Yes, it’s all Rev. Wright all the time over at the “fair and balanced” network. They of course threw in one non-Wright story about a deadly shark attack for their “balance.”

No issues for them – just the hard-hitting journalism that “the people” demand. The public demands nothing but stories about Rev. Wright – they just can’t get enough of the guy. He’s the new Paris Hilton. Sorry, Paris.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/04/beyond-parody.html

That was utterly, totally, and truly brilliant, Glenn. If ever I doubted, I am now a true Glenn believer, for evermore.

Did I mention that it was simply hilarious, as well?

BRAVO GLENN!!!! BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO!!!!!!

I take back any and all innuendos, and am your from this point forward, your unquestioningly faithful servant...

Your post contained 150% of my daily allowance of sarcasm. Yummy. I'll have another helping, please.

The issue is the brazen double standard being applied by the media, which continues to deem the controversial comments of a black pastor somehow imputable to the black candidate even after the candidates denunciation of such controversial views, but conspicuously fails to apply the same standard to McCain as regards various rightwing pastors whose endorsements and support McCain has assiduously sought, even though McCain has not only refused to repudiate their objectionable views but has reiterated his respect and admiration for these haters.

This is Jim Crow journalism. The media has taken wildly disparate approaches to two very analogous situations. They cannot justify the difference in their treatment of Obama and McCain on any journalistic basis. Why are we not seeing clips of Falwell and Robertson stating that America deserved 9/11? Why are we not getting carpet bombed with clips of Hagee's attacks on Catholics? And why isn't McCain being hectored daily to comment upon, and ultimately denounce, the bigoted and delusional views of these rightwing radicals?

It is the press's obligation to ruthlessly examine its own assumptions and biases and ensure that their coverage is not effected by them. Not only has the media failed to do this, they have seemingly embraced their biases and assumptions, which posit that a black candidate is presumptively less patriotic, inherently more suspect in his claims to love his country, and more likely to share the views of any controversial figure with whom he has come in contact.

Where is the Democratic Party and its leaders? Why are not Dean, Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy and Kerry assailing this glaring double standard every day, and challenging the press to justify as a matter of journalistic principles its stunningly divergent approaches to the candidates and the pastors with whom they have associated themselves?

You'll need a crowbar to pry that tongue out of your cheek. LOL

Re: "Can't we discuss Hagee the horrible, too? Since the US has no problems, we should have time to talk about him as well."

Of course not. That would be holding Republicans to the same standard as Democrats. And Foxnews would never permit that to happen. Without the lead of Foxnews, the rest of the Mainstream Media would not know on what to report (it's not as if there are any wars that are going badly, or inflation, or increased poverty in the US, or our government torturing people as part of natinal policy).

Unfortunately this will work completely, right through President McCain's innaugeration.

Make sure Joan sees this post. I don't think she'll get it, but show her anyway.

Sometimes, when all else fails, sarcasm is your only solace.

If the actual words of Jeremiah Wright, in full, not the edited to protect the Ferengi parasites version, are presented. Which is of course THE PROBLEM here. Wright can actually speak to many of our most prominent issues. What he says is not pleasing to the overlords, though. Dr. King's was not, either, which was captured by "Cancer Man" in an episode of the X Files, in which it was stated that by advocating social justice, not just racial equality, King had crossed the line and deserved what he got.

Obama's reaction to all this is part of appeasing the MCM which unfortunately sets the tone and the agenda, no matter how utterly ridiculous it is, because the last thing this country needs is an electorate that can think for itself.

Of course, the MCM will carefully parse Wright's words to leave out the parts that reflect actual Christianity, not the disguised Mammonism that is the coin of the Village and Pat Robertson alike.

So Obama was for Wright before he was against Wright.

Now that's a narrative the media can wrap their arms around.

Query: How long before the storyline changes to "Obama is a flip-flopping political opportunist who would throw his good friend under a bus"

Even if he was outrageous and inflammatory, I am personally tired of being coddled and lied to in soft tones. I want truth, no matter how painful it is. Even if I'm angry now, it's better for me in the long run than if I consume the soothing tones of liars and politicians.

AMEN!!!!

I can easily handle getting offended.

I can't at all handle the ruination of this country's economy, the Presidentially-approved torture of non-convicted suspects, or a tap on every phone.

We need a lot more Americans who don't care if some soft-headed soul gets offended by the truth. Not just politicians, ALL OF US.

I want to have like ten thousand of Glenn's babies.

to Joan Walsh's ears!

Let Them Eat Cake!

The only thing missing from your post is a Wright/wrong play on words for the title. Like, "It's the Wright time to be wrong," or "Wright to the point," or "Wright here, Wright now." Maybe even, "The Wright-ing is on the wall"

Please be sure to let us know where you end up working - I look forward to reading your columns in the future, where ever it is you land.

Jedimaster, you know how to coin a phrase.

*Goes off humming: If I had a hammer, I'd hammer in the morning, etc.*