You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Fran Eaton' category.
Fran Eaton, Illinois Review’s editor, picks up on a speculative post by fellow conservative partisan and her “good friend” Joyce Morrison in a feebly attempt to “debunk” global warming.
You see, oceanographers discovered a series of underwater volcanoes 2 1/2 miles below the Arctic Ocean. They are so deep in fact that these cracks in the earth don’t behave like their counterparts on land because the herculean water pressure distorts lava and gas bubbles and even prevents steam from forming.
Now, one who doesn’t know much about vulcanology and oceanography might leave it to scientists to describe the processes at work here. And indeed, the researchers studying these deep-sea volcanoes depict an alien world of oddly shaped stones and shards of glass-like rock.
To her credit, Ms. Eaton does indeed briefly quote the Science Daily article written about the study.
But she and her good friend Ms. Morrison then jump to a completely illogical and unfounded conclusion that isn’t even mentioned in the article at all: that these few volcanoes, 2 1/2 miles under the ocean surface, might have something to do with the melting polar ice cap.
Is carbon dioxide released in a volcanic eruption? Sure. Just as it has been throughout the earth’s history — but the recent global warming temp spike has happened much more quickly than anything found in any geologic record. Thus it is illogical to think that one volcano (or even three, as in this case) would be the cause for the sudden worldwide jump in temperature seen in the past century-plus.
Is lava hot? You bet. Scientists studying volcanoes have died because magma has burned them to death. It’s real hot stuff. But is the lava produced by three volcanoes which are located 2 1/2 miles underwater going to be hot enough to melt polar ice from Russia to Alaska to Canada to Greenland? No, it’s not — for the same reason that the underwater volcanoes near Hawaii don’t raise the air temperature on those tropical islands. It’s just too deep.
Finally, logic would dictate that if these volcanoes were causing the Arctic ice to melt, then the Antarctic ice would not be melting due to a lack of magic volcanoes. Sadly for this myopic partisan duo of conservativedom, the Antarctic ice is also melting quite rapidly — with entire sheets of ice breaking off the southern continent and floating away to melt. (Such vast quantities of freshwater suddenly melting into saltwater are very likely to disrupt ocean patterns which have stabilized the global climate for millenia, mind you, but far be it from this dynamic duo to care about such things when there’s a funky partisan yarn to spin.)
Maybe Fran and Joyce read that creative Science Daily headline (”Fire Under Arctic Ice: Volcanoes Have Been Blowing Their Tops In The Deep“) and got all hot and bothered thinking they had found the cure for what ails their fellow partisan ostriches who just need to find that one last miracle shred of infopimping that can be twisted just so in order to convince the rest of the globe that reality isn’t really real…
Sadly, they have failed in that regard.
The other day political journalist Rich Miller noted that Illinois Review editor Fran Eaton was violating copyright laws by posting subscriber’s only material he had written for Capitol Fax. Today, she does the same by copying + pasting an entire Illinois Times article.
Even more interesting, Ms. Eaton labels the fact-based article about Illinois conservatives’ efforts to demonize Sen. Barack Obama (and, in particular, infopimp crass distortions about his church and his faith) “amazing” and “entertaining” as if it was somehow inaccurate.
In fact, the article has all the stock conserv-o-partisan players — Ms. Eaton, Dave Smith of the Illinois anti-Family Institute, Jill Stanek of “Debby Does…” fame, and a host more. It connects the dots on the history of Obama opposition from these comrades and also points to the many ways they are willing to twist and distort his words and the words of those with whom they like to tar and feather him as they try to advance their conservative agenda while desperately trying tearing him down any way they can.
Did Ms. Eaton forget that she herself wrote a post decrying Sen. Obama’s abiding faith and how she considers his faith dangerous to the conservative agenda? Other times, she has simply called Sen. Obama “dangerous” not because he actually is but because of her partisan-tinged misunderstandings of his church’s tenets. Yet here, in her post copying an article about her repeated partisan attempts at sliming Sen. Obama, she claims to be “humble”.
Humble? Ms. Eaton has been systematically info-pimping her schlock for well over a year.
As we saw with Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004, conserv-o-partisans are avoiding the high negatives of their failed policies by attacking the Democratic candidate’s strongest attributes. In 2000, we got lies from George Bush wherein he falsely claimed Al Gore said he invented the Internet, etc. VP Gore of course never said that, but it didn’t stop then-candidate Bush from info-pimping this and similar lies in an effort to undermine Gore’s credibility and whitewash then-Gov. Bush’s own lacking credibility. Same in 2004 in which veterans who never served with Kerry (and even a few who had, despite the fact they sung a different, completely opposite tune before 2004) bald-faced lying about Sen. Kerry’s time in Vietnam.
Now, circa 2008, we have these myopic, hollow attacks on Sen. Obama’s former pastor, the hard truths to which his pastor has borne witnessed, his fellow church congregants and even Obama’s fundamental Christian faith which guides him each and every day…
But hey, at least we’re not talking about the effect of conservatives’ failed policies on the economy, our international standing, and more.
Update: Ill Review commenter “Marriage Defender” exclaims:
The Illinois Times is a left-wing Christian hating rag!
What a coinky-dink! I’ve repeatedly explained how Fran Eaton and other conserv-o-partisans write their own Christian hating screeds at that “right-wing rag” known as Illinois Review, among others. (Of course, one has to rely on those same partisans’ definition of “anti-Christian” in order to discuss such things….)
Be forewarned, this is as about Inside Baseball as you can get.
Yesterday I posted on the whiney crybabies over at Illinois Review crabbing because their guy Jim Oberweis was the butt of a Capitol Fax joke.
CapFax is published by long-time Illinois political journalist Rich Miller. Ill Review is published by long-time Illinois conservative activist and former Alan Keyes worker Fran Eaton.
Ms. Eaton received a call and was, somehow/someway, forwarded copyrighted and subscription-protected material from yesterday’s “Subscriber’s Only” CapFax post which was full of April Fool’s Day jokes. She proceeded to re-publish that Subscriber’s Only material. I’ve already noted just how whiney and myopic her rant about one joke in particular was.
Mr. Miller later saw this post and noted that Ms. Eaton is violating copyright laws by repeating “Subscriber’s Only” material on the Ill Review.
Ms. Eaton did nothing for her case by earlier admitting she took the material out of context in the first place and had not seen the rest of that humorous post which made fun of Democrats.
Of course, this isn’t the first time (and likely won’t be the last) that Ms. Eaton has jumped the gun and hopped off against a perceived opponent without all the facts. Rhetorical myopia seems to be a routine problem for her and her fellow Reviewers, in fact.
What a bunch of whiney babies.
In her feigned outrage about an April Fool’s Day joke, publisher Fran Eaton of the Illinois Review sarcastically notes that Rich Miller “prides himself at being so politically and journalistically objective”. She then proceeds to crab about a little joke just because it comes at the expense of one of her uber-conservative heroes completely ignoring the rest of what Mr. Miller posted today.
Regarding Mr. Miller’s objectivity, it’s interesting to note that turnabout is indeed fair play with him given that he also posted Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s goofy looking high school photo and it turned into a Question of the Day designed to encourage snark galore at that Democrat’s expense.
And here we thought, according to Ms. Eaton’s fellow Ill Review contributor George Dienhart, that Illinois Review was full of jokesters who enjoyed poking fun at people.
Apparently they’re so done with being court jesters.
United States Constitution, Amendment IV, 1791:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
(Keep in mind that part about “probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”)
Arch noted yesterday — with tongue planted firmly in cheek — that according to Illinois Review’s analysis of Congressman Bill Foster’s first vote in Congress we are, apparently, all going to die.
Well, yes, we eventually will all die. But not because of Bill Foster’s vote to uphold the rule of law and honor the Constitution.
The very interesting thing here is that while the final vote on the FISA matter had a comfortable margin, the procedural vote before it passed by a single vote. Rep. Foster provided that margin by replacing a GOP vote (Speaker Hastert’s) against our Constitution with a Dem vote in favor of our founding document.
It’s the least we Americans should expect of our Congressmen.
Curious then that Fran Eaton would get hopping mad that Rep. Foster voted to uphold our 4th Amendment rights… except when you realize that it is Ms. Eaton’s idol, conservative Pres. Bush, who wanted to violate our 4A rights.
Ms. Eaton regurgitates:
Bill Foster is already playing partisan politics with America’s national security. In a weak attempt to distract voters from the Democrats’ negligence to renew the Protect America Act, Foster voted in lock-step with the liberal Democrat leadership to fund duplicitous pet projects over critical human intelligence programs.
Her own Ill Review commenters put her squealing in perspective…
From “GB“:
Remember that Tim Johnson down in the 15th also voted to block this FISA bill. Is he, too, guilty of “partisan votes that compromise America’s national security”? Does he, too aid and abet terror as you are insinuating? No American wants to make this country less safe; stop trying to always assume moral high ground with inflammatory language, a poor reflection of the actual issue at hand, and little room for dissent. When you decry partisan bickering, yet you capitulate to the same, it speaks volumes about your intentions as well.
From “raz60115“:
Gotta disagree with the premise of the post.
The bill had nothing to do with national security. The telecoms have current immunity to cooperate with the nosy feds. The bill had everything to do with retroactive immunity for cooperating with the feds while the feds admittedly broke the FISA law.
Foster’s vote was a vote for the rule of law; the partisans here are trying to put illegal behavior, which the administration admits to, beyond judicial accountability and review.
And, from “TheReallyRightGuy“:
This is a totally ridiculous issue. We’re never going to be trusted by the American people until we get beyond fear mongering and offer concrete principles and benefits.
Precisely. Although, to be sure, the one thing these commenters didn’t point out to Ms. Eaton is that the President’s illegal wiretapping activity originally had nothing to do with combatting terrorism (that was an excuse they came up with after cynically using the Sept. 11th attacks for partisan gain).
You see, this so-called “conservative” Administration approached the telcos with the illegal domestic wiretapping program seven months before Sept. 11th (in other words, only three months after Bush took office). (h/t georgia10)
Why is it illegal? Remember that last part of the 4th Amendment I told you to keep in mind? What the Bush Administration wanted AT&T, Qwest and other Big Telcos to do was simply scoop up any and all communications without warrant, without probable cause, without particular description of elements to be seized, etc. In other words, President Bush literally wants to be a Peeping Tom on every single American citizen.
Only Qwest refused, based wisely on the 4th Amendment, and they now have a very good case suggesting that the Bush Administration retaliated against them by causing hardships for the business enterprise (apparently rank partisanship trumps even loyalty to Big Business).
…And that case (and a few other related court cases) leads to my favorite comment from the lemming side of the Ill Review aisle. It takes a special breed of uber-partisan to roll a few con red herrings all into one, so Pete Speer takes the cake with his rant against the Dems and those evil(-til-you-need-one) trial lawyers:
Bill [Foster] will get his just reward — from the Trial Lawyers Association. As will the Democrat [sic] House Campaign Committee.
Truly strange that the cons would somehow spin their fight to dismantle the 4th Amendment into a battle against not after-the-fact terrorists but instead against … lawyers.
Conservative partisan and former Alan Keyes for Senate worker Fran Eaton is certainly entitled to her opinions and her version of values, just as much as the rest of us over here in the mainstream are free to point out the failings of her so-called “conservative” values (just look at how well Pres. Bush’s conservatism has “worked” for America).
But, lately Ms. Eaton has decided to simply flat-out lie in order to promote opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment (an odd topic to lie about, eh). She’s even dragged Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg into her lies by outright making things up about what Just. Ginsburg said regarding ERA.
And ArchPundit has been calling her out on those lies with gusto. For whatever reason, Ms. Eaton feels it necessary to lie in order to advance her conservative opinions. Sadly, the Southtown Star continues to give her a corporate-media forum in which to do it.
Why does anyone still believe anything Ms. Eaton says? More troubling, why does the Sun Times News Group give her lies a patina of credibility by letting her write in their paper?
Shame on both of them.
Shorter Fran Eaton: Barack Obama attends a historically black church. This church’s pastor has some daughters who run a magazine. That magazine published by the daughters of the pastor of the church that Sen. Obama attends gives out awards to those who have helped the downtrodden — historically black communities across the country and black peoples around the world. Last year, one of those awards was given to Louis Farrakhan because of his and his organizations’ dedication to rehabilitating and improving the plight of ex-convicts.
Therefore, Sen. Obama is evil. Oh, and don’t forget that he goes to a “black” church.
The logic is… impeccable (not).
(And did she ever mention Sen. Obama attends a “black” church? And Farrakhan has made anti-Semitic remarks? Might’ve skipped that last one. Remember: Obama, Farrakhan. See how easy that is to figure out? Obama… Farrakhan… … … Black…)
–
In the recent past, Ms. Eaton has whined that she’s simply expressing her opinion that Sen. Obama is “hypocritical” when it comes to his church. That’s a far cry from her first few acid-tongued posts declaring that Sen. Obama’s Christian church was “racist” and “black supremacists” and “black separatists” simply because they devote much of their Christian charity and compassion to those in the black community who may be in need.
Recall that Ms. Eaton is editor of a conservative blog site which proudly promoted the notion that Chinese people eat babies; complete with sweet-n-sour sauce.
Regardless of whether she’s being soft or acidic in her myopia, myopia it is. The entirety of her premise that Sen. Obama’s Christian church is somehow “bad” and that he is somehow “hypocritical” is based on her own ignorance of the history African American Christianity in this country and her own misreadings of Trinity United Church of Christ’s tenets related to liberation, compassion, charity and community. (Oh, and her disdain for people who dislike her hero, George W. Bush, crossed with a deeply partisan loathing for Sen. Obama himself — to be expected from a former campaigner for Alan Keyes for Senate, Illinois edition.) The intertwined network of conservative partisan media has helped her efforts at promoting this ignorant misinterpretation of basic information. (This wouldn’t be the first time Ms. Eaton proved to be ignorant and apparently willfuly misinformed, nor the second, nor the third, nor the… you get the idea.)
Now that her original, anti-Christian premises have been thoroughly and repeatedly refuted … she’s taken to regurgitating the latest limp lament from conservative partisans that Sen. Obama is evil because he is someone who “associates with someone who associates with someone who associates with someone who likes Farrakhan…“
It’s Six Degrees of Louis Farrakhan, and the cons are running with it.
Burt Prelutsky of Pajamas Media tried to spin this tangential, guilt-by-association meme a few days ago and local anti-Obama con John Ruberry spit that same baloney back up shortly thereafter. In a much more widely read forum, Richard “Unity, Schmunity” Cohen decided a day later to follow suit by playing the Six Degrees game in the Washington Post. (Keep in mind that, although Republican, Sec. Cohen worked in Bill Clinton’s Administration and is now part of the hypothetical “Unity ‘08″ effort which may culminate in a presidential campaign by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg — more on that in a bit post is here. Either or both of those tidbits may explain his desire to suckerpunch Obama as he did.)
Are these people all really so arrogant as to think that if they simply say something often enough that people will buy it, even if it has no actual import because the connections are so weak?
Sen. Obama attends the church, but that’s the extent of the connection…
The magazine is published by the church’s pastor’s daughters, yes, but Sen. Obama does not work for the publication.
The magazine gives out the annual award, yes, but Sen. Obama does not decide who should be nominated for the award nor decide who it should ultimately be given to.
He didn’t even hand out the award and wasn’t even in the same room (maybe not even in the same city) when it was given out.
Heck, even darling of the right Sen. Joe Lieberman (who left the Democratic Party and has recently gone about endorsing Republican candidates) would somehow be “more” guilty then Sen. Obama in this hackneyed guilt-by-assocation game since Sen. Lieberman told us he had respect for Farrakhan and would like to meet and talk with him during the 2000 presidential race.
Maybe the con-partisans thought, by laying this groundwork now, they could peel Jewish support away from the Dems if Sen. Obama should earn the nomination. If so, that effort may have been abjectly futile as this week many Jewish national leaders came out strongly against the vicious, racist, bigoted smears being spread about Sen. Obama, his upbringing and his faith.
But, for whatever reason (narrow-minded partisanship, dislike for his values, disagreement with his record, or even, sadly, perhaps some latent sense of racism) it is clear that these partisan conservatives loathe the very idea of Senator Obama as President Obama. Based on these people’s pure, unadulterated hate for him they’re willing to play the fool, writing and publicizing utter nonsense, to try and tarnish him somehow.
Using their exact same logic, each of these people is guilty of the same sorts of “bad” associations.
Take Ms. Eaton for example…
Ms. Eaton worked for Alan Keyes’ Senate run as an out-of-state carpetbagger. Alan Keyes is a staunch conservative who hates gay people, even going so far as to very publicly tongue-lash and ostracize his own gay daughter.
Before her career as a partisan, Ms. Eaton also went to college at Missouri Baptist University.
Like Alan Keyes, there’s another conservative fellow out there named Rev. Fred Phelps who despises gay people. Plus, Mr. Phelps leads Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas, the state next to Missouri (where Ms. Eaton went to a Baptist college). In fact, Mr. Phelps is so adamantly against gay people that he has led his congregation to protest military funerals because those soldiers defend America and there are gay people living in America.
Therefore, obviously, Ms. Eaton hates gay people and would protest at military funerals to prove it, no matter what she says. (Given the similarities between her and Mr. Phelps, one can easily ignore what she says since she’s clearly in the wrong anyway.)
Of course, the above is purely for demonstration purposes only. I take Ms. Eaton at her word when she says she rejects the Phelps-brand of rabid and vile hate. I also don’t think she’s racist — at least not outwardly so. But, from the pattern of her writing on this and other topics, she is clearly vacuous and ill-informed with little ambition to actually learn anything new, especially if it may counter her narrow, partisan view of the world. But, using Ms. Eaton’s own brand of cracker jack logic and guilt-by-association, it’s really very easy (and very silly) to prove just how “__insert_synonym_for_’bad’_here__” she really is.
….What’s next? TIME Magazine conservative columnists and CNN conservative guests discussing whether or not Sen. Obama picked his nose in kindergarten and how that clearly demonstrates he hates kittens and puppies?
Well, maybe that thought is too ridiculous, eh? Just remember: Obama, Farrakhan. All you need to do is say the two names. C’mon: Obama, Farrakhan.
Obama…
Farrakhan…
…
…
Black…
PS: Yes, Sen. Obama has repudiated Farrakhan’s past spiteful remarks.
Boo hoo.
Illinois Review editor Fran Eaton is rather upset that her bud John Bambenek is again being pilloried as a fool for his incredibly dense lack of reasoning when it comes to the application of electoral law. For some reason her dour mood has led her to pull a completely idiotic Potemkin argument out of her cracker jack box of irrational rants by suggesting that the American folks over at Daily Kos must be overly violent due to … video games.
What?!
I don’t take kindly to partisan attacks, least of all partisan attacks on people’s faith (or even their atheism should that be their choice in our free society). I’ve written a number of times about crass, hypocritical smears coming from the ill-informed editor of the conservative blog Illinois Review, Fran Eaton, a long-time and well-documented Obama hater and former Alan Keyes campaigner.
Ms. Eaton is hardly alone in her partisan, anti-Christian zeal.
As Ms. Eaton’s quest to tar and feather Sen. Obama’s fellow Christians at his home congregation, Trinity United Church of Christ, has progressed and, indeed, mushroomed in recent days I’ve been compelled to respond multiple times (here and here) in the past week. Earlier posts criticizing Ms. Eaton’s anti-Christian screeds have also appeared here, here, here, here, and even here. (She’s been at it a while and seems quite proud of the fact she’s been able to pull the wool over so many reporters’ and interviewers’ eyes. Go figure.)
Ms. Eaton, unfortunately for us honest Americans, is far from the only partisan conservative to have engaged in this bizarrely anti-Christian, twisted malice against Sen. Obama’s faith and church. There have been TV and radio segments by conservative talking heads; countless deceptive postings at conservative blogs and websites; “mainstream” reports questioning Trinity United Church of Christ in legacy media such as CNN, the Chicago Tribune and USA Today; and, increasingly, chain emails peddling lie after lie about Sen. Obama’s faith circulated nationwide.
Now, as these attacks have grown ever wider and ever more false and deceptive (a pattern having all the appearances of being deliberate and well-calibrated), the general minister and president of Sen. Obama’s very denomination, the United Church of Christ, has spoken out against the smear campaign.
According to an article on the UCC’s own website, the Rev. John H. Thomas (General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ) denounced the cons’ fallacies as “absurd, mean-spirited and politically motivated.”
Here is more from that 1/11/08 article by J. Bennett Guess on UCC.org:
Thomas denounces smear campaign against UCC’s largest congregation
Written by J. Bennett Guess
January 11, 2008
A ramped-up smear campaign against the UCC’s largest congregation and U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s home church — Trinity UCC in Chicago — has raised the ire of the Rev. John H. Thomas, the UCC’s general minister and president, who called the e-mail-driven claims “absurd, mean-spirited and politically motivated.”“Our national offices in Cleveland, as well as other settings of the UCC, have been forwarded countless e-mails that obviously derive from a similar source,” Thomas said. “They contain misleading statements obviously meant to undermine the integrity of one of our most vibrant, mission-driven congregations.”
Thomas said, while it’s not his intent to come to the aid of Obama or any presidential candidate, he does feel it’s imperative that “absurd, mean-spirited and politically-motivated attacks against one of our UCC churches be challenged forthrightly.”
Obama, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, has been a member of Trinity UCC for 20 years.
Since Obama won the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3, a flurry of e-mail messages with identical language and sentiment began circulating across the internet, claiming that Trinity UCC was a “racist” congregation because of its long-stated church motto: “Unashamedly Black, Unapologetically Christian.”
“Trinity UCC is rooted in and proud of its Afrocentric heritage,” Thomas said. “This is no different than the hundreds of UCC churches from the German Evangelical and Reformed stream that continue to own and celebrate their German heritage, insisting on annual sausage and sauerkraut dinners and singing Stille Nacht on Christmas Eve. Recognizing and celebrating our distinctive racial-ethnic heritages, cultures, languages and customs are what make us unique as a united and uniting denomination.”
While Trinity UCC is predominately African American, it does include and welcome non-Black members. The Rev. Jane Fisler-Hoffman, Illinois Conference Minister, who is white, has been a member of the congregation for years.
“Trinity is a destination church for many members of the UCC, a multi-racial, multi-cultural denomination that is largely Caucasian,” Thomas pointed out. “When in Chicago, many UCC members flock to Trinity to share in and learn from its vibrant ministries, dynamic worship and justice-minded membership. Contrary to the claims made in these hateful emails, UCC members know Trinity to be one of the most welcoming, hospitable and generous congregations in our denomination.” [...]
While the circulating emails are written to appear as if they are coming from a groundswell of persons, with different names and email addresses, each uses nearly identical language, makes similar claims and even manages to make the same mistakes. For example, each makes introductory reference to “Trinity Church of Christ” instead of “Trinity United Church of Christ.”
“It’s clear that someone is using the internet to give the appearance of widespread concern and, thus, to hopefully create traction for this absurd story,” Thomas said.
About the UCC
Formed by name in 1957 by the union of the Congregational Christian Churches in America and the [German] Evangelical and Reformed Church, the UCC’s roots in American history are deep. Eleven signers of the Declaration of Independence were from UCC traditions, and a full 10 percent of present-day UCC congregations were formed prior to 1776.
Many UCC churches trace their founding to the early 1600s, when the Pilgrims and Puritans first came to America. These Congregationalists, as they became known, sought religious independence from persecuting political authorities in Europe. They believed firmly in local church autonomy, covenantal church life, personal piety and the priesthood of all believers.
Today, the UCC holds firmly to these early religious tenets. Often recognized for its historical and contemporary social justice commitments, its present-day approach to worship, however, might be considered traditional by most standards. [...]
Known for arriving early on social justice issues, the church’s history includes being the first to practice democracy in church governance (1630), the first to ordain an African-American pastor (1785), the first to ordain a woman (1853), the first to ordain an openly gay man (1972), and the first to support same-gender marriage equality (2005).
In 1773, Old South UCC in Boston helped inspire the Boston Tea Party and, in 1777, Old Zion Reformed UCC in Allentown, Pa., hid the Liberty Bell from occupying British forces.
Hundreds of schools including Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth, Howard, Fisk, Wellesley, Smith and Oberlin owe their beginnings to the UCC. The UCC’s publishing company, The Pilgrim Press, is the oldest publisher of books in North America. [...]
The article also describes the history of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ, growing from beginnings in the 1960s with about 80+ families when the Rev. Jeremiah Wright (another target of the conserv-o-partisans acid-tongued vitriol) to the current congregation size of about 8000 Christians.
It also mentions that, coincidentally, there are 5 Republican and 5 Democratic members of Congress who are also UCC congregants (as well as a smattering of Governors and other officials, past and present). Among the Republicans is another member of Illinois’ Congressional delegation (beside Sen. Obama): US Congressman Mark Kirk of Illinois’ 10th district in the north and northwest Chicago suburbs.
As I noted in an earlier comment on another post, I find the hypocritical, misinformed and blatantly partisan attacks on Sen. Obama’s fellow Christians in the congregation of Trinity United Church of Christ, as well as the larger UCC denomination itself, to be utterly repugnant, intolerant and unAmerican.
As I have repeatedly disclosed I do support Sen. Obama’s run for President of the United States. But regardless of that, this Missouri Synod born, baptised, raised and confirmed Lutheran is standing right there with UCC congregants as partisan conservatives — many of whom claim to be Christian themselves — attempt this modern day stoning to belittle, demean and ostracize another denomination’s Christian faith. Welcome to the Republicans’ Bizarro-world definition of “values voters” where up is down, good is bad … and, apparently, saying “black” (as the tenets of the Trinity congregation do) is not white, but it is bad.
Next up for the conservatives’ fallacy-based attack machine? White people (after folks grow weary of their hypocritical anti-Christian venom).
(c/p at Prairie State Blue and Daily Kos)
–
UPDATE: Newsweek debunks the baloney
Earlier on Wednesday I noted that Fran Eaton — Obama hater, former campaigner for Alan Keyes for Senate (Illinois edition), conservative partisan activist on staff at Illinos’ United Republican Fund, editor of the self-proclaimed “conservative crossroads” Illinois Review, “vapid” self-promoter of failed conservative policies and causes … the list goes on — published yet another in her long string of screeds against the Christian pastor and congregation at Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ. In fact, her post on the matter let us all know that the sphere of conservative media are still quite happy to promote the fallacy-based misinterpretations of Trinity’s Christian tenets.
It’s as if these Obama haters can’t help themselves but to oppose normal, everyday Christians due simply to their rank partisanship.
This blog has written several times before, as have others (here and here by ArchPundit plus here by Pastor Dan), about the anti-Christianism emanating from conservative Illinois Review editor Fran Eaton when it comes to her perverse discussions of the church where her apparent nemesis Sen. Barack Obama worships, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.
Trinity United is hardly different from any other Christian church around the world. It is community-focused and reflects its congregation, to be sure, but that is no different than any other house of worship. In fact, in recent weeks, there was a great outpouring of sympathy throughout Chicagoland for Trinity United as their energetic and joy-filled choir director was found murdered under mysterious circumstances.
Ms. Eaton herself is both a self-proclaimed “Christian” (which is odd given how staunchly she opposes this one church) and is also rabidly anti-Obama. She was an Alan Keyes campaigner in 2004 when he packed his Maryland bags and ran for Senate against Obama here in Illinois. She also opposed then-State Sen. Obama for many years before his US Senate run on issue after issue in Springfield.
Unfortunately for those who value honest debate Ms. Eaton’s biases are leading her to infopimp twisted hokum that just isn’t true and, despite the fact honest Americans have repeatedly pointed this out, she is continuing to do so. Perhaps the glare of the spotlights is too appealing as she plays the part of publicity hound busily burying bones of out-of-context hooey here, there and everywhere she can.
Conservative “crossroads” editor Fran Eaton tells us that she hopes Sen. Barack Obama didn’t win the Iowa caucuses because of “guilt”. Says she:
Guilt: Not enough reason to elect Obama president
After hearing pundit after pundit discuss the unexpected surge among Democrats for Barack Obama [editor's note: it wasn't wholly unexpected for anyone actually watching polls in the weeks leading up to Iowa, but calling it "unexpected" sure is dramatic, no?], it occurred to me this weekend that something bigger’s going on as crowds flock to see and hear the man who symbolizes the promised dramatic change Americans crave.
Obama’s words are soothing and energizing, there’s no doubt. He’s a younger, appealing candidate. But he’s more. He’s black. And electing an educated, sophisticated and seemingly kind man with African-American lineage to the White House could help effectively ease the subconscious guilt many white Americans feel for the injustices American blacks have suffered throughout our nation’s history.
This hard truth occurred to me this weekend [...]
Electing Barack Obama for president should not be mistaken as a chance to make up for past injustices. While the thought of such relief is nonetheless appealing and comforting, it’s just not enough.
…I’m sure Mike Huckabee, according to the “logic” of Supremo Obama Hater and for Alan Keyes campaigner Fran Eaton, won the Iowa caucuses because of altar boy guilt or somesuch… Commenters to that Eaton post took it several steps further, decrying “white guilt, etc.
What the heck does “white guilt” even mean? Is it supposed to be another way of saying “compassion” (which is, itself, simply another term for “giving a shit”)? And why does it have to be from “white” folks only? Just because it was white people who ran the slave trade and fought against abolition? The codeword possibilities are endless for the supposedly anti-PC conservatives … who always seem to be against political correctness up until the point it starts to involve their own politics.
It’s weird, though predictable, that Ms. Eaton and her fans would even come up with this sort of hooey given that the Obama for President campaign clearly had a very organized and strong ground strategy for GOTV (something political activist Ms. Eaton herself ought to know about) and that the caucus entrance polls indicated most caucusers preferred a change (that’d be a change away from the failed conservative policies of Pres. Bush that Ms. Eaton still supports) and that they believe Sen. Obama would be best able to implement such change.
Guilt never even comes up. Maybe that’s because Iowans, unlike Ms. Eaton and the Illinois Review crowd, proved able to look beyond color and toward character. Like justice, democracy also ought to be blind. Sadly for Ms. Eaton, that was not the realization she came to post-Iowa.
–
Oh, and Ms. Eaton plays up a happy little conspiracy theory that Obama-endorser Oprah Winfrey’s Harpo Studios released “The Great Debaters” just before the primaries to somehow promote the notion of a black presidency… Maybe that’s also why Fox TV aired the conservatives’ favorite “24″ with a black president at the beginning (and a woman president succeeding him). It was all a plot to warm Americans, even conservatives, to the concept of a black president. Sure.
Of course, conservatives said the same thing about an earlier TV show depicting a woman as president. Ms. Eaton herself has other goofy conspiracy theories about movies in the first place (she obviously never saw Shrek 2).
FYI, Harpo Studios began direct work on “The Great Debaters” in 2004 — asking Wiley College for research assistance, drafting a script, etc. Groundwork for a historically-based major motion picture typically begins well before even that point. Let’s hope Ms. Eaton’s subconscious guilt (or whatever) isn’t leading to an overactive imagination.
Given the re-definition of anti-Semitism conserv-o-partisans like Anne Leary and others have come up with (if you oppose a Jewish person’s politics, you are anti-Semitic)… it’s becoming clear that whiners like Fran Eaton at Illinois Review and Braig Gernliver of Broken Liver are, in fact, anti-Semitic because they’re ranting against Rep. Jan Schakowsky’s vote against a recent House resolution.
For pointing out this bit of logical conclusion-making I’m sure the affable, laughable Pat Hickey will use his eponymous blog to call me a “knuckle gnawer” or some such (as he did earlier in the week) when, in reality, he ought to be calling Ms. Leary and others who hope to pervert the definition of “anti-Semitism” such silly kindergarten names.
(And Mr. Hickey, the song writers you note weren’t wasting time on bizarrely partisan non-issues in Congress… They were trying to write popular songs in an effort to live the American Dream of making a decent buck. And here we thought conservatives whined about the overcommercialization of Christmas.)
Sure, there are a few extremists who fall for the “annihiliation” claptrap talking points … facts be damned. But why does anyone still give this sort of over the top baloney a forum, let alone defend it as some Ill Review commenters are so doing.
Ill Review Fran Eaton claims, “[Todd] Stroger betrays his race and encourages black annihilation” because abortions are performed at Stroger Hospital.
If she had thought about it, one could use the same logic to exclaim, ‘Bush betrays his office and encourages troop annihilation…’ E gad.
To the point, whether you believe allegorical evidence provides a reasonable basis for argument or not (silly goose conservative “writer” Dennis Byrne apparently does), many suggest that conservative economic and social policies tend to backfire and actually increase abortion rates.
What’s a conserv-o-partisan to do?
Did you know that if you put unpopped popcorn kernels in the turkey they’ll pop while it’s roasting and you’ll have instant popcorn stuffing?
Hilariously, that apparently was one of the few goofball remarks that Illinois Review contributors failed to post in their Day of Doody.
Archpundit takes the Review gang to task by highlighting such gems as Jill Stanek linking (in all seriousness) to kooky claims that Terry Schiavo was fully aware despite having nearly half her brain literally and sadly being liquified and George Dienhart rambling on about what he believes are qualifications for being considered anti-American, including opposing Pres. Bush’s failing NCLB of all things. (Arch also points out Fran Eaton’s two-faced regurgitation of anti-Bob Creamer points. I’ll have more on that in a bit.)
But while you’re passing the popcorn and cracking up over the Ill Reviewers’ inanities, don’t forget to read their best Alfred E. Neuman impression in the whiney comments from Ms. Stanek and Mr. Dienhart who, unfortunately for them, don’t read what they write and link to…
These people want to be considered serious? (Worse, anyone actually takes them seriously?)
It’s ok, though. I hear Bill Clinton made them do it… perhaps by using his sax appeal.
(As an aside, good thing Ron Paul fan C-Rock hasn’t tracked down George Dienhart’s anti-Paul squeel. He might find a new blog to enjoy. 
…I do find it really bizarre that Paul supporters were calling uber-conservative Mr. Dienhart “lefty”. So much in-fighting, so many kilobytes in which to do it.)
Normally, people try to at least learn a little bit about a given subject (say, science) before they start piping up about it.
Not so Illinois Review editor Fran Eaton.
I’m all for the Big Guy Upstairs, but I don’t think he literally created Adam out of mud just because that’s what folks talked about around the campfire a few millenia ago. These were folks who likely had no knowledge of medicine, let alone the Hippocratic Oath … which hadn’t yet been invented.
Not so Fran Eaton. As Arch explains she apparently lacks a junior high level understanding of biology. And because she doesn’t understand, she exclaims that she must be right. In other words, she does not think, therefore she’s adamant that the Biblical allegory is fact and that she was made from mud and one of Adam’s ribs.
Again, turning to Arch, even the Pope — conservative as his German self is — claims that such creationist, evolution-denying folks are pagans. My own pastor growing up (I’m one of the frozen chosen, so Lutheran it’s pronounced Lute’rhin) always put the ars scientifica in laymen’s terms like this: God is omnipotent, yet He laid out knowledge for mankind to discover, each bit of understanding coming in its own time.
Thus, God knew the Americas were there before the Aleutian ice bridge allowed man to travel into early Alaska, the Vikings crossed the north Atlantic and Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492. God knew that vitamin C fought off colds and rickets before Limeys took to those same seas with their stocks of citrus. His hand was there guiding Galileo, Newton, Salk, Einstein, Darwin and even Watson as they made their “discoveries”.
In my pastor’s view, the Lord left the knowledge there to be discovered by mankind. Because of mankind’s loss of innocence (see: snake + apple), we would then be faced with a choice — use those discoveries for good or ill. I could go on. They were fascinating discussion for a nerd in a parochial school.
And yet, for all those discoveries and the scientific reasoning backing up those theories, they are all dismissed by those who refuse to spend a few minutes actually reading and trying to learn something…
And those of us who do have a junior high level of biology understanding, well of course we get called “elitists” by the likes of those whom the Pope calls pagans. Whole lotta name-calling there.
(This whole sad tale of Ms. Eaton’s failed education started as a squabble between generally reasonable conservative Dan at Move On and Shut Up when he called out conserv-o-partisan Ms. Eaton’s vacuous railing about how racism proves evolution doesn’t exist … or something. Dan called her a “shrill beast” and her “Who Me?” response ended up proving his point, and digging her own hole of evident ineptitude deeper.)
Fran Eaton over at Illinois Review had steam coming out of her head yesterday after Dan of Move On and Shut Up told her off. …Knee-slapping fun for the whole room.
Essentially, Dan was writing in response to an earlier post by Ms. Eaton indicating that social cons may reconsider support for the Republican Party. Dan said good riddance, in not so many choice words.
The result is that Ms. Eaton is now adamant that her friends — the folks who think the sun revolves around the earth, the people who believe people rode dinosaurs like horses, and the tweedles dee and dum who explain it all away with bullpuckey as if it were a cult — will not be leaving the Republicans, even though their siren is calling for them to abandon the cross-dressing philanderer Rudy Giuliani should he become the nominee. (Just why Giuliani would be the catalyst for such a move is unclear since none of the front-runners seem to have too clear a grasp on reality.) And, even though she hypothesized her and her kooky friends just might do what she’s now saying they won’t.
The kicker? Fran “Claims Barack Obama’s Christian Church is Racist, But Offers No Evidence” Eaton calls Dan an “anti-Christian bigot”… This from the queen of throwing stones at Christians with whom she disagrees; perhaps it takes one to know one.
Does she even realize how twisted and nigh blasphemous she makes herself sound? Clearly not.
Dan’s no bigot, he just knows the difference between reality and partisan-lemming idiocy.
Oh, and another thing. “Values voters” doesn’t mean just anti-gay, anti-Christians-we-don’t-like, and anti-reality voters; though there sure are plenty of them here in America and they are free to espouse those views if they so choose. It also means responsibility, integrity, compassion and honesty — all things emblematic of progressive voters (if not always politicians who claim a “progressive” mantle).
All voters vote their values, it’s just some — say, Republican partisans — hold values that seem to espouse adultery, hypocrisy, greed, and lying your way into war … and those are apparently the sorts of values that a “values voter” like Fran Eaton backs with her punditry.
Me? I support other values by backing other candidates. (No wonder someone like Barack Obama comes in third in an Iowa poll of Republicans.)
UPDATE: Irishwitch has an incredibly salient expose on just why the Dominionist theocracy-seekers should be watched and documented carefully.
For some time now Fran Eaton and Jill Stanek of Illinois Review have been strapping on their mean-girl knickers and poking fun at State Sen. Debbie Halvorson with goofy title posts generally along the lines of a series of porn movies which also use the name “Debbie”. (The goofy title posts are poor attempts at humor, which is in and of itself a poor attempt at covering up the utter vacuousness of their whining about Sen. Halvorson.)
Why they do this is a bit inexplicable. For a pair of cons who profess an abhorrence to “deviancy” and “pornography” they sure seem to get their giggles from referencing same. Well, joy of joys, their streak of silliness may last well into 2008…
Rich Miller’s “This Just In” reports via Politico that State Sen. Halvorson will be seeking to replace the controversial Republican Congressman Jerry Weller, who is retiring amidst a storm of questions over his Central American land deals and simultaneous legislative activity bolstering the profitability of people conducting business in the field of Central American land deals…
With the State Senate Majority Leader jumping into this race for an open Congressional seat in a very purple district, this race is sure to be top tier from the get-go given the prime opportunity to flip it from red to blue.
Today, the Republican National Committee called its own elder statesmen “fringe elements”…
“In a world with terrorists trying to acquire nuclear technology and with Iran and Syria threatening their neighbors, it is difficult to comprehend that a major presidential candidate wants to eliminate our nuclear arsenal. This is yet another example of Senator Obama playing to the fringe elements of his party and failing to understand the threat America faces,” says spokesman Danny Diaz.
Among those “fringe elements” … Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Schultz, Secretary of Defense William Perry, and Sen. Sam Nunn. I guess someone forgot to tell us they all switched parties. Must’ve happened at the Iowa steak fry.
Of course, the lemmings jumped at the chance to sound equally foolish. Illinois Review editor and avowed Obama-hater Fran Eaton fell head over heels in her haste to quickly follow suit, mocking Sen. Obama’s speech and his support for the internationally recognized nuclear non-proliferation strategy.
Oops.
The plan itself actually makes perfect sense, but far be it from the conserv-o-partisans to ever line up on the side of reason.
Here’s what I’ll say as President: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons.We will not pursue unilateral disarmament. As long as nuclear weapons exist, we’ll retain a strong nuclear deterrent. But we’ll keep our commitment under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty on the long road towards eliminating nuclear weapons. We’ll work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair-trigger alert, and to dramatically reduce the stockpiles of our nuclear weapons and material. We’ll start by seeking a global ban on the production of fissile material for weapons. And we’ll set a goal to expand the U.S.-Russian ban on intermediate-range missiles so that the agreement is global.
As we do this, we’ll be in a better position to lead the world in enforcing the rules of the road if we firmly abide by those rules. It’s time to stop giving countries like Iran and North Korea an excuse. It’s time for America to lead. When I’m President, we’ll strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so that nations that don’t comply will automatically face strong international sanctions. (emphasis added)
Maybe it was that bit about it being time for America to lead that got stuck in the RNC’s (and Ms. Eaton’s) craw.
In the 2000 presidential campaign, Karl Rove’s strategy called for then-Gov. Bush’s opponent to be painted as a fibber. Every little thing, whether big or small, was labeled a fib. Even when Bush was fibbing by claiming that VP Gore said he invented the Internet (he never said that, Bush just said he did and the partisans parrot it to this day — you can look it up) we saw that even Bush’s fibs painted Gore as a fibber. Fibbin’ is as fibbin’ does, eh? When VP Gore first started running for president he was seen as trustworthy and honest (esp. in comparison to Pres. Clinton). After Karl Rove was done with him … not so much.
Fast forward to 2004, and the Democratic candidate (didn’t matter if it was John Kerry or a yellow dog) got the Rove treatment with the label “flip-flop”. That decision to call the Dem nominee a flip-flopper was made before the nominee was even known. Again, everything was painted with the same brush. And again, a man who volunteered to go to Vietnam and who shed blood defending liberty was trashed and dragged through the mud by the Rovian slash-and-burn tactics.
It seems the conservative playbook to counter Barack Obama’s well-balanced, thoughtful strategic ideas is to bizarrely label him as somehow “intellectually lazy”. This coming from the administration of a guy whose favorite meal is PBJ, bankrupted a Texas oil company, and who has trouble eating pretzels and riding bicycles?
Over the weekend an “anonymous” White House source used that racially-tinged complaint against Sen. Obama in an interview with conservative author and pundit Bill Sammon. Getting conservative attacks out through conservative reporters — how convenient. The Republican National Committee then reinforced the Orwellian attack with a goofy memo of their own calling him “All Show, No Substance“; just out of pure coincidence, I’m sure.
Do the conservative “leaders” really think Americans are that gullible? Apparently, yes, and they may have been thinking of that conservative blog, Illinois Review, and its Obama-haters when they started pumping out their Orwellian baloney because lo and behold Ill Review Editor Fran Eaton picked up the attack line and spread it faster than you can say “Polly wanna cracker”. (Note to the white editor of Illinois Review: calling black people “lazy” has historically been considered racial code, even if it was not intended that way. Same goes for calling folks “clean”, etc. People who are not “intellectually laze” generally understand this.)
Oddly, the Tribune reported just this weekend that Sen. Obama isn’t quite connecting with “beer voters” as his Q+A sessions around the country have him coming off sounding too thoughtful.
Is it any wonder the American public is sick of this hyperpartisan malarkey?
So after weeks of newspaper reports pointing out ethical challenges, a Republican Congressman who married into an allegedly dastardly family and has been conducting questionable land deals in foreign countries (while simultaneously advocating legislation which may benefit his land deals) announces he’s going to retire.
Forget about the fact that Republican incumbent is on CREW’s list of the most corrupt Congressmen.
Fran Eaton instead goes back to her bag of crapola tricks to again reference porn in criticizing one of the possible candidates to replace the retiring Congressman with a post called “Will Debbie do the 11th CD?” in a reference to Dem State Sen. Debbie Halvorson and the retirement of Repub Congressman Jerry Weller, whose home is now in Guatemala with his family.
Notoriously irrational con partisan Jill Stanek (who has yet to meet a common sense posting that she won’t try to delete) started the idiocy some months back with a series of blogposts questioning State Senator Halvorson’s sexual history and Ms. Eaton gleefully defended her friend and fellow Illinois Review contributor by saying the entire Ill Review blog “proudly” stood against a vaccine which helps prevent cervical cancer. In essence, the perky pair were happy to reference porn if it got them the same attention it got Howard Stern (and for a few days it did).
I’m not even going to bother linking to Ms. Eaton’s latest junior high-level myopic ad hominem about Sen. Halvorson. It’s not worth cloggin’ those Internets. But here’s a sample of Ms. Eaton’s fantasizing:
The old girls [of progressive organization EMILY's List] are now simply tingly about the thought of Debbie in the 11th CD.
If Sen. Halvorson runs in the 11th, the collar counties of Will, Grundy and Kankakee will be exposed to intense, provocative political action they’ve probably never seen before.
And we thought it couldn’t get any more exciting in Illinois . . .whew. Got a cigarette?
Normal folks panned their BS. Yet, Ms. Eaton just can’t seem to let a stupid idea go. And, her attempts at erotic locutions don’t hold a candle to those of her fellow conservatives Scooter Libby and Second Lady Lynne Cheney.
And these conservative ne’er-do-wells wonder why they don’t get taken seriously in Illinois….
“Tingly?”
Your conservative Illinois Review editor, Fran Eaton, jokes around about a recent study finding that conservatives and liberals may actually have their political leanings (and indeed that values they’re based on) hard-wired into their brain. Kinda makes sense, when you think about it. The Tribune has more on the study… but Ms. Eaton’s sarcastic reaction to it is quite revealing.
She mocks gay Americans by rhetorically asking…
Oh wow, it’s genetic. I can’t help myself. I’m physically predisposed to be a conservative [...]
Now, when will the special rights legislation protecting me be introduced and when will we have our first parade to kick off a new movement exploiting our newfound freedom and acceptance? When, I ask, when?
Actually, Ms. Eaton, that “special rights legislation” protecting your hard-wired conservatism was put into law in 1787 though the movement was actually “kicked off” a few years earlier, in July of 1776. Your “special rights legislation” is found in something most folks call the “United States Constitution” and the “Bill of Rights.”
We have parades dedicated to such every year on Memorial Day, Independence Day and even Veteran’s Day (among other holidays).
Funny how Ms. Eaton illustrates the study to a T.
Brown People Beware: the editor of Illinois Review seems to think welcoming you to America costs too much. Apparently Fran Eaton is not of the opinion that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. She writes:
While a recent Daily Southtown story emphasizes the need for immigrants to learn English, it also inadvertently reveals the mounting costs taxpayers are paying to assimilate Hispanic and Aramaic immigrants into the American way of life (emphasis added)
That Daily Southtown article is here. It does not indicate whether or not the immigrants are arriving here legally or not, and to be fair no one at Ill Review has yet mentioned that aspect. Regardless, the article is about the new wave of immigrants arriving to southern Cook County and parts nearby (many of whom likely are indeed legal immigrants) and the community offerings available to them.
Metropolitan Family Services is the charitable organization which runs the early-learning and American integration programs Ms. Eaton chides. According to their 2006 Annual Report (PDF), they had $31,698 in operating revenue for ‘06. Of that, only $17,776 came from government grants (it does not refine those numbers any more definitively). The rest came from individual donations, the United Way, an endowment fund and earned interest.
To me, 17 grand isn’t that much to pay to ensure that scores of young kids get off to a better start in school especially considering that the government grants are bolstered by community donations as well. Helping kids learn new skills earlier in life pays off in spades down the road. Perhaps not too surprisingly, Ms. Eaton disagrees (she has in the past argued against pre-school itself after all).
Truth be told, other conservative-partisans have stated that we as a nation must demand that all immigrants learn English (see: English as a national language) and assimilate into our melting pot culture (which is a bit odd in and of itself considering that American “culture” is an amalgamation of so many of the world’s various cultures in the first place). Not Ms. Eaton. To her, assimilation seems to cost too much. She does not indicate what her alternative would be (more jails … if these kids end up feeling ostracized and unwelcome in their new home … acting out because of it?).
This Metropolitan Family Services program serves the Southtown region, an area on the far South Side and south suburbs which is seeing an influx of immigrants from Latin America, the Middle East and Arabic regions, and also from Eastern Europe. (Indeed, the Daily Southtown article notes that Argo High School has students whose first languages are as diverse as Polish and Hindi — the area is blossoming as a destination for new arrivals.) As has happened with every wave of immigrants throughout America’s history, it is usually the children — the next generation — who best assimilate, learning English and wending their way between the customs of the Old Country and their American home. This is no different, and whatever can be done earlier in the child’s educational career to help smooth out that process will quite likely pay dividends down the road.
Sadly, the first commenter at the Ill Review — dm60462 — also took this opportunity to turn the topic toward xenophobic race-baiting; heaven forbid Latin American and Arabic immigrants bump into each other in a community center’s hallway and dm60462’s wildest fears come to life. I wonder what Ms. Eaton’s fellow conservative-partisans like Anne Leary and Andy Lappin would gather from that one example at the Ill Review blog… hmmm.
Fran Eaton has long railed against embryonic stem cells. Apparently, she would rather see those unwanted and abandoned frozen embryos destroyed in a biohazard incinerator instead of allowing them to help advance medicine and potentially improve the lives of those less fortunate than Ms. Eaton who are maimed by disease or injury.
She’s at it again, grasping at straws in the hopes that she can continue to pull the wool over people’s eyes. Unfortunately, she’s discussing issues that she clearly doesn’t even understand (perhaps willfully so).
Ms. Eaton’s latest myopic screed against medicine is based very loosely on a Daily Herald article. Indeed, her entire blogpost is about extrapolating her opinions (based on the opinions of her dogmatic comrade, found in the article). Her post’s title claims “Cord blood cells again more promising than embryos” yet no facts are found in the article to back up this opinion.
The only thing that even comes close is a quote by the paid consultant on staff at the conservative-partisan outfit “Family Research Council” which, like, Ms. Eaton, also opposes embryonic stem cell research.
Ms. Eaton’s entire claim that umbilical cord blood is “more promising” than embryonic research appears to be based on this quote from the admittedly biased Mr. David Prentice:
“No. 1, you don’t have the controversy and debate you do with embryonic (cells),” said David Prentice, a former Indiana State University medical school professor and the family council’s senior fellow for life sciences. “No. 2, it’s working. We’re already seeing the results.”
No. 1, nevermind the fact that it is groups like the one Mr. Prentice works for which is generating that “controversy”. Most of the country is strongly in favor of limited embryonic stem cell research, especially in light of the fact that the only frozen embryos permitted (by Federal law) for research are those which have been abandoned and are scheduled to be ‘discarded’.
Mr. Prentice and Ms. Eaton are in the minorit on that front, but they fight tooth and nail to pump their side out into the public sphere.
Mr. Prentice himself is an interesting character… He’s used the shadey all-but-a-lie tactic in the past in order to help advance his political ideology by parsing his words quite narrowly to claim that adult stem cells are more promising than they’ve actually proven to be. If he’s taken to fibbing about adult stem cells (”mature human stem cell experimentation”, as Ms. Eaton might wordily word it), how can we trust Mr. Prentice on this matter? Sadly, the Daily Herald does trust him enough to quote his bias.
Which leads us to No. 2, his second point that umbilical cord research is working (keep in mind his employer is a heavy funder of umbilical research).
In fact, it’s not working any better or worse than other research pursuits. The entire article centers on one suburbanite man’s quest to find something which does work. In the article, this fellow tells us he has already had two umbilical cord blood injections in Mexico and that the best that happened was that his multiple sclerosis subsided for about two years. He has not been cured.
In fact, the very same article has a quote from the man’s wife directly contradicting Ms. Eaton and Mr. Prentice:
“We know it’s not a cure,” he said, his wife Karen at his side. “We’re looking to buy time.”
…A cure, not stop-gaps, is what all of this stem cell research is about in the first place. Unfortunately for the rest of us, comrades-in-arms like Ms. Eaton and Mr. Prentice would prefer that abandoned frozen embryos be burned to ash in a metal box because … well … just because … (they never have provided a worthwhile reason to prevent holistic medical research). Meanwhile, other stem cell research is allowed to continue — cloned adult stem cells, umbilical cord blood cells, etc. — which means any “advancement” in those fields is seen as “progress” against a backdrop in which only very limited research in frozen embryoes is able to be done. Essentially, it’s like having a bunch of cars out on the track and the one with frozen embryos has no tires… of course the others are going to advance more quickly.
As the Daily Herald article indicates:
Ozzello’s hope hinges on research that suggests cord blood stem cells are particularly useful in treating auto-immune diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, juvenile diabetes and lymphoma, where the body essentially attacks itself.
While the cells haven’t been shown to cure these conditions, some medical experts believe they are capable of at least slowing symptoms by replacing damaged cells with ones capable of new growth.
“Theoretically, it makes sense,” said Dr. Dusan Stefoski, director of Rush University Medical Center’s MS center in Chicago. “We are still in the early stages of thinking about it, but this likely will evolve into something bigger.”
Theoretically, it also makes sense that you try as many options available to researchers as you can in order to definitively find cures, rather than essentially promoting political rhetoric to boost ideological fundraising and touting half-way stop-gaps as “results”.
Apparently, the original 10 Commandments don’t quite cover it all for the folks at Illinois Review… Illinois Review editor Fran Eaton has a post up seeking comments for new commandments that Illinois conservatives ought to abide by.
Head on over and have fun suggesting some new ones since apparently all that stuff about not bearing false witness, not stealing, honoring thy father and mother, and the others doesn’t quite cut it with them.