|
She started a little late, which works out well because I was late too.
For the DUers who don't remember, Ms. Buchanan, single mom raising three boys, was speaking at my college. And the progressives decided that it would be cool to show up and ask her a few tough-assed questions. So I got some info, showed up a little late, and sat next to some of my fellow progressives as she began.
She hasn't aged that well, and she was pretty irritated for a lot of it. She had a little of a hassle getting to the college I'm at, due to the windy as hell conditions tonight.
She began by talking in a very confusing manner about partial-birth abortion, saying that it's the only restriction ever passed on abortion since Roe V. Wade. She proceeded to expound, talking about the need for a comprehensive study on breast cancer + abortion links. (Note - most cancer societies claim there is no such link.)
The Q&A session was when shit began to heat up a little. She got a few neutral questions from people asking for clarification, then got into a shouting match with one dude who was talking about statements of oncologists (at one point, the dude yelled "Do you know what an oncologist IS?" which I thought was hilarious). She moved on to a few other questions, and then, after I had put my hand up for about a half hour or so (note -- I look like a fucking hippie. I was wearing a hooded jacket and my hair is really long) she called on me. My question, roughly verbatim, was:
I remember reading about Bill Clinton vetoing the partial-birth abortion congressional bill because it didn't make an exception for the life of the mother, like the current one. Do you feel it would have been right to change it providing an exception for the life of the mother to get restrictions on partial-birth abortions through?
You'll note that I was very polite and didn't give away my political orientation, which was my intention; had I prefaced my question with "Man, I really hate babies" I would have gotten a much different answer, in all likelihood.
I managed to force a straight answer out of her, which was basically "sort of, but I'm still right and it should still end up my way." This gave a lot of creedence to the slippery slope argument, in my mind; I now see what people mean a lot more, thanks to Bay Buchanan telling me in no uncertain terms that her goal was to fight like hell against abortion, no ifs ands or buts. She called the mother's health, essentially, a myth (which is kind of ridiculus, but hey, I just wanted to know about compromising).
There were a few notable locals there, such as the director of the local Planned Parenthood, and a LOT of pro-choicers. I'd estimate the ratio at this event (pumped hard by Right to Life) as 60% pro-choice, 40% pro-life.
The quote of the evening came from a guy who was asking a philosophical question; since, according to Bay Buchanan, many Planned Parenthoods are set up in poor neighborhoods, would it be better to give up the non-abortion services and have gun and liquor stores instead? Bay Buchanan said VERBATIM, and I swear to God I'm not making this up:
"I don't know of any gun stores in the inner city."
The person next to me (from my college Green party :-) ) proceeded to say "Has she ever been to Detroit?!"
Afterwards, while I was hoping for a warm reception with punch and cookies, we were basically told to get out so maintenance could take care of shit. As I was walking out, some people gave me some props on my question. A dude in a nice suit shook my hand and said that I should continue to use my brain. A few of the progressive student alliance kids gave me props, as well.
That's been my last two hours. Rock over London, Rock on Chicago.
Note -- I'm posting it in the lounge so we can avoid a flamewar. Mods, you can move it if you care enough.
-C
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
