Congratulations, old buddy. I caught your VP acceptance speech (on Fox, of course) and boy did you knock it out of the park. It hardly needs saying I'm green with envy. Things aren't going so good down here. Nobody likes me anymore. Remember that bill we worked on together that would have limited rape victims' access to abortion funding? How ironic, huh? Seems like a lifetime ago. Those were the good old days.
Listen, please extend my apologies to the ex-liberal-pro-abortion-turned-conservative-prolife Governor of Massachusetts for my ill-conceived (no wordplay intended, promise) remarks about rape and abortion. Whew. There ain't no do-overs in real life, are there? I had no intention of hurting his campaign (to say nothing of mine! LOL!) or the Republican Party at large. By "legitimate rape" I of course meant 'violent.' I don't know how that word came into my head. And on that matter of a woman's reproductive abilities shutting down, well, the science on all that is just too speculative. Should have kept my mouth shut until I got hold of all the facts.
You were also real nice during that phone call you made on the Guv's behalf. You're going to make a great diplomat; I know, because somehow after the call I didn't feel as if I'd been stabbed in the back by an old friend. I did wonder a little what it felt like for you, though, acting as the Guv's toady and all, doing his dirty work for him. Of course, now that I've had time to think about it, I realize that's exactly what happened: I got shivved from behind. I mean, you could have stuck up for me, you know, could have told people how we've worked together, how long you've known me, and reassured the public about my character and reputation, a reputation that should not have to suffer the slings and arrows of outraged members of my own party playing their fortunes against mine. Which is what you did in service to political ambition. After all, your views on abortion are closer to mine than his. But now I've seen the news reports (yeah, I get it all from the media now that you won't take my calls anymore) of how you're distancing yourself from my words ("rape is rape," etc.) and subordinating your own views to those of Romney, saying his are "a step in the right direction." Well, yeah, I guess, better than Obama's anyway. Anybody's better than Obama. But still. You could have stuck up for me.
Listen, I've got to overcome this bitterness. I'm going to work on it. In the meantime, here's what I really meant to say: The child conceived as a consequence of rape is everybody's child. No child is conceived by rape, but every child is conceived. The rape is one thing, a very bad thing; the conception is another, a very good thing. Hell, if every effect is evil by virtue of an evil cause, a whole lot of us could be in trouble. For example, both you and I (and Governor Romney) believe that fornication is evil, but if a woman gets pregnant because of it, we're not going to say she ought to kill it, are we? Same with adultery. Same with in vitro (don't know where the Gov stands on that one). We live in a country in which most people seem to think that fornication's a good thing (for God's sake, think of all the pornography they patronize), but not in a country that believes a good thing causes an equally good effect. In fact, it's all backwards. A lot of them think that if the good cause of fornication leads to the bad effect of a conceived child, the kid can be gotten rid of. Yeah, fornication is good, kid is bad. Imagine that. Funny thing though. That's how Romney thinks about rape. Bad rape equals bad kid (meaning that he, the kid, is the kind we can kill). Or maybe I'm being too literal. Let's give him credit for some degree of subtlety and say that bad rape equals such a bad effect on the mother that, out of compassion, we'll give her the choice to kill the kid. The fornicators will agree with him on that, but take it a step further: good (meaning consensual) fornication equals (sometimes) such a bad effect on the mother that we'll also give her the choice to kill it. I mean, what's the difference. Everything's confused and upside down.
In fact, I think I've confused myself and might be on the verge of uttering another inanity, so let me just conclude by saying that sex and conception, though connected, are separate events. The first might be good, depending on the circumstances, and the second always is. We should never speak of the "child of rape" or the "child conceived in rape," (been guilty of it myself) because they are not two facets of one event. To be raped is wrong. To be human and in existence is good, always and everywhere, without exception. Let's just stick with that principle and quit trying to hedge our bets when the questions get uncomfortable (which is what happened to me). I'm sure you'll agree, and will try to bring Romney over to our way of thinking.
In the meantime, best of luck with the campaign. I'll soldier on down here, and if by some miracle I pull this thing out and make it to the senate, you can tell Governor Romney, that bet-hedging, fence-sitting compromiser-in-chief, that as a loyal (and genuine) conservative he can count on me never to forget who threw me under the bus.