I Just Found Out Republicans Are Oppressing Me

Sometimes you read a blog so stupid it kind of makes your day.

That happened today when Google obligingly sent me my daily news results for articles containing the words "Texas" and "abortion," and I clicked on a link titled "Barefoot, Pregnant, and In the Kitchen." This blog post for Salem-News.com is written by one Daniel Johnson, who looks in his photo like a deflated Wilford Brimley.

Fasten your seatbelts for this roller coaster ride, because you are about to experience the heights of idiocy, interspersed with sharp plummets to crazy.

Here is how the whole thing starts off:

I was outraged by the headline when I opened this morning’s New York Times: Women in Texas Losing Options for Health Care in Abortion Fight. I’ve never been a great fan of democracy because it’s a given that people can usually be counted on to vote against their own best interests. 

Isn't it awesome how this guy just goes right ahead and admits it? "I've never been a great fan of democracy..."

Liberals hate it when people get to do stuff they don't think we should do, like believe in God and drive SUVs. It drives them bonkers.

A drunk liberal at a party once accidentally let slip something like, "I don't believe in free speech..." She then tried to backpedal (and later punched my friend in the face, but that's another story) but the damage was done, and the truth was out.

Louis C.K. can refer to Sarah Palin's vagina as a "disgusting retard-making c***" and everyone think's it's a real scream, but call one of the ladies of the Left an ugly name, and we just cannot continue to go on as a nation unless Limbaugh apologizes. Better yet, pull your sponsorship dollars! Yank him from the air!

I don't want Louis C.K.'s despicable ass taken off the air. Let him have his show. It's called the First Amendment.

Anyway, Johnson goes on to say:

This is what Abrahamic religion does to women. We have come to see it in Islamic countries where women are not allowed to go out in public without a male "guardian".

It's always really fun for me when people point out the obvious correlations between Islam and Christianity. There are lots of similarities, after all. Have you ever noticed how in the United States, where we have Christian Law, there is no punishment for men who throw acid on the faces of women who deny their marriage proposals? And have you noticed how women have to cover themselves or be beaten? And how women who talk to non-Christian males, lose their virginity before marriage, or get raped, can legally be killed by their fathers and brothers? Oh, and remember how homosexuality is a crime punishable by death, and women can't drive, vote, or speak to a man unless spoken to?

Yeah, me neither.

Moving on.

The real fun comes when Johnson starts perusing the comments section of the NYT article in question. Now, Internet coments are never what you'd call a forum for enlightened and even-handed debate, but even for the insanity of the Webbertubes, these are pretty insane.

This one is my personal favorite:

Texas should be regarded as a third world country, such as Afghanistan: Primitive beliefs, rampant corruption, lacking in education, mistreating women. It's a pity it can't be ceded to Venezuela, or at least be forced to move culturally in the direction of the 21st century. Banning cowboy hats and boots, and other such adolescent props, might help. If hats are needed, let them use pith helmets.

I'll bet you five horses and a moo-cow that thar Yankee ain't never even been to Texas! Hell, I bet he thinks we still ride horseback to skewl, when the truth is ever' last homestead has us a covered wagon. Yeeeehaw!

Compared to the rest of the U.S., Texas has a high standard of living. In a tanking economy, we are remarkably solvent and jobs are comparatively plentiful. We also take the dishes out of the sink before we pee in it.

Apparently we don't excel at the kind of fancy book-learnin' this person favors, and we aren't as 21st century as he would have us be. He's also not fond of our style of dress. (Apparently his fancy books have taught him all Texans run around in cowboy hats and boots all the time.)

So, like a typical liberal, what he doesn't like he wants to ban. Note how he uses the words "forced" and "banning" both in that small paragraph. Ah, yes: the party of tolerance.

To you, anonymous NYT reader, I would like to extend this invitation: come to Texas. We'll show you just how primitive we are.

Here comes another comment I really liked:

Any woman who votes Republican deserves what she gets.

That's a little ominous, isn't it? If he means I get a Republican president, then... that's awesome. Cool. But this seems to have a weird threatening twist to it.

It reminds me of Janeane Garofaloalolflo on MSNBC saying that women and "people of color," a PC phrase that makes my eyelid twitch, who identify with the Republican party must have a form of Stockholm syndrome and that we subconsciously seek to "curry favor with the oppressor."

It would be really funny, but it's so hard to laugh while looking at Janeane Garolalalfoalala. Remember when she was cute and fun? Remember Reality Bites? What happened, Janeane? She looks all dry and bitter, like a dessicated almond in hipster glasses.

Here's the last little bit of Johnson's cuckoo blog:

Then I read about the Republicans' physical assault on women.

In Texas a woman seeking an abortion must first allow an ultrasound probe to be inserted into her vagina. "It’s state-sanctioned abuse," said Dr. Curtis Boyd, a Texas physician who provides abortions. "It borders on a definition of rape. Many states describe rape as putting any object into an orifice against a person’s will. Well, that’s what this is. A woman is coerced to do this, just as I’m coerced." [Emphasis in original.]

First of all: spare me the dramatics. A woman seeking an abortion is going to have an ultrasound anyway. That's part of the process. This law just makes sure she has the opportunity to view it, and have it described to her, before a 24 hour waiting period.

I attended a meeting hosted by Planned Parenthood of North Texas at which Nancy Northup of Center for Reproductive Rights spoke about their case against the Texas Sonogram Law. One slightly off-kilter lady stood up and started ranting about the vaginal probe being rape, and Northup, the crusading abortion advocate, dismissed this. You could tell she thought it was silly.

The woman stood up again and again her concern was waved off by Northup. Trust me: if there was a case against the probe, CRR would have mentioned it.

Second: let's talk about Dr. Curtis Boyd for a second. He commits abortions (right here in Dallas) up to 24 weeks of pregnancy. By any standard, that is past viability. He famously told WFAA-TV, "Am I killing? Yes I am."

So forgive me if I am simultaneously yawning and rolling my eyes when Boyd acts concerned about women being "abused" by a sonogram probe. Okay, Boyd: if the probe is abusive to a woman, what is it when you jam things into her cervix and suck her baby out of her? It ain't no foot massage.

What Boyd does to women is the ultimate form of abuse. And his concern for her well-being and virtue is utterly false. His only concern is for his paycheck, which he knows is threatened by the sonogram law. Late term abortionists stand to take a particularly hard hit: a woman viewing an ultrasound of a 24-week-old fetus is going to see clearly discernible limbs, movement, perhaps even yawns and hiccups. Kind of hard to sell the old "clump of cells" line when the clump is sucking its thumb, huh, Boyd?

I hope you enjoyed this ride into the fascinating mind of Daniel Johnson and his fellow wackos. I think I'll send a copy of this blog to him and see what he has to say. I bet it'll be interesting, and I'll be sure to share it with you.

I better get going. I have to pump out this young'un and cook up some vittles 'fore sundown iffen I don't wanna git beat.