Quantcast

«

»

May 04 2012

Despicable Right-Wing Political Hack New Director of the Secular Coalition for America

Can someone explain to me why the Secular Coalition for America–presumably an organization that is opposed to right-wing religious authoritarianism–has chosen Edwina Rogers as its new Executive Director?

Rogers is typical right-wing political hackefucke slime, with the resume to prove it:

She was an Economic Advisor for President George W. Bush at the White House during 2001 and 2002 at the National Economic Council, focusing on health and social security policy. Ms. Rogers was General Counsel of the National Republican Senatorial Committee during the Republican take-over of the Senate in 1994. She worked for Senator L ott while he was Majority Leader in 1999 and she handled health policy for Senator Sessions in 2003 and 2004. Edwina worked on International Trade matters for former President George H. W. Bush at the Department of Commerce from 1989 to 1991.

I have no idea what the fucke these fucken idiots at the Secular Coalition for America were thinking hiring this sleazy right-wing asshole as their new Executive Director. She has spent nearly her entire professional life carrying water for the worst of the right-wing slime that have relied on the theocratic jeezus freak impulses of our most ignorant and hateful pig-people citizens to gain political power and then used that political power to push more and more pig-people religious and racial hate into the political sphere, and oh yeah, fucked uppe every fucken thing they touched: the economy, civil rights, foreign policy, our national physical infrastructure, education, etc.

31 comments

2 pings

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    slc1

    Ms. Rogers claims to be an unbeliever, which seems to be her entire qualification for the job.

  2. 2
    ash

    It’s that leftover from old-school touchy-feely liberalism that feels the need to be “fair” even to those who oppose us. Whatever…But do we have to give them fucking posistions of POWER in owr movements. NO!

  3. 3
    ash

    I predict that either she leaves or that there will be an exodus from the SCA.

  4. 4
    Phillip IV

    It’s all for camouflage. You see, right-wingers recognize each other via odor marks – as soon as Rogers has pissed all over the place at the SCA, the organization will be practically undetectable to the right-wing bloodhounds.

    That this is the correct interpretation is clear based on Sherlock Holmes’ reasoning: “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

  5. 5
    sqlrob

    @ash:

    or?

  6. 6
    bubba707

    Let’s look at this without the Republican/Democrat blinders. What Edwina Rogers has shown in her career is she does the job her employer hires her to do and does it well. You may disagree with that job but it remains what she was paid for. She comes into this job with the skill sets and professional connections badly needed by the secular community and there is nothing to indicate she won’t do the job she’s been hired to do.

  7. 7
    Raging Bee

    Rogers has shown in her career is she does the job her employer hires her to do and does it well. You may disagree with that job but it remains what she was paid for.

    I could say the same thing about a paid assassin for a drug cartel.

    Since when did getting paid for something make it excusable or beyond reproach?

  8. 8
    John D

    This place shouldn’t be called “freethought” blogs. Please change your name to obscene Republican hater blogs. Truth in advertising would at least improve your credibility.

    Just so I understand your claims…

    Claim 1: SCA are “fucking idiots”

    Claim 2: Rogers is a “typical right-wing political hackefucke slime”

    Ummmm… okay. Real freethought here I see. Carry-on…

  9. 9
    Timid Atheist

    It’s funny how the Freethought is always challenged when it’s a thought that someone doesn’t agree with. And by funny I mean, seriously getting old.

  10. 10
    John D

    So Timid – let me get this straight. You think that this comment is somehow thoughtful: “typical right-wing political hackefucke slime”

    Please help me understand.

    Or perhaps you think “freethought” is a reference to personally attacking someone with a long obscene slur. I guess I really must not understand “freethought”.

  11. 11
    Timid Atheist

    John D –

    Free thought, as I understand it, means I’m allowed to have whatever thoughts I like and express them. You in turn are allowed to disagree with them.

    Don’t agree with Physioproffe? Awesome, tell us why.

    Your comments are what they call tone trolling. You seem to think that because Physioproffe is swearing and calling her names that he’s not being thoughtful. That is your opinion.

    To make sure that you don’t misunderstand, I don’t agree with name calling, but that’s just my personal preference and I have just as much right to it as Physioproffe. Now if he were to start using gendered or racial slurs, I’d call him out on it. But I don’t really have a problem with complaining about politicians, I think they’re all corrupt. Yet another opinion.

    Amazing how free thought works!

  12. 12
    John D

    Haha… you kids are a trip. Glad to see you have your own definition of free thought. I also enjoy your strangely constructed rules about cursing. You have a neat little special club here.

    Susan Jacoby wrote an excellent book about freethought. You should read it.

    Ingersol is rolling over in his grave. I somehow doubt he had calling people “fucking idiots” in mind.

    Timid – You are talking about free speech. You shouldn’t confuse the two.

  13. 13
    Timid Atheist

    Pretty sure I’m talking about free thought. You know, I’m free to think what I like. But nice try.

    Also, assuming that everyone thinks just like I do is a very bad assumption to make. You might want to rethink that.

    I haven’t been a kid in a very long time, but nice try on the condescension.

  14. 14
    John Horstman

    @10: “Freethought” refers to the collection of blogs, which are expounding a range of opinions on Rogers. It does not indicate that specific blogs/bloggers agree with or are welcoming of all ideas. Please think before you post (or stop trolling if you’re intentionally feigning ignorance).

  15. 15
    John Horstman

    Okay, he is just trolling. Disengage, Timid; it’s not worth it, and without an audience, he may just go away.

  16. 16
    DrugMonkey

    Why is it so unimaginable that there are secularists on the right? And that it might be a damn good idea to enlist them for the part of the battle that is limited to decreasing religious influence over politics?

  17. 17
    slc1

    Ah, Phisoproffe is just out of sorts because his fucken Yankees lost another fucken game last night.

  18. 18
    Dalillama

    @drugmonkey
    Because the right has been pushing faith-based initiatives pretty much incessantly. When people consistently vote for politicians who push faith-based laws, those people are by definition not secularists. Therefore, it is unimaginable to me that people on the right could be secularists, because there is zero evidence to support such an idea. It is irrelevant that some people on the right may claim to be secularists, as their actions give the lie to that claim.

  19. 19
    Ing

    Why is it so unimaginable that there are secularists on the right?

    Because anyone who CARED enough about secular issues stopped supporting the right in the 90s at most.

  20. 20
    Jacob Schmidt

    @Dalillama

    John E Jones III, the judge who presided over Kitzmiller v. Dover, was a conservative republican. There are republicans who have the right idea, at least as far as secularism goes.

    The fact the Edwina Rogers is conservative doesn’t bother me. However, her interview with Hemant Mahta makes me wary.

  21. 21
    Setár, Elvenkitty

    John Horstman #15:

    Okay, he is just trolling. Disengage, Timid; it’s not worth it, and without an audience, he may just go away.

    Silence is generally taken for agreement, so fuck that noise.

    DrugMonkey #16:

    Why is it so unimaginable that there are secularists on the right? And that it might be a damn good idea to enlist them for the part of the battle that is limited to decreasing religious influence over politics?

    Because the Right has a very long and well-documented history of being lying dishonest subversive corporatist assholes who try to spin everything in their favour. This includes fabricating a trope about how the Democrats are growing more radical at the same rate as the Republicans when the actual case since 1968 has been that the Republicans turn their crazy up to 11 for a given presidential election, after which that level is set as 1 and then dialled up to yet another 11 for the next presidential election cycle.

    The result is that Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and even possibly Bush Sr. would today be declared RINOs (Republican In Name Only) and given the heave-ho in a primary — but the “centrists” don’t want you to believe that, so they trot out Jonathan Haidt and let him go on and on about how cognitive foibles affect all humans so liberals have to be just as bad as conservatives, with a few just-so stories thrown in for effect.

    It also makes corporate tools like Clinton and Obama look liberal because they’re nominally left-leaning on some prominent issues (or they’re just Democrats, take your pick), even though in the big picture they’re both to the right of Reagan.

  22. 22
    Setár, Elvenkitty

    John E Jones III, the judge who presided over Kitzmiller v. Dover, was a conservative republican. There are republicans who have the right idea, at least as far as secularism goes.

    And yet if you were to toss those Republicans into a primary election today, they’d more than likely be declared RINOs and given the heave-ho.

    You really have been living under a rock for the past ten years.

    The fact the Edwina Rogers is conservative doesn’t bother me.

    No. What should bother you was that she worked for George W. Bush, and before that for the decidedly anti-secular Trent Lott.

    If that doesn’t bother you, these should.

    If those don’t bother you, your conservatism is showing.

  23. 23
    skeptifem

    Rogers has shown in her career is she does the job her employer hires her to do and does it well. You may disagree with that job but it remains what she was paid for.

    ..and she doesn’t let pesky shit like integrity get in the way of being efficient. Nice. As if americans do not already consider atheists untrustworthy.

  24. 24
    mutt50

    If you work for a regime of torturers and war mongers,…well…
    We are what we do.

  25. 25
    Zengaze

    Hey hold up a minute. I’m fairly lefty myself, but secularism has absolutely nothing to do with the political spectrum. Period. It’s like Christians trying to claim ownership of morality. I even seen on another blog someone say hitches wasn’t secular as a reply to a poster pointing out hitchens supported the Iraq war! I call bullshit!

    Where there may be mileage in pointing out that the republican party appears to be made up of a lot of religidiots who want to break down the wall of separation it is a fallacy to say that all republicans want to break down the wall.

    I would want to see her record on separation. Did she ever work to break down the wall? If so then we have a problem.

  26. 26
    Mark D.

    @Zaengaze

    In a perfect world, your point would mean something.

    In reality though, secularism does have something to do with the political spectrum, because Republicans have consistently placed themselves as anti-secular in an attempt to pander to religious people.

    You might be able to get away with “Not all Republicans are theocratic, racist, classist, misogynist assholes” as an abstract argument, but the fact that people like Gingrich, Huckabee, Bachmann, SANTORUM, and all those other worthless idiots can have a good chance to be elected to the highest office in the nation doesn’t speak very well for them.

  27. 27
    Zengaze

    Okay, I’m defining my position. She should in no way have been hired. It seems she supported rick perry for president. No person interested in preventing religious nuts creating a theocracy would back perry. Simple. How the fuck can she define herself as a secularist?

    Secondly I don’t give a shit if she would lobby well, I don’t want a juke box that will sing whatever song i pay it to.

  28. 28
    Zengaze

    For insight I to the coalitions thinking behind this appointment, read the following:

    http://secular.org/blogs/herb-silverman/what-atheist-groups-learned-christian-coalition

  29. 29
    Pierce R. Butler

    Zengaze @ # 28 – the only insight I gained from the link you supplied is that SCA pres. Herb Silverman isn’t very insightful.

    Using the Christian Coalition as a role model would only make sense if secularists were in a position similar to that of fundagelicals. That does not apply – socially, ideologically, organizationally, or any other way I can think of – and makes as much sense as treating a colony of feral cats as equivalent to a herd of domesticated sheep.

    The only point of similarity between SCA and the classic glory-days CC is that Edwina Rogers comes across as another Ralph Reed: amoral, nasty, and endlessly self-promoting. We should do all we can to make SCA move immediately into the current CC mode: an irrelevant and ludicrous shell personified by a lone nutcase who emits a string of universally-ignored press releases, serving only as a distraction from the real powers in the movement.

    SCA has, practically overnight, become an impediment and an embarrassment to the secularist movement. Dump it and move on (just like Robertson did with CC).

  30. 30
    melody

    FYI: Edwina Rogers has an “Ask me anything” up on Reddit right now: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/tdbbh/iama_republican_from_alabama_who_now_leads_the/

  31. 31
    art

    Over the last six years members from the Make it Safe Coalition (MISC) have arranged
    an assembly of Whistleblowers in Washington,DC each year for an annual conference
    originally known as Washington Whistleblower’s Week. The ACORN 8 and the USDA
    Coalition of Mionrity Employees will co-­‐host this year’sWhistleblower Summit on
    Civil & Human Rights.

    This year’s theme is WoW…Obama—fighting the War on Whistleblowers and Women.
    We are proud to announce that MSNBC Host Dylan Ratigan has agreed to participate
    and that the PACIFICA Radio Network will broadcast the historic event nationally this year.

    The Pillar Human Rights Award for International Person’s of Conscience will be awarded to notable civil and human rights champions.The international press may cover the event as well.

    Monday

    The Opening Plenary and Panel Discussion will take place in the
    Dirksen Building Senate Judiciary Hearing Room on May 21, 2012 (12:00—4:00 PM).Followed by Welcome Reception and Art Auction at the Mott House on May21, 2012 (5:00—7:00 PM)

    Tuesday

    A Press Conference on the Mall at the Martin Luther King Memorial will be held on May 22, 2012 (11:00—2:00 PM). Followed by Historic Whistleblower Book Signing and Film Screening at Busboy’s & Poets (14th and V. Street)on May 22, 2012(4:00—8:00 PM).Notable authors, whistleblowers and advocates include Tom Devine, the Whistleblowers Survival Guide; Michael McCray, ACORN8: Race, Power & Politics, and Eyal Press, Beautiful Souls.

    Wednesday

    Civil and Human Rights Roundtable on the War on Women,and the War on Whistleblowers will be held at the Mott House on May 23, 2012 (10:00—2:00 PM). ACORN 8, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees and the MISC are an assortment of various public interest/advocacy groups. For more information call 202.370.6635 or 703.743.0565 or for more information please visit the ACORN8.com website.

  1. 32
    Matt Dillahunty Weighs In on Edwina Rogers | Greta Christina's Blog

    [...] With Hammers The Pros and Cons of Hiring A Republican to Represent Secularists, Camels With Hammers Despicable Right-Wing Political Hack New Director of the Secular Coalition for America, Comradde PhysioProffe Edwina Rogers: the unanswered questions, The Crommunist Manifesto Can a [...]

  2. 33
    Edwina Rogers: the unanswered questions | Crommunist

    […] to Head the Secular Coalition for America? Who is going to be our spokesperson on Capitol Hill? Despicable Right-Wing Political Hack New Director of the Secular Coalition for America Secular Coalition For… The Right Wing GOP? Edwina Rogers vs. Michael J. Fox The Pros and Cons of […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>