior unfortunately contributes to the growing dark side of our culture — a disrespect for persons and their sincerely held beliefs. Such hateful speech vulgarizes our culture and goes against everything the University of St. Thomas stands for.”