Trashing Scott Walker

Dick Polman is a typical left-wing, slash-and-burn syndicated columnist.  One of his recent columns was no doubt printed in several dozen newspapers.

Polman's primary objective seems to be to trash Governor Scott Walker.  Obviously, the leftists consider Walker a serious threat to their morally, ethically, and charismatically challenged presidential candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton.  So he must be destroyed.

Polman chastises Walker for signing a bill that bans Wisconsin abortions after 20 weeks and for saying, “That's the time when an unborn child can feel pain.” 

“That's not what science says at all,” asserts Polman.  Then he cites a few sources who put the number at 4 to 6 weeks beyond 20.  By emphasizing scientific precision, he's making Walker out to be an anti-science nutjob.  Clearly, he misses Walker's real point.

Walker and his cohorts simply want to minimize pro-choice madness – via political (and logical) compromise.  They're saying that if abortion is your choice, please be rational and humane enough to have it done before you're 20 weeks pregnant, for God's sake!  Why should pro-abortion people have a problem with that?

For what it's worth, an accidental prick from an amniocentesis (typically after 14 weeks) needle tends to result in the fetus recoiling as if in pain.  Even if pain plays no part in that reaction, many scientists would characterize it as a natural survival instinct.  Leftists couldn't care less.

Polman also accuses Walker of “pandering to the Republican voters who abhor [is he serious?] actual science” by saying he didn't know the answer when “asked whether being gay was a lifestyle choice.”  

“Wake this guy up ... it has been settled science for decades that gays are hard-wired to be who they are,” says Polman, with as much arrogant condescension as he can muster.  It's “biology, not choice.”

In Governor Walker's defense, it's not uncommon for people to be unclear about what constitutes being gay.  Is it feeling a special love (affinity) for someone of the same gender, or is it having homosexual feelings, or is it having physical homosexual interactions – or is it all of the above?  Not everybody has spent a lot of time thinking about this.

Obviously, feelings and behaviors are not the same thing.  Having a genetic predisposition to feel an attraction to someone of the same gender does not mean that one must have physical contact with that person.  Not all who engage in homosexual sex have a “hard-wired” predisposition to feel any kind of love attraction.  Choice must play a part. 

Many well-intentioned Americans are sick and tired of leftists falsely applying (or implying) disparaging labels – homophobic, racist, sexist, etc. – in order to embarrass, shut down, or otherwise cause harm to their political opponents.  Attacks like these are almost always falsely supported via the exaggeration, obfuscation, or slanting of relevant facts.

As Polman insists (and presumably we would all agree), “facts are very important.”  And it makes sense that we should all have “respect for the scientific method.”  However, we should always keep in mind that factual data can be (and often are) interpreted differently by different people – including those in the scientific community.  

Fred Bindewald is a conservative retiree who loves to critique leftist tactics.  He has had some success converting voters in the Democrat stronghold of Southeast Iowa.  His e-mail is

If you experience technical problems, please write to