Falwell and Dobson Traps…

Posted on Monday 25 September 2006

To me, the Values Voters Conference in Washington actually has clarified something for me. Jerry Falwell made a wise crack about Hillary Clinton’s candidacy for President.
“I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate. I hope she’s the candidate, because nothing will energize my constituency like Hillary Clinton. If Lucifer ran, he wouldn’t.”
In a later phone conversation, he clarified things.
"The statement about, ‘she would be a better candidate than Lucifer’ was totally tongue-in-cheek and totally meant as a joke and everybody knew in the building and laughed accordingly."
Ha Ha. Nothing like a little Prayer Breakfast humor. But he went on to say that Hillary’s Pro-Choice stance would energize and insure her demise with his constituency.

Venus Flytrap - Dionaea muscipulaThere’s a point in following this story that’s not about the idiocy of these guys. It’s about something else. This is a mammoth trap that has given our petty demogogues a lot of milage. The Roe versus Wade Decision was based on Rights. It established that abortion, under the United States Constitution, is a fundamental right, thereby subjecting all laws attempting to restrict it to the standard of strict scrutiny.

Rights are regulated by the Judicial Branch in this country – period. Labelling political candidates as Pro-Choice or Pro-Life is simply a trick to rally the Religious Right to vote based on one issue rather than on the political stand and integrity of candidates for the jobs they are running to fill. The Executive and the Congressional Branches should not be involved when Rights are at stake [today’s debate on habeas corpus excepted]. Even the distinction Pro-Life versus Pro-Choice is a trick. The right answer is Pro-Constitution and Pro-Bill_of_Rights. Maybe even Pro-American…

Candidates should answer questions about Rights in a monotonous way – by giving a lecture about our government and Rights. If asked about supporting Pro-Life appointees to the Judicial Branch, they should simply say that of course they would never make their decisions about a judicial candidate based on any single "issue" and shut up. If pressed, they should say it again. If pressed further, how about, "I’ve answered that one. Next question."

It’s not evasion. It’s the right answer. It’s not the business of Congress or the Executive. Maybe somewhere down the road, if enough people say it, the Falwell/Dobson "trick" will be exposed for what it is, a Venus Flytrap…

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.