Thursday, April 21, 2005

Note to David Brooks: I hope someone strangles you with an umbilical cord

He's not the most evil pundit on planet Earth(the caged deathmatch for that title has yet to take place), David Brooks holds a place close to my heart-each and every one of his columns sends me into blinding fits of rage. How can one man be so infuriating? Today he managed to plant blame for the impending clusterfuck over judicial nominees in one of the Christian conservatives' favorite receptacles-the womb.

Today's column features one of the most creative arguments I've heard for overturning Roe v. Wade since I started paying attention to politics. Sanctity of Life? Old news, my friend; apparently the Supreme Court's decision to legalize abortion created the basis for all the alienation and fanaticism that exists in politics today. Gee David, you don't think the deep divide between liberals and conservatives has anything to do with the fact that you and yours let Evangelical wackjobs more interested in bringing on the Rapture than helping those in need set your political agenda?

I can't believe I actually have to tell you this, Mr. Brooks, but my uterus has NOTHING to do with anyone but me, and it's disgusting that it took a Supreme Court decision to affirm that. Politics can, should, and will get better regardless of what women do with their bodies, and if anyone is trapped, it is the countless women and children who suffer illness and poverty because politicians who you say "love their institution" believe it is more important to reserve their seat on he Godmobile by proselytizing than ensure their constituents a decent quality of life.

The coming fight over the nuclear option isn't the result of one admittedly polarizing issue; it is an inevitable fight because Bill Frist and the Republican leadership are drunk with their own power. One of these "nominees that have majority support" is a woman even Alberto "waterboarding: it's not just a sport anymore" Gonzales thought was crazy.

David Brooks has every right to hold and voice his opinion on this and every other crazy idea he has. What continues to amaze me is that he does it for the New York Times and not somewhere more appropriate for his views, like a street corner in Mississippi.

For the record, I don't condone violence done to David Brooks with any type of medical detritus.

No comments: