h
Subject: Re: [Mike's Message] Using the Supreme Court to Scare Me Into
Voting for Gore
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 16:11:56 -0400
From: Nurev Ind Research <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike's Message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: 1
FYI _ Mike is Michael Moore of " Roger and Me " and " TV Nation " fame.
> Mike's Message wrote:
>
> August 9, 2000
>
> Dear friends,
>
> I have received a lot of mail in the last few weeks from people who have
> decided to vote for Al Gore out of fear. I can certainly understand this.
> Many fear that if Baby Bush is elected, a woman's right to choose would be
> eliminated, not to mention the other havoc he will create.
>
> I wrote a column on this very dilemma for grassroots.com (see below), but
> apparently quite of few of you missed it. I would like to reprint it here so
> you can read my thoughts about the Bush scare regarding the Supreme Court.
>
snip>
> Yours,
>
> Michael Moore
> www.theawfultruth.com
> www.michaelmoore.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Ain't Fallin' For That One Again
> Michael Moore
> Release: Tuesday, July 18, 2000
>
> I think the first time I remember hearing this political urban myth was in
> the 1976 presidential election. Somebody told me the reason I had to vote
> for Jimmy Carter was because if Gerald Ford was elected, women would lose
> their right to choose to have an abortion. Abortion had been legal for only
> three years at that point. It was considered a great victory, one we all
> wanted to support.
>
> So, I voted for Jimmy Carter -- and guess what? One of the things he did was
> to stop all abortions provided for women or wives in the armed services! He
> also stopped any further funding to birth control groups overseas that
> offered abortion as an alternative. And he ended all Medicaid payments for
> poor women in need of an abortion.
>
> I felt a bit abused. I mean, Gerry Ford had been pro-choice. His wife was an
> ardent supporter of women's rights. And it was a Nixon appointee to the
> Supreme Court -- Justice Blackmun -- that wrote the majority opinion making
> abortion legal. What was I thinking? (Other than that the Nixon Nightmare
> years had to come to an end! That, I correctly rationalized, was worth the
> vote for Carter.)
>
> Four years later, Democrats and liberals were going nuts over the
> possibility that Ronald Reagan might unseat Carter. Dire warnings were
> issued to all: If Reagan gets in, abortion will be illegal, period.
>
> Well, I didn't vote for Reagan OR Carter, Reagan got in, and then something
> strange happened: Abortion remained legal! Sure, Reagan built on Carter's
> abortion restrictions, but Roe v. Wade was still the law of the land when
> the Gipper rode off into the sunset eight years later.
>
> Yet Reagan had appointed plenty of wingnuts to the Supreme Court, so when
> the doomsayers in 1988 warned that George Bush would CERTAINLY send women
> back to the alleys to have illegal abortions, another bizarre thing happened
> -- Bush got elected, and ... four years later ... ABORTION WAS STILL LEGAL!
>
> But Bush did leave us with Clarence Thomas, so when the Democrats came to
> scare the bejeepers out of me with what Bush would do to a woman's right to
> choose if he got a second term, I decided to vote for Bill Clinton.
>
> So what's happened under our first feminist-man president?
>
> Perhaps Clinton misunderstood his mission: he was supposed to support a
> woman¹s right to choose, not his right to choose women. Roe v. Wade is still
> on the books (mainly because of the consistent and unwavering support from
> the Reagan-appointed Justice O'Connor, the Ford-appointed Justice Stevens,
> and the Bush-appointed Justice Souter! They have voted to uphold abortion
> rights every single time). But it is now twice as hard for a woman in
> America to obtain an abortion as it was when Clinton took office. The
> anti-abortion terrorists have been so successful in their campaign of
> violence against abortion clinics and doctors and hospitals who perform
> abortions that a woman can now get an abortion in only 14% of the counties
> in the United States. That's right. Terrorism has scored its first victory
> on U.S. soil by assassinating enough doctors and firebombing enough clinics
> so that no one wants to perform an abortion. So if you live in one of the
> 86% of counties where not a single doctor will do an abortion, let me ask
> you this: what good is a "right" to an abortion if you can't get one?
>
> The stunning thing about this virtual elimination of abortion in America is
> that it has occurred at a time when nearly 70% of the country supports some
> form of legal abortion. The terrorists have literally gotten away with
> murder -- with a pro-choice attorney general sitting in Washington, D.C.,
> doing damn little about it. About the only reason I voted for these clowns
> was because of this issue -- and where the hell have they been?
>
> Which brings us to Ralph Nader. Vice President Al Gore, on Meet the Press
> this week, told Tim Russert WHAT WOULD HAPPEN if George W. were elected
> president. Women would lose their right to have an abortion, Gore bellowed,
> with no equivocation and no hint of shame for what has happened on the
> Clinton/Gore watch.
>
> All the pundits -- and the Democrats -- tell us that a vote for Nader is a
> vote for Bush because all Ralph will end up doing is siphoning off votes
> that would have gone to Gore. This is their mantra:
>
> "IF BUSH IS ELECTED, HE WILL APPOINT JUSTICES TO THE SUPREME COURT AND THEY
> WILL DECLARE ABORTION ILLEGAL!"
>
> Well, I've fallen for this before and I ain't fallin' for it again. In fact,
> I will go so far as to say that George W. Bush, if for some reason he is
> magically elected, will NEVER do ANYTHING to make abortion illegal.
>
> Here's my proof:
>
> 1. To recap what I have already stated: Roe v. Wade was written by a
> Republican, and upheld for 27 years by Republicans. No Republican president
> has made abortion illegal, and none will this time around.
>
> 2. George W. is, first and only, a politician. For crying out loud, if 70%
> of the country favors legal abortion, trust me, that party boy is NEVER
> going to cook his goose on this issue. He is already moving to the center on
> abortion and has been doing so since the primaries. He wants to win. He
> already has the majority of women supporting him in the polls, in part
> because a lot of women are confident he will not upset this apple cart.
>
> 3. The New York Times two weeks ago did a study of Bush's court appointees
> in Texas and found that he did NOT appoint right-wing crazies, but rather
> moderates or moderate conservatives who have upheld legal abortion in Texas
> and struck down some cases that tried to put restrictions on a woman's right
> to choose.
>
> 4. Sometimes even conservatives end up accepting that the tide has turned
> against them. The most stunning example of this came last month when
> ultra-conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist insisted on writing the
> MAJORITY opinion for the court upholding the Miranda ruling that requires
> the police to inform an arrestee of his or her constitutional rights. Now,
> you know a guy like Rehnquist personally just hates forcing the police to
> read someone their rights. But in his decision keeping Miranda the law of
> the land, Rehnquist wrote that the Miranda rights are now "part of the
> American culture" and therefore should not be done away with. Even
> pro-Miranda liberals had never heard that line used by the Supreme Court in
> backing a decision, but it was, in essence, the truth. Reading someone their
> rights is now like apple pie -- and so is a woman's right to choose what to
> do if she should become pregnant. The overwhelming majority of Americans
> believe it a decision best left with a woman, her doctor, her God -- and
> it's nobody else's dang business. That, too, is part of the American
> culture. It's called privacy, and it's been around for over 200 years.
> Nobody, regardless of their political stripe, wants the politicians or the
> justices in their bedroom.
>
> So, this year, I'm not going to let the fearmongers scare me into voting
> against my conscience. And I'm not going to let the Democratic candidate for
> president cynically use this issue when he himself has served in D.C. for 8
> years allowing the right to get an abortion to be whittled away to near
> nothing.
>
> Plus, I believe the true Nader constituency out there is among the 100
> million nonvoters who have given up, thinking they no longer have a say in
> what really goes on in Washington. Gore shouldn't worry about Ralph taking
> votes from him. Rather he should think about what his administration with
> Bill Clinton has taken away from the women of this nation.
>
> Come November 7, I plan to enter the voting booth and vote not from fear,
> but from a desire to see this country returned to the people.
Dear Michael,
Allow me to respond to the above. First let me say that I have tremendous
admiration for your past work, and think you are genuinely funny, witty and
incisive. BUT, you are a Liberal and that is a problem in current politics.
Yes. Clinton and Gore are scumbags. But who put them in office? TWICE!
Liberals. Who defended him ( them ) from charges of treason, lying under oath,
lying right into our faces? Liberals. Who defended a man accused of forcible
rape by defending him and blaming the rape rape victim? You want to know who?
The National Organization for Women. Liberals. Who was it that elected,
supported, and paid for a war against a country that did absolutely nothing to
us. Liberals. Why? Because they were too stupid to recognize war propaganda
directed at them, and as a result had no qualms about killing
demonized civilians of whom they knew nothing. Compassionate war. Yikes! In
the end there was no genocide, no mass graves, and the people they " saved "
turned out to be racist heroin dealing murderers. In the meanwhile you
glorious saviors of humanity destroyed and delivered the independent country
of Yugoslavia into the maws of the New World Economic Order policed by the
US military.
Abortion is not important. Neither is Affirmative Action, Gun Control, Gays
In The Military, Death Penalty, Animal Rights, etc. These are not the reasons
for which elections are held, nor are they the reasons that the Rich see fit
to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on putting " their man " in the
Oval Office.
Power and Money! This is the name of the game. The Duopoly has the market
cornered on power and money because THEY know what the real point of elections
are about while the rest of the society are spinning their wheels over hot
button issues which are only important to certain interest groups, and serve
the political purpose of fracturing the Nation into bite sized pieces.
Keeping abortion legal IS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN PREVENTING THE NEXT GLOBALIST
FROM STARTING A WAR IN COLUMBIA. Nor is it more important than preventing
corporate capitalists from impoverishing hundreds of millions of the world's
people. AND, it is certainly not more important than preventing the capitalist
driven destruction of the biosphere.
These are the things a President can do, and focussing on abortion and women's
rights and gay rights and pet rights and gun owners' rights are UNBELIEVABLY
( but typically ) self-serving and self centered. These " issues " are well
crafted to separate Liberals and Conservatives from their critical faculties
AND ARE ALWAYS SUCCESSFUL!!!
The reason not to vote for Gore is NOT because he might, or might not appoint
a liberal Judge. The reason not to vote for Gore is because he is an Inter-
nationalist Corporatist. He is no different from his mirror image - Bush.
They are BOTH owned by Big Oil. They BOTH are Millionaires from Political
dynasties. They BOTH are not very bright. They BOTH will continue to serve the
Rich at the expense of everyone else.
IT HAS NEVER BEEN CLEARER. There is no difference between Democrats and
Republicans. If you vote for either, be honest. Do it because you are doing ok
and don't mind too much that almost every one else suffers from your decision.
Don't play as if saving abortion rights is the most important thing about
Presidential elections.
By the way. Either Party can nix a Supreme Court nominee. That is to say, it
takes BOTH parties to produce a Supreme Court Judge. The issue of who a
President puts on the Bench is bogus. It is exploited as an issue in order to
force the simple minded into a voting booth to vote AGAINST the other party.
Not for the purpose of expressing the right of a citizen of a democracy to
freely chose who will lead.
Joshua2
============ " It's the economy stupid." -- William J. Clinton =============
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
