Screw all those foreign and domestic policy issues like ISIS and the upcoming budget wranglings. Tucker Carlson says that Obama should be promoting marriage which, did ya know, "tames" men.
On Saturday's Fox & Friends, happily married Ainsley Earhardt began by citing stats from the very right wing Heritage Foundation which indicate that poverty is correlated with marital status. Happily married Tucker Carlson chimed in about the awesomeness of marriage as the banner happily proclaimed "Put a Ring on It! Kicking Off National Marriage Week." (Do they know that "put a ring on it" is a lyric from the "toxic" Beyoncé?) He made the dubious, if not bogus, claim that social science proves this and, as such, that's why "we" are celebrating an entire week dedicated to the awesomeness of marriage. Clayton Morris, divorced from first wife and now happily remarried, introduced his guest, Sheila Weber from the National Marriage Week.
Weber, who has pimped National Marriage Week, on Fox, for the last two years, lamented the decline in the marriage rate. She explained that her marriage pimping group wants folks to know about the awesomeness of marriage. When she said that single men don't live as long as married men, wall of genius Ainsely Earhardt asked if that was because single men "booze it up." Fellow wall of genius, Tucker Carlson, claimed that marriage "tames men." (Uh, tell that to the married women who are lucky enough to have survived an abusive husband!) Weber replied that marriage is great for both men and women.
Carlson repeated the claim that every study proves the benefits of marriage which, as he was schooled by an actual sociologist, just isn't true. Never one to waste an opportunity to smear the President, he asked why Obama has never said "why don't you get married." (Tucker has a problem with single mothers whom he has described as "the ultimate in negligence.")
Interestingly, this isn't the first time that Carlson has used the marriage issue to smear Obama. After he had his ass handed to him by the aforementioned sociologist, Carlson subsequently hosted a Fox & Friends segment in which he made the bogus claim that kids do best with married heterosexual parents and that Obama is ignoring the issue. Once again, Tucker is lying. Obama has addressed the importance of involved fatherhood on at least four times. (Here, Here, Here, Here) But he didn't mention marriage which, in Tucker's 1950's world of white, heteronormative privilege, is the only institution in which children can be properly raised.
The discussion, on the awesomeness of marriage, continued. Hey, Andrea Tantaros, Anna Kooiman, and Bill Hemmer - why don't you folks put a ring on it?! And yeah, screw ISIS and the upcoming budget process - Obama should be promoting marriage.
Note - While National Marriage Week seems non-ideological, it is being heavily promoted by the Catholic Church and evangelicals. All the website visuals show heterosexual couples. One of their recommended books is "The Case for Marriage" written by Maggie Gallagher who is head of the homophobic hate group, "The National Organization for Marriage."
FUN FOX FACT: Fox's less than genius blondes Ainsley Earhardt, Anna Kooiman, and Heather Childress all went to the same South Carolina grammar school. I guess Roger Ailes does love him his southern comfort?
And I’m guessing that I touched on some flaw in your character, given the way you responded. I mean, if there’s nothing wrong in your life, you would’ve responded to the content of the comment, instead of—once again—engaging in a personal attack. (Let me guess—you’re a self-hating gay conservative with a fondness for Renee Zellweger movies or Helen Fielding novels. Whoops! Did I hit too close to home?)
As to “defensive with regards to marriage,” I don’t really care. What I DO care about are hypocrites. I mean, when the President and First Lady take time for “date nights” (reinforcing the fact they’re a happily married couple—and a pretty damned good way to “promote marriage”) the right-wing, led by FoxNoise, freaks out, suggesting that the President isn’t doing his job. And, again, when seemingly SINGLE hosts and pundits get on their high horses about promoting (heterosexual) marriage, that’s being “defensive” over hypocrisy—if these people were married, why no mention in their personal biographies? Any couple should be allowed to engage in a civil marriage ceremony—and if they belong to a denomination that doesn’t have a problem with marriage equality, they should be able to hold a religious ceremony. If I were in a relationship at the moment, I’d be considering marriage—but NOT because the FoxNoise hypocrites think the President should be endorsing it.
Got news for you, Tuck-Tuck:
The President is already promoting marriage — by virtue of remaining married to the same woman for almost 23 years, a woman who, from all accounts, he’s still crazy about (and vice versa.)
Let’s compare and contrast that with some of your repub heroes . . .
- Rush Limpballs (married 4x)
- Newt Gingrich (3x)
- Rudy Giuliani (3x)
- Rupert Murdoch (3x)
- Ronald Reagan (2x)
There is not a SINGLE thing that Priscilla wrote that constitutes a “personal attack.” Maybe the closest is the suggestion that Tantaros, Kooiman and Hemmer should get married, as all three’s biographies are incredibly quiet on their marital statuses (though Kooiman has announced she’s now engaged—about time for a conservative woman in her early 30s) while they spend time demanding that the President spend time “promoting” marriage. Some folks would call Tantaros, Kooiman and Hemmer’s attitudes “hypocritical” for being such strong advocates in an institution in which they do NOT participate.
One of your rules for posting reads NO PERSONAL ATTACKS! Please lead by example.