Letters to the Editor
-
First
It would have been nice if, like Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com was talking about this two months ago instead of their futile war against Barack Obama.
-
Uh, Gary...
have you asked this question of your own Editor-in-Chief? She wrote about 6 pieces on the "really scary" Reverend Wright with barely a mention of Hagee and certainly no mention of the Family. It's been going on for months. People have written about it in the letters section. Did you maybe get the idea for this piece from that? Because that's a 2-month old idea, at least.
Guess this is as sure a sign as any that Obama has won the nomination and Salon is going to have to tough it out or lose any "liberal" cred.
Touching. But very late.
-
Radical Right Wing Cleric
is probably a more fitting term. What about Psycho Journalists? Psycho Broadcasters?
Psycho White Women Editors-In-Chief Who Write Incessantly About Ministers Whose Faith They Don't Understand? Nah, that one's too long.
I've got a problem with someone who calls himself a Christian and then takes on the Roman Catholic Church and prays for the destruction of Israel as a harbinger of the Second Coming of Christ. Not cool.
-
I'm sorry, but this is boring
Talk about a dog-bites-man story:
Media Sucks Up To McCain, Christians
Although Joan Walsh is probably surprised.
-
The end of the mainstream media.
The 1976 movie Network was truly prophetic, even in the biblical sense. It predicted a time in which news and news organizations become nothing more than entertainment. That time has now arrived.
I think the best way to understand the situation is to see that, with some exceptions, "the press" no longer exists. It's just not there. Yes, the trappings are there -- "reporters," "analysts," "anchors," and so on. There is video, print, audio. But the press is gone, other than a few dinosaurs.
The Fourth Estate was good while it lasted. But today it's like the cathedrals of Europe; largely empty, with perhaps a few true believers in attendance.
Network used to be seen as a satiric comedy. Today we see that it was almost a documentary.
-
has Salon embargoed all references to HRC and Douglas Coe
there are a lot of readers who would like to know more
-
The Media Supports the Chosen
The owners/contollers of the MSM have found the Christian Right Wing as willing soldiers. Neo-Cons merely use the Religious Right as pawns. The issue not discussed, is the agenda that the MSM keeps pushing...and why they are pushing it.
-
They hate America, too
These right-wing Christianists (it's playing into their propaganda to concede that they're actually Christians) also hate America, in their own way, which is why they're always denouncing it. McCain should be asked why their consorting with people who denounce America is less important than flag lapel pins or what Michelle Obama said.
I discuss this particular brand of America-hatred further in my article "Why Conservatives are Always Wrong," available by clicking on my name below. Also there, I discuss their failure to take their own religion seriously. Not just because Jesus was the Prince of Peace, but because they don't actually believe that Christianity is the exclusive way to God, as they claim. On this, Hagee was actually being more intellectually consistent than the far-right holy rollers usually are: If you believe there is just one such way (yours), then of course any other organized religion, especially one with worldwide reach like Catholicism, would be a dangerous satanic cult. The fact that the Christianists, most of the time, are busy making political alliances with not just Catholics but Jews, and not just any Catholics and Jews but conservative ones (i.e. those most entrenched in their own faiths), shows that they don't really believe their own pseudo-religious claptrap. They are a political movement masquerading as a religion, and should be treated accordingly.
-
Same McCain
That all the Hillary dead-ender say they will vote for. I seriously do not understand how "democrats" could vote for this man. You may not like Obama, but to say that McCain would be better makes you as crazy as these loons.
As to the article, the MSM is a pathetic disgrace. No real story there.
-
OMG this article is so bad
I will try to keep this brief. McCain consorts with "holy men" while Obama invites one into his personal life on all levels for over twenty years. NOT THE SAME! NOT THE SAME! NOT THE SAME!
Obama invited Wright into his life and his life and those of his wife and children became entwined with Wright. Did that occur with McCain and his wife and children? NOT THE SAME! NOT THE SAME! NOT THE SAME!
The Wright/Obama relationship has been correctly scrutinized and Obama failed under that scrutiny politically. We all saw it.
Kamiya wrote "no one seriously believed that he shared Wright's views" about Obama. Oh really? You know how many articles I read on liberal sites and in liberal papers regarding white people's ignorant shock being exposed by hearing these crazy statements being made by Wright when many, many blacks have been exposed to these types of sermons for decades and take them for granted? He has a twenty year relationship with this guy, gets married by this guy and has his children baptized by this guy yet shares only his conformist, nonreactionary, safe views? Obama doesn't just sit in the church but cultivates a deep, long term relationship with the guy, invites him into his personal life yet disagrees that strongly with him. Do we know this? Has anyone come out and said Obama said so-and-so about Wright behind his back?
So it is up to us to parse out which views Obama agrees with and which he doesn't? How do we do this? Oh that's right, because Obama said so. If that is the new measuring stick for all politicians fine but if it is just for Obama then I call NO FAIR!
Kamiya wrote: "More or less "orthodox" Christian-right insanity, of the sort espoused by Hagee and Parsley, is familiar and normal, whereas black-church radicalism, with its ties to left-wing liberation theology, is not. In 2000, 45 percent of the population told Gallup they were either born-again or evangelical Christians." By marrying these two statements you are implying that 45 percent of the population is being subject to the same sort of insanity as Wright was preaching from his pulpit. Yet the same benefit of the doubt that you give to Obama (see above where you write "no one seriously believed that he shared Wright's views") you don't extend to these regular, church going folk. You imply that they buy into these sermons hook, line and sinker by not allowing them the same discernment that you ascribe to Obama. What is that? Elitism? Liberalism gone astray? Not knowing enough Christians to realize that extremists are few and far between?
Also, see above and do some research about black-church radicalism's normality within the black community. And go to a Christian church and check out a regular sermon. If you are only looking for extremes that is what you will find.
Kamiya wrote: "For the media to suddenly go after McCain on Hagee as hard as it has gone after Obama on Farrakhan and Wright would represent, in their eyes, a "controversial" rejection of the way things have always been done." Again, these holy men change their allegience during every election to the candidate that they believe will help them the most. Also, the candidates pay homage maybe on an annual basis, not every friggin Sunday and holy day for twenty solid years and then invite them into their intimate, personal, life-changing events.
If McCain has a twenty year relationship with anyone that can provide us with his possible views, by all means, analyze it to death. But this article was whiny crap.
I have been a registered independent for 24 years. I do not support McCain or Obama. I support good journalism.