The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.
The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.
His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.
He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.
He also might be of Swedish descent and live and breathe hockey, although he probably can't skate himself (just guessing). He may also be an African-American family man who loves God, is a good husband/father/friend, and plays by the rules.
Yes, you heard me. My point of contention with this piece is that it labels the wrong group as disenfranchised and unrepresented. "Angry White Man?" Couldn't this label describe Barney Frank when he can't find his male page boy? Or wouldn't Senator Kennedy be an Angry White Man if the bar closed early?
This election has left out the CONSERVATIVE. White males may make up a block of the larger pool, but it is LIBERALISM that we collectively despise. We recognize that liberalism is what has been tearing at the very fabric of our country, and it is liberalism that is at the root of our problems. And while we may get "Angry" and frustrated at times, we do not walk around "Angry".
Hubbell singles out Hillary Clinton at the conclusion of this piece as the target of the so-called Angry White Male's loathing. While I have no love lost for Senator Clinton, I found the author's omission of any mention of Barak Hussein Obama as rather conspicuous. It is almost as if he stopped typing at this point, began to wring his hands thinking, "should I or shouldn't I?" and deciding that mentioning Obama would open him up to charges of racism. Well, I don't know about Hubbell, but I believe Obama is even more dangerous to our "Hope" and our "Future" than even Clinton. Why? Because of LIBERALISM!
Am I an "Angry White Man?" If you ask me, I'm a "Happy Colorblind Conservative."