Available at 
Tweet
Not sure why I'm typing in the debate section, I purportedly have sworn it off. 
What I understood when I read Annie's comment on the Duggar diatribe by that oh-so-enlightened San Francisco scribe, was that readers are apt to give the writer more leeway when it's a safer target (the Duggars) as opposed to more politically correct subjects such as obese folks or fill-in the blank with the group of your choosing.
And I think that's a valid point to make and doesn't lose its validity because there are millions of obese people and one Duggar family. The writer (who must know her audience) was taking a much wider swipe than a particular critique of the family.
That single family (or her estimation of it) was just a launching pad for some attacks and pretty specious conclusions she has about a lot of groups of people who probably don’t have a helluva lot -- if anything --in common with Duggar clan. I don't want to reread it because it's not worth my time - but it's kind of amusing (and scary) to see all of the backflips she does to tie in everyone she hates in her little rant.
From what little of the family that I’ve read, they do sound odd. And I can’t relate to any of their experiences, goals, or beliefs that I’ve read about. But I don’t think the “Duggars of the world” are a pressing concern locally or globally.
But maybe I’m just not as smart as the author or her readership. Maybe pollution, terrorism, sexual assault and other problems could be eliminated if only those Duggars would get their tubes tied. Oh, wait a minute the solution isn’t as simple as that according to the implications of the author’s little rant since the Duggars obviously must have so much in common with anyone who: voted Republican, lives in a rural area, is Catholic, refers to themselves as evangelical, etc. If everyone could be as cool and smart as that tattooed, Bay area, pagan dad – or at least aspire to that, this world would be peachy-keen. Yes indeed.
What I understood when I read Annie's comment on the Duggar diatribe by that oh-so-enlightened San Francisco scribe, was that readers are apt to give the writer more leeway when it's a safer target (the Duggars) as opposed to more politically correct subjects such as obese folks or fill-in the blank with the group of your choosing.
And I think that's a valid point to make and doesn't lose its validity because there are millions of obese people and one Duggar family. The writer (who must know her audience) was taking a much wider swipe than a particular critique of the family.
That single family (or her estimation of it) was just a launching pad for some attacks and pretty specious conclusions she has about a lot of groups of people who probably don’t have a helluva lot -- if anything --in common with Duggar clan. I don't want to reread it because it's not worth my time - but it's kind of amusing (and scary) to see all of the backflips she does to tie in everyone she hates in her little rant.
From what little of the family that I’ve read, they do sound odd. And I can’t relate to any of their experiences, goals, or beliefs that I’ve read about. But I don’t think the “Duggars of the world” are a pressing concern locally or globally.
But maybe I’m just not as smart as the author or her readership. Maybe pollution, terrorism, sexual assault and other problems could be eliminated if only those Duggars would get their tubes tied. Oh, wait a minute the solution isn’t as simple as that according to the implications of the author’s little rant since the Duggars obviously must have so much in common with anyone who: voted Republican, lives in a rural area, is Catholic, refers to themselves as evangelical, etc. If everyone could be as cool and smart as that tattooed, Bay area, pagan dad – or at least aspire to that, this world would be peachy-keen. Yes indeed.
:>
I would say that they are definitely not your average evangelicals! 
Comment