Is there some way for me to be de-counted so that Salon doesn't in any way benefit from my viewing this crap? Really, I wish I could get the last 5 minutes of my life back and not show that I read the wingnut series.

Ugh...upon reading this garbage I think I can literally feel my intelligence dwindling. SALON REPENT FOR YOUR SINS!!! (I'm not even religious).

I almost didn't have time to do my translation this week. I have a full schedule of job dodging, Oprah watching, family destroying, welfare collecting, and putting off my dozens of girlfriends' abortions until the last minute. I managed to find the time because Wingnut is such a serious thinker, and I knew you guys would need help understanding him.

I really don't understand how this issue was ceded to the Republicans.

In a sane world, being pro-family would mean favoring universal healthcare, generous welfare, strict laws favoring maternity and paternity leave. In other words the dreaded social democracy of Western Europe.

But no, "family values" has been transformed by the the alchemy of conservative newspeak into meaning "anti-gay".

They had tony Perkins on either CNN or MSNBC (you would expect this from fox but it wasnt) discussing universal healthcare. He was saying how we can't have a public option because it's communism or some garbage.

I thought:

1) What on earth qualifies Perkins to discuss this subject? The fact that hes an incendiary Jeebus-freak?

2) If he really wanted to reduce abortion, wouldnt he want to make it easier for women who want to have their babies to have them? (Answer: no, because that would be socialism. Which is apparently worse than "murder" since thats what they consider abortion to be).

The public isn't center right, however our two parties are center right and lunatic right. This is because our government is controlled by elite lobbyist money from large corporations. Why else would we be the only developed nation without universal health care?

...I will show them this article.

I'm certain GW knows, by the way, cherry picked statistics and redefinition in place of explanation are not an argument.

Knows this but writes this anyway.

And it is indeed appreciated. In fact, his thoughts are so intriguing that I now want his newsletter. I think I have a question that would be good for GW to not answer next week:

Dear Wingnut,

After reading your column all these weeks, I now see that I have supported pure evil all my life, as a liberal. I realize I can never truly make up for all those flags I've burned and all those wars I haven't supported, but I still want to be on the side that isn't going to burn in Hell while yours watches us from above and laughs, which evangelists have told me will be the special and sweetest pleasure of the blessed. That's not for me! Please, tell me, how can I, too, become a conservative like yourself?

I'll first echo what others have already said: You essentially dodged the question of why conservatives believe they hold a monopoly on such values as hard work and the family. A few poll numbers on political labeling and hot-button issues don't validate your argument. You and I both know that liberals value hard work and the family just as much as you do.

Beyond that, let's talk about the broader scope of history. Time and time again conservatives have lost on the changing values of the American public. Conservatives, by definition, don't want to change the status quo. Yet, you lose to history every time. Let's just look at this century. Women's suffrage, FDR's banking regulations, Social Security, integrating the military, civil rights legislation (spare me the southern Democrat argument -- they all became Republicans and were central in your party's "Southern Strategy"), Medicare, abortion rights (still legal after 36 years), expanded equality of women, seat belt laws (added to the list primarily because conservative hero Reagan opposed them), continuing environmental legislation, and expanding gay rights. This last one is still a work in progress. But I have a prediction: 20 years from now gay rights (marriage, etc.) will be a done deal, and all of the conservative opposition will look as has always looked with the other examples -- like backwards-thinking ridiculousness.

I hope that helps.

Your entire essay is the stalest of dogwater, siphoned straight from the dank pool of unthinking stupid that is conservative talking points.

Because I'm a merciful guy, I'm going to examine only one of your idiotic bullet-points in detail:

This includes the 93 percent who, in one recent poll, rejected the idea that abortions should be permitted "at any time during a woman's pregnancy and for any reason." In fact Gallup now shows that, for the first time, 51 percent of Americans -- do I need to say this constitutes a majority? -- said they were "pro-life" rather than "pro-choice.

HEY WINGNUT, how come you didn't name that poll that claimed 93 percent of Americans rejected anytime anywhere abortions? Is it maybe because it was some bogus poll, using loaded wording designed specifically to elicit this kind of result? Give us the name of the poll, you whining coward. $100 says it was either some insane Dominionist advocacy group, or contained extra information that so contradicted your point it managed to trigger the vestigial sense of shame that even salamanders like you possess.

But wait! it gets better. What about the poll that Wingnut did have the courage to cite? The Gallup one that mentioned that 51% percent of people identify as "pro-life"? Well, this is a disturbing swing, but take a look at the history given in the link. According to Gallup, this is the first time since at least NINETEEN NINETY-FIVE that there have been more pro-lifers. The idea that 14 years of pro-choice dominance and a few months of pro-life razor-thin majority supports the center-right proposition is the kind of schizophrenic counterfactual only a Bush operative could love.*

I've saved the best for last: If you look at the Gallup link, their polling shows that 22% of Americans believe abortion should be "legal under any circumstances". You read that right folks: Wingnuts' own cited Gallup poll directly contradicts his un-sourced claim that 93% percent of Americans reject abortion-on-demand. Laziness, stupidity, or dishonesty?

In summary, Wingnut you have less capability for critical thought than the average hamster, and I pray to God** that you have never had any actual influence on government policy.

*This is consistent with all the other polls I've seen on this subject. For more context (incredibly damaging to Wingnuts' point), try http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-zorn-19-may19,0,6619273.column

**Hahaha, just kidding, as a liberal I don't believe in wizards.