That’s my takeaway from her piece about the Massachusetts election. Every wingnut has an opinion on this, and they’re equally unformed, yet each is strikingly unique! Matt Barber, despite all polling evidence to the contrary, found it to be a rebuke of Obama’s healthcare reform plan, despite the fact that Massachusetts already has universal healthcare of a stronger variety than anything being considered in Congress.

Phyllis, though? Well, you see, it was because Martha Coakley is a feminist!

It was not so great when Coakley was disdainful about Brown campaigning in the cold outside Fenway Park, the fabled home of the beloved Boston Red Sox. It was not so great when Coakley dismissed one of the biggest Red Sox stars as a “Yankee fan.”

Those comments fit the profile of feminists who have contempt for men’s sports and therefore have eliminated hundreds of men’s teams from college athletic programs under a misinterpretation of Title IX. Howard University even canceled both wrestling and baseball on the same day, giving double pleasure to the hateful feminists.

Boston University is the largest school in Boston, but it no longer has an NCAA baseball team. Nationwide, feminist opposition to anything masculine has forced the elimination of more than 450 wrestling teams.

Brava, Mother Schlafly! Lady candidate makes a dippy gaffe about sports and Phyllis is able to tie it all back to the mean feminists who want to take the wrestling teams away from our burly manly men! But, Phyllis, how are you going to tie this to abortion?

Coakley insulted people with religious values by declaring that those who oppose abortion probably shouldn’t work in emergency rooms because an occasional patient might demand an immediate abortion. Feminists refuse to allow respect for a right of conscience because that might get in the way of their ideology that abortion is women’s premier right.

Oh, I see. That’s how it’s all about abortion. What does this mean, Phyllis?

It’s no wonder that non-college-educated men voted overwhelmingly for Brown against Coakley by a massive 27-point margin. The Democrats are lucky enough to elect some feminists, but feminists are just too unappealing when running against a masculine man such as Brown.

Faced with a hot guy, Massachusetts’ uneducated straight men go weak in the knees and forget all about the lady running for the seat. Tr?®s int?©ressant! Does Mother Phyllis back any of this up with polling data? Ha ha, of course not. But she still thinks she proved her case!

Commentary about Brown’s appeal to women is diversionary — it was male voters who overwhelmingly pulled the lever for him. Men are fed up with the feminist mindset and delivered a clear message in the Massachusetts election: give us a candidate who stands up to the feminists, and we will cross over from Democrat and independent to elect a Republican.

Gotcha. Men pulled their levers for Scott Brown because they’re fed up with ladies with minds of their own.

How this squares with the fact that Massachusetts repeatedly elected Ted Kennedy, who fought for feminist issues throughout his career, is beyond me, but it’s Phyllis. She doesn’t spend any time doing research on the issues she holds forth on, so why should we spend an inordinate amount of time analyzing Phyllis?

It’s a bit revelatory that wingnuts are finding such diverse reasons for the election of Scott Brown, all reflecting their own biases. Perhaps it’s because Scott Brown is exactly the blank naked slate I think he is.

Time for Peter to weigh in on how the Massachusetts election was a rejection of gays.

(h/t Right Wing Watch)