Bloodless Coup

Well Said

Scott Lemieux at Lawyers, Guns and Money does an extremely fine job breaking down the "logic" behind a Tacitus post:

And so, of course, Tacitus’ attempt to catch supporters of reproductive rights in a contradiction is only useful as an illustration if you’re trying to explain to someone what “begging the question” means. Since pro-choicers completely reject the premise that the fetus is a “child”, there is obviously no internal contradiction in the arguments of pro-choicers who oppose the death penalty. And then, of course, there’s the bigger question: why on earth should pro-choicers accept the premise that the fetus is the moral equivalent of a “child,” when most of the people who purportedly believe it aren’t willing to apply this principle with the slightest consistency?

He then goes on to explain why, according to the GOP, Fetuses Are Rights-bearing Subjects, Adult Women Are Not. Go poli sci team!