Yesterday, we wrote an article about Chick-Fil-A's decision to stop donating to some worthy causes to appease politicians subservient to the homo lobby. This decision has angered Conservatives across the country. In researching our article, we cited The National Review and the website Life Site News, which had several specimens of Conservative reaction to the decision.
However, the Red Pills, true to their quasi-Leftist instincts, immediately jumped on the story to vilify Conservatives. Blogger Dalrock, one of the most obnoxious gurus of the cult, penned a borderline-hysterical piece today; flapping his arms over some obscure article that appeared in PJ Media. The author, one Stephen Kruiser, comes across as the sort of world-weary Republican Party donor who thinks that David Souter was a great intellect, and who's been in a depressed state since Mitt Romney lost in 2012. We all know the type...probably wears checkered slacks and drives an Alfa-Romero convertible.
The thrust of Kruiser's article seems to be nothing more than stating he's already bored with the whole controversy and has to rush off to the Country Club if he expects to make luncheon before tee-off time. At any rate, Dalrock took the whole thing out of context, punctuating Kruiser's effete observations with interjections like: "Kruiser opens by suggesting that Chic-fil-a has done the nation a great service by cucking to anti Christian SJWs!" and "Next comes the bizarre meat of Kruiser’s argument, a vague suggestion anything less than compliance to anti Christian SJW activists is really a bold act of defiance!" ; taking Kruiser's obvious sneering sarcasm as literal statements.
Worse yet, Dalrock tries to spin the whole piece as typical of Conservative positions. This despite the fact that Kruiser himself actually said at the conclusion that, "I realize mine is an unpopular opinion". Dalrock then bursts into this tirade: