Wednesday, January 29, 2014

#895: Gina Loudon

We’ve had a spate of wingnut pundits lately, and Gina Loudon is no less crazy than the others. Loudon runs the website “Dr. Gina Smart Life,” a rather unpalatable combination of abysmally inane political commentary and woo-friendly motivational and health-related drivel (she still seems to endorse the HCG diet scam). She also writes for the World Net Daily and Politichicks, and her work has been endorsed by no less authorities than Ann Coulter, Joseph Farah, Pam Geller and Todd Akin (who called her a “reliable source of truth … a voice of clarity, wisdom and understanding about [the] issues,” and we all know how good Akin is with truth.)

Loudon does, indeed, have a degree in psychology, which apparently makes her perceptive enough to have noted a “radical shift in psychology” from the “tyrannical left”. Evidence? She has noted that “Leftists subscribe in lock-step, while conservatives shake their heads at the lemming mentality.” No, that’s not the conclusion; it’s her evidence. It is allegedly supported by a study by The Association for Psychological Science saying that liberals tend to have a false sense of uniqueness, and conservatives tend to have a false sense of consensus. Apparently the study in question is this one, so I suggest a reader exercise: try to figure out how the study’s conclusions, if correct, make liberals exhibit a “lemming mentality” and make them prone to tyranny. To do so, you may need to know what tyrannical traits Loudon is referring to. Well, it’s the usual stuff, of course – legality of abortions and endorsement of the work of the UN and Obamacare, topics that Loudon concludes are clear examples of tyranny, which is the kind of thing wingnuts say when they want to formulate the claim that they disagree with your positions.

But there is hope. Loudon believes that young people will rise up against President Obama when they realize that he has “taken the hard-earned ‘Land of the Free and Home of the Brave’ and turned it into ‘The Land of the Enslaved Effeminates and the Home of the Cowards.’” The transformation is particularly evident from Obamacare advertisements that promote “homo-erotic twerking,” as part of a larger Hollywood agenda that “tore down men and glorified world peace and transvestites.” (Yes, the claims supporting that conclusion are as stupid as the conclusion itself). And to top it all, Obamacare is already causing suicides, says Loudon – completely without a shred of evidence, of course. Apparently it is supposed to follow deductively from her dislike of communism. You can see one of Loudon’s best efforts to take on Obamacare here.

A particularly illustrative case of Loudon is, perhaps, her exchanges with Vanity Fair reporter Michael Gross, in which Loudon repeatedly displayed her dishonesty, ending by concluding that she could have “speculated” that Gross was gay because he has a “psychological profile” of someone who “attacks children.” She can say that since she’s a professional psychologist. Also interesting is the conflict between Loudon, the St. Louis tea party, and fellow wingnut pundit Dana Loesch.

Diagnosis: It’s a tough fight, but we’d judge Loudon to be even a small notch more idiotic than Loesch (though Loesch may be more vile). In any case, that people actually listen to her is a travesty.


  1. Indeed, Loudon is extraordinarily dishonest, even for a wingnut pundit. Here are some more lies. Meanwhile, Obama is a psychopath, according to Loudon, because he takes vacations.

  2. This website is for haters. You present bigotry and slander, but not evidence. Mention a few names, and that's your "evidence." Haters hate.

    1. Elaborate? We sum up some of those of Loudon's activities that we think qualify her as a loon, and we link to more elaborate discussions of those activities. What "evidence" do you think is missing, and for what?

      I do suppose there is a case to be made for calling Loudon a "hater", as you suggest, though.