The Rude Pundit: Why Does Conservative Spooge Bucket Kevin McCullough Fear Women?

[meegbear]

Here's a line from conservative columnist Kevin McCullough that just screams, "I need cock, lots of cock, now," from a piece from last week: "Feminists cower in fear at the picture, the symbol, and the meaning of a strong father today." It's in McCullough's charming Father's Day celebration titled "Why Feminists Fear Fathers," and this little bitch, who had to publish a book called The MuscleHead Revolution to appear masculine, uses as "evidence" his own powers of observation.

McCullough, one of those so obviously closeted Christian-spouting queens that you just wanna buy him a half-shirt, drop him onto a Fire Island dance party, and ask him, "Where is your God now?" just before he drops to his knees to worship what will really fill his soul or, at least, his mouth, says that fathers are part of God's plan, endowed by their creator with their manly manliness that makes them protectors over weaker women and children.

No, seriously, he writes, "Opening doors, allowing women to proceed in front of them, assisting a woman up a flight of stairs, across a busy street, or escorting them to their side of an automobile are also simple symbolic gestures of manly protection." In just about any other context, that would be called "camp" or at least "ironic" writing. But not with McCullough, who likes his fathers to be rough and tough, especially on him. One can imagine McCullough weeping for his Daddy to beat his ass, hard, because he intentionally did something wrong and he loves the smacks from Daddy's calloused hands so, so much, as well as the slap-worthy hard-ons he gets from it.

But it doesn't end with feminists preferring to open their own doors, those whores. Oh, no. See, rebellion against fathers has a larger meaning, and why wouldn't it? "It is rebellion against God - the ultimate father," McCullough says, because...oh, who the fuck cares, but "Feminists wish to subvert God's plan, order, and instruction in order to create a world that they see as the ultimate reality. A reality that is made in their own image. Scripture refers to that as idolatry." Man, you gotta love it when the line is crossed from fervor to fanaticism.

It doesn't actually matter that the National Organization of Women routinely praises men who take on the role of strong fathers (maybe not door-opening ass spankers, but still, you know, fathers), saying things like "The good news as Father's Day approaches is that more and more men are sharing duties on the home front." That might require McCullough to go to the NOW website and type the word "fathers" into the Search space, maybe even clicking on a link or two.

Why bother when you can base your column on something that some Fox "news" reporter told you (which is what McCullough did) about research into creating sperm cells so that men might not be needed in the conception process. Especially if it allows you to write, "What a strong father represents to this time, life, and world has never been more underestimated and modern feminists have taken it upon themselves to attempt to eliminate the need for them all together."

Of course, McCullough is all about figuring out why liberals do things. Yesterday's column was about "Why Liberals Loathe 'the People,'" which apparently has something to do with gay marriage and some idea of Michael Bloomberg's. And motherfucker has http://www.townhall.com/columnists/KevinMcCullough/2007/05/13/why_rudy_is_striking_out">figured out "Why Rudy Is Striking Out" (hint: it rhymes with "schmabortion").

McCullough, though, hates him some feminists, in that vicious way that only latent, lying-to-themselves homosexual men can. In April, in his column, "Why Feminist Mommies Are Like Pimps," he used as his models Kim Basinger and Keira Knightley's mother to conclude, "For some time the modern feminists of our society have done all they can to minimize the influence of men, assuage their own conscience for the break-up of their homes, and have turned to sexualizing their children." And, in the explains-it-all-to-you titled, "Why Feminists Fear Men," he opines, "It has to be obvious to the angry feminists today that in fact the happiest women in America are those who have a caring, life giving, spiritual, emotional, and physical relationship with a man they are married to."

And what comes through most strongly in McCullough's writing is that that's what would make him happy, too.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

[shenmue]

1. Brilliant

:rofl:

[Kurovski]

2. K&R.

Strong daddies aren't ascared of strong mommies.

How much time does Kevin spend in steam rooms?

[Bucky]

3. I don't like "queen" being used as an insult

Yes, I understand the nuance. Yes, I understand it's anti-denial and anti-hypocricy and that it serves mostly to psychologically undermine the fundies who loathe gays.

I just don't think it's cool to equate gayness with being bad, even in a roundabout way.

Wouldn't it be better to be loving toward these hateful people and encourage them to embrace their inner homosexual and feel the joy of release of self awareness?

[keithjx]

4. TRP is, by definition, RUDE. n/t

[Kurovski]

5. And he'd probably be rude about any complaints.

:D I dunno.

All one can do is state their case.

[Iris]

6. I'm glad Rude Pundit reads (and responds!) to that drivel so I don't have to! n/t