THE BLOG
06/10/2010 05:12 am ET Updated May 25, 2011

Update: Congressman Franks Responds

I wasn't being fair to Congressman Trent Franks.

The general impression you get about Franks is that his eight months of college were wasted. He might be, just on a straight standardized test level, the stupidest person in Congress. I'm not talking about his politics. I'm talking about basic problem solving and sounding out big words. Pity is one of the reasons you tend to cut him a certain amount of slack when he says black people had it better under slavery than they have since Roe v. Wade, or that there might be Muslim spies on the Judiciary Committee.

It would be cruel to dwell. Trent Franks is the kind of rural innocent who, at the beginning of the horror movie, either gets hypnotized by the lights in the sky and then eaten, or lured into the frat house and tricked into having sex with his sister.

So I didn't really expect him to respond to my open letter. It was sort of a trap anyway, asking him to care about some dead Afghans, just because he's a single-issue anti-abortion absolutist, and one of the women we tax-payers killed was a pregnant mother of six and the other was a pregnant mother of ten.

Is all unborn life sacred? Or is there an exception when it's taken by Delta Force? I was trying to catch the conscience of the king, and by "king" I mean "idiot."

I was pretty sure he'd have nothing to say.

I was wrong.

Congressman Franks stepped up to the plate. And here's what he said:

If there is any foundational purpose for this Congress, it is to protect the innocent in humanity. Sometimes we complicate that greatly. Perhaps one of our greatest abilities as human beings is to hide from something that we would rather not face, and I think that that is indeed the situation that we face today.

So I understand the hesitation to face the reality here; but sometimes, there has to come a point in all of our lives where we just put aside those things that we know in our hearts are not true and embrace what is obviously a self-evident truth.

When a mother is assaulted and her child is killed, there are two victims. To say to say that her grief was not real, is just beyond description, in my opinion.

An honest look at the truth reflects the unavoidable reality that there is a child, and if there is a child, how can those of us in this body, whose primary, principal purpose for being here is to protect the innocent, how can we ignore that fact?

I just hope that people on both sides of the aisle will simply recognize the reality of the humanness of the child and the great mourning of a mother that loses that child to someone that would deliberately take that child's life or take that child's life incidentally to trying to assault her. It is time we stood up and did what was right, and I hope that we will do that.

And you're way ahead of me. Of course Trent Franks didn't say that, this week, about real dead pregnant women. He said it six years ago, about a completely hypothetical American woman, carrying a theoretical embryo, after an entirely imaginary assault.

He still hasn't said boo to a goose about the fetuses of Afghanistan.

I wish he would.