Imagine a conservative congressperson doing something this unhinged and not getting raked over the coals in the press (Wall Street Journal link requires subscription):
Tuesday was Africa Malaria Day, and Michigan Representative John Conyers marked the event by inviting something called the Pesticide Action Network to Capitol Hill to denounce DDT as an unsafe malaria intervention. What was he thinking?
Malaria, which is spread through mosquito bites, kills about a million people annually, mostly children and pregnant women in Africa. We're not sure where the House Judiciary Chairman got his medical expertise, but he won't reduce that death toll by promoting disinformation about DDT and malaria prevention. And at taxpayers' expense, no less.
PAN and a shrinking band of other activist know-nothings insist that employing DDT against malaria is "especially dangerous for developing infants and children," but there is no scientific basis to the claim. Zip.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓..... The World Health Organization, the Global Fund and the U.S. Agency for International Development have overcome this hostility and endorsed DDT as a safe and effective tool for fighting malaria. Even environmentalist groups, such as the World Wildlife Fund and Greenpeace, that once deplored DDT have piped down.
But not John Conyers, who is lost in a time warp.
Hey John: It's 2007, not 1967. DDT is A-OK.
The web site of Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) has a "Truth Sheet" (PDF) dated April 23 that is largely a comical exercise in non-science. But it also crosses the line by not so subtly portraying those who wish to have DDT used to fight malaria as race traitors. It's not easy to get a reinforcement of that offensive point, the names of George Bush and Karl Rove, an unnamed reference to Valerie Plame, and the war in Iraq all into one sentence, but PANNA's Truth Sheet pulls it off:
CORE’s 2005 Martin Luther King celebration honored “Green Revolution” scientist Norman Borlaug and Karl Rove, George W. Bush’s election strategist, recently under criminal investigation for his role in “outing” a CIA agent whose husband disagreed with the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Google News searches on "Conyers Pesticide Action Network" and "Conyers Africa Malaria Day" (both searches done without quote marks) confirm that the Wall Street Journal's editorial is the only coverage anywhere of Conyers' craziness, and his association with a group that is on the fringe even by environmentalist standards.
It must be nice to have the Formerly Mainstream Media ignore you when you jump the shark.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
There is a brilliant chapter
April 30, 2007 - 08:05 ET by HelenSThere is a brilliant chapter about DDT in the wonderully-named "Politically Incorrect Guide to Science." After reading and understand the issues, it is clear that any continued ban on DDT is not only criminal, it is immoral and blatantly racist (why else would the few and the priveleged be so careless with the lives of the world's poor? Throw-away people, I suppose - "They don't contribute to my comfort/greed so they're expendable.")
The problem is that the other
April 30, 2007 - 08:23 ET by jcrapes4The problem is that the other pesticides that are being used to replace DDT are just about usless. The mosquitos are resistant to them. The other lovely fact is that there are 4 types of Malaria. Africa has all 4 types if my memory concerning epidemilogy is correct. Falciprum Malaria (ex sp) is the most dangerous and is prevalent throughout Africa. Just by that fact alone is reason enough in my opinion to use any means to kill off the mosquito population.
How many thousands (millions?
April 30, 2007 - 09:57 ET by taznarHow many thousands (millions?) has this sham killed? It infuriates me every time I think about it. Then I see the same *bleep* happening with respect to global warming. The attitude is, "Let's let the poor die by the legions because we think we might know something about what could be a possible danger to me."
I'm not a WSJ subscriber, s
April 30, 2007 - 08:50 ET by motherbeltI'm not a WSJ subscriber, so I couldn't read the whole thing, but I see that Conyers doesn't want to use DDT to kill mosquitoes to fight malaria. Does he have an alternative that works as well or better? And if not, is he a racist to oppose the use of DDT at the expense of thousands of African lives?
Tom--it's not congressperson,
April 30, 2007 - 09:06 ET by ncstevemTom--it's not congressperson, it's congressman. It's not gay, it's homosexual or homosexuality. It's not an affair, it's adultery.
NB is the last place I'd expect to see PC speech but it's all too common both by the staff and those posting responses. C'mon people, if we're going to fight the libs, we have to take back the language and use it in it's proper form.
pc
April 30, 2007 - 09:16 ET by Tom BlumerMy GOP representative validly calls herself "congresswoman."
Somebody making Conyers' misstep could be a congressman or congresswoman, hence the "congressperson" reference. Unless you can show my a stylebook-driven or grammar-driven reason why I am wrong (and I am open to being corrected), the word stands as stated.
"Gay" v. "Homosexual" -- don't know what you're referring to in this post, or in previous posts, though I don't have time to scour them all. I did a quick search on "gay" in my most recent 15 posts, and the word doesn't appear. So Whassup?
I haven't commented on people's "affairs" or their "adulteries" here, but you can have an "affair" as an unmarried person that is not adultery in the commonly understood sense, though "adultery" in the Biblical sense may include all sex outside of marriage.
Actually these people should
April 30, 2007 - 09:22 ET by Gat New YorkActually these people should be called Representative since they serve in The House of Representatives. I think the term Congress_ _ _ is wrong. There are two houses of the Congress and we don't call Senators Congress _ _ _.
In regard to "I haven't commented on people's affairs or their adulteries here" please advise where you have posted them so I can read them (LOL).
Liberal
April 30, 2007 - 10:42 ET by iveseenitallJohn Conyers is one of the most intelligent Democrat(ic)s in the U.S. Congress. His I.Q. is 90, well above the others. Why..... why, he's the head of a Congressional committee, isn't he? There must be some mistake. A brilliant liberal would never say such a stupid thing, 'ya think?
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
Sex outside of marriage is fo
April 30, 2007 - 12:54 ET by Ron_servativeSex outside of marriage is fornication, biblically speaking.
Using proper English there i
April 30, 2007 - 16:39 ET by ncstevemUsing proper English there is no such thing as congressperson, fireperson, policeperson, chairperson. It's congressman, fireman, policeman, chairman.
It's irrelevant what word your congressman uses to refer to herself. If she called herself a 'duck' would you do so also?
The other examples I used were not in reference in anything you posted--just see those terms used frequently here and elsewhere.
Cwoman
April 30, 2007 - 23:05 ET by Tom BlumerMy congresswoman has the dictionary on her side (i.e., your battle, however noble, was lost long ago, like between 1915 and 1920, according to the link). I did not see "duck" as a synonym. :-->
Congressperson is there too (c. 1970 - 1975). So are policeperson and chairperson (same origins).
Fireperson isn't. Go figure.
Tom,In this day and age, with
April 30, 2007 - 23:09 ET by BlondeTom,
In this day and age, with the total lack of anything of redeeming value on the part of those in Congress....
"Congresscritter" works for me.
Just a technicality, Tom:
April 30, 2007 - 20:43 ET by motherbeltJust a technicality, Tom: sex between two unmarried people is not called adultery....it's fornication.
Conyer, Levin, Stabenow. The Three Stooges.
April 30, 2007 - 10:32 ET by heldmywConyer, Levin, Stabenow. The Three Stooges.
Every time one of them speaks, all I hear is "Hey Moe! Nyuk-nyuk-nyuk!"
On behalf of the population of the State of Michigan, I apologize for these egregious dullards and promise that we will try to do better.