THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD
(apologies to Keith Olbermann)
Erick Erickson
It takes a very “special” sort of troll to be able to find solace in denying rights to an entire gender, in the idea that one class (men) should by rights exercise dominion over the bodies of another class (women). Erick Erickson has always been a very “special” sort of misogynist, a Conservative perfectly comfortable with the idea that women are, and should remain, the property of the men in their lives. I’d say that I feel sorry for Erickson’s wife, but she made her choice. I’m just grateful I don’t wake up next to him every morning.
Erickson’s particular “skill” has been parroting Right-wing dogma as if it was writ by the hand of God and is therefore beyond reproach or question. The flip side is that he seldom has a well considered and/or defensible argument, and he too often falls back on smug arrogance and sarcasm, evidently in the belief that his Conservative values and beliefs are self-evident and therefore need no justification or defense.
Sometimes his “arguments” are just plain offensive. He undoubtedly is keenly aware that if he’s pissing thoughtful people off, but I suspect he’s happy that they’re at least paying attention to him. To his credit, he’s parlayed his smug arrogance into a gig as a Fox News Channel analyst, where he’s expected to do the one thing he does exceedingly well- parrot Right-wing talking points as if they they’re immutable word of the Almighty. I’m not certain Erickson could hold his own in a debate where facts are the coin of the realm, but whether on his blog or on FNC, he isn’t expected to support his arguments. He makes a living off tossing rhetorical bombs, which I can’t really argue with because someone’s willing to write him checks for doing that.
The rolling back of women’s rights, especially insofar as the Right’s progressing nullification of Roe v. Wade goes, is nothing to make light of. While Erickson may see the abortion issue in black and white, what he fails to recognize are the shades of grey that should be part of the public debate. Despite the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision recognizing a woman’s right to a safe and legal abortion, the Far Right holds their views to be above the law, and so they’ve worked tirelessly and patiently to destroy Roe v. Wade by tinkering around the margins. Zealots like Erickson define this as “defending life,” but what they fail to understand are what consequences will flow from the efforts. Women of means will still find ways to obtain abortions, but less affluent women will be forced to pursue other (read: more dangerous) means of terminating a pregnancy. Women will die because the holy and self-righteous believe in “protecting life,” unless the life in question is that of a pregnant woman, whose sole value and function is as an incubator.
It would be easy to go on at some length about the depths of Erickson’s insensitive, mean-spirited arrogance. The truth is that’s really all Erickson has to offer. That he’s making a living off said arrogance says just about all anyone needs to know about the state of America today.
Then again, it could be worse; I could have to wake up next to him for the rest of my life.
