Asshole Of The Day

Like many people, I’ve been horrified at the treatment of women who address topics like racism or rape or other issues online. But I haven’t found the words to express it or address it, which is why I was glad to see this post from i-come-by-it-honestly which compiled what John Scalzi had to say on it. You can add this blog and teapartycat to the list.

And if you don’t follow @scalzi, you should:



Share on Tumblr   
Cliven Bundy, Asshole of the Day for April 24, 2014
by TeaPartyCat (Follow @TeaPartyCat)
Cliven Bundy is a rancher who claims to be a patriot, flies the American flag, but doesn’t pay his grazing fees (now over $1 million for last 15 years) or recognize the federal government. He’s also threatened to open fire on government officials.
And yet somehow Sean Hannity and other people who claim to be patriots but latch on to any opportunity to side with people against America while Obama is president— Putin for example— have decided to take up Bundy’s cause. Having him on the show, encouraging people to defend him, and praising the militias that went out for a chance to fire on government troops. Jon Stewart did a good job taking apart all this treasonous silliness, including how you can’t pretend you care about the Constitution or the Founding Fathers and support guys like Bundy who are no different than the Whiskey Rebellion that George Washington himself crushed.
But now that Hannity has given Bundy this platform, Bundy keeps on talking. And it’s not pretty. Here’s what Bundy had to say about black people, which isn’t even related to his land dispute, but he just felt he had to tell the world:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” the rancher began as he described a “government house” in Las Vegas where he recalled that all the people who sat outside seemed to “have nothing to do.”
“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he said, as quoted by the Times. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

Black people were better off as slaves.
He really said that.
And what does Hannity have to say? He says Bundy’s remarks are “beyond repugnant” and reinforce the “ignorant view” that conservatives are racist.
But now this is where it gets interesting. Hannity thinks it’s an “ignorant view” that conservatives are racist. But how ignorant is it? Let’s review where Mr. Bundy might have heard such things:
Maybe he heard Phil Robertson saying that blacks were better under Jim Crow and just confused that with slavery.
Maybe he heard the GOP’s Virginia Lt. Governor candidate E.W. Jackson say that “welfare hurt black families more than slavery ever did”.
Or maybe he remembers the pact that Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum signed in Iowa in 2011 while running for president, which opened:

"Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President," the opening statement reads.

Mr. Bundy didn’t come up with these ideas on his own. The racist view that African Americans were better off under slavery or Jim Crow is something that gets said by conservatives from time to time. Hannity’s claim that it’s an “ignorant view” that conservatives are racist is just hot air. Hannity and others may not be personally racist, but they are popular with racists, and they know it. Or more concisely:

Cliven Bundy is not a racist for saying “blacks were better off as slaves”; he’s just plagiarizing Michele Bachmann and E.W. Jackson.
— Top Conservative Cat (@TeaPartyCat) April 24, 2014
So, for claiming that people were better off under slavery, Cliven Bundy is the Asshole of the Day, but let’s not pretend he came up with this all on his own.
It is Cliven Bundy’s first time as Asshole of the Day.
Full story: Talking Points Memo

Cliven Bundy, Asshole of the Day for April 24, 2014

by TeaPartyCat ()

Cliven Bundy is a rancher who claims to be a patriot, flies the American flag, but doesn’t pay his grazing fees (now over $1 million for last 15 years) or recognize the federal government. He’s also threatened to open fire on government officials.

And yet somehow Sean Hannity and other people who claim to be patriots but latch on to any opportunity to side with people against America while Obama is president— Putin for example— have decided to take up Bundy’s cause. Having him on the show, encouraging people to defend him, and praising the militias that went out for a chance to fire on government troops. Jon Stewart did a good job taking apart all this treasonous silliness, including how you can’t pretend you care about the Constitution or the Founding Fathers and support guys like Bundy who are no different than the Whiskey Rebellion that George Washington himself crushed.

But now that Hannity has given Bundy this platform, Bundy keeps on talking. And it’s not pretty. Here’s what Bundy had to say about black people, which isn’t even related to his land dispute, but he just felt he had to tell the world:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” the rancher began as he described a “government house” in Las Vegas where he recalled that all the people who sat outside seemed to “have nothing to do.”

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he said, as quoted by the Times. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

Black people were better off as slaves.

He really said that.

And what does Hannity have to say? He says Bundy’s remarks are “beyond repugnant” and reinforce the “ignorant view” that conservatives are racist.

But now this is where it gets interesting. Hannity thinks it’s an “ignorant view” that conservatives are racist. But how ignorant is it? Let’s review where Mr. Bundy might have heard such things:

Maybe he heard Phil Robertson saying that blacks were better under Jim Crow and just confused that with slavery.

Maybe he heard the GOP’s Virginia Lt. Governor candidate E.W. Jackson say that “welfare hurt black families more than slavery ever did”.

Or maybe he remembers the pact that Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum signed in Iowa in 2011 while running for president, which opened:

"Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President," the opening statement reads.

Mr. Bundy didn’t come up with these ideas on his own. The racist view that African Americans were better off under slavery or Jim Crow is something that gets said by conservatives from time to time. Hannity’s claim that it’s an “ignorant view” that conservatives are racist is just hot air. Hannity and others may not be personally racist, but they are popular with racists, and they know it. Or more concisely:

So, for claiming that people were better off under slavery, Cliven Bundy is the Asshole of the Day, but let’s not pretend he came up with this all on his own.

It is Cliven Bundy’s first time as Asshole of the Day.

Full story: Talking Points Memo



Share on Tumblr   
Mitch McConnell, Asshole of the Day for April 23, 2014
by TeaPartyCat (Follow @TeaPartyCat)
Mitch McConnell is running for reelection this year. And while he still has to get through a primary against Tea Party asshole Matt Bevin, he’s more focused on Alison Lundergan Grimes in the general election.
And since she’s a woman, Mitch McConnell is trying to convince people that he has a good record on women’s issues. Last summer he tried to tout his support for the Violence Against Women Act, except it turns out he supported it a long time ago, but has voted against it in 1994, 2012, and 2013.
Then in November he claimed he “worked his entire career” for equal pay, but again it turns out he voted against equal pay the last 5 years.
And now he’s claiming he stood up for women in a Senate sexual harassment scandal, but it turns out he actually sabotaged it when he had the chance:

Talking about the Packwood scandal this past week, McConnell noted that he was chair of the Senate ethics committee when Packwood resigned. In a Tuesday interview with the Lexington Herald-Leader, McConnell said he had taken “the toughest possible position.” The newspaper reported that McConnell had “offered himself as an example of how elected officials should handle situations when a member of their own party is accused of sexual harassment.”
But the bulk of the ethics probe against Packwood took place when the committee was chaired by a Democrat. When Republicans regained a majority in the Senate after the 1994 elections and McConnell became chair of the committee, he transformed the Packwood investigation into a partisan mess.
…With Republicans now in the majority, McConnell, as chair of the Senate ethics committee, took control of the Packwood inquiry. And the investigation suddenly slowed down. As the committee missed its projected deadline for voting on public hearings by several months, McConnell dodged questions about where the investigation stood.
In mid-May, the committee announced it had acquired sufficient evidence to hold public hearings on the allegations. Its investigation had substantiated “18 instances of kissing, grabbing, groping or propositioning women,” often by force, the New York Times reported.
It was unprecedented for such serious ethics charges not to result in public hearings. But McConnell battled to keep the ensuing proceedings against Packwood closed. With Democrats demanding public hearings, McConnell canceled an ethics committee vote on holding such hearings without explanation. In the following weeks, he allowed committee debates over whether to hold public proceedings to drag on without a vote.
Despite calls for public hearings, McConnell blocked them. And when it came up for a vote on a public hearing, McConnell filibustered. Filibustered. He does a lot of that. 
Mitch McConnell played along with an investigation against a fellow Republican while he was in the minority and couldn’t really stop it. But once he had power, he sabotaged the investigation and public hearings. That’s not standing up for women; that’s standing up for the harasser.
So, for trying to rewrite his record on women’s issues, which says the opposite of what he claims, Mitch McConnell is the Asshole of the Day.
It is Mitch McConnell's second time as Asshole of the Day. His previous win was for his crocodile tears over filibuster reform even though he had exactly the opposite position when he was in the majority.
Full story: Mother Jones

Mitch McConnell, Asshole of the Day for April 23, 2014

by TeaPartyCat ()

Mitch McConnell is running for reelection this year. And while he still has to get through a primary against Tea Party asshole Matt Bevin, he’s more focused on Alison Lundergan Grimes in the general election.

And since she’s a woman, Mitch McConnell is trying to convince people that he has a good record on women’s issues. Last summer he tried to tout his support for the Violence Against Women Act, except it turns out he supported it a long time ago, but has voted against it in 1994, 2012, and 2013.

Then in November he claimed he “worked his entire career” for equal pay, but again it turns out he voted against equal pay the last 5 years.

And now he’s claiming he stood up for women in a Senate sexual harassment scandal, but it turns out he actually sabotaged it when he had the chance:

Talking about the Packwood scandal this past week, McConnell noted that he was chair of the Senate ethics committee when Packwood resigned. In a Tuesday interview with the Lexington Herald-Leader, McConnell said he had taken “the toughest possible position.” The newspaper reported that McConnell had “offered himself as an example of how elected officials should handle situations when a member of their own party is accused of sexual harassment.”

But the bulk of the ethics probe against Packwood took place when the committee was chaired by a Democrat. When Republicans regained a majority in the Senate after the 1994 elections and McConnell became chair of the committee, he transformed the Packwood investigation into a partisan mess.

…With Republicans now in the majority, McConnell, as chair of the Senate ethics committee, took control of the Packwood inquiry. And the investigation suddenly slowed down. As the committee missed its projected deadline for voting on public hearings by several months, McConnell dodged questions about where the investigation stood.

In mid-May, the committee announced it had acquired sufficient evidence to hold public hearings on the allegations. Its investigation had substantiated “18 instances of kissing, grabbing, groping or propositioning women,” often by force, the New York Times reported.

It was unprecedented for such serious ethics charges not to result in public hearings. But McConnell battled to keep the ensuing proceedings against Packwood closed. With Democrats demanding public hearings, McConnell canceled an ethics committee vote on holding such hearings without explanation. In the following weeks, he allowed committee debates over whether to hold public proceedings to drag on without a vote.

Despite calls for public hearings, McConnell blocked them. And when it came up for a vote on a public hearing, McConnell filibustered. Filibustered. He does a lot of that.

Mitch McConnell played along with an investigation against a fellow Republican while he was in the minority and couldn’t really stop it. But once he had power, he sabotaged the investigation and public hearings. That’s not standing up for women; that’s standing up for the harasser.

So, for trying to rewrite his record on women’s issues, which says the opposite of what he claims, Mitch McConnell is the Asshole of the Day.

It is Mitch McConnell's second time as Asshole of the Day. His previous win was for his crocodile tears over filibuster reform even though he had exactly the opposite position when he was in the majority.

Full story: Mother Jones



Share on Tumblr   
Sean Hannity, Asshole of the Day for April 22, 2014
By The Daily Edge
Sean Hannity loves to play the good Catholic. For example, he’s happy to talk about Jesus washing his disciples’ feet. And he loves to talk about the need for Christians to “serve others.”
Of course, the Lord Hannity draws the line at the idea that HE would ever wash anyone’s feet. He’s NOT that good a Catholic, hahaha.
But where he really loses the plot is with the idea that the Government should do anything to help feed the poor. After all, we’ve heard from Reaganomists like Hannity for 30 years that tax cuts for the rich would trickle down and we won’t need no stinking Uncle Sugar to feed us and we shouldn’t expect to rely on Medicare when we get older, either.
Of course, the facts, don’t actually bear that out. We now know that Reaganomics have destroyed the middle class and made America’s poor WORSE off than many of those socialist, vacation-loving European countries. (That story’s here: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/upshot/the-american-middle-class-is-no-longer-the-worlds-richest.html?_r=2 )
To Hannity, the biggest sin you can make as a Catholic is to become a nun like Sister Simone Campbell, devote your life to studying the Bible, and then actually try to be like Jesus and speak up for the poor. Because if you do all that, then, like a good Catholic, you’d have to denounce Paul Ryan’s reverse-Robin-Hood plan to gut $5.3 TRILLION from programs to help the poorest Americans, while handing $4.3 TRILLION in tax cuts to the already rich. 
In Hannity’s sick, twisted mind that qualifies you as a communist. This guy’s the epitome of a religious hypocrite. And a total asshole.
Full story: http://crooksandliars.com/2014/04/sean-hannity-calls-nun-communist-speaking
Sean Hannity’s previous Asshole of the Day win: http://assholeoftheday.us/post/52898372258/asshole-of-the-day-june-13-2013-sean-hannity-by

Sean Hannity, Asshole of the Day for April 22, 2014

By The Daily Edge

Sean Hannity loves to play the good Catholic. For example, he’s happy to talk about Jesus washing his disciples’ feet. And he loves to talk about the need for Christians to “serve others.”

Of course, the Lord Hannity draws the line at the idea that HE would ever wash anyone’s feet. He’s NOT that good a Catholic, hahaha.

But where he really loses the plot is with the idea that the Government should do anything to help feed the poor. After all, we’ve heard from Reaganomists like Hannity for 30 years that tax cuts for the rich would trickle down and we won’t need no stinking Uncle Sugar to feed us and we shouldn’t expect to rely on Medicare when we get older, either.

Of course, the facts, don’t actually bear that out. We now know that Reaganomics have destroyed the middle class and made America’s poor WORSE off than many of those socialist, vacation-loving European countries. (That story’s here: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/upshot/the-american-middle-class-is-no-longer-the-worlds-richest.html?_r=2 )

To Hannity, the biggest sin you can make as a Catholic is to become a nun like Sister Simone Campbell, devote your life to studying the Bible, and then actually try to be like Jesus and speak up for the poor. Because if you do all that, then, like a good Catholic, you’d have to denounce Paul Ryan’s reverse-Robin-Hood plan to gut $5.3 TRILLION from programs to help the poorest Americans, while handing $4.3 TRILLION in tax cuts to the already rich. 

In Hannity’s sick, twisted mind that qualifies you as a communist. This guy’s the epitome of a religious hypocrite. And a total asshole.

Full story: http://crooksandliars.com/2014/04/sean-hannity-calls-nun-communist-speaking

Sean Hannity’s previous Asshole of the Day win: http://assholeoftheday.us/post/52898372258/asshole-of-the-day-june-13-2013-sean-hannity-by



Share on Tumblr   
Cardinal Dolan, Asshole of the Day for April 21, 2014
by TeaPartyCat (Follow @TeaPartyCat)
Cardinal Dolan is the most prominent Catholic in America*, being Archbishop of New York, and president of the US Conference of Bishops. Aside from the Pope, he has the most say when it comes to the news on Catholics in this country.
So it matters when he gets things wrong, especially when he tries to influence public policy for the entire nation and not just inform the private decisions of his flock. And yet here he is dismissing the healthcare needs of women without understanding the science or medicine involved:


Is the ability to buy contraceptives, that are now widely available — my Lord, all you have to do is walk into a 7-11 or any shop on any street in America and have access to them — is that right to access those and have them paid for, is that such a towering good that it would suffocate the rights of conscience?

That would be Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York, on Face the Nation yesterday. It was Dolan who, as president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops from 2010 until 2013, guided the bishops into a firm alliance with conservative evangelicals (and implicitly, with the Republican Party) in a crusade for “religious liberty” defined as the right of employers to refuse their employees insurance coverage for contraceptives—typically those they regard, in defiance of standard medical profession and scientific definitions, as “abortifacients.”

The problem is that what Cardinal Dolan wants to block are, among other things, IUDs. IUDs are effective, more effective than the condoms you can purchase at 7-11, but they are not cheap, nor can they be bought just anywhere. An IUD can cost $500-1000, but they last for years. And if an IUD is what your doctor thinks will work best and be best for you then why should Cardinal Dolan come between you and your doctor to decide you should stick with condoms or never having sex?
IUDs are the contraception covered under the mandate the Cardinal is fighting. The mandate doesn’t cover condoms or anything you can buy at 7-11. It’s only about the things that require a prescription. So his 7-11 comment is not germane, and demonstrates either that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about or doesn’t care or, is trying to deceive people as to what this fight is really about.
And Cardinal Dolan’s influence over the healthcare choices of women aren’t just limited to the contraception mandate. The Catholic bishops are responsible for the Catholic hospitals in this country, and are limiting what treatments doctors are allowed to offer based on doctrine, not medicine, but they aren’t disclosing to the patients that other treatments and choices exist, so women can’t make informed decisions or know that they should get a second opinion or avoid Catholic hospitals altogether.
So, for pushing policies that limit women’s choices of contraception while refusing to educate himself on the medicine and science and costs involved, Cardinal Dolan is the Asshole of the Day.
It is Cardinal Dolan’s first time as Asshole of the Day.
Full story: Political Animal
*except perhaps for Colbert, who has often given himself the title of America’s most prominent Catholic.

Cardinal Dolan, Asshole of the Day for April 21, 2014

by TeaPartyCat ()

Cardinal Dolan is the most prominent Catholic in America*, being Archbishop of New York, and president of the US Conference of Bishops. Aside from the Pope, he has the most say when it comes to the news on Catholics in this country.

So it matters when he gets things wrong, especially when he tries to influence public policy for the entire nation and not just inform the private decisions of his flock. And yet here he is dismissing the healthcare needs of women without understanding the science or medicine involved:

Is the ability to buy contraceptives, that are now widely available — my Lord, all you have to do is walk into a 7-11 or any shop on any street in America and have access to them — is that right to access those and have them paid for, is that such a towering good that it would suffocate the rights of conscience?

That would be Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York, on Face the Nation yesterday. It was Dolan who, as president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops from 2010 until 2013, guided the bishops into a firm alliance with conservative evangelicals (and implicitly, with the Republican Party) in a crusade for “religious liberty” defined as the right of employers to refuse their employees insurance coverage for contraceptives—typically those they regard, in defiance of standard medical profession and scientific definitions, as “abortifacients.”

The problem is that what Cardinal Dolan wants to block are, among other things, IUDs. IUDs are effective, more effective than the condoms you can purchase at 7-11, but they are not cheap, nor can they be bought just anywhere. An IUD can cost $500-1000, but they last for years. And if an IUD is what your doctor thinks will work best and be best for you then why should Cardinal Dolan come between you and your doctor to decide you should stick with condoms or never having sex?

IUDs are the contraception covered under the mandate the Cardinal is fighting. The mandate doesn’t cover condoms or anything you can buy at 7-11. It’s only about the things that require a prescription. So his 7-11 comment is not germane, and demonstrates either that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about or doesn’t care or, is trying to deceive people as to what this fight is really about.

And Cardinal Dolan’s influence over the healthcare choices of women aren’t just limited to the contraception mandate. The Catholic bishops are responsible for the Catholic hospitals in this country, and are limiting what treatments doctors are allowed to offer based on doctrine, not medicine, but they aren’t disclosing to the patients that other treatments and choices exist, so women can’t make informed decisions or know that they should get a second opinion or avoid Catholic hospitals altogether.

So, for pushing policies that limit women’s choices of contraception while refusing to educate himself on the medicine and science and costs involved, Cardinal Dolan is the Asshole of the Day.

It is Cardinal Dolan’s first time as Asshole of the Day.

Full story: Political Animal

*except perhaps for Colbert, who has often given himself the title of America’s most prominent Catholic.



Share on Tumblr   
Is David Cameron Asshole of the Day?

Is British PM David Cameron asshole of the day for saying the UK is a Christian country?

“Some people feel that in this ever more secular age we shouldn’t talk about these things. I completely disagree,” the Conservative prime minister wrote in the Church Times, an Anglican newspaper.

“I believe we should be more confident about our status as a Christian country, more ambitious about expanding the role of faith-based organisations, and, frankly, more evangelical about a faith that compels us to get out there and make a difference to people’s lives.”

The open letter, which was organised by the British Humanist Association and published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper, disputes Cameron’s claims that Britain is still a Christian country.

“Constantly to claim otherwise fosters alienation and division in our society,” it says.

More at Raw Story

It’s fine for Cameron to be a Christian, but when the head of state says the country is a Christian country, then that should make the citizens who don’t share his religion nervous. He should be everyone’s leader, not just those who share his religion.

Photo source: https://twitter.com/David_Cameron



Share on Tumblr   
Is this the end for 5-time Asshole of the Day Rush Limbaugh?

Interesting post about how many of Rush Limbaugh's sponsors are leaving or gone. Read it here.



Share on Tumblr   
Bryan Fischer, Asshole of the Day for April 17, 2014
by TeaPartyCat (Follow @TeaPartyCat)
Bryan Fischer is an asshole. He has been featured on this site many, many times, and has been named Asshole of the Day five times prior to today. Usually though we feature him for his hatred of gays, which is so awful that the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the American Family Association where Fishcer works as a hate group. Yeah.
But Bryan Fischer is more than just a bigot. He can be offensive on many conservative topics, including income inequality. After discussing that the top 1% pay 30% of all federal taxes, Fischer told listeners that the poor ought to kiss the ground that the rich walk on:

the poor and middle class families in this country “ought to be kissing the ground on which [the rich] walk” because it is the top 1% that is paying for EBT cards and food stamps and federal housing.
The rich, Fischer asserted “ought to be given ticker tape parades once a week in all of our major cities to thank them for funding welfare for everybody”

Now of course Fischer doesn’t discuss how the top 1% got all that income— was it by manipulating laws to favor them, creating monopolies to raise prices, inheritance, spending $400 million on an election, or any of that other stuff. He’s not interested in that.
Fischer portrays himself and his conservative beliefs as traditional and Christian. And he has studied religion extensively:

Fischer has an undergraduate degree in philosophy from Stanford University, and holds a graduate degree in theology from Dallas Theological Seminary. Fischer served at the Cole Community Church in Boise, Idaho and founded the Cole Center for Biblical Studies and was the church’s director for thirteen years. Fischer then founded Community Church of the Valley and was senior pastor for twelve years. Before joining the board of directors of American Family Association, Fischer was also executive director of Idaho Values Alliance.
In 2004, he co-founded the Keep the Commandments Coalition, a group dedicated to keeping a Ten Commandments monument in Julia Davis Park in Boise. From 2000 to 2005, he served as a commissioner for the city’s Park and Recreation Department.

But apparently when doing all that Bible study, Fischer missed the parts where Jesus praised the poor and vilified the rich.
The suggestion that the poor should kiss the ground the rich walk on should be offensive to any Christian. And that Fischer represents himself as a Christian and has studied the Bible extensively and says this, only makes it more offensive. So, for turning Jesus’ own worldview of rich and poor upside down to give comfort to the rich, Bryan Fischer is the Asshole of the Day.
It is Bryan Fischer’s 6th time being named Asshole of the Day. Previous wins were for saying
claiming the Founding Fathers only meant to protect Christianity, not other religions
claiming the Senate had been intimated into silence by the bullies and bigots of Big Gay
claiming Obama was photoshopped into the Situation Room photo of the Bin Laden Raid
claiming that homosexuals are just like Nazis because most Nazis were homosexual
people who believe in evolution should be banned from holding office
Full story: Right Wing Watch

Bryan Fischer, Asshole of the Day for April 17, 2014

by TeaPartyCat ()

Bryan Fischer is an asshole. He has been featured on this site many, many times, and has been named Asshole of the Day five times prior to today. Usually though we feature him for his hatred of gays, which is so awful that the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the American Family Association where Fishcer works as a hate group. Yeah.

But Bryan Fischer is more than just a bigot. He can be offensive on many conservative topics, including income inequality. After discussing that the top 1% pay 30% of all federal taxes, Fischer told listeners that the poor ought to kiss the ground that the rich walk on:

the poor and middle class families in this country “ought to be kissing the ground on which [the rich] walk” because it is the top 1% that is paying for EBT cards and food stamps and federal housing.

The rich, Fischer asserted “ought to be given ticker tape parades once a week in all of our major cities to thank them for funding welfare for everybody”

Now of course Fischer doesn’t discuss how the top 1% got all that income— was it by manipulating laws to favor them, creating monopolies to raise prices, inheritance, spending $400 million on an election, or any of that other stuff. He’s not interested in that.

Fischer portrays himself and his conservative beliefs as traditional and Christian. And he has studied religion extensively:

Fischer has an undergraduate degree in philosophy from Stanford University, and holds a graduate degree in theology from Dallas Theological Seminary. Fischer served at the Cole Community Church in Boise, Idaho and founded the Cole Center for Biblical Studies and was the church’s director for thirteen years. Fischer then founded Community Church of the Valley and was senior pastor for twelve years. Before joining the board of directors of American Family Association, Fischer was also executive director of Idaho Values Alliance.

In 2004, he co-founded the Keep the Commandments Coalition, a group dedicated to keeping a Ten Commandments monument in Julia Davis Park in Boise. From 2000 to 2005, he served as a commissioner for the city’s Park and Recreation Department.

But apparently when doing all that Bible study, Fischer missed the parts where Jesus praised the poor and vilified the rich.

The suggestion that the poor should kiss the ground the rich walk on should be offensive to any Christian. And that Fischer represents himself as a Christian and has studied the Bible extensively and says this, only makes it more offensive. So, for turning Jesus’ own worldview of rich and poor upside down to give comfort to the rich, Bryan Fischer is the Asshole of the Day.

It is Bryan Fischer’s 6th time being named Asshole of the Day. Previous wins were for saying

Full story: Right Wing Watch



Share on Tumblr   
Phyllis Schlafly, Asshole of the Day for April 16, 2014
by TeaPartyCat (Follow @TeaPartyCat)
In the last month or two equal pay laws and the gender pay gap have been in the news, and the excuses to do nothing about this have been all over the place. And not in a good way. So far we’ve seen:
Bill O’Reilly said there was no point in even discussing it, even if it’s a real problem
Rep. Andrea Kieffer said it made women look like whiners
Red State Women’s Cari Christman said women are “too busy” to need equal pay laws
Texas GOP Exec. Director Beth Cubriel says women just need to be better negotiators
Sen. Lamar Alexander worried that equal pay laws might make men get paid less than women
Neal Boortz says equal pay is just a scam pushed on “easily manipulated women” by Democrats
But of course all those people are rookies compared to Phyllis Schlafly, who won’t be left out of the conversation. She’s been pushing for women to be second class citizens for 40 years! Her argument against equal pay laws? Women won’t find husbands if they’re paid equal to men:

While women prefer to HAVE a higher-earning partner, men generally prefer to BE the higher-earning partner in a relationship. This simple but profound difference between the sexes has powerful consequences for the so-called pay gap.
Suppose the pay gap between men and women were magically eliminated. If that happened, simple arithmetic suggests that half of women would be unable to find what they regard as a suitable mate.
Obviously, I’m not saying women won’t date or marry a lower-earning men, only that they probably prefer not to. If a higher-earning man is not available, many women are more likely not to marry at all. […]
The best way to improve economic prospects for women is to improve job prospects for the men in their lives, even if that means increasing the so-called pay gap.

If you boil down her argument, it’s

Some women prefer a man who makes more money than them
AND most men prefer to make more money than their wife 
THEREFORE it’s good for women that men are paid more.

But does this even make sense? No. Since not every woman will eventually get married to a man— because some won’t get married, and because others will marry women— that prior to getting married, it would be better for women not to be paid less than men as a rule, because they won’t know whether they will fall into the married to men, married to women, or not married later in life category. The women who don’t end up married to a man will be sacrificing fair wages but not getting the “benefit” of better paid husbands.
And even among the women who do get married to men, there’s two other problems that Ms. Schlafly isn’t addressing— divorce and death. What happens when this better paid husband is gone? Should the woman forgo fair earnings then too? With half of all marriages ending in divorce, why should women ever accept unfair wages just to prop up the wages of husbands who may not be there when they need them?
And let’s go back to her original statement as well— Ms. Schlafly says that not all women prefer a man who makes more, nor do all men prefer to make more. But those people should just suffer along with the single women and gay women and the divorcees and widows so that some women can get better paid husbands.
And, yes, she’s old, so it may be understandable that she still thinks these things. But this isn’t a case of your 90-year-old grandma with outdated views lovingly giving advice to her granddaughter. She is still in the public sphere trying to influence policy. And she’s wrong. And if her policies are followed it will continue to impoverish millions of women and their children. And for what?
So, for saying women should accept lower wages to prop up their prospects for a husband, Phyllis Schlafly is the Asshole of the Day.
It is Phyllis Schlafly’s first time as Asshole of the Day.
Full story: Think Progress

Phyllis Schlafly, Asshole of the Day for April 16, 2014

by TeaPartyCat ()

In the last month or two equal pay laws and the gender pay gap have been in the news, and the excuses to do nothing about this have been all over the place. And not in a good way. So far we’ve seen:

But of course all those people are rookies compared to Phyllis Schlafly, who won’t be left out of the conversation. She’s been pushing for women to be second class citizens for 40 years! Her argument against equal pay laws? Women won’t find husbands if they’re paid equal to men:

While women prefer to HAVE a higher-earning partner, men generally prefer to BE the higher-earning partner in a relationship. This simple but profound difference between the sexes has powerful consequences for the so-called pay gap.

Suppose the pay gap between men and women were magically eliminated. If that happened, simple arithmetic suggests that half of women would be unable to find what they regard as a suitable mate.

Obviously, I’m not saying women won’t date or marry a lower-earning men, only that they probably prefer not to. If a higher-earning man is not available, many women are more likely not to marry at all. […]

The best way to improve economic prospects for women is to improve job prospects for the men in their lives, even if that means increasing the so-called pay gap.

If you boil down her argument, it’s

Some women prefer a man who makes more money than them

AND most men prefer to make more money than their wife

THEREFORE it’s good for women that men are paid more.

But does this even make sense? No. Since not every woman will eventually get married to a man— because some won’t get married, and because others will marry women— that prior to getting married, it would be better for women not to be paid less than men as a rule, because they won’t know whether they will fall into the married to men, married to women, or not married later in life category. The women who don’t end up married to a man will be sacrificing fair wages but not getting the “benefit” of better paid husbands.

And even among the women who do get married to men, there’s two other problems that Ms. Schlafly isn’t addressing— divorce and death. What happens when this better paid husband is gone? Should the woman forgo fair earnings then too? With half of all marriages ending in divorce, why should women ever accept unfair wages just to prop up the wages of husbands who may not be there when they need them?

And let’s go back to her original statement as well— Ms. Schlafly says that not all women prefer a man who makes more, nor do all men prefer to make more. But those people should just suffer along with the single women and gay women and the divorcees and widows so that some women can get better paid husbands.

And, yes, she’s old, so it may be understandable that she still thinks these things. But this isn’t a case of your 90-year-old grandma with outdated views lovingly giving advice to her granddaughter. She is still in the public sphere trying to influence policy. And she’s wrong. And if her policies are followed it will continue to impoverish millions of women and their children. And for what?

So, for saying women should accept lower wages to prop up their prospects for a husband, Phyllis Schlafly is the Asshole of the Day.

It is Phyllis Schlafly’s first time as Asshole of the Day.

Full story: Think Progress



Share on Tumblr   

Asshole of the Day contributor @goldengateblond mockingly explains how you too can live like a superstar asshole.



Share on Tumblr