Thursday, January 25, 2007

Is William Stewart a Coward? You decide.

The following "rules" are posted for commenting on William Stewart's blog (creatively entitled William Stewart):

I would love to know your opinion, just make sure you follow a few simple rules:
1. Stay on topic
2. No dirty language
3. Obey all rules.


Stewart claims that he wants to hear people's opinions; however, he has a very annoying habit of deleting any comments that disagree with him. It's beyond annoying.

Apparently, West Virginia's self-proclaimed "leading political blogger" is so insecure that he feels the need to delete comments that disagree with him. To do so, with no explanation and without the courtesy of even an email, is in bad taste and strikes me as cowardice.

If you only allow comments that agree with you, then say so. Otherwise turn comments off.

Since Stewart has done this before, I should have copied my comments before posting them, but unfortunately they are gone now. Gone, but not forgotten though.

So since this is MY blog, I will post my comments in response to Stewart's most recent name calling post here instead.

Stewart’s post was the latest example of his recent pattern of criticizing women in the Legislature for having the audacity to present legislative proposals aimed at solving problems in WV. For some reason, strong, independent, intelligent women are so intimidating to Stewart that he is reduced to calling them names. Instead of his posts being “insightful”, now they are just “inciteful”.

The post in question, "Bonnie Brown’s snake oil", criticizes Delegate Bonnie Brown's proposal to provide HPV vaccine to West Virginia girls in the 6th grade, in an effort to prevent cervical cancer, which is killing an increasing number of women each year.

Stewart cites statements in the Charleston Daily Mail criticizing the FDA's approval of the vaccine because in clinical trials "those who had been administered the vaccine suffered from moderate to severe pain at the site of injection". So the shot causes pain at the "site of injection"? Imagine that.

Stewart also claims that "there is no evidence that this vaccine works after five years" without noting that the reason they don't have more evidence is because current tests only have a five-year follow-up and according to the CDC "There is no evidence of WANING immunity during that time period." (emphasis added). Apparently, Stewart wants us to wait for 100 years worth of testing before approving a new vaccine.

Finally, the biggest doozy is Stewart's claim that "80% of all cervical cancer comes from promiscuity or sex before 18 years of age". He takes the statistics for the rate of cervical cancer that is caused by HPV and somehow turns it into a claim that teenage sex causes cervical cancer. It's a ludicrous claim.

Contrary to whatever Puritanical Medical Journal Stewart has been reading, the human body doesn't miraculously flip a switch on someone's 18th birthday.

Does this mean that I think teens should be promiscuous? No. There are many reasons to wait until you are mature enough to deal with the consequences of sexual intimacy.

But to claim that teen sex is responsible for "80% of cervical cancer cases" is either ignorant or blatantly dishonest. I will let you decide which is the case for Mr. Stewart.

As for the question of whether Delegate Brown's proposal "will encourage young women in immorality" as Stewart claims. I suggest that he take another look around the Capitol, because I don't think she is the member most likely to "encourage young women in immorality".

Hmm... I wonder who would "win" that honor?


UPDATE: Apparently, Stewart's website has crashed. I wonder what Earl J. Hickey would say about that?

UPDATE II: Now the website is back up, but the post about "Bonnie Brown's Snake Oil" has "magically" disappeared with no explanation, so I guess Mr. Stewart's no longer just deleting comments. He is now deleting entire posts. Thanks to the Google cache, the post is not yet forgotten.

Lest the Cache of the Day be lost forever, Raging Red has captured a screenshot documenting Stewart's revisionist history.Stewart's Original Post

No comments: