Ross Douthat is very angry this week and you won’t like Ross when he’s angry. I mean you’ll like him even less than you already do which is probably a lot. As you might guess it’s about abortion and the Susan G. Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood and the unfairness of life and WHY WON”T PEOPLE LISTEN TO ME? I MEAN I’VE GOT A NEW YORK TIMES COLUMN FOR GOSHDARNS SAKE! DOESN’T THAT MEAN ANYTHING ANYMORE? I AM A VERY SERIOUS PERSON AND I HAVE IDEAS. REALLY SMART ONES! JESUS MARY AND JOSEPH, HAS THE WHOLE WORLD GONE MAD?
But before we get to that, let’s review previous ineffectual (some might say laughable) feints and jabs that Ross has taken over the years at vaginas and the ladies who own them.
Oh, here is Ross and some other guy swinging their dicks around and bemoaning the fact that women won’t agree to give up a fraction of their rights in return for Ross and his buddy’s approval of their lifestyle. Sez the Ross-ster:
If we take O’Rourke’s hypothetical on its own terms, it reads as an argument for, say, a legal regime that makes abortion available to women/girls below the age of consent – and I think I speak for many pro-lifers when I say that I would gladly entertain that sort of compromise, as part of a broader package of restrictions, if we were drawing up abortion law from scratch. But it’s not even close to an argument for the legal regime we have, in which no middle ground is even possible. And so long as Roe remains inviolate, those who urge pro-lifers to “compromise” without providing any legal ground on which a compromise could be forged are effectively telling them to just give up on their movement’s goals entirely.
Clever boy. He seems to have figured out that someone has very nicely couched a response that could best be summed up as: go fuck yourself.
Here is Ross suggesting that, if you’re really sincere about wanting crazy forced birthers to quit murdering doctors who perform abortions, you could give up the right to having an abortion and… problem solved! Easy-peasy!
Since he writes so often about the sexy, here is Ross, in an effort to build up some street cred, actually admitting to having had sex at least once. Oh yeah, he’s a playa, he’s a baller, all the ladies go (ohhh) when a Ross go by.
And here is Ross reminding poor women who want to terminate their pregnancy that there are rich women starving
in China for a baby and that the poor ladies, who obviously had no problem ‘giving it up’ in some drunken hook-up in a hallway or the back of a Jetta, should consider ‘giving it (the baby) up’ to some deserving lady of means. After all, not everyone has the time to to go through a no-questions-asked adoption like Chief Justice John Roberts and his wife did in order to get a fine matching set of tow-headed, blue-eyed “Irish” urchins from South America. Also, shut up about the Boys From Brazil. Just shut up.
Which brings us to today where Ross is lamenting how totally lame the mainstream media (you know… the one that employs Ross Douthat) was when covering Komenfuckedupgate:
…reporters have different obligations. Even if some forms of partiality are inevitable, journalists betray their calling when they simply ignore self-evident truths about a story.
Three truths, in particular, should be obvious to everyone reporting on the Komen-Planned Parenthood controversy. First, that the fight against breast cancer is unifying and completely uncontroversial, while the provision of abortion may be the most polarizing issue in the United States today. Second, that it’s no more “political” to disassociate oneself from the nation’s largest abortion provider than it is to associate with it in the first place. Third, that for every American who greeted Komen’s shift with “anger and outrage” (as Andrea Mitchell put it), there was probably an American who was relieved and gratified.
Well, yes and no. When an organization ostensibly devoted to eradicating breast cancer (apparently through mass merchandising, brand building, and self-aggrandizement) decides to give the cold shoulder to a partner who is one of the largest providers of low cost breast cancer screenings in the country because a few new hires think that Jeebus whispers in their ears, well, they just made themselves controversial. Secondly, I think we can all agree that we would like to see cancer go the way of Work It, but when you use a self-promoting wingnut witchhunt to achieve your aims you have made the political into the personal. Lastly, if half of America was on the side of the Susan G. Komen Foundation … where were they?
Two-thirds of more than 3,600 sentiments expressed online about the split were negative to Komen, according to NetBase Solutions Inc., a Mountain View, California-based company whose software reads and interprets 50,000 sentences a minute from billions of social media sources.
The negative reviews of Komen on GreatNonprofits.org, a review system for non-profit organizations, increased 300 percent after the initial announcement that Komen halted funding of Planned Parenthood, according to an e-mail from Molly Niffenegger, a spokeswoman for the website.
About 250,000 people had signed a petition on the website MoveOn.org, a political supporter of President Barack Obama, calling on Komen to reverse its decision, Sarah Lane, a spokeswoman, said. San Francisco-based Credo, the mobile phone provider that is Planned Parenthood’s largest corporate funder, had a petition that garnered 350,000 supporters, said Becky Bond, the company’s political director.
Komen’s San Diego affiliate increased its security after receiving threatening e-mails about the new funding policy, even though it does not fund its local Planned Parenthood. Executive director Laura Farmer Sherman said she personally received nearly 400 e-mails on the subject — two in favor of the new policy and 386 against it.
… and there is lots more here including complaints from Komen affiliates who were unhappy with the decision.
As evidence that half of America totally supported the Komen Foundation (in their obviously very muted passive coy whispered don’t quote me on this secret decoder ring way) Ross cites a quote from Komen CEO Nancy Brinker which apparently was given to Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller because reporters at real newspapers that aren’t run out of backyard forts made out of an old packing crate couldn’t contain their giggling when Brinker said that their contributions had gone up “100%”
“Our donations are up 100 percent in the past two days. With all of the emotion around these issues — which we understand, we get emotional too, we do this every single day of our lives,” Brinker said…
To which Ross adds:
But of course, you wouldn’t know that from most of the media coverage. After all, the people making those donations don’t exist.
Considering that the next day Nancy Brinker rolled over and piddled on her belly like a puppy while attempting to make nice with Planned Parenthood, I would say that Ross’s statement that “the people making those donations don’t exist” might be the one thing he got right.
Kudos., Ross. You’re no longer in a last place tie with former New York Times columnist Bill Kristol in the “was not intended to be a factual statement” derby…