I’d like to tell you that I hope this is going to be my last Erick Erickson post for a while, but that would be a lie. I hope no such thing. The truth is I have totally loved this story. I mean, I have really loved it – loved it with the heat of a thousand suns. I love it so much I’d probably marry it, except that Erickson and Lou Dobbs would just point out that something-science-something-something-society-crumbing if I did.
There is some serious stuff going on and these guys touch on it (tangentially, but they do touch on it) but it’s done in such an ugly and stupid way… I keep hoping for the Republicans to collapse and for us to all realign in the aftermath. It keeps not happening.
I agree with this observation, and had been thinking about it all day. And then I saw this video, which made me wonder – hey, is it possible I’m witnessing the first cracks of that collapse Jaybird spoke of, appearing right now before my very eyes?
If you haven’t seen this interview Fox’s Megyn Kelly did with Erickson and Dobbs yet, do yourself a favor: Unplug your phone, put the Do Not Distrub sign on your front door, microwave up some Orville Redenbacher, sit back on the couch, and take in the entire delicious eleven minutes and twenty seconds of the schadenfreude bliss:
Wasn’t that space-awesome amazing???!!!
I mean, it had something for everyone! For people like me that have been waiting for conservatives to get serious and act like grownups, it had an actual grownup Fox anchor taking two Fox frat boys to the woodshed and laying the wood on thick. For liberals who want to see conservatives continue to sink their own boat on live TV, it had two male Fox anchors giggling like ten year olds at the just-adorable-when she-gets-mad woman who was clearly the smartest person on the screen. For the Daily-Caller-Drudge-Limbaugh Conservative crowd it showed that their favorite cable news network isn’t taking Erickson’s or Dobbs’s slights to women very seriously, and doesn’t seem prepared to bring any kind of hammers down.
It might well be the perfect cable news moment, no matter who you are. Seriously, has any eleven minutes in cable news ever delivered so many wins to so many people on so many sides of the aisle?
Everyone keeps talking about Erickson’s whole “women who earn more money than men are defying science” schtick, which is by far the stupidest thing he’s said in all of this. But no one seems to be talking about the most bizarre thing he’s said, which makes me wonder how long he’s got before his first divorce.
Erickson keeps talking about how a woman in a marriage competes with her husband when she is successful outside the home, when she should complement her husband by being not successful. Or to put it more succinctly: when she wins, he loses. What does it say about Erickson that he views the personal successes of his wife as failures on his part – that goals achieved by her somehow diminish him?
My own wife has a PhD from a well-known Ivy League university, and is now a successful faculty member at a well-respected school of medicine. She is frequently asked to give lectures to outside organizations, and there are a number of successful business leaders and academics who consider her a personal mentor. (Some of them are even men. Go figure!) According to Erickson, my wife’s successes – and the money she earns from the university and when she is paid as a consultant for her expertise – don’t complement my own personal successes or earnings; they compete against them. I can’t begin to tell you how utterly bizarre I find this notion, and I find myself wondering why no one else seems to be calling him on it. (Best guess: the whole “science” thing was so blindingly stupid everything else got lost in the radiance of its idiocy.)
This is one of those areas where a certain kind of conservative man and I look at the same data and see two opposite things. Erickson looks at his reluctance to be paired with a strong, successful woman, and he thinks this makes him appear “naturally dominant.” I think it just makes him look like a total wuss.