Newborn in Danger at White House
Front of the Post and the Times, a picture of the president breathing his germs all over a newborn. As a parent I am appalled, consternated, and atwitter with outrage. The baby is a month old and has no business being in crowds, much less passed around as a prop in a political theater. Why not just THROW THE BABY AROUND? Hey, Rove, CATCH. The White House is surely full of infectious agents, namely well-traveled people who converge in a tiny space to share their microbes. Bacteria, viruses, paramecia, prions, little mites that live on the eyelids, bugs that under a microscope look like lobsters -- they're just immersing the baby in this hideous biological brew. They're all concerned about protecting human life, but they don't think twice about lugging their newborns into strange places as though they're a bunch of Gucci bags. The president is constantly jetting around, and is thus potentially a disease vector. A human being is a colonized entity, rife with trillions of organisms that exploit the various habitats of the human body for their fanatical germy reproduction. If the president wants to hold a newborn baby for a photo op, then he should use a plastic replica, or maybe an American Girl doll.
Or better yet, a plastic reproduction of a microscopic, frozen human embryo, which I'm guessing doesn't look a whole lot like a newborn baby.
By
Joel Achenbach
|
May 25, 2005; 8:36 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Fisher's Online "Radio" Show
Next: Why Carrie Will Win
Posted by: Tom fan | May 25, 2005 11:47 AM | Report abuse
Joel, this is actually part of the president's health-care plan. The baby is being exposed to germs so that it can get a head start on developing antibodies.
Posted by: Bilbo | May 25, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse
Hilarious!
But you know that the Prez, Congress and that bunch all got every immunization possible before anyone susceptible was eligible for them!
Posted by: Wendy | May 25, 2005 12:15 PM | Report abuse
Ordinary bugs can't live in Bush's frigid blue blood. The baby is safe assuming it has normal metabolism.
Posted by: Mother Jones | May 25, 2005 12:15 PM | Report abuse
Listening to NPR on the drive to work, I thought I was going to drive off the road when I heard some of DeLay's comments about stem cell research. I just had to keep telling myself to breath deeply. What I'm hearing can't be real.
Posted by: LB | May 25, 2005 12:23 PM | Report abuse
I finished reading your last sentence about five minutes ago and I still cannot stop laughing. Gene Weingarten - watch out!
Posted by: Liza Covert | May 25, 2005 1:30 PM | Report abuse
We mow down green forests for the trees
For nature's woody giants are cost-free.
With mighty saw we harvest living things
"Sweet land of liberty, to thee I sing."
Of our close cousins, primate and ape
Captured for labs with no hope of escape
Stuck, injected, pricked by needles' sting
"From every mountainside, let freedom ring."
But release to science discarded embryos?
A scientific area where Bush dare not go
When so much human suffering is at stake?
"Let mortal tongues awake, let all that breathe partake!"
Posted by: Linda Loomis | May 25, 2005 1:43 PM | Report abuse
You do realize that otherwise healthy new born babies and specifically breast fed babies are virtually immune to most infections/pathogens that could possibly be passed from casual contact? Or did you miss Bio 101
Posted by: Hmmm | May 25, 2005 2:49 PM | Report abuse
How would a newborn baby be immune from an exotic pathogen carried via jetliner from Asia by a traveling politician? Are babies superhuman? I definitely missed that part of Bio 101.
Posted by: Achenbach | May 25, 2005 2:53 PM | Report abuse
But why am I arguing the point. The blog item was just random silliness. Sometimes I forget.
Posted by: Achenbach | May 25, 2005 2:54 PM | Report abuse
I think sometimes a lot of people forget.
Posted by: Dreamer | May 25, 2005 2:58 PM | Report abuse
Why not just THROW THE BABY AROUND? Hey, Rove, CATCH
Now now... We all know Karl Rove eats babies... And puppies...
Posted by: The Bean | May 25, 2005 3:22 PM | Report abuse
I second the plastic baby stand-in. The precedent was set a while back with the plastic turkey.
Posted by: Nance | May 25, 2005 3:32 PM | Report abuse
Oh, chill. I agree with Bilbo. Isn't it established that babies overly protected from germs and dust are more prone to develop things like asthma later in life?
So from that standpoint, Bush is helping the baby be healthy later in life.
Hmm. Have we found something that GWB is useful for?
Posted by: BillH | May 25, 2005 4:19 PM | Report abuse
Can see you are still suffering withdrawal symptoms! Grow up...I wasted my time reading it...countless others will to...and it worked you have my comment. I laugh right along with others not with you at you! Enough is enough...get over it...he won ....you lost....
Posted by: BO from Texas | May 25, 2005 4:42 PM | Report abuse
Why are there no trackbacks. I am hugely disappointed.
Posted by: Achenbach | May 25, 2005 5:28 PM | Report abuse
I don't know about others, but I myself am getting just a wee bit tired of the "get over it" line. This is supposed to be a free country with free speech (at least until Nino gets the big job with the Supremes!). Would you like to try that "get over it" stuff on Pat Tillman's family? Or the families of the other 1600 who sacrificed themselves to prevent totally nonexistant Iraqi WMD from reaching this country?
Posted by: kurosawaguy | May 26, 2005 4:29 PM | Report abuse
You guys are missing the whole point.
It's a woman's right to choose ... who holds her child!
Posted by: CMc | May 26, 2005 10:52 PM | Report abuse
You guys are missing the whole point.
It's a woman's right to choose ... who holds her child!
Posted by: CMc | May 26, 2005 10:52 PM | Report abuse
pfceybc [url=http://nljj.com]test2[/url]
Posted by: John S | September 3, 2006 9:55 AM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.
THIS one is bound to rouse the rabble. Let the fun begin.