Connect with us

Chris Kluwe Totally Takes Down ‘Cowhumping Glue-Huffer’ NFL Owner For Financing Anti-LGBT Hate

Published

on

Chris Kluwe is back with another hysterical but on-point, biting letter to the NFL owner who donated thousands of dollars to fund an anti-LGBT campaign of hate.

Back in 2012 then-Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe penned a letter to a state anti-gay lawmaker promising him that “gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won’t come into your house and steal your children. They won’t magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster.”

Naturally, Kluwe’s hysterical letter went viral, and he became one of the LGBT community’s best straight allies – so much so that many said they believed the Vikings punted him off the team because of his activism.

Kluwe is back today with another letter, this time to Bob McNair, the owner of the NFL’s Houston Texans football team. McNair, a billionaire, recently made news because he donated $10,000 to the Campaign for Houston, an anti-LGBT group working to ensure HERO – the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance – does not pass.

The tactics the Campaign are using are disgusting and offensive, and falsely paint LGBT people, especially trans people, as threatening, scary, and possibly even pedophiles who will be sharing restrooms with young girls.

Kluwe delivers an intelligent, biting, ascerbic, and exceptionally hysterical attack upon McNair, really should be read in full, over at Sports Illustrated’s The Cauldron. 

Get ready for Kluwe’s unique brand of put-downs. A few excerpts:

“Surely,” I said to myself, “one of the NFL’s thirty-two owners, businessmen with more accumulated wealth than most third world nations and completely vested in the well-being of the society that afforded them such success … surely this man could not be a pants-on-head, cowhumping glue-huffer stupid enough to buy in on clearly outdated ideals of bigotry and intolerance?”

Sadly, however, it appears I must hide my livestock, because the facts do not lie. You have, indeed, donated $10,000 to a cause whose sole purpose is to denigrate a specific group of American citizens.

*

Are you not aware that trans individuals are nine times more likely to try and kill themselves due to the odiously corrosive social views like the one you’ve just financially enabled? Have you no knowledge of the fact that LBGT youth are far more likely to experience harassment at school and home, leading to depression and ideations of self-harm — mostly due to the shortsighted wrongheadedness of privileged narcissists like yourself?

*

Kids killing themselves after being mercilessly bullied? Bob McNair just don’t care! Trans individuals murdered at an obscenely high rate? Bob McNair just don’t care! Transgender people being murdered, just because of who they are? Bob McNair just don’t care! Basic human dignity? You get the gist.

*

On the one hand, we have a feel good, league-sanctioned position of a professional sports league intended to support all members of the populace, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. And then on the other hand, we have you: A slack-jawed, moldering husk of pigvomit, all wrapped up in a too-expensive designer suit; a sluggish waste of oxygen who values bigotry over empathy.

*

Sincerely,

Someone Who Is Sick And Tired Of Watching Stupid Old White Men Ruin The World For Everyone Else Because They Can’t Get Over The Fact That Everyone Deserves A Chance To Live Their Life,

Former NFL Player,

Chris Kluwe

 

EARLIER:

Texas Groups Scare Voters With ‘Bathroom Ads’ Ahead Of HERO Vote

Trailing In Polls, Houston Equal Rights Opponents Continue Desperate Anti-LGBT Ad Campaign

Watch: Anti-LGBT Right Wing Group Releases Ad Promoting False, Fear-Mongering Trans Bathroom Myth

Pastor In Anti-LGBT Radio Ad Attacking Nondiscrimination Ordinance Was Fired For Sexual Harassment

 

Image: Kluwe is Grand Marshall at 2014 DC Capital Pride. Photo by Tim Evanson via Flickr and a CC license
Hat tip: Jon Green AmericaBlog

 

Friends, would you help us out and use the red share buttons below to share this post on Facebook and Twitter?

And please like us on Facebook, and make sure you tell Facebook you want to see our articles!

see_first_fb.jpg

get_notifications_fb.jpg

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

ANALYSIS

‘Basically Game Over’: Legal Experts Say SCOTUS Likely to Gut Abortion – and There’s a ‘Lot More on the Chopping Block’

Published

on

Legal experts are weighing in after listening to Wednesday morning’s Supreme Court oral arguments on abortion, and they’re almost entirely certain the 6-3 conservative majority will gut Roe v. Wade – the only question is how much.

Bloomberg News Supreme Court reporter says there’s no question that the Supreme Court “seem poised to slash abortion rights” and maybe worse.

Slate’s legal expert Mark Joseph Stern predicts that basically by the end of next year – six months after the Supreme Court hands down its decision in today’s case – half the states across the country will have abortion bans in place.

To those who say women can just travel to a state that doesn’t ban abortion, University of California, Irvine School of Law law and political science professor and election law expert Rick Hasen offers this question:

And Hasen made clear it won’t stop there.

He says, “it won’t end with overturning Roe and allowing guns outside the home. There’s a lot more on the chopping block coming in terms of voting rights, LGBTQ rights, environmental protection, immigration, and more. Decades of work by the conservative legal movement is paying off.”

NYU law professor Melissa Murray agrees it’s not just about abortion.

Stern observes this one “question from Amy Coney Barrett is basically game over for Roe.” The far right wing faith-based justice says now that women can simply give up a child for adoption after giving birth means there’s no reason to not ban abortion.

 

 

Continue Reading

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

AOC Slams McCarthy and His GOP ‘Ku Klux Klan Caucus’ for Allowing ‘Violent Targeting’ of Women of Color in Congress

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is criticizing House Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy for refusing to deal with the members of his “Ku Klux Klan” caucus who are ignoring and allowing the “violent targeting” of women of color members of Congress.

The Democratic Congresswoman from New York, herself the frequent target of violent threats, pointed to this video of U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar playing a death threat received after she was targeted by GOP Congresswoman Lauren Boebert:

“People truly don’t understand the scale, intensity, & volume of threats targeting” Congresswoman Omar, Ocasio-Cortez says.

“Kevin McCarthy is so desperate to be speaker that he is working with his Ku Klux Klan caucus to look aside & allow violent targeting of woc members of Congress. This cannot be ignored,” she warns.

Congresswoman Boebert over the past week was exposed – on video – suggesting Rep. Omar is a terrorist three times, including in one video she herself posted to social media.

McCarthy has refused to take any action against Boebert.

 

 

Continue Reading

'BLAZING POSITIVE'

‘Massive, Dangerous, Likely Intentional’: Immunologist Blasts Trump for Ignoring Positive COVID Test Before Biden Debate

Published

on

A Harvard epidemiologist, immunologist and physician is blasting Donald Trump‘s decision to continue his activities as normal in September 2020, not go public with the results of his positive COVID test result, and continue business as usual – including participating in a debate against Joe Biden – revelations made in a new book by Trump’s White House chief of staff Mark Meadows on Wednesday.

Dr. Michael Mina says if Trump had been given a rapid COVID test the day of the first presidential debate against Joe Biden, President Trump “would have been blazing positive,” and calls the decision to not test “massive, dangerous and likely intentional.”

“The decision to continue to not test on [the] day of the Rose Garden superspreader event and on [the] day of the debate with now @POTUS Biden was a massive, dangerous and likely intentional decision,” says Michael Mina, an Assistant Professor of Epidemiology and Immunology and Infectious Diseases at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and an Assistant Professor of Pathology at Harvard Medical School’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

“Was Trump the superspreader? For a year, I’ve suggested Trump was the likely superspreader at White House Rose Garden on 9/28/20,” Mina posits. “All were supposedly tested, so how would a superspreader enter? Now we know Trump tested COVID positive 2 days earlier.”

Citing Meadows’ new book, The Guardian reported Wednesday morning that Trump tested positive on Sept. 26, and shortly thereafter, before the Sept. 29 presidential debate, tested negative – but three days after the debate, on Oct. 2, again tested positive, and was rushed to Walter Reed hospital hours later.

Because Trump “was testing so frequently, he was [likely] detected using a molecular test at the earliest time, before becoming infectious,” says Mina.

“So when he immediately tested again with a rapid Ag test, it did not yet register positive because he was not YET infectious,” Mina explains. “Had he used a rapid test later that day or next day though, once he was becoming slightly infectious, he almost certainly would have been positive.”

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.