Possibly the Stupidest Press Release We've Ever Received

If you've been scratching your head, trying to parse the political significance of Brad and Angelina's baby, look no further. Just in: a press release promoting conservative author Katherine DeBrecht, author of Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! (endorsed by Rush Limbaugh and Grover Norquist) and its rollicking sequel, Help! Mom! Hollywood's in My Hamper. DeBrecht is outraged over "Angelina and Brad going to Africa, a country that is plagued with AIDS, famine and out-of-wedlock pregnancy, to demonstrate that is it perfectly acceptable and even glamorous to have a baby outside of the context of marriage?" Hang on: Africa is a country?

If you rely for your information on the liberal media, you probably think that people in the "country" of Africa are suffering because of disease, underdevelopment, famine and war. You're wrong, of course. Their problem, according to DeBrecht, a mother of three who was a co-captain of Security Moms for Bush, is all the babies being born to moms who lack marriage certificates. Forget nutrition programs from the evil United Nations: feed those black children some moral fiber for breakfast!

DeBrecht is furious that Shiloh Jolie-Pitt is "unapologetically born and celebrated" despite being conceived by an adulterous couple. But shouldn't every baby be celebrated? And why should any child apologize for being born? Doesn't that contradict the idea of a "culture of life"? I'm not sure why the public gets so excited about celebrity babies (or why Brangelina named its baby after a bloody Civil War battle. So many unanswered questions). But compared with DeBrecht's far-right mean-spiritedness, the media obsession with Shiloh's birth seems almost touching. If it's not too late, maybe I'll go buy that issue of People right now, even though, like everyone else in the world, I've seen the pics on Gawker .

Comments (23)

1. Well, actually Ms Featherstone, before its infamy in 1862...."Shiloh" was also known as the "assembly place of the Israelites where the Ark of the Covenant was kept"....

   as Indiana Jones said "Didn't any of you guys go to Sunday school?"

   As for some Right Wing woman's obsession over the Jolie/Pitts and Hollywood cotton candy....Katrina vanden Hueval devoted TWO articles on "The Nation" blog to "American Idol"....so it crosses ideological lines.

   Posted by Mask at 06/14/2006 @ 09:10am

2. Liza,

   Your thought for the day centered on an authors "mean spiritedness"? On the NATION blog?

   Maybe considering the out of wedlock percentage of our births rates and the lamenting of the lefts for the "attack" on the American family by the the evil policys of the GOPers, we should take a second look at what is the American Family today?

   The only people obsessed on Jolie/Pitt story are the MSM. And the facts are there..adultry, out of wedlock birth, endless coverage because, well, I don't know why, traveling in style to a country where the interest on Pitt/Jolie money alone brings in more cash than the entire country of where ever they had their baby ...doesn't seem to me to be anything more than a publicity stunt by the couple..I feel bad for the newborn, if the pattern continues, the childs parents will be slit up before the 2nd birthday.

   It seems the "obseswsed author may have a point after all. The question for me is, What is Lizas point? Slow day at the office....

   but hey, at least ALGORE was shamed into flying coach for his big movie beg-a-thon..:) :) :)

   Posted by john maasch at 06/14/2006 @ 09:56am

3. DeBrecht books...another thing to put on the list of "things not to bother with". (After all, I really don't need a nonsensical religous lecture about the evils of the "country of Africa") Sheesh...and conservatives buy this crap? It'll be good to sweep some of them out of DC soon!

   Posted by leftofcenter at 06/14/2006 @ 10:06am

4. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 06/14/2006 @ 09:56am

   It's encouraging that you acknowledge that Gore doesn't fly everywhere in Gulfstreams afterall.

   But your spin that he was "shamed" into flying coach, as opposed to his doing it out of his own concern for the environment, is interesting. Have you read something on this subject that I haven't? Who "shamed" him?

   Do you suppose he's finally wised up and started reading your posts?

   Posted by drhammer at 06/14/2006 @ 10:34am

5. It is a measure of Liza's pettiness that she would blast someone over what is essentially a case of semantics.

   And as for Brad and Angelina? They are actors, and their actions sensational and irrelevant.

   CT

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/14/2006 @ 10:47am

6. it's not a case of semantics! it's a case of terrible cultural geography.

   Posted by darladoon at 06/14/2006 @ 10:52am

7. "Do you suppose he's finally wised up and started reading your posts?

   "

   Wouldn't that be something!!!:) :) :)

   I think Gore, as a political animal and ever aware of polls, would have heard, been advised or hopefully actually thought about his position he is trying to sell, some how was made aware that his life style is not matching his message.

   Had he not switched travel methods I believe he would eventually heard the voices questioning his credibility and using the "carbon footprints" against him. Common sense.

   Many politicians and celebs tout policys and behaviors that "we, the little people" should emulate, but reserve privelige for themselves as their message is so important that they are exepmt in order to deliver it.

   Beside, flying coach ALGORE may actually look out the window and find Tenneesee...

   Posted by john maasch at 06/14/2006 @ 10:53am

8. "And as for Brad and Angelina? They are actors, and their actions sensational and irrelevant."

   (Particularly the latter.)

   Posted by drhammer at 06/14/2006 @ 10:54am

9. Let's synopsize this...

   Ms Featherstone writes an article asking why people are so upset about meaningless pap about "celebrity babies"...and one of her key points is on how she's upset about meaningless pap from a right wing author?!??!

   Posted by Mask at 06/14/2006 @ 11:09am

10. Why even devote an article about Mr. Pitt and Ms. Jolie. Who cares about their family? Hell, who cares about Ms. DeBrecht's opinion about their relationship and progeny? I mean, this article is an example of what the author was lamenting in the first place. Fortunately, for me, I have a life of my own to live. So to be concerned/interested in the daily lives of actors and the consequential opinions offered by authors(of any political persuasion) is totally nonsensical. Moving on....

    P.S. Go Heat

    Posted by k330k at 06/14/2006 @ 11:39am

11. The Right has also criticized Jolie for adopting children (poor orphans) as a single mom (without the crucial role of a father at the time). Yet I just heard some heartwarming, applaudable stories about Iraq solidiers, single men, adopting Iraqi children that they got to know when deployed. That's awesome.

    But by the Right's own logic, wouldn't it be wrong for single people, in this case men, to adopt a child without the "family representation" of a mother? Dan Quayle? Want to weigh in?

    Posted by kfine at 06/14/2006 @ 12:07pm

12. "Posted by MASK 06/14/2006 @ 11:09am | ignore this person "

    Exactly.

    Posted by john maasch at 06/14/2006 @ 12:37pm

13. Tough to consider something stupid within the body of a blog that, itself, misspells "received."

    If The Nation would like my services, I'll be happy to edit...and invoice.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 06/14/2006 @ 1:43pm

14. "I'll be happy to edit...and invoice"

    LOL!!!!!!!!Well Done!!!!!!!

    Invoice anyway, they will probably pay it!!!!

    Posted by john maasch at 06/14/2006 @ 1:47pm

15. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 06/14/2006 @ 12:37am | ignore this person

    Must not be any new Wal-Mart news, for Ms Featherstone to report on.

    Posted by Mask at 06/14/2006 @ 2:37pm

16. This is now my simple response to all posts by Rio Bravo, CPT, and the like:

    "You are an idiot." In this case, I am not seeking anything remotely like intellectual satisfaction; rather, pure, childish petulance is what I am promoting. It satisfies only the prodding of my blood pressure rather than an impulse from my brain. The post leading to my now standard reply will be self-evident in its foolishness.

    So, to inaugurate my new response:

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 06/14/2006 @ 2:41pm

    Rio Bravo, you are an idiot.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 06/14/2006 @ 3:01pm

17. Posted by RIO BRAVO 06/14/2006 @ 3:43pm

    You are an idiot.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 06/14/2006 @ 3:47pm

18. Ironically, keeping true intentions secret was the successful strategy for the GOP in the 1980s through 1990s. Emboldened by 13 consecutive years of Congressional majorities, and 20 of the last 32 years in the Executive Branch, conservatives feel they can now, finally, plainly speak their mind.

    From drug dealing addicts like Rush who thinks he has moral authority over gays to Cheney who leaks a CIA agent's name who is assigned to defend the US against Nuclear Holocaust: the cat is out of the bag!

    We know that Ollie North flew cocaine flights to fund illegal war in Nicaragua for the GOP in the 1980s. We know Rush bought and sold drugs throughout the 1990s up until this year (if he's actually clean).

    But, back then, the GOP would at least keep these treasonous felonies a secret. Nowadays, the conservatives are so bold, they flaunt their crimes in the open, knowing that the "Special Prosecutor" won't prosecute a speeding ticket, let alone for treason and torture as openly admitted and, in fact, bragged about by the GOP.

    Posted by BECAUSEISAYSO at 06/14/2006 @ 5:02pm

19. RIO - are you clergy, or are you just a hypocrit? Or both?

    Posted by BECAUSEISAYSO at 06/14/2006 @ 5:05pm

20. The irony being, that no one really knew what a conservative stood for until recently.

    Now, we know conservative politics is about caving into terrorism and gutting civil liberties.

    We know conservative finance is about giant corporate giveaways on the backs of the middle class.

    We know conservative "values" is a catch phrase for open and aggressive homophobia, immigrant bashing, and fear of accounting and evolution.

    We know it not just because that is the result of GOP rule in the US the last decade.

    We know it because now the conservatives flaunt warrantless wiretaps of all Americans living in America (not just "terrorists"); encourage voodoo economics with giant deficits and reduced services to working families; and vocally and aggressively hating immigrants and gays.

    Now, finally, conservatives can speak openly and plainly about what conservative politics is all about!

    Posted by BECAUSEISAYSO at 06/14/2006 @ 5:15pm

21. Where is Pat Buchannan when you need him! He could speak his mind!! He explained why hating people was necessary! He explained why only Christian Republicans can transform America into the new "Holy Land". God Bless Him!

    Posted by BECAUSEISAYSO at 06/14/2006 @ 5:18pm

22. Trust me, the Ann Coulters, Laura Ingrahams, and this new fantical cluck, whoever she is, have lacked credibility since day one. I for one have never bought any book any of these pieces of white trash have ever put out and never will for various reasons. Rightwingers will think anything bad about anyone they are prejudice against, and this is but another sad and sorry example. But if Rush Mr. Druggie Junkie Oxycontin Slimebaugh has an audience, why not these bimbos?

    Posted by POSEIDON at 06/14/2006 @ 7:50pm

23. The problem is not that mothers lack marriage certificates, it's that babies lack fathers. And yes, that is important no matter how liberal you are.

    Shiloh Jolie-Pitt has a father- not to mention food, resources, access to education and healthcare. For a child born in Africa, that deserves celebrating.

    Posted by Sugar at 06/17/2006 @ 10:31am