Oh lord, Mike Huckabee’s really imploding right before our very eyes, isn’t he?

Crazy not-birther Mike Huckabee thinks Natalie Portman is corrupting America by having been “visibly pregnant” at the Oscars without being married. On Michael Medvedev’s radio show, Medvedev talked about how “sending that kind of message is problematic.” Huckabee agreed:

There aren’t really a lot of single moms out there who are making millions of dollars every year for being in a movie,” he said. “And I think it gives a distorted image. … Most single moms are very poor, uneducated, can’t get a job, and if it weren’t for government assistance, their kids would be starving to death and never have health care. And that’s the story that we’re not seeing, and it’s unfortunate that we glorify and glamorize the idea of out-of-wedlock children.

Uh. How messed up in the head do you have to be to be unable to embrace the position, “Natalie Portman Can Do Whatever The Hell She Wants”?

Gawker has the audio, so click the above clicky if you want to hear the completely useless discussion.

But what I really want to point out here is Angry Black Lady’s reaction to this:

So let me get this straight. The Huckster is concerned about the colored kids born out of wedlock, but at the same time wants to force all women to have babies should they become pregnant through rape, contraception failure, a mistake, or rampant sluttery, and then he has the temerity to lament the poor uneducated and unemployed status of the zombie babymakers single moms while at the same time preaching abstinence only.

How has his head not exploded from cognitive dissonance?

Haha, that would require movement in Huckabee’s grey matter. He’s just pandering to mindless wingnuts, is all.  I do agree, though, that Mike Huckabee may have picked the wrong Hollywood starlet to talk smack about.  [NSFW, but amazing.]

Um…

But the politically correct attitude not only insists that heterosexual and homosexual relationships are equivalent, but also erases differences between relationships between two women and relationships between two men. If men and women are profoundly different-and both science and common sense tell us they are- then an all-female couple is even more different from an all-male couple than either homosexual bond differs from a heterosexual union. This distinction helps explain the oft-noted quirk in public attitudes that sees stronger opposition and denunciation, in the Old Testament and elsewhere, to a physical relationship between two males and intimacy between two females. A physical connection between a female couple, like a physical connection between man and woman, is based primarily on acts of affection. The most common sexual practice between two men involves an act of aggression —inflicting more pain than pleasure for at least one of the parties. Even decisions by Congress, equating homosexual and heterosexual relationships, or erasing distinctions between the interaction between lesbians on the one hand and gay males on the other, cannot repeal politically incorrect realities.

Michael: You’re doing it wrong.

[h/t Joe]

Oh, how I love him:

Today I listened to Michael Medved and some moron from a “Religious Liberty” think-tank flipping out about the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Their thesis was that forcing God-fearing, 1000% straight men like themselves to share locker rooms and barracks with gay men will mean the end of civilization, presumably because all that uncorrupted religious straight-dude flesh will be too much of a temptation for gay soldiers ‚Äî who naturally will have enlisted for deadly dangerous combat in stinking Middle Eastern hell-holes just to get a glimpse of toothless Christian boys from Arkansas naked. These megachurch-bred anti-gay advocates with their visceral terror about the end of the closet, sure that liberated gay men by the hundreds will be lying in wait to rape them the instant the shower-nozzles turn on … I mean, the amount of projection going on is so obvious, it’ almost laughable.

(Quote comes as an aside in a longer rant about Rush Limbaugh’s comments that, if New York Governor David Paterson appoints the replacement for Big Gay Groper Eric Massa, it will be the first time Paterson himself is a “massa.” But don’t call Rush racist, you guys! And by all means, if you have Republican family members/coworkers who think that’s funny, don’t call them on it, because they’ll just start telling you how much they didn’t mind it when a black family lived near them.)