Times Q & A With _______ _______

Posted: April 8, 2009 in Threat Quality

You have to go to law school to be a lawyer, and _______ _______ sure must have done that.  It turns out that going to law school doesn’t actually make you implicitly capable of constructing intelligent or valid arguments.

Time just did a Q&A with _______ ________, hater of gays, despiser of equality, and foe of a free society.  I have taken the liberty of annotating it for you.

[On Defeating the ERA]

In the political field, yes. Of course, I have six children and I’m most proud of them. If you’re talking about politics, it was quite an achievement because of the odds we were up against. Nobody thought we could possibly win…In politics, it’s more fun to win than it is to lose.

(Obviously, as opposed to parenting, where losing is the fun part.)

[On What life would be like if the ERA had passed]

It would have given vast new powers to the federal courts because the Equal Rights Amendment did not define the operative words, which were sex and equality. So what does sex mean? Is it the sex you are, or the sex you do?

(What, really?  The Supreme Court’s vast powers would have included enshrining the civil rights of people who DO sex?  Does this mean she would have been okay with the ERA except that it might have promoted equality for people that like to do it reverse cowgirl style?  Was her nightmare the Supreme Court Case E! vs Kardashian, that would have supported equality for people that like to get peed on?)

What does equality mean? Does it mean equality of individual people like the Fourteenth Amendment, or does it mean the equality of a group?  In America we really don’t believe in group rights.

(Oops, it looks like she’s answered her own question.  Yeah, it turns out the Supreme Court has already rejected group rights.  What’s the term for an argument that you make up, and it’s not really your opponent’s argument, but it’s easier to attack?)

I think it’s pretty clear that if the Equal Rights Amendment had passed, we would have had same-sex marriage 25 years ago.

(That, _______, would have been the POINT of the ERA.  The question is, what would be the terrible consequences of it?  Canada has had same-sex marriage for a while, but they still haven’t devolved into a nation of state subsidized goat-fucking perverts.  Their divorce rate is lower, too!)

[On Whether or not America Will Accept Gay Marriage]

No, I don’t believe it’s going to happen. I think the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to that.

(Ha.  Shows what you fucking know.  Actually, most Americans don’t really give a shit.  We have our own lives to worry about.  It’s just noisy busybodies like you and your Eagle Forum thing that hate it when other people are happy.)

[On the Dangers Facing Marriage]

My own belief is that the problem [facing] marriage is maybe only 5% a problem with gay activism, and 95% a problem with feminist activism. [Feminists] have given us divorce…

(cough, cough, what are you fucking talking about, you crazy whacked out bitch?  Divorce has been around SINCE THE EXISTENCE OF MARRIAGE–and precipitated exclusively by MEN.  Remember when Henry the VIII had to create his own church so he could divorce his wives easily?  Remember how the Catholic Church had to invent some kind of loony “annulment” proceeding so that it could separate marriages without divorcing people?  WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU SMOKING?)

…millions of fatherless children and the idea that it’s O.K. to be a single mom.

(This is a typical imaginary woman that Republicans talk about all the time–the one that finds a man, gets pregnant by him, then runs off to live on government welfare.  Because the meager welfare payments that you get for having extra children–which you presumably keep in a shed, or something, so you don’t have to feed them–is a HUGE financial incentive, and keeps these welfare queens living in the lap of luxury.  That’s why the only people that live in affluent suburbs are single mothers with three kids and welfare payments.)

I believe that the worst thing the liberals did in this country was the Lyndon Johnson welfare system, which broke up millions of marriages by funneling taxpayers’ money solely to the woman. That made the father and husband irrelevant.

(Which is stupid, for a variety of reasons.  Firstly, it posits that the only relevance that a father has to a family is his income–but, if that were the case, then it shouldn’t matter whether or not he was there, as long as the money was.  Secondly, it suggests that men have no actual responsibility for any of these broken families–men never walk out on their wives, never abandon their children, never get a woman pregnant and then never speak to her again.  Thirdly, it suggests that the best way to solve this problem is by forcibly tying the woman to a man that she doesn’t want to be with by making her financially insolvent on her own–and conveniently overlooks the number of children who suffer physical and psychological abuse by growing up in families with, say, abusive fathers, or just bitter and angry parents.)

[On Being a Successful Career Woman]

The feminist movement is not about success for women. It is about treating women as victims and about telling women that you can’t succeed because society is unfair to you, and I think that’s a very unfortunate idea to put in the minds of young women because I believe women can do whatever they want. Feminists don’t honor successful women. You never hear them talking about Margaret Thatcher.

(_______ ________ reveals that she doesn’t know any feminists.  These conversations come up all the time, actually–whether or not we should be honoring a woman for being successful, despite being successful at something terrible.  Fortunately, there are plenty of women to idolize–for every Leni Riefenstahl that we’d rather not talk about, there’s a Katherine Hepburn.  For every Margaret Thatcher–who promoted some brutally oppressive politics–there’s a Hillary Clinton.  Feminism regularly idolizes a MYRIAD of successful women–_______’s just mad because she’s not one of them.)

Take Condoleezza Rice. She’s a remarkable, successful woman.  You don’t hear the feminists talk about her…

(No, YOU don’t hear feminists talk about her, because you don’t talk to any feminists.  Idiot.)

…or Carly Fiorina…

(Hear them talk about what?  How she drove HP into the ground?  Or how she helped make John McCain’s campaign a complete fucking laughingstock?)

…or Jeanne Kirkpatrick.

(Maybe we’re uncomfortable with her policy of supporting fascist authoritarian dictatorships in foreign countries in order to prevent the spread of Communism?)

They don’t talk about them because they are just determined to preach this idea that women are unfairly treated in our society and they need legislation and government and taxpayers’ money in order to get them a fair break.

(This is the typical “I did it, therefore everyone can do it” theory of social policy.  Which would be fine, if it were true.  Calvin Coolidge seemed to think that anything can be accomplished with hard work–this is nice for the people at the top, because it makes them feel like everyone else failed because they were lazy.  Didn’t have anything to do with luck, or privilege, or anything like that.  _______ ________ probably doesn’t like to think about the fact that if it hadn’t been for generations of feminists before her, she wouldn’t have been able to be a lawyer at all.)

[On What’s Next]

Well, I guess the next cause is to keep Obama from taking this country into socialism…

(Fortunately, Obama is basically a mild centrist.  He’s not even going to give us a national healthcare program, or actually finance higher education.)

— which means the government running everything…

(No, _______, it doesn’t–you’re thinking of Communism.  Socialism just means the government takes a vested interest in social programs that support the general welfare with tax money, the way it says we’re supposed to do it in the Constitution.)

…which means having everybody believe that the government can solve their problems.

(Okay, now you’re just making shit up.  Even actual socialist nations don’t believe that.)

And of course I grew up during the Depression. We didn’t have any of the handouts and we grew up to be the greatest generation.

(Except, of course, for the SINGLE LARGEST GOVERNMENT HANDOUT PROGRAM IN HISTORY.  You’ve heard of the New Deal, right Phyllis?  How about when there was a 91% tax in the upper-marginal tax bracket?  How about when Franklin Roosevelt essentially appropriated the entire GDP for the war?  Remember the GI Bill, that sent thousands of soldiers to college on taxpayer dollars?  Do you remember those things ________, that HAPPENED IN YOUR LIFE?)

You can read the whole interview with _______ ________, Enemy of Humanity, here.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Zak (better than Chris, regardless of anything typed by Chris starting now) says:

    Sadly, if you listened to the recent California Supreme Court hearings to overturn prop 8, the gay rights movement isn’t much better at making legal over emotional/moral arguments

  2. Zak (better than Chris, regardless of anything typed by Chris starting now) says:

    Just read her full interview. Alright, they’re definitely better than _______ ________, just not as good as is necessary.

  3. V.I.P. Referee says:

    Privilege is such a cozy pulpit to preach from. Thankfully for her, the places she patronizes don’t allow Jewish people to become club members, so she’ll never have to listen to any sob stories from matrons about lost legacies, devastating partings and boo-hooing over The Holocaust. That she even bothers to put up with all this American riffraff is amazing—even more, that she bothers herself to the point of intervening on our behalf! How generous of her.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Mom Blogs – Blogs for Moms…

  5. deb says:

    WHY IS SHE STILL TALKING??????? WHY IS ANYONE STILL ASKING HER TO??????

    Sorry. _______ ________ makes my skin crawl — ever since she managed to get the ERA defeated by convincing middle-America that passing it would mean we’d all have to use the same bathrooms.

  6. V.I.P. Referee says:

    She’s a creepy little thing, isn’t she?

  7. Jeff Holland says:

    And she will be dead soon. And we will win.

  8. kithkin says:

    A mischievous woman who says terrible things indeed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s