Letters to the editor
Posted on Thursday, August 28, 2008
Republican smear campaign du jour
Once again Lucas Roebuck plays out the Republican smear campaign du jour. He should be more careful about calling people liars (August 21 ). I found much more information about Illinois abortion votes than Roebuck told us in just halfan-hour online with sources such as the Chicago Tribune, New York Times and a transcript of the Illinois Senate session, March 30, 2001. Either Roebuck didn't do his homework, or he thinks the end justifies the means, which is to mislead a public that doesn't understand the ins and outs of legal maneuvering and constitutional law.
Since 1975, Illinois law has contained explicit protections for babies that might survive an abortion, an extremely rare event occurring in less than 1 percent of U. S. abortions. Despite the existing law," born alive "bills were repeatedly introduced in the Illinois legislature. They could have affected the way courts interpreted the 1975 Illinois law.
The "born-alive "bills were always part of a package of bills. Provisions in the other bills contradicted Roe vs. Wade. A companion bill would allow legal action on behalf of the child against health-care providers. In other words, doctors could be sued for not taking extraordinary measures to save the lives of infants born so prematurely that they could not possibly survive. The Illinois State Medical Society opposed all these bills.
These packages of bills were unnecessary, unconstitutional and designed to trap legislators into votes that could be used against them later. In 2005, the Illinois legislature did pass a version of the "born alive "bill that added a provision that the law would not affect existing federal or state law regarding abortion. Both abortion opponents and pro-choice advocates supported this bill. The "born-alive "packages may have especially targeted Obama for their trap, as right-wing operatives have targeted so many charismatic, rising Democratic figures since John F. Kennedy. In 2004, Republican Alan Keyes moved from Maryland to Illinois to run against Obama for the U. S. Senate, using the "born-alive "issue. Keyes lost in a landslide. It is Roebuck, not Obama, who is playing fast and loose with the facts here. If Roebuck hates lies, he might study Congressman Dennis Kucinich's 35 articles of impeachment against George W. Bush for examples of the mendacity of our current administration. Articles I, II, III, IV, XXI XXX, and XXXII all refer to actions that are "misleading"or demonstrate "misrepresentation, " "fraudulent justification"and / or "manufacturing a false case. "I'm sure it's easier to use talking-point handouts from Karl Rove types. Let Roebuck prove he is really a Hatchet instead of another dull knife Rovians put to use every election so they won't have to run upon their failed domestic, economic and foreign policy platforms. Hurling slime is much easier than defending eight years of failed policies.
Larry Woodall / Springdale
Pastor's efforts worth the trouble
At the risk of being run out of town by some of my peers in your subscribing community, I would like to say "kudos "to Pastor Rick Warren for his presidential forum. The controversial Saddleback pastor left egg on the face of many (even some local pastors ) who had criticized his "stepping out of religious bounds"and poohpoohed his foray into discourse with such high profile politicians at a "house of worship. "I myself began the broadcast with a little skepticism and modest concern for the potential impact (positive or negative ) of such an event. My concerns were put to rest in the opening statement from Warren. He said," I believe in the separation of church and state, but I don't believe in the separation of faith and politics. "The American public got to know the candidates better in that short hour of casual, yet meaningful conversation than all the countless hours of previous and impending debates combined. What was most interesting to me was how Warren used his soft personality to punch in direct and challenging questions. With humility, he unashamedly pried open the very souls of these two men. Coming away from those two hours, the issue that mattered the most was addressed: what makes them tick. Both men appeared to be genuine people who want to make a difference in their country and world. But both also revealed drastic differences in moral absolutes when it came to issues like killing unborn babies, defending marriage and confronting evil. Many news agencies have tried to blur the lines between the candidates, but thanks to the candid questions of Pastor Rick Warren, there was little doubt where each man stood by the end of the night. Thank you, Pastor Warren, for helping me make up my mind, as I will now match the candidate's answers to God's Word before I vote. And shame on any pastor who has spent the past week bemoaning the "compromise"of the Saddleback pulpit. Before you stand back up in your own pulpit this week I must warn you: Jealousy doesn't look good in a suit. God bless America !
Brandon Champagne / Farmington
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online