Thursday, November 12, 2015

WINGNUT BLOGGER THINKS DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL FIELD IS OLD BECAUSE DEMOCRATS ABORTED YOUNGER CANDIDATES

On the op-ed page of The New York Times, Mark Schmitt of the New America think tank laments the fact that the Democratic presidential field skews elderly:
As Republicans never tire of pointing out, the Democratic candidates for president are old....

Where are the national Democratic politicians in their 40s and 50s? At 52, Martin O’Malley, the former Maryland governor, is this year’s lone exception. Does it say something about the party, or about the generation, that other than President Obama (born at the tail end of the baby boom), national candidates from this age group are rare?
What explains this? Wingnut blogger (and RedState front-page diarist) Moe Lane puts on his thinking cap and comes up with a theory:
Do you know what word is missing from this half-screed, half-lament by the New York Times? ...

“Abortion.” And I don’t even think that it’s intentional, either. In fact, I suspect that if you walked up to the author and said Hey, do you think that maybe the relative lack of forty-something Democratic politicians above a certain level might be due to the fact that Democratic families have had access to abortion for the last, oh, forty years or so? that said author would look at you with a legitimately baffled expression on his face. The idea would be... bizarre... to him.

... Are you going to tell me that Roe v. Wade didn’t have an effect? None at all?
On the presidential field? Yes, I am going to tell you that.

Let's look at the youngest people in the Republican presidential field: Ted Cruz (born 1970), Bobby Jindal (born 1971), Marco Rubio (born 1971).

Do you notice something about all of these guys?

They were all born before the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade. That was in 1973, Moe.

Or is your argument that, after Roe, abortion providers culled the field of 2016 Democratic presidential aspirants by going back in time?

I'm also puzzled because at this very moment right-wingers are furious at college students all over the country who are leading protests against racism. They're so furious, in fact, that Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds argued in USA Today this week that some young people seem too immature to vote, and therefore all young people should be deprived of the franchise until the age of 25. Um, if those on the left are aborting so many potential leaders, where the hell did the leaders of this movement come from? And these leaders were born in what the right regularly derides as the sex-without-consequences, pro-choice Clinton years. How the hell could that have happened with all that abortion going around?

Also: The highest-polling Republican candidates for president are a 64-year-old retired neurosurgeon and a 69-year-old real estate mogul? Just sayin'.

7 comments:

Never Ben Better said...

Details, details....

Aunt Snow said...

That's got to be the dumbest argument ever.

Unknown said...

I'm fine with humans under 25 being deprived of 'the franchise'. So few under 25s vote as it is, they might as well be designated subhuman. My problem is we can't go defranchistrating by age-swaths due to whacky thinking process & cut off just those pre-folks, if equal or worse skewed brain defects typically characterize other birthdate-delineated groupings.

I'm referring specifically to the Fox News demo, above all those "the folks"addicted to the reduced-content idea juice and faux-content fact meat-like dehydrated slurry cooked up in & distributed each week day out of Bill O'Reilly's Factory. That place should be condemned & burned to the ground for serving stuff so rancide not even those oldsters could keep down except for the free olfactory dampeners in the Factory's Nose Pins Zone.

According to public interest high information service Conservapedia (originally founded to save the owls, or herd them all up & drive them all into kill pits for mass culls), the "average age" of a typical The Factory addict is 71. Erring on the side of caution, it's just obvious we have to devoterate all those over 65; besides, they won't even notice what with being permanently hooked up to The Factory by i.v., and their entire opinion output could be just as o'reliably reported directly via chiron on The Factory. So, at age 65, that's it you saggy old meat bags: shut TFU now & go back to watching TV.

Ten Bears said...

Just want to sure I've got this straight: the baby boomers aborted themselves? The biggest population boom in the history of the country aborted itself.

Been a lot of not just SciFi written about people "jacked" into a digital fantasy world. Ranks as an addiction equal to drugs, pornography and religion.

Grung_e_Gene said...

The funniest thing is it blithely allows them to ignore Barack Obama...

Aunt Snow said...

... Are you going to tell me that Roe v. Wade didn’t have an effect? None at all?

Yes, the nation has truly been deprived of Presidential candidates that were born unwanted children to mothers not ready to have them. All those aborted babies, the ones with spina bifida, the ones whose mothers would have neglected them or failed to bond with them, the ones born to homeless families, the ones born of incest and rape. The ones born to families who couldn't afford to feed them. They would all have made great Presidential candidates.

Although, to be fair, I guess they wouldn't have been worse than the bat-shit insane Republican slate.

maxk1947 said...

Democratic voters purposefully didn't have children so that there'd be no competition for Pres. Obama when he arrived from Kenya. I thought everybody knew that.