Sandra L. Hood – 4/7/05

This page was last updated on April 9, 2005.

Let’s talk about propaganda; Sandra L. Hood; Beaver County Times; April 7, 2005.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“This is in response to M.D. Olshanski’s letter. (‘Out of the Marxist textbook,’ April 1):

“Besides the talking heads for the right wing, who ever said that Terri Schiavo was not in a vegetative state?

“There were 19 doctors who actually examined her, and all came to this conclusion. The doctors who said that she was in a state of minimal consciousness were people who came to this conclusion by observing her on TV.

“I know I wouldn’t want someone who just saw films of me on the outside to make health choices for me. Also, I did not see ‘Dr.’ in front of M.D. Olshanski’s name.

“Apparently, not all holier-than-thou Republicans fought for Terri because the judge who ruled against the family and followed the law was a Christian conservative.”

[RWC] Nothing like a little name-calling. How does Ms. Hood know the original trial judge was “holier than thou?” Assuming the judge was a Republican, does she believe all Republicans are “holier than thou?”

Regarding the “followed the law comment,” I’m confused. I never questioned the judge followed the law. The judge’s decision was driven by his belief of hearsay testimony that Terri Schiavo wanted to die. I believe that’s where many of us had a problem given the husband’s obvious conflict of interest.

“More than half of the federal appeals court judges were Christian conservatives, and they also came to the same decision.”

[RWC] I don’t know the religious or political leanings of the judges, but Ms. Hood was wrong when she wrote “they also came to the same conclusion.” All the federal – and state – appeal judges did was rule on legal procedure; they did not rule on the facts in the case. In other words, they did not rule on her medical condition or her desire to die. The appeals courts did not rule the trial judge made the correct determinations. All they did was say the judge made no reversible procedural errors when he made his determinations.

“Also, not all Democrats thought that the feeding tube should be removed. After all, quite a few Democratic congressmen voted along side of their Republican counterparts for the tube to be reinserted.”

[RWC] Less than half of House Democrats participated in the bill’s (S.686) vote and less than half (47%) of those who participated voted in favor of the bill. In other words, less than 25% of House Democrats voted in favor of the bill. I guess “quite a few” is in the eye of the beholder. We don’t know how many Senate Democrats voted for the bill because the Senate conducted a voice vote, not a roll call vote.

“I think it is very unfair that every time there is a debatable issue that the far-right wants to lump everyone together. We are not of one thought. That is why the party is labeled liberal - because we are allowed to be free thinkers.”

[RWC] Ms. Hood complains that the “far-right” wants to lump liberals together, yet she implied above all Republicans are “holier than thou!”

Ms. Hood is in error as to the origin of “liberal” to describe persons of her persuasion.

“We [liberals] are allowed to be free thinkers?!” Is she kidding? If she truly believes this, it’s obvious Ms. Hood has not followed the vicious liberal attacks on Harvard President Lawrence Summers, a fellow liberal. He’s under attack because he said it’s possible one reason women may not do as well as men in math and science may be genetic. He didn’t say it was the reason, only that it should be considered along with other possibilities he listed. Further, he even said he “would prefer to believe otherwise.” This was at a conference during which participants were allegedly encouraged to think “outside the box.”

“And you want to talk about propaganda. Let’s talk about Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Jim Quinn and the rest of the lock-step Republican propaganda pushers.

“As I have said in past letters, everyone I know who listens to any or all of them all say the same thing word for word. Talk about being brainwashed.”

[RWC] This comment reminds me of liberals who say they don’t know how Republicans get elected because they don’t know anyone who voted for Republicans.

Let’s look at the accusation, however. All three men are conservative or conservative/libertarian first and Republicans second. Anyone who listens to these shows can tell you all three men regularly criticize Republicans, usually for not being conservative enough. For example, I’ll believe you’ll find none of these men support President Bush’s proposed amnesty program for illegal aliens. I doubt any elected Republicans consider these men to be “lock-step Republican propaganda pushers.”

Further, all three men deal with current economic, political, and social news. Given their similar – but different – economic, social, and political philosophies and that they have to deal with the same news as everyone else, it should be no surprise their shows sound similar to liberals. With minor exceptions, I believe all liberal broadcasters and columnists sound the same.

I wonder why Ms. Hood failed to mention the lockstep liberal “propaganda pushers” we read in the Beaver County Times, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and The New York Times and hear/view on ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, NPR, and PBS? Oh, that’s right, liberals “are allowed to be free thinkers” – not.