repairing the damage, before roe

There’s an essay in the New York Times by Waldo Fielding, M.D. that’s currently making the rounds of the pro-choice blogs. Dr. Fielding is a retired gynecologist who worked in large urban hospitals in the days before Roe v. Wade. He witnessed firsthand the kinds of horrific things that women do to themselves when they can’t obtain a safe, legal abortion.

The worst case I saw, and one I hope no one else will ever have to face, was that of a nurse who was admitted with what looked like a partly delivered umbilical cord. Yet as soon as we examined her, we realized that what we thought was the cord was in fact part of her intestine, which had been hooked and torn by whatever implement had been used in the abortion. It took six hours of surgery to remove the infected uterus and ovaries and repair the part of the bowel that was still functional.

*string of capital vowels and consonants indicating incoherent horror*

This is something that anti-choice people either conveniently forget, or lie outright about: The re-illegalization of abortion will do nothing to stop abortion. All it will do is remove the sterile environments and knowledgable doctors from the equation, leading to nightmare scenarios like that one.

The best way to stop abortion is comprehensive sexual education to young people; treating sexuality like the natural biological process that it is, instead of something dirty, shameful, and disgusting; and the widespread distribution and easy access of birth control. Funny how anti-choicers are so opposed to that, innit?

Oh wait, I didn’t mean to say “funny”. I meant to say ”frustrating, counterproductive, and rage-inducing”.

stop saying “gummi” so much!

After the recent US re-legalization of absinthe, NYC restaurant Tailor spent months tinkering with the absinthe:gelatin:sugar ratio to get a gummi bear that’s boozy enough to be worthy of the infamous liqeur. The end result packs a pretty walloping 85% absinthe punch.

They’re exclusive to Tailor, meaning you can’t yet walk into a 7-11 and purchase a bag of absinthe gummi bears, but maybe one day!

game over, man! GAME OVER!!

It’s all over but the shouting for the Democratic primary. Hillary hasn’t conceded yet, and that wacko Terry McAuliffe is still not giving up, but she’s through. She’s nosing around for the veep slot, which I have mixed feelings about.

On one hand, it would do a lot for party unity. On the other hand, FUCK HILLARY CLINTON.

Mind you, I’m not an Obama Zombie. Kucinich was my first choice, although that was never anything more than a pipe dream. And I would have voted for Edwards, but he dropped out before Super Tuesday. I was literally undecided until the night before my state’s primary. It’s been a very rancorous primary season though, and I kind of hate the Clintons right now. Which is weird, because a few years ago Clinton/Obama was my dream ticket. Literally, in the sense that I never would have thought there was a chance it would actually really happen.

Obama has two choices:

1. He puts Hillary on the ticket to placate her rabid supporters that are threatening to not vote or vote for McCain. Although I have a feeling most of that is just sour grapes and they wouldn’t actually go through with it. If they do… you know that saying “People get the government they deserve”? Those idiots would deserve a 3rd Bush term. Unfortunately, I’d have to suffer through it with them–or move to Canada–so I’d rather not see it happen.
2. He doesn’t put her on the ticket, because the very mention of the name “Clinton”–any Clinton–makes the conservative base start foaming at the mouth, and it’s the one thing that could totally unite the opposition.

He needs to figure out which choice would help or hurt more.

The veep nominee is supposed to provide balance, bring something to the ticket that the presidential nominee lacks. For the Democrats, that’s usually being a Southerner. Sadly, Edwards has said he would pass on the VP position this time around. And I don’t think Hillary can call herself a Southerner, although she lived in Arkansas for many years. But some pundits say Obama needs someone who’s perceived as being tougher and more experienced than he is, and Hillary could certainly fill that description.

A lot to ponder. What do you think?

Warning: If you’re one of those people who still thinks Hillary can lock up the presidential nomination… well, you’re entitled to your opinion, but I will probably mock you for it.