Outrage-Off: Kevin McCullough vs. Charles Lane

Obama is collaborating with Tiger Woods' Muslim followers to screw America, for the homosexual movement. The only way to stop the outrage: Outrageous right wing wingnuttery. Today's contestants: Kevin McCullough and Charles Lane.

Townhall.com Nobel Laureate (? checking on that) Kevin McCullough explains "Why Obama is worse than Tiger." Is there any part of this essay that's worse than any other part? Not really, so we'll just pick something representatively idiotic:

Outrage-Off: Kevin McCullough vs. Charles LaneIf Tiger puts into practice a principle from my newest book (The Kind of Man Every Man Should Be) and pursues reconciliation, forgiveness, and healthy life choices from this point on—all while agreeing to absolute accountability—he may very well lose his wife and children anyway. Yet at the very least, by making such choices, and by adopting a different path than the one that took him down the road of danger, Tiger can give to his children and possibly even to a former wife a degree of health and sanity. It will not replace what betrayal has taken from them, but his desire to reconcile will produce healthy results.

President Obama, from all appearances, will refuse to admit that his statist view of the world has any flaws in it whatsoever. He will dig in. He will give more speeches. He will possibly even accept more absurd awards on the world stage, even while insulting the host nation who is silly enough to honor him with such acclaim. President Obama refuses to see, what everyone else easily does, that his actions are damaging the future of millions of people, but his stubborn refusal to pivot may damage generations of descendants of those people.

Outrage-Off: Kevin McCullough vs. Charles Lane

The key difference is that Tiger uses Kevin's book! Okay. Contestant #2: Charles Lane, who writes for the award-winning WaPo editorial page. He knows how to help the poor! Here's one way:

— Reduce the federal minimum wage. In 2007, Congress enacted a three-step increase in the minimum wage, which was then $5.15 per hour. The final installment took effect in July, raising the rate to $7.25 per hour. In the meantime, unemployment climbed from 4.7 percent to 9.5 percent.

I am not saying that the minimum wage increase caused this; far from it. But study after study has shown that this supposed benefit to the poor prices low-skilled workers out of entry-level jobs. It was unwise to keep raising the cost of hiring them in a recession.

Haha. Here is just one rebuttal, for example. Vote for your fave smart guy below! [Pic via and via]