Sure, it's only March, but it's hard to imagine anyone achieving greater asshattitude in the next nine months. In response to questioning as to what would constitute a valid exception to South Dakota's abortion ban, Bill "Total Asshat" Napoli had this to say:

A real life description, to me, would be a rape victim. Brutally raped; savaged. The girl was a virgin; she was religious; she planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.

So let's figure out just how "bad" it has to get for Bill Napoli to concede you can have an abortion, shall we?

• You must be raped — "brutally," as if there was any other kind of rape. Apparently, you can be "gently" raped. If you are, you can't get an abortion.
• You must be a virgin. Because, as we all know, any woman who has ever had sex is just asking for it. Might as well put a big neon sign on her vagina saying "Eat At Joe's," right? Once you've had sex, you have no right to cry "rape." Looks like Bill Napoli subscribes to the Scream rules here.
• You must be religious — obviously. Only the far right fundamentalist fucks can get the abortions they want to deny to everyone else. That makes sense. And how much do you want to bet that Bill means — and would categorically deny — that only religious Christians count? How about some Wiccans? Or Shintoists? Do they qualify as "religious enough" for you, Bill?
• You must have been planning to save yourself for marriage. And, apparently, you'll need to prove this case in court. Simple.
• You must be sodomized "as bad as you can possibly make it" — if you're just mildly sodomized, no go.
• You must be impregnated. Hey, you know what? We actually agree with Bill on this one! Call us nutty, but we don't think you should be allowed to have an abortion if you're not pregnant. Bill Napoli, you are a keen legislative mind to be reckoned with.

All of this will, apparently, mess up a girl physically and psychologically to the point where the pregnancy could threaten her life. But remember, if you're not a virgin, or you're not religious, or it was just a friendly, happy rape, then you're not messed up enough to have an abortion.

Thank you, Bill Napoli, you Sexist Asshat, for ending the 2006 Asshat of the Year contest so expediently, so we can get on with the more important business of opposing complete moronic fucking assholes like you for the rest of the year.

Makes me want to punch him visciously and repeatedly about the head and face.

She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated.

Grammatically, doesn't that comment mean the poor girl must be impregnated via the caboose?

Anyway. I'd like to ask him what his application and screening process is for any poor girl that happens to meet his prerequisites. Would she have to write an essay, similar to an essay for a college entrance board?

"Dear sirs, I humbly request your permission to grant me an abortion based on the following extraordinary events...."

Could she lie and just say she meets said requirements? Religious? What religion, all of them?
I could spend all day making fun of that fuck stick's comments. The sad part is that he is serious. He fails to see the lunacy in his own words and that's the worst part. It speaks volumes about the stance on the issue.

Bra-fucking-vo. Just answer me this: why, exactly, did you go easy on the guy?

What a fucking douchenozzle. He needs to be anally gang-raped by the Crips and then have a full-term fetus shoved down his throat. Then he has to be told that he can never take it out because the gang rape wasn't "brutal" enough.

Fuck that guy. I hope he dies in a car fire.

What amazes us is that this guy's fucking insane "exception" example isn't even a recognized exception under the legislation he voted for. In the example he proposes, there is no clear threat to the woman's life — her "spiritual well-being," maybe, but not her life. According to the terms of this law, this brutally raped and sodomized Jesus-loving virginal young girl would not be allowed to get an abortion, and would be forced to endure all the shit that this sexist asshat is vaguely referring to.

Fuck, the more we read about this shit, the more we want to aid Napoli in graphically demonstrating just what the fuck he's talking about, with the help of a concrete dildo. Seriously, it's hard to believe that we have to share a planet with fucking batshit insane assholes like this.

One more reason not to go to South Dakota. Not that I needed another reason, but here it is.

You know it's funny that when someone has an ass-hat on they look like a dick head.

So am i allowed to spam calls and e-mails to assholes like this and express how i really feel? I hope so. I have alot of words to say to atleast his secretary. Cause you know damn well he doesnt care about what his people think. I wonder what polls show for the people of SD and what they would have wanted....

Jonathan,

I wonder about that too; I haven't had a chance to do any research on it, but someone somewhere must be taking advantage of this situation to poll somebody in SD on current opinion in the state.

I *also* wish I could overload Napoli's inbox with feedback on his statement; the optimistic part of me insists that he may read at least one e-mail calling him on his shit. And if he reads at least one, maybe it might make him think--

On the other hand, my pessimistic side keeps saying, "Don't even waste your time."

I'm just curious guys. Was there any fallout in the press following these comments? Was it widely reported?

We recently had a liberal backbencher make some pretty stupid comments during the abortion pill debate. She said she was voting no because she feared 'real' Australians are aborting themselves out of existence and we may become a muslim country. Such stupidity prompted a media feeding frenzy and she copped a serious bollocking.

Her comments, however, are sugar coated candy compared to what this fucking asshole said. I'm just wondering if he was exposed in the press for the lunatic that he is. Or, are things so bad in South Dakota that these comments would garner browny points from his constituents?

What year was he born and why was abortion not legal then?

Adam,

The answer, I think, is that we didn't even hear about this asshat via the media — we heard about him via blogs, and went to look into it ourselves. So, if Napoli got any bad press for his ignorant, hateful remarks, it doesn't seem to have been national to any great extent. We can't speak for what got covered in South Dakota in local news (since we don't live there) or what people in that state think of Napoli, but if the national coverage is any indication, then our hopes aren't high.

For a quick and dirty check, we searched ABC News, MSNBC, and CNN for articles about Napoli's little speech. ABC and MSNBC had nothing, and CNN only had one columnist's mention of Napoli's diatribe. By contrast, check the Technorati hits for "Bill Napoli". No shortage of coverage in the blogosphere.

But yes, what this guy said is fucking ignorant, hateful shit, and he should be properly horse-fucked in the public arena for it. Sadly, the media seems to have struck out again.

What a disgrace. Where's Bill O'Reilly's biased left-wing secular media when you need 'em, eh?

Interesting to read his further comments in the CNN article, with his nostalgic call for the return of the shotgun wedding. What a fuckwit. Be sure to keep his name in mind when the 'Asshat of the Decade' award is under consideration.