S456 ARCHIVES: Obama's Tyrannical Gun Control

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 school year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

Barrack Obama is rolling out new gun legislation. What's odd is that the new legislation does not seem to be a reaction to the disaster at Sandy Hook Elementary School, in which a madman wielding an assault rifle gunned down twenty children and six adults. No, this new wave of gun law proposals focuses on a five-year-old girl in Pennsylvania, who said, according to CNN, "I'll shoot you, you shoot me, and we'll all play together." It is reported that she was referring to a Hello Kitty bubble gun.

Barrack Obama is pushing a ban on military-style bubble guns, assuring Americans that concealed bubble guns for home defense and bubble guns intended for hunting will remain perfectly legal. Barrack Obama is also pushing for a maximum of four fluid ounces for containers of bubble soap.

There is outrage from both the left and the right. Piers Morgan is outraged at this new legislation, claiming that what the president should be focusing on is restrictions on what Morgan calls "actual guns." The National Rifle Association is outraged, but from a different perspective. The NRA believes that the president is infringing upon American children's second amendment rights to defend against robbers on the playground.

Barrack Obama has said that he understands many American's desire for a ban on assault rifles and large clips, but has said that the country needs to focus on the "true issue" first. The President has said that he has spoken with eye doctor Richard Starr about the negative effects of bubble soap in children's eyes. Starr says that bubble soap coming in direct contact with children's eyes halts the development of their vision. Barrack Obama says that taking away the bubble guns will force bullies on the playground to use finger guns instead, which the President claims are "much less damaging." When asked about a ban on finger guns, the President fears that removing children's fingers will decrease overall proficiency in handwriting.

Americans are overwhelmingly against the President on this issue. In response, the President said "My propositions have a higher approval rating than congress, which is probably pretty good, right?"

-only the first quote from CNN is real; the contents of this article are fictional and satirical-

S456 ARCHIVE: Gear Seminars

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 school year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

Last month I invited a group of students to the library for a forty-five minute lecture about comic books, and the day after, I went to a lecture about alpacas. Ringgold’s gifted program, GEAR, allows students in the program to host educational seminars about virtually anything they please. Each student that decides to host a seminar chooses his/her own format, meaning students can do a lecture, a series of activities, a moderated discussion, etc. GEAR Instructor Ms. Linda Fetchen aids and guides, but this is very much an independent project for the students.

I spoke with Ms. Fetchen about GEAR Seminars. After looking in her computer files, she found that records of GEAR Seminars go back at least ten years, meaning there were probably seminars even further back than that. She told me she started hosting the Gifted Program in 1975, but back then, seminars were “not something [they] did.” She told me, even though the seminars are “different every year” and therefore “hard to compare,” “the quality of the presentations get better throughout the years” because students become “more organized.” In past years, she told me, there were two exceedingly talented presenters, one, a student named Matt Patton, who did seminars about film, and another, a student named Ethan Harger, who did seminars about music. Her hopes for the future of GEAR seminars are that students learn to present well and do good research, and also that the audience members learn. She told me that she wishes students would do more seminars about history, but made it clear that she will never force a seminar topic on a student. This is because she believes students must have a passion for their subject matter in order for the seminar to be successful.  

I do GEAR seminars and I’m quite passionate about what I talk about. In my tenth grade year, after going to several seminars and thinking I can do that!, I decided to conduct a general seminar about comic books, in which I lectured about breaking into the hobby, contemporary comic book events, and more. This year, I have been doing a monthly series of seminars, each focusing on an individual subtopic within the realm of comic books, including “The History of the Joker,” and “Comic Book Creators.” I have a lot of fun doing these seminars, all of which are loosely structured lectures. These lectures are very well-received, which is something the evaluation sheets filled out by my audience members can attest to. Recently, I decided to start a new series of seminars to coincide with my comic book seminars, this one about video games.

I love doing these seminars and look forward to them all, but I also enjoy attending other seminars. Not too long ago, I attended a seminar by twelfth grade student Leanne Fries. She started doing seminars in her eleventh grade year, and continues to do them in her current year. She has covered music in her seminar about Stevie Wonder, and also in her seminar “The Greatest Love Songs of All-Time.” She has also covered fashion and beauty, in her seminars “Fashion Dos and Don’ts” and “The History of American Beauty.” When asked what she’ll do with her seminars in the future, she replied “probably music,” and when asked if she’s proud of her performances so far, she replied, “I think so.” She plans to use the public speaking skills displayed and developed through these seminars for a career in broadcasting. Her advice for students thinking of doing seminars themselves? “Pretend like you’re talking to your friends.”  

The seminar I teased earlier about alpacas was hosted by tenth grade student Noah Smith. This seminar took place in February and was Noah's first. Noah's seminar was unique in that he had hands-on experience with his subject matter, as he frequently works with alpacas owned by family members. I asked him if he plans to do more seminars and he wasn't sure, but he did say that if he did he'd probably do one on massage therapy. He said he had fun and he "guess[es]" he's proud of how he did, but he claims he prefers watching seminars over hosting a seminar. His advice for students who haven't done a seminar yet but are considering taking the plunge? "Take the plunge."

I hope more students take that plunge and do a seminar. And even if they don't take that plunge, I hope that they'll go be an audience member to others' plunges. I hope this because GEAR Seminars are fun, creative ways to educate and develop the skills of the student body. And seriously, when else do you get to sit in a room for forty-five minutes to hear about alpacas?

S456 ARCHIVES: Matt Takes On - Ringgold's Renaissance Fair

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 school year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

On Wednesday, February 7th, Ms. Jubic hosted a Renaissance Fair in the library. The students from Jubic's College English 12 class put together an event for the rest of the students and faculty to come and enjoy throughout the day. The presenting students were stationed in the library throughout the entire school day, and any students with permitting teachers could head down and enjoy the event. I was one of those students, and spent two periods there. The fair was far from unenjoyable, thanks to the intrinsic pleasure of games and food and socializing with peers, but redundant, and sometimes irrelevant information, as well as a general sense of apathy from some students brought it down.  

After talking with Ms. Jubic, I learned that this is the first year that she has done this event, and that it is meant to coincide with the students' reading of Macbeth and Renaissance poetry. The event covered music, food, sports and art. I talked to student 12th Grade Student Joe Smith at the event, and he told me that the students got into groups and were assigned a topic at random. Once given that topic, Joe continued to tell me, students could focus on whatever subtopics they wished. Joe told me that his group spent about a week on their presentation.

One of the problems with the event stems from the fact that many groups covered the same information. Instead of collaborating together, most groups seemed to tackle their topic [sports, food, etc.] in a very general sense. Because of this, I learned about jousting more times than I would have liked, for example. The information seemed to bleed together, and sometimes didn't really fit. Food found its way on presentations that weren't even about food and Bruno Mars music blared for no apparent reason. Some presenting students also seemed to not care so much, and resorted to hiding behind their stands.

It was hard not to enjoy yourself in some fashion, though. Alan Howard and Mike Rizzo told me about bicycle jousting, which is the equivalent of Renaissance jousting, and joked[?] that they do it themselves. Billy Balsley's stand offered face-painting, and I was surprised to hear that a lot of people actually obliged to the offer after asking him. Trey Martin's food stand may have been the best, offering cinnamon rolls and chicken that lots of people had positive things to say about.  Over at a sports stand operated by Dan Hess and other students, I popped balloons in a dart game and won an apple tart.

The general opinion on the event seemed mixed, from what I picked up on. More than a few students told me that they found the event boring. I did hear a lot of good things about the food, and it certainly wasn't hard to find smiling and laughing at the event. Ms. Jubic told me "I think everyone's been enjoying themselves." I'd say it was fine.  

S456 ARCHIVES: Obama Needs to Step It Up

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

The economy took a massive turn for the worst under Bush, and that same president's warmongering in the Middle East fired up the anti-war crowd the most since the Vietnam War. America as a whole seemed very displeased with their leader, so when Democrat Barrack Obama was elected president back in 2008, it was a very exciting time for many disappointed Americans. It was an especially exciting time for progressive Americans, as Barrack Obama presented himself as a candidate that would lessen war, provide left-leaning economics, and stand for social progress.

Well, how did he do? For both America as a whole and progressives?

Well, he "came out of the closet" as the first president in United States history to formally support Gay Marriage, and repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell. He didn't do anything against women's right to choose, and he didn't do anything against Planned Parenthood. He did bring the troops home from Iraq, but it sure did take awhile, and we are still in Afghanistan. He and his Justice Department have hit hard on Medicinal Marijuana clinics, and the next four years under Obama do not look particularly bright for full-legalization of weed in states that desire to do so. He has been very weak on taxes, even though his spending has been no holds bars. The Affordable Care Act is certainly a step in the right direction, but there's certainly a long road ahead if we plan to seriously compete with other countries in regards to healthcare.

He's done an immensely "okay" job so far. In his second term, he needs to step it up, and hopefully he'll be more willing to do riskier things without the fear of not being reelected hanging over his head. I'm not very educated on foreign policy and our situation in the Middle East, so I'm not going to pretend that I am, but I do know that Obama and congress needs to get that all resolved as soon and as nonviolently as they can. And I do know that sounder economics and a rational and modern approach to marijuana legislation are the two things he needs to focus on the most.

If Barrack Obama needs to do a lot of spending for his agenda, so be it, but he has to raise taxes to compensate. Some very rich Americans manage to pay a very low tax rate, and Obama seems to know and care about that, but we can't be sure if he's going to actually follow up on his principals. And America can definitely do for some big cuts to spending - our bloated Defense budget that out-spends China 6-1 comes to mind immediately. In the debates Obama was very firmly against Mitt Romney's position to actually raise military spending, but it doesn't seem like our president is proactive about making significant cuts to Defense.

Marijuana Legalization is an issue of civil liberty and freedom, but it's also something that can help the economy of states that wish to legalize it. Money will not be spent putting people in jail for nonviolent weed offenses, and states will actually see revenue by taxing transactions that are already happening anyway. Heck, if Obama and Congress got together and ended prohibition of cannabis on a Federal level, telling each state that they cannot stop the sale, usage and ownership of marijuana by adults, and allowed states to handle regulation and taxation, that would be fantastic. Probably won't happen, though.

Like many liberals, I want to like Obama more than I actually do. He does a very good job of extrapolating a very progressive, inspiring view of the world and government in his speeches, but he doesn't do that great of a job when actually carrying out his rhetoric. Loads of money we don't have is being spent, and our taxes are pathetically low. Obama's Justice Department seriously believes that medicinal  marijuana is a threat to society that requires throwing harmless people behind bars. America should be even more skeptical of President Barrack Obama in his second term, and part of me is optimistic, but I'd be surprised if the next four years aren't anything but another shade of okay. 

S456 ARCHIVES: The 2012 Presidential Election - An Overview

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

The 2012 presidential election is quickly approaching, and the question on everybody’s mind is simple: Who should we vote for? Should President Barrack Obama be reelected, should the Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney get the job, or should we throw our votes at someone else like Gary Johnson, Ron Paul or Rocky Anderson? Let’s take a closer look at these gentlemen.

***

Barrack Obama is the current president of the United States. Barack Obama is our first president to officially back Gay Marriage. On abortion, he is adamant in securing a woman’s right to choose with his pro-choice position. Obama’s health care plan is very controversial, especially with the insurance mandate which came along with the Affordable Care Act. On taxes, Obama believes in the rich paying more than they currently do and the middle class paying less, respectively. Obama had Osama Bin Laden killed and brought the troops home from Iraq, which is a part of his fight against Al Qaeda. The national debt has increased by approximately five trillion dollars since Obama took office. His VP choice – and current Vice President, of course – is Joe Biden.

Official Website: http://www.barackobama.com/

***

Mitt Romney is the official Republican nominee running against Obama. Mitt Romney believes strongly in “traditional marriage.” On a federal level, Romney wants Gay Marriage to be outlawed. On abortion, he believes in overturning Roe v. Wade and making abortion a state’s rights issues. He is personally pro-life and is against any federal funding towards abortion. When it comes to health care, Mitt wants Obama’s health care smacked down on a federal level in exchange for policies that, as his official website reads, “give each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens.” He wants the federal government’s only roll in health care to be helping to secure a “level playing field for competition,” his website also reads. Romney wants more money going to National Defense. Mitt believes in tax rates much more similar across the board than what Obama wants. He is running with his VP pick Paul Ryan.

Offical Website: http://www.mittromney.com/

***

When it comes to third-parties, Gary Johnson is probably the most well-known. Gary Johnson is a Libertarian with the basic belief structure built around limited government and liberty. He believes in non-interventionalism, meaning he only thinks that military actions should be taken when absolutely necessary. When it comes to the economy, he wants spending to be cute and taxes to be cut. He thinks that removing Obama’s proposed insurance mandate and focusing on competition is the solution to America’s health care problem. He is in favor of ending America’s strong efforts to incriminate drug users and wants marijuana prohibition to cease. He is very similar to Congressman Ron Paul, who is more popular but has ended his campaign.

Official Website: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/front

***

Though not as popular as Gary Johnson, at least from my observations, Rocky Anderson is another third party gaining traction. On health care, Rocky takes a more far-left approach to health care, standing for the single-payer approach that Canada takes, or at least something similar. Rocky Anderson wants Minimum Wage to be raised to “no less than $10.00 an hour,” as to help fight disparity amongst the economic branches. Anderson wants America to end its financial and diplomatic support for Israel. Anderson is against the death penalty and thinks that life sentences bereft of parole may be a better option. Rocky is firmly against Guantanamo Bay, wanting it shut down, and for fair trials for terrorists to fill the void. He is a part of the Justice Party.

Official Website: http://www.voterocky.org/

***

I asked around and students of Ringgold High School certainly have things to say. I do not have enough data to give an approximation of where Ringgold stands as a whole, but I can give you some individuals’ opinions.

Students like Sam Allman (11^th) and Jonathan Layton (11^th) support Barrack Obama. Liz Gearhart (12^th) and Aaron Turkovich (11^th) are willing to throw their hats in the ring with Mitt Romney, even though only the former is of age to actually vote. Nate Petrosky (11^th) supports Gary Johnson, while Alex Ferguson (10^th) sticks with his support for Ron Paul. Yet still, students like Eric Rosenburg (10^th) don’t particularly care, and students like Alex Stumpf (11^th) don’t really like anyone.

As for me? Well, before I wrote this I half-heartedly was rooting for Obama, but after writing this, I have to say, I’m quite smitten by Rocky Anderson. 

S456 ARCHIVES: Mitt Romney has Already Lost

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 school year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

For whatever reason, the loud and proud Herman Cain, the liberty-loving Ron Paul, the "Strong" Rick Perry, the Chick Fil-A chomping Rick Santorum and the feminine Michelle Bachman did not clinch the Republican nomination. None other than Mitt Romney claimed the spot in the ring against Barrack Obama. If you ask me, I would say that he got the nomination because he was perceived as the least controversial and therefor the safest bet to getting Obama out of office. But, now that he has had some time in the limelight as the Republican pick, and now that the Republican and Democratic National Conventions have ended, it's apparent that Romney is not doing the job that so many conservative Americans want him to do. It seems like he does a new dumb thing every day, I can't imagine he's very appealing to minorities and moderates, and the RNC and DNC made the Democrats look a whole lot better than the Republicans. Mitt Romney has already lost the 2012 Presidential Election.

Romney and his VP pick Paul Ryan say that they're going to remove certain tax loopholes as an alternative to President Obama's proposal of taxing the rich more, but when asked which bracket will receive these tax cuts, Romney and Ryan didn't have any answers and Mitt took the opportunity to make Democrats out to be bullies for pressing him. Another day Romney made it a point to say that airplane windows really need to open, and that it's, as Huffington Post reports, "very dangerous," that they don't, making Americans collectively giggle and sigh a depressing sigh. He may have been kidding, but this flub, no matter how much of his words he meant, hit the internet hard and made him look less than intelligent. The Stranger reports that, when asked, "Is $100,000 middle income?" Mitt said, “No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less." Now, 250,000 is the maximum amount to be considered middle class under our current president's tax plan, as the same source points out, but Romney shooting down the questioner's "$100,000" to say "$200,000 to 250,000" is misleading when, to quote this same source again, directly, "median household income in this country is $50,000." Romney just keeps saying things that makes the general public view him as an out of touch aristocrat that doesn't care about them.

Besides white, heterosexual, rich men, who is really going to connect with Mitt Romney? Are the gays, who he wants to make sure can't marry on a federal level, going to be slapping ROMNEY/RYAN bumper stickers on their car? Will all of the Americans that make critically-acclaimed films like Milk so successful be okay with this stamp on LGBT rights? I say no to both. Similarly, I can't imagine enough of those who don't place themselves clearly on the left or right of the political spectrum would throw their vote at Romney instead of Obama or even a third party. Romney may catch their eye when he promises to be more fiscally responsible than Obama, but they'll probably be quite turned off when they hear him go on about how he wants federal protection of abortion to cease, and when they hear him talk about his opposition to contemporary demands of the gays and when they hear him say that he will smack down all of Obama's progress on healthcare. Who exactly does Romney speak to that's going to net him a place in the White House? He's not even likable compared to his opponent, as a Gallup poll reveals.

The Republican National Convention did a good job of making their party, and Romney along with it, look oh-so-very silly. At the RNC, Clint Eastwood, speaking very poorly, might I add, reprimanded an invisible Obama like a painfully annoying Jeff Dunham (or more painfully annoying, depending on your opinion of Mr. Dunham) talking to a puppet. Also at the RNC, the room was filled with applause and shouts of glee as they shouted "We built it!," a response to a version of Obama that is socialist and doesn't value an individual's hard work; such a man Obama clearly is not. At the DNC, we see a beautiful, glorious, inspiring, hour-long speech from Bill Clinton that really makes Obama out to be quite the promising candidate and makes the Republican plan out to be foolish. And he does so with facts. And logic. And rhetoric that's not misleading. Not with invisible politicians and aggrandized slogans that aren't even rooted in reality.

I can't see Romney winning this. The polls agree, the latest from the Huffington Post [as of 8:00 PM, September 30th, 2012] placing Obama at 48.8% vs. Romney's 44.4%. Unsavory sentiments fall out of his mouth like snots from a child's sick nose. His backwards-approach to social issues is hardly going to help him get moderates and minorities on his side. His party looks bad, as the RNC and DNC exemplified. I don't think that it is too early to say that Mitt Romney has already lost the 2012 presidential election.

***

Tell me why my opinions aren't quite good in the comments below.

***

Sources:

"Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan Can't Say Which Tax Loopholes They'd Plug (VIDEO)": http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/09/mitt-romney-paul-ryan-tax-loopholes_n_1868444.html

"UPDATE: Mitt Romney Wonders Why Ann Romney's Airplane Windows Don't Roll Down": http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/mitt-romney-airplane-windows_n_1910930.html?utm_hp_ref=travel

"Romney Stresses Opposition to Marriage Equality in South Carolina": http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/01/17/405115/romney-stresses-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-south-carolina/?mobile=wp

"Poll: Americans pick Obama over Romney on likability, but Romney wins on economy": http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/245243-poll-americans-pick-obama-over-romney-on-likability-but-romney-wins-on-economy

"Mitt Romney Thinks America's 'Middle Income' Is $200,000 to $250,000": http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/09/14/mitt-romney-thinks-americas-middle-income-is-200000-to-250000&view=comments

"Clint Eastwood speaks to an invisible Obama: Twitter mocks 'gran turdito'": http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/us-news-blog/2012/aug/31/clint-eastwood-invisible-chair-twitter

"‘We Built It’ Resounds at RNC’s First Night": http://frontpagemag.com/2012/joe-kaufman/we-built-it-resounds-at-rncs-first-night/

"2012 General Election: Romney vs. Obama": http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-general-election-romney-vs-obama

"Transcript of Bill Clinton's speech at the DNC": http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/05/transcript-bill-clinton-speech-at-dnc/

"Values" [Romney's official position on abortion is detailed on his official website here]: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/values

"Healthcare" [Romney's official position on healthcare is detailed on his official website here]: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care

A Perspective on the Morgan/Mock Debacle

I really do like Piers Morgan. I think he can be prudish, dismissive, and embarrassingly ill-tempered, but I really do like Piers Morgan. He seems like a well-intentioned, passionate, and generally kind person. I especially admire his strong passion for gun control advocacy, even though I have issues with some of his approach on that issue.

Whenever I saw this tweet, I was puzzled:

What did I miss? I thought. Don't tell me he's transphobic...

And then I saw this tweet:

Oh boy. Is he joking or is this for real? What the heck happened?

Eventually, I got myself educated on this controversy Morgan had stumbled into. Janet Mock, a trans woman and trans rights advocate, was recently on his CNN show to discuss her new book Redefining Realness: My Path to Womanhood, Identity, Love & So Much More. His interview was very supportive of her and her cause, and the two had a friendly discourse about mostly her growth to her current state as a fully-transitioned woman.

It turns out, this exchange of their's caused some controversy; most notably from Mock herself in these tweets:

After the drama on Twitter, Mock was invited back on the show by a disgruntled and slightly vindictive Piers Morgan:

"I'll deal with you." Yeesh.

You can watch the videos here and here to catch up for yourself if you are not already caught up.

Overall, I'm very disappointed by Piers Morgan. My central problem with how he handled himself is that he did so very much in a fashion that showed much more concern for saving face than actually caring for the struggles of the trans community. He brought up his support of the gay community, as if that somehow gives him a pass on offending a different group of people. He brought up an old article in which she seemingly labels and characterizes herself just as he did, when in actuality, that article wasn't something she was responsible for, as she wrote about at the very beginning of her book, according to her.

It seems very obvious to me that he made a mistake when describing her life, and is too obsessed with maintaining his righteous self-image to admit to his mistake. He's missing the distinction between gender, something very nuanced, and sex. It's not appropriate to call her "formally a man" and "born a boy" because ever since she was able to fathom such a thing, she didn't identify as a boy, despite her sex and assigned gender.

She also makes the point that focusing on her transition in relation to her very committed relationship with her boyfriend "sensationalizes" her life history in a way that cheapens the struggles of the trans community. While I don't blame Piers for spending a lot of time on this, because it is very interesting and new to so many people, I certainly get her point. Framing this as her being a "former man" certainly takes that discussion to a bad place, and there are a lot of meatier, larger issues that could have been discussed. For example, check out these statistics in this screen cap from a "Pantheos" article:

Piers Morgan's main critique of Mock seemed to be that she did not call him out and correct him for his apparent mistake, to which she replied that sure, she probably should have, but that she didn't because she was afraid. I think this fear is obviously understandable. If this fear wasn't understandable, the argument between the two over Morgan's [mis]representation of trans people wouldn't have happened.

Janet Mock came off as a coolly intelligent and warm woman. She didn't handle the situation absolutely perfectly, but her failings were not only understandable, she also personally admitted them. 

With all of that being said, one of the main reasons I found this controversy so fascinating was that I really identified and sympathized with Piers on an emotional level. I identified and sympathized with him not because I feel I would have also misrepresented trans people in an offensive manor (although, to be clear, I would be open to the possibility of this article showing some kind of ignorance on my part), but generally because I could picture myself putting my foot in my mouth in a similar way. 

I sometimes say things that are ignorant, or offensive, and my ignorance/offensiveness should be apparent to me. But it isn't, because of a kind of worried attempt on my part to make myself seem morally and intellectually righteous at all times. It can be tough to admit you screwed up.

I really think I know the mental process he went through when the controversy started on twitter. The rapid dash for sources and arguments backing up his claim that were attractive for simply confirming his opinion rather than for their credibility, as her counter-argument in the second interview showed; the bringing up of other, clear moments of moral/intellectual righteousness, that really aren't relevant but absolutely are to him, in his deluded state of mind; etc. He just knew he was in the right, because he just knows he's a good, smart guy. 

I get it. I feel bad for him. He made an unfortunate, offensive mistake in discussing a complex issue. While labeling him transphobic may be a stretch, he's in the wrong here, folks. I only wish that he quits being bullheaded and admits that he goofed.