Friday Reads: As the world–and my stomach–churns (e.g. Dugger Excuse Fest)

Good Morning!

I want to talk about the ridiculous Duggar interview on Fox but really hate to hit you with that first thing since it’s just another example of the perps calling themselves innocent victims of the liberal media. So,  there’s some Hillary news this week that’s worth sharing.  I’ll do that and then dissect the Duggar debacle downpost.

First, Hillary has come out front and center for voting rights and for enfranchisement.

Saying there is a sweeping effort underway across the country to disenfranchise people of color from voting, Hillary Clinton called for universal, automatic voter registration for every citizen when they turn 18, at a speech at Texas Southern University in Houston, one of the largest historically black colleges in the nation.

“I think this would have a profound impact on our elections and our democracy,” she said.

People would be able to opt out of being automatically registered under the proposal, Clinton said. She also called for the adoption of an early voting standard of at least 20 days before an election across the country, along with increased availability to online voter registration and reduced waiting times on election day.

She spoke to the largely black crowd after receiving the Barbara Jordan Public-Private Leadership Award and recalled coming to the area after Katrina with her husband “and a young senator from Illinois by the name of Barack Obama,” she said to cheers.

But Clinton also sought to connect the life of Barbara Jordan, who was the first woman and first African American woman ever elected to represent Texas in the House of Representatives, and her fight for the Voting Rights Act, to the current climate, where she said the law has had its “heart ripped out.”

And she called out former Texas governor Rick Perry, as well as Scott Walker, Chris Christie and Jeb Bush — all for their actions on voting rights.

Clinton pointed to a law passed in Oregon in March that registers everyone who visits the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to vote as a model for the country to look towards.

Cynical wingers are calling this a way for Clinton to shore up the black vote.  Increased voter participation always favors the Democratic party so Republicans are thwarting the voting process all over the place. However, the right of one person to one vote is a pretty sacred idea in the US unless the Surpremes go all plutocracy as they have been known to do recently.

In 2012, Republicans won a majority of seats in the House even though more people voted for Democratic candidates over all. This is because of structural biases, factors that allow a party to outperform its share of the popular vote. The Republicans are expected to again have a big advantage in 2016 because of such factors, which include gerrymandering and the tendency of Democratic voters to be concentrated in cities.

But not all structural biases favor Republicans, and one that doesn’t will be the subject of a Supreme Court case connected to the question of what “one person, one vote” really should mean. If the court overturns current law, it will probably make the composition of Congress even more biased and lengthen the odds for Democrats to retake the House.

Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, Evenwel v. Abbott. It’s about whether voting districts need to have equal populations (as they do today), or whether they need to have equal numbers of eligible voters: adults who are citizens and who haven’t been disenfranchised as a result of imprisonment or felony convictions.

Equal population districts have been taken for granted; every state draws its districts in this way, and it was surprising to see the court even consider the question. But it’s a system that has been an advantage for Democrats for a long time. If the court requires that districts have equal numbers of eligible voters, it will make the elections of representatives to Congress even more biased toward Republicans.

That case may be the reason Clinton is coming out strongly for universal voter registration. We know of at least two Supremes that are basically Right Wing Political Operatives.

The misogyny machine is gearing up and Lady Lindsey Graham is the latest gear in the gasbaggery.  Question.  How is Hillary Clinton like the infamous North Korean Dictator?  No clue?  That’s because you’re not delusional and living a life that’s a public lie.

Presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) took a swipe at Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton during a Thursday appearance on Fox News, comparing her to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.

“Well, it’s easier to talk to the North Korean guy than it is her,” Graham said on “Fox & Friends,” referencing Clinton’s refusal to take questions from the press in the past several weeks.

“I think it’s the lack of confidence in her ability to distinguish herself from Barack Obama,” he said.

Graham was on message throughout, telling the hosts that he was committed to sending American troops back to Iraq to destroy the Islamic State.

Co-host Steve Doocy had to cut in.

“It’s a tough message,” Doocy said. “A lot of people are just worn out by war.”

“Well, don’t vote for me,” Graham said.

“Don’t vote for me, because I’m telling you what’s coming. Barack Obama’s policies of leading from behind are going to allow another 9/11,” he said.

I’m not sure who exactly Graham believes will be voting for him but I certainly wouldn’t want to meet those folks.  I can’t imagine what those ten or twenty people might be like frankly.  Probably a few of them are self-loathing closet cases and defense contractors.  I can’t imagine any other following.

Okay.  NOW, I’ve come to the long part of the post.  BB did a great job of covering the start of the Duggar scandal.  I’m going to follow up her work here and hope she can add to some of the research I found on juvenile sex offenders.

As usual, Fox News did something to really piss me off.  It provided a platform to air Duggar Excuse Fest.  Yes, the Duggar dig out continues with the fallout from the Megyn Kelly interview. They are now doing the usual thing of pointing to the press and every one else and claiming they’re the real victims. They’ve even sunk so low they’ve trotted out their abused daughters.  It should be clear by now that the Duggar parents are not victims. They are perpetrators.   The interview may not have had its intended goal. They seem generally confused that no one sees them as doing the right thing.

The Duggar sexual philosophy is that girls’ bodies never belong to the girls themselves. They’re under the authority of their father or another male figure, and then they belong to their husbands. There is no individual right of female sexual pleasure. There is no value placed on female bodily autonomy or ownership or control. Instead, the message is that girls’ bodies are never their own, that the girls themselves are simply vessels for male pleasure, male desires, and male authority, and the girls’ job is to preserve their bodies to hand over to the appropriate man.

It’s the same mentality — male authority over and right to female bodies — that begets sexual assault in the first place.

Compounding the sexual abuse and then the raising of their girls to believe that sexual touch sullies them was the Duggar parents’ decision to put the whole family on TV and turn their then 16 kids into a cash cow.

“They’ve been victimized more by what has happened in these last couple weeks than they were 12 years ago,” Michelle Duggar told Megyn Kelly about her daughters, “because they honestly they didn’t even understand or know that anything had happened until after the fact when they were told about it. In our hearts before God, we haven’t been keeping secrets. We have been protecting those who honestly should be protected. And now what’s happened is they’ve been victimized.”

Now, Michelle says, the Duggar daughters have been victimized — not when their brother was sneaking into their bedrooms to molest them or when he was molesting them on the couch or when their parents never actually got him professional help. It’s now that the story is public. And surely this is awful and traumatizing for them. Surely they do feel victimized.

But who put them on TV in the first place? Who turned them into public figures? Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar invited cameras into their home to put their family in the public eye, both so they could make money and so they could spread their religious beliefs (evangelism is part of the requirements of their religion, and what better way to spread the word than a television show beamed into households across the country). They believe their way of living — the woman at home and subservient to her husband, girls not pursuing higher education, forgoing contraception, and having as many children as God gives you even if it kills you — is not just right for them, but the only righteous, acceptable, moral way to live. They presented themselves as living examples of a particularly strict, misogynist, and retrograde sexual morality. They made their many children into minor celebrities. They wanted the public to be interested in them, because that interest meant cash and it meant influence.

They did that knowing their own family’s history. They sold a narrative of sexual restriction as noble, of sexuality as shameful, knowing their daughters were sexual abuse victims and that being publicly identified as such would be, to use their word, “devastating.”

They did that. That was a choice. The tabloid media may have also behaved poorly, but if the Duggars were just another big family in Arkansas, no one in the national media would have cared.

Many key points made by the Duggars in the interview were not only delusional, they were out-and-out lies.   The Duggar parents are basically unrepentant felons that did everything to avoid the consequences of their actions and their son’s actions.

When discussing the legal situation surrounding Josh’s confession of molestation, Jim Bob told Fox News that he and Michelle were “not mandatory reporters, the law allows parents to do what they think is best for their child.” Not so. While they are not mandatory reporters, the law does not allow them to do what they think is best for their child in this situation, multiple legal experts tell In Touch.

By not reporting the at-least SEVEN instances of abuse on at least THREE occasions during a period of more than a year, they could have faced felony charges for child endangerment, with a six-year prison term.

Law professor Michael Johnson, a former United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, tells In Touch: “It is possible that investigators looking into this case could have cited the parents Jim Bob Duggar and Michelle Duggar with Arkansas Code 5-27-221 ‘Permitting Abuse of a Minor.’ Having once learned of the behavior, they recklessly allowed it to continue. This crime is a class D felony because the abuse consisted of sexual contact with a minor. The maximum penalty for permitting this type of abuse under Arkansas Code 5-4-401 is six years imprisonment and a $10,000 fine.” The new issue of In Touch magazine has complete details on the Duggars’ cover-up and how it could have landed them in prison.

Also, they’ve consistently stated that the police reports were made public illegally.  Not so. Arkansas has its own version of FOIA and every release was in keeping with its law. This was not some little adolescent curiosity at work given the time period and the number of victims.

Jim Bob suggested the records of Josh’s crimes were released because the Springdale police chief, Kathy O’Kelley, may have taken a bribe. The records were obtained through Arkansas’ Freedom of Information Act, which is one of the most liberal open records laws in the country, according to the state’s attorney general.

In Touch has a paper trail that proves city attorneys reviewed the FOI request and approved the records’ release. Further, Jim Bob’s “bribe or personal agenda” explanation for the records’ release loses all credibility in light of the fact that a SECOND police report detailing Josh’s crimes was obtained by In Touch magazine through FOIA.

That second report comes from the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, and the Springdale police chief has no involvement in deciding if those records can be released.

It does appear that Huckabee is ready to throw them under the bus.  He’s removed all evidence of their endorsements from his website.  He got an earful from potential voters after his May 22nd defense.  Now, he’s sent them to byte heaven.

Endorsements from Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar, of TLC’s “19 Kids and Counting,” have disappeared from former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee’s (R) presidential campaign website.
The Duggar endorsements enjoyed top billing on the campaign site’s “I Like Mike” sidebar on May 22, the day Huckabee issued a full-throated defense of the family following the publication of a 2006 police report that showed the Duggar’s eldest son, Josh, was investigated for molesting five underage girls when he was a teenager. Parents Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar said that four of the victims were Josh’s sisters, while the fifth was a babysitter, during an interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly that aired Wednesday night.

Jim Bob, a former Arkansas state representative, and Michelle Duggar endorsed Huckabee both for his 2008 and 2016 presidential campaigns. Their endorsements did not appear in the “I Like Mike” section of the site Thursday morning. Archived versions of the campaign site show that the endorsements were removed sometime Monday night.

USA Today has a tick tock up on the Duggar antics releated to Josh’s sexual assaults on the five young girls.  However, this is the thing that’s interested me. The new police report has information that shows exactly how delusional the Duggar family have become in order to protect themselves, their financial interests, and their cult. 

Josh Duggar confessed to his father Jim Bob Duggar on THREE separate occasions to multiple acts of sexual molestation against his sisters and a family friend, according to a new police report obtained exclusively by In Touch magazine.
The document also makes clear that Josh was 15 years old when he molested his 5-year-old sister and committed at least SEVEN acts of sexual molestation.

The new report is from the Washington County Sheriff’s Office and was obtained by In Touch using the Freedom of Information Act. In Touch broke the story about Josh’s dark past and previously obtained and published a Springdale Police Department report about the molestations, also by using FOIA.

With fewer redactions than the first report, the Washington County Sheriff’s document makes it clear that despite Josh’s chilling confessions the Duggars waited at least 16 months before contacting authorities about the molestations, even though the behavior was continuing and growing worse. During that period they did not get professional counseling for Josh or his victims. Legal experts tell In Touch that Jim Bob and Michelle could have faced six years in prison for their inaction, if the statute of limitations had not expired.

“James said that in March of 2002 [redacted, Josh] who had just turned 14, came to him very upset and crying,” the new report reads. “James said that [redacted, Josh] had told him that he had been sneaking into [redacted, his sisters’] room at night and had been touching [redacted, his sisters] on the breasts and vaginal areas while they were sleeping.”

The report details that Josh went from sister to sister, stating, “Apparently all of the girls were sleeping in a common room at this time.”

The sheriff’s document also shows the extent of Josh’s abuse. “[Redacted, Josh] told James that this had occurred 4 to 5 times and had occurred as [redacted] was sleeping on the couch.”

We probably won’t fully understand the nature of their crimes until one of the Duggar girls breaks free from the cult.  This admission from the police report is the most chilling to me. 

A 15-year-old Josh Duggar confessed to molesting his 5-year-old sister while he held her on his lap and read her stories, according to a newly released police report obtained by In Touch Weekly.

That confession alone would make any aware person realize Josh has issues.   Here is an extremely interesting report/study on Juvenile Sex Offenders.

In addition to a diversity of backgrounds, diversity in motivation is evident. Some juvenile sex offenders appear primarily motivated by sexual curiosity. Others have longstanding patterns of violating the rights of others. Some offenses occur in conjunction with serious mental health problems. Some of the offending behavior is compulsive, but it more often appears impulsive or reflects poor judgment (Becker, 1998; Center for Sex Offender Management, 1999; Chaffin, 2005; Hunter et al., 2003).

Similarly, clinical data point to variability in risk for future sex offending as an adult. Multiple short- and long-term clinical followup studies of juvenile sex offenders consistently demonstrate that a large majority (about 85–95 percent) of sex-offending youth have no arrests or reports for future sex crimes. When previously sex-offendingyouth do have future arrests, they are far more likely to be for nonsexual crimes such as property or drug offenses than for sex crimes (Alexander, 1999; Caldwell, 2002; Reitzel and Carbonell, 2007).

These empirical findings contrast with popular thought and widely publicized anecdotal cases that disproportionately portray incidences of sex crime recidivism. Nevertheless, a small number of sex-offending youth are at elevated risk to progress to adult sex offenses. To identify those who are more likely to progress to future offending, researchers have developed actuarial risk assessment tools that have demonstrated some predictive validity; efforts to refine these tools are underway (Parks and Bard, 2006; Righthand et al., 2005; Worling, 2004).

This fact sheet comes from the National Juvenile Justice Network.

Youth Sexual Offending Behavior Is Different from Adult Sex Offending Behavior The scientific literature on this issue distinguishes the behavior of juveniles from adults. • Youth sex offenders engage in fewer abusive behaviors over shorter periods of time and have less aggressive sexual behavior. (National Center on Sexual Behavior of Youth (NCSBY) • Juveniles are not fixed in their sexual offending behavior. Juvenile offenders who act out sexually do not tend to eroticize aggression, nor are they aroused by child sex stimuli. Mental health professionals regard this juvenile behavior as much less dangerous. (NCSBY) • More than nine out of ten times the arrest of a juvenile for a sex offense is a one-time event, even though the juvenile may be apprehended for non-sex offenses typical of other juvenile delinquents. (Zimring, p. 66) • Only 8% of the incidents leading to juvenile arrests for sexual offenses would be eligible as evidence of a pedophilia disorder under American Psychiatric

The information and studies seem to indicate that providing Josh with an evaluation and proper counselling at the time might have been enough to head off any future problems.  However, the Duggars have not been forthcoming about what exactly they did for the son other than to send him off to a friend to build things and keep his hands otherwise occupied.  They also have not been open with the HHS evaluation done in 2006.  The incidences with Josh occurred over a period of time and to five separate little girls. It’s really a shame that this family seems to have a more vested interest in denying and downplaying the incidences rather than investigating the possibility that their son may truly have an issue.

This may come from a lot of their own issues but certainly the views of their religious cult played a role.  How any one can accuse a five year old of immodest behavior or excuse the abusive 15 year old as just being curious is beyond me.  But, some of these beliefs contribute to the idea that men basically own women’s bodies and lead them into sin. Yes, that good old Adam and Eve story strikes again.  When do we get to leave the iron age mythology in the proper receptacle like a library.

The Duggars frame dysfunction, abuse, and psychopathology in terms of sin, repentance, forgiveness, and grace … oh, and DEMONS.

I’ve written before about the way popular Christian teachings about love and relationships actually provide chapter and verse justification for “dysfunctional game playing and crazy-making head trips.”

Like the majority of fundamentalist Christians, JimBob and Michelle harbor a grave mistrust of pretty much every respected, evidence-based approach to behavioral issues: secular psychology is “spiritually dangerous,” modern medicine, therapy, and pharmaceuticals are equated with “witchcraft,” and abusive, criminal behavior is often attributed to “a heart issue,” or even demonic influence or possession.

The sad fact is, the Duggar family called Josh’s sexual abuse of minor girls a “teenage mistake” and they naively believe that because the boy repented, humbled himself before God, and asked forgiveness, God’s “grace, mercy, and redemption” have changed Josh into a new man who can be trusted not to molest minor children.

Anna Duggar, Josh’s wife and mother of his three young children (with another baby on the way), is standing behind her husband, calling him, “a man who knows how to be a gentleman and treat a girl right.”  Apparently, her immersion in Christian culture influenced Anna to interpret the revelation of Josh’s “past mistakes” (which she says he confessed to her and her parents two years before he proposed to her) through the “sin, forgiveness, and redemption” narrative rather than giving credence to the prevailing understanding that sex offenders rarely (never?) change.

Christians who trust in repentance and forgiveness of sins when it comes to abusive situations will PRAY for the abuser rather than PROTECT the abuse victim.

Whatever the issues, TLC should insure that this cult is not fetishized ever, ever again.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?