Wingnuts

Assholes On Parade

« December 2006 »
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2
3
8
9
10
13
16
17
19
23
24
25
30
31

Memo to Kevin McCullough: YOU ARE DUMB.

I need to clear something up from yesterday. When I said that people discussing Mary Cheney's pregnancy should "Hate them and hate their choice and hate their child honestly, or shut your stinkin' holes.", obviously I'd prefer it if those people kept their yaps shut as well. Or, even better, stop being such idiots about gay people you'll never meet and actually stop hating them. Barring that, though, a little honesty goes... a little way.

Kevin McCullough is an honest commentator. That is the only nice thing I can say about him, and I only mention THAT because context requires it. McCullough posts at TownHall.com, where apparently Dennis Prager is the resident intellectual. Because as bad as Prager was on the Ellison Qur'fluffle, McCullough elevated public discourse to exciting new lows with his pieces about the Chenbryo.

He started by posting six questions he obviously felt were clever and thought-provoking, then, when told by the masses that he was a dumbfuck, he wrote a follow-up restating his points in statement form. Five of the six questions were used to make essentially the same point, which I summarize to save you the trouble of reading his tortured prose: ACTUAL PARAPHRASE TIME

"Chicks don't have sperms!"

I shit you not. You see, they couldn't make a baby on their own, therefore they needed help, therefore their relationship was fundamentally incomplete, therefore society shouldn't reward incomplete spermless relationships. And his sixth question was just a reprise of the "science shows children do best with a mother and a father" bullshit we're all tired of.

Having been stupid, and then having been informed that he was stupid, he proceeded to write a whole other column falling back on that oh-so common defense of the stupid - the Thought Police are trying to keep him from reaching certain conclusions. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"I'm not supposed to be allowed to think such things... Let's face it in America today if we bring up such obvious inconsistencies we are immediately branded and labeled a bigot. I was repeatedly labeled such this week for asking six additional questions arising from the fake act of two women supposedly 'becoming parents.'"

Tough shit. This is because only a bigot would call two women becoming parents a FAKE ACT just because they had some sperm shipped in. That's how it works. Bigots do bigoted things, and that's how we know you're bigots. That's like trying to get out of a ticket because you don't think going faster than the posted limits qualifies as "speeding". Mr. McCullough, if you want to prevent yourself from being called a bigot in the future, it's easy enough to do. Just stop saying stupid shit like this:

"And since homosexuals insist upon desiring limitless sexual activity, not governed by provincial rules and traditions, why would they want children?" - Um, because that's not homosexuals you're describing, dipshit. It's BONOBOS. Just because they don't want your brain-dead ilk imposing the limits on them doesn't mean they have, or want, no limits. Being gay doesn't prevent chafing. OK, one last quote, just because it really drives home what a smarmy dick McCullough is.

"I am curious as to why they would desire to reinforce the inferiority of their sexual behavior. And no amount of hate-mail from small minded radical activists will stifle the curiosity from which I seek to learn."

Fight on, you brave knowledge-seeker. How dare anyone try and stop you from learning? From asking ridiculous, loaded questions based on assumptions at right-angles to reality? You're curious. About gays. And there's nothing wrong with that. So go forth, Kevin McCullough, and learn. Be as gay-curious as you so obviously, so desperately want to be.

Syndicate content