Actually, while it was a remarkably unfortunate way to phrase the argument, I got his point. The argument in Freakonomics is basically that abortion reduces crime. From the point of view of people who view abortion as murder, that is the same as saying that there’s an upside to genocide.

So, Bennett was really just saying something equally abominable (from his point of view) to try and make a point. A pretty damned blunt instrument to use when trying to make a point, it’s true, but I can only imagine how tough it would be for somebody who believes that every fertilized egg is a complete human being to understand how one assertion is worse than the other.

And, after listening to Randi Rhodes screaming about this on Air America today, I imagine it’s tough for many liberals to understand that Bennett was doing something less egregious than advocating genocide.

That’s cultural drift for you.

I understand that he was attempting a theoretical discussion based on some of the material he *thought* he understood from Freakonomics.  But his argument was ill-phrased, ill-timed, ill-thought out and not at all in line with the principles set forth in the book he was discussing.

It was a boneheaded dumb thing to say, no two ways about it.  I’m more amazed at the “circle the wagons” effect after the fact though.  Jesus H. Christ, do we have to defend every little stupid screwup “our side” makes just because the person is on “our side?”

It’s nonsense.  Bennett isn’t a racist, but he screwed up and a simple “Sorry about that, I blew that one” would have stopped this dead.

Jesus H. Christ, do we have to defend every little stupid screwup “our side” makes just because the person is on “our side?”

But that’s my point—I’m not on his side, I’m a moonbat, remember?

I don’t think people are necessarily rushing to Bennett’s aid to defend him, I think they’re defending the comparison. Remember during the debates when Bush pulled Dred Scott out of his ass? Everybody I heard analyzing it afterwards scratched their heads for a little while, until somebody realized that Dred Scott is often compared to Roe by anti-abortion activists. Equating abortion to slavery or genocide is part of the playbook.

Being anti-criminalization myself, and having no particular problem with black babies, I agree with you that Bennett’s comment was despicable. He really stepped in it good, and smeared it around in the process. But I think the principle beneath what he said is fundamental to that side of the debate, so they don’t want to back away from it. So instead they go on the attack and accuse, accuse, accuse—until everybody’s forgotten the issue because they’re so pissed off.

The angry mob doesn’t want to hear their leader apologize. The angry mob wants to fight!

I didn’t mean you were defending him, I was just complaining out loud about those who do.

I can see how, carefully, with some prep and thought as how to frame it, one could use this statement of his in a purely theoretical discussion.  But as you put it...he just stepped in it, and now the wagons are circled and they’re trying to convince me that isn’t shit on his shoe.

I ain’t havin’ it.

You’re right.  It is a poverty issue, but I have a feeling that if he’d used the term “impoverished babies” instead of “black babies”, they’d still be all over him.  And I’m sure someone would have still found a way to bring race into his statement (Jessie Jackson).

I’m sorry, I don’t see a problem with his comments.  He was making an absurd argument about two thing he’d abhor doing to make a point, and everyone missed the point.

Race is not the component.  Poverty is.

You are so right. I just wish that both democrat and republican politicans could get this simple concept into their heads.

I’m sorry, I don’t see a problem with his comments.  He was making an absurd argument about two thing he’d abhor doing to make a point, and everyone missed the point.

Not that simple. He was saying that there is this thing, that while he would never do, would have some good consequences.

Its like saying, if we shot all gay people HIV infection rates would go down. If we gassed all mental patients we could spend more money on heart transplans and save ‘important’ lives, if we just put all prisoners on a big island and let them fight it out then we wouldn’t need expensive prisons etc.

The statemtns are obvious facts, but saying them; even if at the same time you say “oh I would never do it” reveals something about the way you think.

Its like saying, if we shot all gay people HIV infection rates would go down. If we gassed all mental patients we could spend more money on heart transplans and save ‘important’ lives, if we just put all prisoners on a big island and let them fight it out then we wouldn’t need expensive prisons etc.

The statemtns are obvious facts, but saying them; even if at the same time you say “oh I would never do it” reveals something about the way you think.

So does the fact that you were able to come up with those three analogies reveal something about the way you think as well or were you just using them to make a point...the same way he was?

What was his point then? Why did he bother to say it? It seems different to me making some absurd comparisons than suggesting something, but then saying - oh wait that would be bad.

Or in other words, why did he say “black babies” and not just “babies”, or even “white babies”? Would crime not go down if you aborted every white baby as well? Its sort of the difference between saying to stop HIV we should kill all gay people instead of saying we should kill all people with AIDS. Both are completly morally reprehensible (which he agrees) but his choice of one over the other shows his ‘bias’.

I honestly dont care what Bill Bennet said. Whatever happened to the days when someone would say something stupid and people would just say “Man that was dumb” and move on. I am sick of the outcry over words. GET A LIFE.

GAMEDUDE, in a way that’s what I’m saying Bennett should have said.  he made this a million times bigger by getting all tough guy about it.

Now it;s a big issue and no one is gonna back down.  of course, that might have been his plan all along.  This has turned into quite a windfall of publicity for him.  Bet we see a book in the next 12 months.

Padders, if you’re trying to imply he was actually advocating abortion for all or ANY black babies, you’re way off.  If you’re trying to imply that he was saying ALL black people commit crimes, you’re also off.  If you’re trying to imply he’s racist, I also think you’re off about that as well.  Yes, his comment may have a been a bit insensitive because it wasn’t “politically correct”.  But why hide behind political correctness?  Poverty is at a higher percentage amongst blacks, as is poor education and children being born to unwed mothers.  And so is crime.  Those are facts, not racism.  Why not try to fix them instead of running away from them? I’m a black, pro-life, conservative female and I was not offended by his remarks, but rather intrigued.  My cousin was offended and we got into an argument about them.  If Bill backs down, I’ll be dissapointed in him.  I think he’s brought to light a very interesting and touchy subject that has spawned some challenging and informative debates.

Eh Bill Bennet is right though. It’s a logical point and he’s spot on. Why he’s right is another question. It’s no different than saying if you shot all Muslims you’d end Islamist terrorism. Blacks are responsible in the US for a disproportionate amout of gun crime given that they’re a small minority (or so I’ve read over and over at Moorewatch) so if you want to lower gun-crime you’d abort all black babies. What and why he phrased what he said like he said it I know not. I haven’t read that blacks cause more crime in general though, only gun-related murders and possibly violent crime but nothing else.

Perhaps there is a culture that certain young – not always poor – blacks take upon themselves and thus it is related to race if you see what I mean. Just as honour-killings in an Islamic context is related to race. I had a massive argument about this very comment in question on an English Blog and we concluded that we got our wires crossed and that it’s all really about upbringing rather than race per se. And then we mentioned ghettos or something and the problem of multiculturalism and how ethnic groups do not mix with each other and how that is asking for trouble.