Michele Bachmann: Let them eat lead?

Michele Bachmann lets it be known that she loves children; she’s birthed five and had 23 teen girls as foster children. Sometimes I feel that these politicians (such as Santorum, and Romney, in addition to Bachmann) have large families so they can put it on their political resume, like high school kids who hope that volunteering for the Humane League will puff up their college application. That could just be the cynic in me, but then I don’t know anyone who has more than three kids. I do know a couple that have two beautiful children and had an urge for a third, but in the interest of doing their part to save the earth from over population, decided not to go forward. Apparently, when you choose not to believe in science (the “earth is 5,000 years old” crowd), you can go forth and multiply mightily and not see it as irresponsible.
I find it interesting that Michele Bachmann is so crazy about progeny and yet wants to destroy the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). China doesn’t have an EPA so let’s look at what is happening there to people who love their children. The New York Times reported on June 15, that there are numerous cases of lead poisoning among the children in China. This is all in the name of economic progress, of course, which also seems to be Michele’s argument for demolishing the EPA. Officials in China like to overlook environmental contamination and dangers to public health. In Henan Province alone, nearly 1,000 children from 10 villages were found to have elevated blood levels in 2009. Parents and grandparents there say that hospitals are now refusing to even test for lead poisoning in the children, even when the families offer to pay. The Haijiun Battery Factory, which exports motorcycle batteries and batteries for electric bikes to the United States, had furious and distraught families from the local village break into the factory office recently and smash equipment because of the damage that had been done to their children in the name of “jobs” and “economic progress.” Children were poisoned by up to seven times the level that was considered “safe” in that country; if we can assume that any lead finds a safe home in the bodies of our children. One father, when told by his doctor, that his precious three year old had absorbed enough lead to irreversibly damage her physical health and her intellect, said he felt his heart shatter at the prognosis.
Are we really to understand that the regulations that have been in place for 40 years to protect our air and water, and which have cleaned up our cities and rivers, should be done away with because some presidential candidates claim it is a “jobs killing organization?” It was fairly disgusting to watch the GOP debates last week and see several of the candidates nod enthusiastically as Michele made her radical statement.
Is this really the scenario that Mrs. Bachman would choose for our country and for her 28 children and foster children? Would Mr. Santorum choose this for his seven children, or Mr. Romney think it fine to dismantle the EPA and seal the fate of his five children and numerous grandchildren? Would Ron Paul want this for the 4,000 babies he has delivered? Wouldn’t they all rise up and smash factory equipment themselves if they found out that deregulation had altered the lives of those they loved? Have they not considered the implications of the choices they would make for our country if the EPA really were eliminated?
Most of these candidates also claim to be “pro-life” but apparently that doesn’t extend to children once they are born, just from conception to delivery. Michele will do well in Iowa, but she will eventually be sent packing by the voters who have more sense than she does.