What Difference Does It Make, Jack Krier?

It’s been a while since the last time I wrote about Shithead Hall of Fame® Inductee™ Jack Krier. Too long, in fact. I wish I hadn’t lost my write up of the“editorial” of “his” that claimed that the Plymouth Pilgrims discovered and then rejected socialism. That alone was worth writing about, but then to discover that he had plagiarized the work from a Rush Limbaugh book was even better. His ensuing “I’m an old man what don’t know how the e-mail forwards work and what whence they came” shtick that followed when a reader wrote to him about it was nothing less than to be expected from Old Man Jack.

It’s doubly so if you happen to read Jack Krier’s one black friend, Thomas Sowell. You’ll literally hear an echo if you read Dr. Sowell, then wait a week to read Jack Krier. On more than one occasion, a similarly minded articled was birthed by both men, even down to a book to read selection. So either Dr. Sowell is ripping off Jack Krier, they share an odd ability to intercept the echo chamber, or Jack Krier is just "rephrasing" Thomas Sowell.

But that’s not why we’re here today. Michael Sam, a University of Missouri football player, came out recently. What’s more The Westboro Baptist Church came to Columbia MO with about fourteen people to protest against Michael Sam, they were greeted by large number of his supporters. I couldn’t have been more proud of those students/supporters. Jack Krier doesn’t see what all the fuss is about.

The title of Mr. Krier’s article is “What difference does it make?” Not only is it a super clever Benghazi jab, it’s also the thesis of his editorial. But you’d think that if it didn’t make any difference then why dedicate an entire editorial to it? Espousing not only how you don’t care what difference it makes, but then stating for the record that you believe it’s morally wrong (and that marriage is between and a man and a woman...blah blah blah)? Then The two ideas leap frog over one another as Mr. Krier’s article shambles on.

Right-wing boogeyman roll call: Mainstream Media loves anything to do with homosexuality. “Masses of liberals, led by Michelle Obama, loudly proclaimed Mr. Sam’s bravery.” This leads to Mr. Krier’s assumption that “[…] the media and progressives are obsessed with people’s sexuality and those who decide to publicly come out, praising their actions, like homosexuality is the new “it” thing to be.” Wait, who’s REALLY obsessed with people’s sexuality here? The people who support a man for coming out, or the people obsessed with his sexuality and how it doesn't fit their religious worldview? Mr. Krier’s assumption that people are looking for the conservatives to “lambast (sic) the homosexuals for ‘coming out’” is pretty absurd. Trouble is, we don’t have to, they more than help themselves at any and every opportunity. I mean look like Jack Krier slings around the word "homosexual" as a poorly veiled epithet.

Mr. Krier states that conservatives “don’t give a rats behind” about anyone’s sexuality, but then here he is writing about how much of a rat’s behind he does give. It’s an odd conundrum. To say the least of his mistaken assertion that liberals and the media put those who do come out on a pedestal. Can we not lend mass support to someone, a public figure, when they need it most, regardless of their sexuality?

“Why is embracing your sexuality such an act of bravery?” Jack Krier asks, using the idea that if being gay is natural, and the way someone is born, then why is coming out something to be praised? I assume he thinks that this is clever. Trouble is, it’s not…by far. You see, being gay is still a difficult thing to navigate in this day and age. And while yes, culturally we have made great strides for our gay brother and sisters, as a society we have much further to go. That Michael Sam, a Texas born, Missouri educated man came out is a marvelous thing to behold. He is attempting to enter a venue such as the NFL that seems unfriendly at the least to a gay man. He needs all the love and support he can get.

Reaching back for any strand of a hope to mask his bigotry as a thought piece, Mr. Krier latches on to when Tim Tebow entered the draft. According to Jack, Tebow “ […] encountered a rain of hate from people worried for the sport, people who  resented having to hear about the personal beliefs of “Saint Timmy.”” Except, none of that happened. If anything people were hoping for failure because he was overrated at a position he couldn’t play at a higher level than college and was inexplicably drafted in the first round. And I don’t remember Michael Sam’s mother having a commercial (paid for by evangelical conservative think tank Focus on the Family) air during halftime of the super bowl.

Now, if Jack Krier could’ve couched his bigotry with his false equivalency to Tim Tebow’s “coming out” as a Christian better, he could’ve made a point: both Sam and Tebow were/could be distractions to an football organization, regardless of talent level. But I’m of the mindset that Michael Sam will be a lot like Manti Te’o than a Tim Tebow, and by this time next year, no one, on either side, will care.

This line toward the middle of his article struck me: “Just as the person has the right to stand up in front of the world and say, “I’m gay and I’m proud,” so, too, do others have the right to stand beside them and say, “I think it is morally wrong and I don’t approve of it.”” But what difference DOES it make? You’ve lost. No one really cares that you think it’s “morally” wrong and don’t “approve” of it.

Not so long ago, what people’s religious views were no one’s business. You kept it to yourself. It only started mattering when the GOP right-wing needed fresh voters to help stem the tide of the electorate towards their regressive socioeconomic agenda. Suddenly, religion mattered, in the very place it shouldn’t: our federal government. We even have entire chunks of pundit class who ONLY cover religious elements in our government, and sadly, their articles aren’t in the religious sections. They stand toe to toe with other “substantive” opinion pieces. These people have kept the “debate” of a woman’s constitutional right to her body going for over four decades. So too will they keep the flame for their regressive ideas about what is morally “right” and “wrong”. Unfortunately, time is not on their side. Because of Michael Sam’s bravery, many more will follow in his footsteps and not be trepidatious about coming out. And yes, Jack Krier, we will laud, love and support them as well.

The Great American Humor of Tom Purcell

Tom Purcell’s bio blurb at the end of his columns states that he is a humor columnist. Far be it from me to wonder where exactly the humor is in his columns, unless you count bigotry and ignorance with a heaping helping of right-wing baloney humor? Not only that, but the vast majority of his output seems to be these columns written as conversations wherein he espouses more GOP right-wing idiocy read as policy breakdown. He, or an ideological representative, sets about educating a caricature of a right-wing bogeyman to the great wealth of conservative thinking. I can’t tell if he’s patronizing his readers, is actually trying to educate them on policy, or is attempting this “humor” that is spoken of in his bio.

The GOP right-wing is currently obsessed with proving that Obamacare is costing Americans their jobs. The Congressional Budget Office released a report showing that, because of Obamacare, about 2 million Americans will leave the work force. The GOP right-wing pretends it doesn’t understand the difference between a person willfully leaving their job versus actually not having a job. Tom Purcell chimes in with his “humor” filled "thoughts".

Working is just no fun! Seems to be the crux of his "humor" piece. So why wouldn’t millions of Americans just line up to get all those free goodies, that Mr. Purcell has to pay for with his rising premiums? Again, this notion that the GOP right-wing uses as evidence of Government overreach is absurd. Their premiums went up, and it’s because they have to pay more so more and more “others” can take needed healthcare. The nerve! But everyone’s premiums went up! They’ve gone up every year at ungodly leaps and bounds. This is the downside of the lack of a single payer option, and giving over our healthcare to for-profit corporations. Of course they’re going to squeeze everybody!
But that is just no fun, Mr. Purcell doesn’t feel like doing it. He doesn’t even get going with his job - being a “writer” - till about 11 a.m.! And his nugget for the day: pull yourself up by your bootstraps…blah blah blah. It’s so easy! See, he and his other like minded conservative friends have done just that! Never mind the conservative welfare state of writing books, that are bought up by right-wing think tanks to be foisted on to their members, speaking engagements, and sometimes you get called up to the Fox News and are paid to yell over other people on a television program.

Or you could do as Mr. Purcell puts it: “you can go the other direction and find ways to avoid work and minimize your income on paper, so that others will help cover your costs.” Then he reaches in to his right-wing pundit cliché bag and pulls out the “I met an ‘other’ that is cheating the system” card.

I can’t stand this antiquated bullshit. At least I would respect the right-wing punditry more if they could just spice it up a little from time to time. If you’re going to invent somebody to help make up your lie/point, at least give them a name. That’s always been the big red flag for me when reading right-wing tin foil hat paranoia fanning articles. The writers can ring out entire oral histories from these “others” yet can’t be bothered to grab a first name? Give me a break.

Mr. Purcell took a cab from the airport recently and just so happened to strike up a conversation with his driver…a native of Africa! So that dog whistle gets to make the cut, but no name…oh well! This African man had just so happened to have signed up for Obamacare and of course qualified for all the subsidies ever, so that his premium was low enough to be affordable. Which of course it is, because as Mr. Purcell relates, his premiums doubled because he has to subsidize the man! What’s more: “He also told me he has a nice suburban home and he and his family are living very well in Pittsburgh.” The temerity of this “other” to live in a good home with his family, how dare he! He’s a cab driver for Pete’s sake, he has no right!

Mr. Purcell wonders how this “other” came to be in this great, fortuitous situation. Well, he cheated the system of course! You see, the driver is paid in cash, and he keeps the vast majority of it off the books! Pure genius! According to Mr. Purcell this is two-fold harming America. One, it is keeping much needed tax revenue away from the government. Two, this much needed revenue is what is necessary to pay for this "other"'s subsidy. So this “other” is not only damming himself, but the entire American society! For shame!!!

This new “entitlement” is going to now make countless millions of other Americans discover this new vaunted secret of freebies. No more tax revenue…no more God fearing America to love! Mr. Purcell sums it up nicely “[…] policy that is helping put nails in the coffin of the American dream.”

Much like most of his punditry brothers and sisters, he’s misusing causality to make a right-wing talking point. Like the assumption that the welfare state is part of the reason why the government is running a deficit every year. What about bloated defense budgets? Which can allow for a blank check welfare state for our military: to build planes it doesn’t need and bases in foreign countries that no nation desires on their soil is beyond me. That the CBO clearly states that people are LEAVING the work force, citing the freedom from “job lock” as the main reason for this. Too many people, baby boomers mostly, are staying at their job because they desperately need the health care. They can ill afford to be jobless at a time when their health is in fast decline. With Obamacare people can now have the freedom to find better employment opportunities, and do this whole “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” right wing fallacy they keep parroting as some fix-all for a lagging economy being weighed down by fear of loss of health insurance and job insecurity.

Mr. Purcell, and his right-wing pundit ilk, have been railing this “my premiums doubled under Obamacare” argument a lot recently, but they fail time and again to provide context. How much is double? What amount of increase will your premiums undergo before you yourself decide to drop your own coverage? What kind of coverage do you have? I’m assuming it’s a Cadillac plan, and that it’s wroth every penny paid in to it.

I’m also assuming people like Mr. Purcell can get sick and not have to worry about losing his cushy not having to get started till 11 a.m. writing job because Cagle Cartoons could just hire someone to take his place. Hell, he could just run reprints of old columns and not miss a beat. Perhaps this is the “humor” of his bio, the sick joke he’s playing on his readers.

Above Kathleen Parker's Pay Grade!

Oh all right, I’ll indulge this petty need to write about Shithead Hall of Fame Inductee™ Kathleen Parker. It’s not that she hasn’t been dropping turd nuggets of all sorts lately, far from it, but I couldn’t bear to write another article blasting Susan Stamper Brown for “knowing” that Reaganomics worked. Really…you KNOW Reaganomics worked? And of course she sources nothing, but her “know”-ing, it’s maddening for sure, but I’m just not in the mood right now.

The National Prayer Breakfast is an antiquated joke. Every single year Obama seems to fail to give a proper speech. This years was no different. But this year, Ms. Parker has something to say about it…I think.

Bill O’Reilly’s column was finally put out to pasture late last year, and for good measure. From the little I covered of his articles, it was desperately necessary, as he was just not writing anything of substance. On top of that, the word count was woefully short. Perhaps the Washington Post should cut Ms. Parker’s output down to just one column per week, as she just quits on this piece. And really, she doesn’t need two columns.

Waddling out in to the tides of a religious column just isn’t in Ms. Parker’s wheelhouse. It’s painfully obvious to everyone involved about three oddly placed sentences-as-paragraphs in. Since I’m assuming she didn’t attend the event in question, she’s just hoping to fill a word count quota and move on to her next column idea. So sure, lets just assume that religious protections are under attack in America.

Obamacare is forcing for profit religious entities to cover contraception for it’s employees. Again, this goes back to my notion as to why that’s an attack on religious freedom, and having people who aren’t in need of boner pills pay for others need to defy nature, isn’t an attack on their freedoms from the un-need of boner pills?

That Ms. Parker states that religious-liberty lobby is losing is absurd. They’re not losing any ground, and if anything are attempting to strengthen themselves by coalescing in to concentrated tribes in the middle and south of the country. So sure, they may be marginalized in terms of mainstream popularity, but their far from out in terms of their single issue voter bloc, and the GOP right-wing’s ability to rile them up and drive them to the polls with the word “abortion”.

But this debate is more than just about birth control, it’s about the stability of the nation!  If we force for profit businesses with “religious convictions” to offer basic insurance coverage to their employees, of which their use of it is absolutely none of their business, the religious freedoms are doomed!

This IS more than a debate about birth control. Indeed, it is yet another way for the GOP right-wing to team up with their 12th man evangelicals to try and dismantle Obamacare. Waste more time and money propelling this case through the federal court system, and ultimately, lose at the Supreme Court.  But then, they have something to rile up the one issue evangelicals with for the 2014-2016 elections, and ultimately, lose there too.

The problem with the “but my religious convictions” argument is that these businesses are for profit. Religious groups are one thing, and ideally, if they are participating in the free market, they should be obliged to pay for insurance coverage, just the same as any other business. But businesses like Hobby Lobby, a non-religious corporation, are only a pawn in yet another campaign to destroy Obamacare. The fact that Ms. Parker parks them all together into this “persecuted” mass is a disservice to the argument she’s attempting to make. Thanks to Citizens United, corporations are people now, so I guess if they want to make a better argument they need to baptize their corporations and get them to start tithing to become religious entities fit for prosecution.

But then she just drops her entire thesis. Quoting Obama’s answer to Rick Warren back in the day: “It’s beyond my paygrade.” What an utter waste of time, right? All this stupid ass pontificating, and all you have for us is a shrug? Shame on you, Ms. Parker! Shame! What we are left with is a bunch of right-wing posturing about Obama-come-King nonsense.

Reducing the argument down to “free contraceptives for women” is an attempt by right-wing punditry to put the argument back in to the government overreach arena. That the whole reason of Obamacare is for the government to offer freebies to all the ladies, thereby locking them down in to democrat voters for the foreseeable future, just like what they did with welfare and the “others”.

But it’s not about “free contraceptives” it is and always will be about offering health insurance to anyone and everyone who wants it. This odd religious argument Ms. Parker makes is dangerous as it pertains to only a certain religious thought. What about other religions and their objections? Should we honor all of those as well? By Ms. Parker’s definition their religious liberties are under attack, and NO ONE is speaking up for them in the pundit class! And what about Hobby Lobby’s (probably non-existent) non-religious employees? Should they have their corporate overlords religion foisted upon them? What about their rights?

The answers? Oh yeah, that’s above my paygrade. But at least Kathleen Parker got her comments section in a tizzy! Over 1,000 comments and counting!

Jonah Goldberg's War on Women

Far be it from me to be yet another white guy with an opinion on women’s issues. But I can’t help it, and the pundit class isn’t covering anything of note. Which makes sense on some level. The right-wing pundit class has “spoken” on Chris Christie’s current problems, and if anything use those as a launching off point to cover all the Obama “scandals”. More importantly it’s yet another reason to trot out Benghazi…again.

One of the biggest women’s issues is, of course, their ability to control their own bodies. White old men have plenty to say about this and do as much as they can to control it…and by extension…women.

It would be reductive to say that women need to step it up and get more of themselves in positions of power, but that’s exactly what they need to do. And not just in Congress, but state and local places of power too. As it’s becoming clearer that the anti-abortion crowd is finding more success on the local level in their war against a woman’s constitutionally protected right to an abortion.

Roe v. Wade’s birthday was recently, and this article would’ve probably been more at home here, but then I would have missed Jonah Goldberg’s ridiculous hit piece against Wendy Davis, who’s making a run for Texas Governor.

If there’s one thing the GOP right-wing hates more than abortion, it’s powerful women democrats. Look no further than the ascension of Hilary Clinton’s phantom 2016 presidential bid. It may explain this continued insistence on Benghazi, just in case she does decide to run, it will be in the recent memory of “independent” voters. Wendy Davis is just a more recent, fresher example of persona non grata for the GOP right-wing pundit class, that she made a stand for Texas women and their reproductive rights, just doubles the rage against her.

Mr. Goldberg’s reducing of Wendy Davis to her pink sneakers and 11-hour filibuster is hugely misogynist on it’s own merits, but he doesn’t stop there. His article attempts to insult her intelligence on current abortion news, and wonders aloud why she has so many problems with common sense legislation on abortion clinics.

This is currently how the anti-abortion crowd is propelling their agenda: legislating abortion clinics in to oblivion. They act as though these are just common sense laws that are helping the clinics perform and conform better thereby providing safer baby killing abortions. Sadly it’s working all to well.

Gone are the days of scaring young people with programs that were largely unsuccessful: abstinence only "sex education", and shoving pictures of dead fetuses in the face of young people on campuses across the nation. Unfortunately, what they’re doing in the state legislatures is much more horrific than anything they could conceivably put in a picture.

What’s more, the amount of sheer ignorance to abortion is on display from the GOP right-wing, that you really do wonder why they have so much to say on the subject, but so little substance to back it up. Arguments always boil down to “well, I feel that…” and no one should give a shit about how you “feel” about another persons right to do what they wish to their own bodies.

Couched amongst the Wendy Davis hit-piece of an article is the Kermit Gosnell case. And while the entire ordeal is indeed eye-brow raising, it does show the horrors of both a society that turns a blind eye to a very real need amongst young minority women and immigrants that need proper medical care, and government bureaucracy that would let something like Gosnell’s clinic exist in it’s failed state in the first place. The lack of oversight can also be found in the like of the recent toxic leak in West Virginia. Where a tank hadn’t been inspected in over two decades!

Wendy Davis’ crime in all of this? As a vaunted pro-abortionist she didn’t know much about the Gonsell case! “For shame!" Cries Jonah Goldberg. To be fair, who else really knew about the Gosnell case from the lack of reporting from the corporate media? The GOP right-wing certainly didn’t say anything about it. I would’ve noticed and written about it at the time, it just wasn’t really covered. But to who’s determent is that? Doesn’t the GOP right-wing have an entire channel dedicated to their bullshit?!

Her further crimes are pointed out in that when asked about the fact that a majority of American women support a ban on late term abortions, she answered that she felt a lot of people (key word) don’t really understand the landscape of what’s happening in that arena today. To which Mr. Goldberg assumes Ms. Davis meant JUST WOMEN and that she was “casually dismissing the majority of American women”.  Saying nothing to the fuller extent the PEOPLE  mentioned, of those being the white old men who haven zero concept on not just abortion but of birth control and other women’s health issues, who are pushing all this regressive anti-women legislation.

Jonah Goldberg isn’t quite done with trying to convince us that Wendy Davis isn’t worth supporting, and the war on women is a made up construct. When asked “When does life start?” She treated it like the non-question it is, and stated the Supreme Court has answered that question. To which Mr. Goldberg adds “Blah Blah Blah.” So this answer, and Mr. Goldberg’s friend Tom Bevan (who would have guessed a conservative?) agrees, is cowardice? She should’ve answered the question in a straight forward manner because it’s assumed that she’s made pro-abortion a “signature issue of her political life”.

This is an odd statement, seeing as all she really did was stand up for the women’s rights in Texas. The question itself is ridiculous on it’s own, because who cares when life begins? Most assuredly the anti-abortion camp does, and they’re doing everything in their power to close the window of opportunity a woman has in getting an abortion. To say nothing of if she can find one within reasonable distance to her general location, needless ultrasounds to compound the guilt and add a dash of shame. The 24 hour waiting period if she does go through with the procedure, because hey if you got time for an abortion, I guess you have a few days to wait around and kill some time along with that precious fetus.

Mr. Goldberg surmises that the pro-abortion crowd is just afraid to talk about abortion. That they attack the anti-abortion crowd out of insecurity that they’re defending murder. Which again, goes back to my point that the GOP right-wing just loves painting pro-abortion advocates as soulless baby killers who don’t understand the profound depths of having an abortion. What’s more, this debate is convictions versus rights. As the debate unravels it always comes down to someone’s faith telling them that abortion is wrong, and therefore the person’s rights mean nothing in the eyes of an almighty deity. It’s an absurd base argument with which to build on and curtail a constitutionally guaranteed freedom. This same logic somehow doesn’t apply with common sense gun laws and the GOP right-wing 2nd amendment crowd.

Further from that in Mr. Goldberg’s misogynistic ramblings against women’s right to choose is the notion that Wendy Davis is ignorant and therefore an unworthy mainstream political candidate. Not unlike the left-wing conspiracy that makes Sarah Palin a perpetual joke. But the problem is…Sarah Palin IS ignorant on most topics (political or otherwise) that matter to people. For Pete’s sake she couldn’t be bothered to answer a question about what newspapers she reads in a straight forward manner. Which means she’s a coward for not knowing about reading newspapers?

On the subject of women’s issues the GOP right-wing is only doubling down and losing. If they continue to push the issues, especially in the case of Obamacare covering contraceptives for women, they will lose further. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that insurance covers men's health items such as boner pills, penile implants and a score of other things, that I’m pretty sure women, or young people in general, aren’t interested in having to “pay for” out of their hard earned money.

The GOP right-wing is hoping to gain a foothold on gender issues by pressing the horrors of late terms abortions and banning them in the states. It’s seems like their eventual hope is to waste more taxpayer time and money propelling another case to the Supreme Court in the hopes of squashing a woman’s right to choose no matter the cost. This cost is going to be women voters across the board, and with the old white men arm of their party base slowly dying off, the GOP right-wing may need to pick their battles more carefully.