Saturday, October 01, 2005


In Defense of Bill Bennett

During the "Morning in America" radio talk show hosted by former Education Secretary and Drug Czar-turned radio talk show host Dr. William Bennett, the following exchange took place during the last segment on Wednesday 28th:

CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.

BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?

CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.

BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.

CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.

BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --

CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.

BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.

Predictably, the left took one sentence (But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down.), out of context to paint Dr. Bennett as some knuckle-dragging Nearderthal racist who wants to exterminate blacks.

After getting home from work Thursday morning, I happen to come across a CNN segment dealing with the story during my morning ritual of T.V. channel surfing. And guess who they had on to give his view on the matter? Al Sharpton. And of course, Mr. Sharpton (I refuse to call him Reverend) railed about how racist Bennett's comments were. But there was nothing racist about them. All Dr. Bennett was doing was drawing a hypothetical sceanario following the twisted logic of the "abortion lowers crime" crowd and said that if we were to "abort every black baby in this country and your crime would rate would go down." And you know what? Bennett's right. If we were to follow the aforementioned sick logic, the crime rate WOULD go down if we were to abort every black baby. That's right! In proportion to population, the crime rate amongst blacks is the highest in the country with black on black crime having the highest per capita crime rate and black on white having the second. Where is Shapton's outrage (or Jaaaaaaaaaaacksonnnn's, or Mfume's, or Maxine Waters' etc. for that matter) over that fact? Where is their outrage over the fact that about one third of the unborn children slaughtered every year in abortuaries in this country are black when blacks make up only 10-12% of the population? No wonder black pro-life leaders call legal abortion genocide. And why in the hell doesn't any of the info-babes (Thank you Rush) or empty suits in the liberal media ask them that question? But we already know why they don't ask those questions, don't we? Rich Lowery, editor of National Review tried getting a straight answer from Democrat strategist Michael Brown (a black man himself) on the question of blacks and abortion while filling in for Sean Hannity on Hannity and Colmes and Brown danced a Bojanglesque jig around that question.

The fact of the matter is this: the so-called black civil rights leaders have become the Uncle Toms doing the bidding of the white liberal slave master. And legal abortion, as well as keeping as many blacks as possible a permanent underclass, is foundational to the white liberal ideology. It's that simple, boys and girls.

Just as I thought things couldn't get worse...well...they got worse. On my way home from work Wednesday morning, I hear local (San Diego) talk show host Rick Roberts lambasting Bennett for his comments. Those of you who listen to Michael Savage are familiar with Rick Roberts because he often fills in in Savage's absence. So Roberts is no liberal by any stretch. In fact, I like him. He has been a great force for good in the San Diego community. He has done the Lord's work, so to speak, on championing the cause of keeping the Cross/War Memorial on Mount Soledad. He has also been tireless in his efforts to draw attention to problem of our porous southern border. I've met him in person and have talked to him on the air several times when he was previously with a different San Diego radio station. So, listening to him go after Bennett the way he did was a real disappointment (not to mention a shock) to say the least when he should have been sticking up for him.

But even worse than that was the White House and RNC chairman Ken Mehlman joining the criticism of Bennett chorus, calling his remarks "regrettable and inappropriate." Of all people, they should know better. They know Bill Bennett. They know he is not a racist. They know that he is a stand-up guy. They should have at least given him the benefit of the doubt and checked with him before joining in on the criticism. Of all people, they should know that the left has made a cottage industry out of twisting the statements of conservatives out of context for political purposes.

I would like to say that I am surprised by this, but unfortunately, I am not at all surprised by it. The present republican leadership and this administration is so terrified in the face of any pressure of these race-baiting thugs that they are willing to sacrifice even a staunch ally like Bill Bennett to appease them. If I were Dr. Bennett, I would be offended by this.

Setting a "new tone in Washington" was one of the pillars of the Bush presidential campaign. Memo to the President: if you want to set a new tone in Washington, it's real simple. Cut the B.S. That'll set a new tone in Washington!

You can start cutting the B.S. by denouncing those "race-pushing poverty pimps" (thank you J.C. Watts) who do nothing but cash in on the misery of those whom they claim to speak for and who do everything in their power to bring about your political destruction, not those who go to the matt defending your policies like Bill Bennett {1} when Bennett did nothing wrong to warrant any criticism.


{1} In fact, Bill Bennett, like the rest of talk radio, has been far more articulate in defending Bush policies than anyone in the administration has.


<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?