Chumley is for instance wrong about science, as she carefully illustrates in her otherwise vapid Mooney-time intelligent design creationism-promoting article “Science’s godless problem” (science needs God – but apparently it’s got to be her version, not some liberal, progressive God).
Mostly,
Chumley writes about various religious political issues, however,
espousing more or less the views you’d expect (“all of patriotic America
should pray for the Biden Administration to go down in flames. It’s what’s best
for the country” and globalism leads inevitably to communism, and so on).
In 2019, after Obama and Clinton offered their condolences and support to the
victims of the Easter Sunday bombings in Sri Lanka, Chumley was aghast that they referred to the church-goers
as “Easter worshippers”; apparently, the condolences were therefore “anti-Christian”
and possibly signalling the transformation of America into a secular,
postmodern wasteland.
She is no fan of LGBT rights either, of course. So when the International Human Rights Defense Act was put forward back in 2014, Chumley was quick to point out that its protection of LGBT rights (“alternative lifestyle choices”, according to the WND) was not only unconstitutional, but would “make America look even more impotent on the international stage” because the bill “reeks” of Obama’s “special interest agenda, and – just as our nation’s military under Obama is tasked with pursuing a radical environmental agenda” (yes, she’s a climate change denialist; what did you expect?). There are some dots we struggle to connect in her reasoning, but we suspect “nebulous mass of things I dislike” figures prominently in Chumley’s, well, mind. A similar lack of ability to draw distinctions seems to have played a major role in her reaction to the removal of Confederate statues in 2020: because statues are being pulled down, said Chumley, “Christians have the right to wrap an American flag around a Baphomet statue’s head and set it on fire. And they should”; it would conceivably be bizarrely interesting to try to grasp the reasoning process here but we can’t be bothered.
During the pandemic, Chumley predictably assumed the role of a vaccine skeptic – not only are the vaccines dangerous (no, vaccines reduce the risk of myocardial infection, even in young people, when you take the total risk, including the risk of myocardial infection after having COVID, into account), but there are conspiracies afoot! Did you hear the rumor that pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer haver pushed “to keep secret its COVID-tied pharmaceutical information for 75 years”, for instance? It’s nonsense, of course, but Chumley has never been overly concerned with the sense/nonsense distinction, and she will push whatever antivaccine talking point comes her way.
Diagnosis: Oh, there’s a lot of them around, and Chumley is hardly among the loudest. But she is incredibly dumb, and she does have a significant audience of like-minded people.