Why Kevin D. Williamson is Too Dumb to Write
One of the things about me is that I am very conservative in certain areas. I do not believe in flag burning. I think defining that as free speech was as egregious a mistake as the latter day SCOTUS defining corporate cash as free speech. Men and women died to protect the ideal that flag represents, which are the ideals of a nation, never that of a government.
Another one of my conservative beliefs is my staunch opposition to abortion. My technically Roman Catholic nuclear family was never that wild about religion, not much had rubbed off on me, a person who's been an atheist for a half a century. That is, except for the sanctity of life. I never could even begin to embrace the fact that an innocent fetus has to die because its mother made a poor judgment call or was brought into being because its father was a rapist. In most cases, adoption is a preferable alternative.
Having said that, I also acknowledge that a woman has the right to do with her body as she sees fit and there seems to be no common ground between the child's right to live and a woman's sovereign right to her own body. If I were King of the World, would I ban abortion? Absolutely not. And there are scenarios in which termination of a pregnancy is not only wise, it's sometimes necessary.
Abortion seems to be the focus of Kevin Williamson's latest opus in the pages of the National Review, a right wing rag that, even in its so-called intellectual heyday was, at best, a bastion of leather chair-bound, pipe-sucking right wing clubber elitists snuffling their pseudo-intellectual credos in a neverending quest to justify selfishness. It was essentially Playboy without the funny cartoons or nude women.
However, in the last couple of decades the magazine has undergone a noticeable decline not only in quality but in sanity. And the very fact that the NR insists on employing an unreadable, fascist hack like Kevin Williamson should be enough to make William F. Buckley pinch the bridge of his nose and compel his semi-recumbent ghost to chase the miscreants who work there to the very gates of Hell and beyond.
Now, allow me one more brief digression by way of illustrating that I am not the hide-bound liberal some may think I am and that this screed is not the product of kneejerk reactionism or liberal bias (which wouldn't make me any less right). As stated above, I've always been contemptuous of the diktats of fashion, political correctness and the herd mentality and that includes the real focus of Williamson's bitter screed, "Five Reasons Why You're Too Dumb To Vote": Lena Dunham.
As stated before in the pages of this forum, I do not see any reason for Lena Dunham's existence on the planet earth. As with the fly and dandelions, I do not know why is she is here. She is a little air-headed twit who, as I'd said, "Put $3.6 million of pennies on the eyes of Western culture" for a solipsistic book. She used her show business connections and mommy's influence to break every submissions protocol in the publishing business by disseminating a 60 page book proposal, accessing people in the business from whom the rest of us unwashed beggars are ordinarily barred.
Having said that, Williamson seems unhealthily obsessed with Lena Dunham in much the same way that Rush Limbaugh is obsessed with Michelle Obama. To paraphrase Charles Krauthammer, let's call it, "Dunham Derangement Syndrome."
While I haven't the slightest amount of respect for her, if she wants to take to the internet and remind her readership to go out and vote this November, I haven't a problem with that. She's right. You should go out and vote on November 4th.
But Kevin Williamson has a problem with that because, darn it, those 20-something Millennials have a habit of voting Democrats and liberal and we can't have that. Therefore, concludes Williamson, if you vote Democrat, you're too dumb to vote. In fact, as he says at the end of his screed,
If you get your politics from actors and your news from television comedians — you should not vote. There’s no shame in it, your vote is statistically unlikely to affect the outcome of an election...Let's just set aside for a moment the inherent stupidity and ignorance of such a statement and focus on the bigger picture painted in fecal matter upon Williamson's wall: If you read Lena Dunham, you exist solely to serve as a cash cow for "a gang of abortion profiteers." But it gets a lot worse. When challenged in the comment section by a reader on his extreme views, he said that, while he opposes capital punishment, women who get abortions ought to be hanged. Yes he actually said that and on Twitter before he deleted it.
No word, yet, on whether his leniency regarding capital crimes and capital punishment would be extended to men who rape little girls and woman who are then forced to have an abortion because they may have a problem with having their lives dramatically altered by being the only mother in their Middle School.
After a few barely coherent paragraphs of "Dunham Derangement Syndrome" posing as ersatz intellectual puffery, our wouldbe David fucking Brooks then takes hypocrisy to new, unimagined heights when he writes,
there are many much more meaningful ways to serve your country and your fellow man: Volunteer at a homeless shelter; join the Marine Corps; become a nun; start a business.
All of which being, we can reasonably conjecture, things never once attempted by Kevin "D for Douchebag" Williamson.
It ought to be mentioned that Williamson, believe it or not, is not some fringe lunatic chewing off his hindleg from behind a shitty little byline at NR or the Moonie Times or Breitbart's online convection ovens. Williamson is a frequent contributor at Fox "News" (see lead picture) and seems to represent the mainstream conservatism.
So the next time some right wing gas bag screams in your face that there's no war on women, just remember this asswipe who called for the hanging of woman who get abortions, which is part and parcel to extreme radical right wing eliminationist rhetoric designed to scare and intimidate rather than debate and educate.