Or, the Republican battle plan for this fall versus Barack Obama. You knew it was going to go this way. They can’t help themselves.
Tag Cloud
Politics 2008 Election Republicans Conservatives Media Iraq Barack Obama Democrats John McCain George W. Bush Humor Hillary Clinton Links 2006 Election Uncategorized Newsweek NFL Oliver's World Race Right Wing Media Redskins Sports Maryland Terrorism Movies Religious Right Mitt Romney Fox News Economy Racism Women Liberal Media Michael Steele Liberals News Rudy Giuliani Superman Fred Thompson Black Conservatives Television Comics Economics Immigration Democratic Congress History John Edwards Democratic Convention Ben Cardin Media For McCain Global Warming Technology 9/11 U.S. Attorney Scandal Crime Al Gore Al Qaeda Republican Culture Of Corruption Religion Dick Cheney Bill Clinton Democratic House Iran Site Stuff Fox News Channel Science TV Joe Lieberman Energy Education Democratic Senate Weird Stem Cell Research The Politico Useful "Liberals" Intelligent Design Supreme Court Foreign Policy Abortion Free Speech Health Care Books Guns Kirsten Powers America Video Atheism tba2007 Progressives Washington Post Katrina Bob Ehrlich The Washington Post World Military David Broder Mike Allen Jessica Alba Hillary Clinton's Experience Washington D.C. Virginia Business USA Entertainment Stupid Things 2005 Election Fox News Democrats Joe Biden Instapundit Martin O'Malley Snoopgate Ron Paul Space Howard Dean MSNBC Gay Marriage Nancy Pelosi Evolution Glenn Reynolds Hugh Hewitt Virginia Tech Massacre GOP Bigot Eruptions D.C. Jamaica Blogs OW Radio National Security Anti-Gay Disney Doctor Who CK CNN MBAPBSAllAmericaDem Sarah Palin Advertising Afghanistan Army Alaska BBC The Truth New York Times Mark Penn New Orleans Dumb Liberals Freema Agyeman Chris Matthews First Amendment James Carville Torchwood The War Time Magazine Tom DeLay 163 The Daily Show Ted Kennedy Jon Stewart Alan Colmes John McCain And Airbus John Kerry Torture Democrat 209 Glenn Beck Health Weblogs Football Zen! Wal-Mart Hillary Hate Karl Rove Islam Iowa Howard Kurtz Homeland Security Trade Legal Bill Kristol Bill Richardson Republican Bigot Eruption CIA Art Cindy McCain
The Right will spend the whole campaign telling voters that we need to move beyond race in this country all while implying that Obama is too black to be trusted as president.
If Obama is the nominee, and i hope he will be, I suspect this is going to be one of the ugliest campaigns in recent American history. So sad.
“You don’t have to say that he’s unpatriotic; you don’t question his patriotism,” he added. “Because I guaran-damn-tee you that, with that footage, you don’t have to say it.”
The only racial arguments made in that column were by the leftie author. The quote above–not racial in nature–is the crux of the point made by the conservative ad man.
The Right will spend the whole campaign telling voters that we need to move beyond race in this country all while implying that Obama is too black to be trusted as president
No, I think what will actually happen is that any negative remark made about Obama will be made into a racial issue by the left.
One the one hand, I would respect it more if they would just own it. Come right out and say “I don’t wanna vote for the n***er.”
At least we’d then know who we’re dealing with.
But then you gotta ask, “Why not?” What the hell are you so afraid of? Do you imagine Obama will change the National Anthem to “Fight the Power” or something? He’d be the President, not the King.
“The quote above–not racial in nature–is the crux of the point made by the conservative ad man.”
This is a classic example of why the conservative strategy will work on some people. Scratch, let’s break this down.
You believe the quote you cite is “not racial” in nature. Why? Just because the guy doesn’t mention race? Ok. Fine. But tell me, how exactly does one infer from Reverend Wright’s comments that Obama is unpatriotic? Unpatriotic in what way?
So the Democrat plan is to try to paint as racist any criticism of Obama that can be even tangentially linked to race. Big surprise there.
“So the Democrat plan is to try to paint as racist any criticism of Obama that can be even tangentially linked to race.”
Are you suggesting that there are legitimate reasons to criticize Obama based on his race, or are you suggesting that Dems will stretch any criticism to appear racial?
What’s racist about it is the implication that black people march in such lockstep with each other that anything Obama’s pastor says must be felt by Obama himself due to their association…and that Obama is now suffering a death-blow because of that association, even though he has made it clear on a number of occasions that he disagrees with Reverend Wright’s “God Damn America” rhetoric.
“But…but…” the spinmeisters will say. “If he really disagreed, he would have stood up and walked out of that church.”
“You mean the way that McCain and other politicians stopped talking entirely to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson after they said gays and feminists caused 9/11?”
“Um…that’s different.”
“Why?”
“Because…ah…”
“Why shouldn’t I assume that McCain is just as angry and scary as Rev. Hagee?”
“That won’t work politically.”
“Why not?”
“Er…because ‘Scary angry white man’ isn’t an accepted and easily exploited stereotype.”
No, Obama didn’t stand up and walk away from Wright when Wright said something that Obama openly disagreed with. He did the mature thing and talked to him about it.
Conservatives can remain president of the playground if they want; I’d like to elect an adult to the leadership of the country, thank you.
“The Right will spend the whole campaign telling voters that we need to move beyond race in this country all while implying that Obama is too black to be trusted as president. ”
And as we see here, rank and file cons will pretend it isn’t happening, while at the same time insinuating their own racial invective. See http://www.instapunk.com for examples of that strategy, aka “Some blacks (Colin Powell, Thomas Sowell) are cool but that Obama, he’s just a n—- uhhh, RADICAL.”
fafaroo, you’re right, get ready for an ugly, racist campaign like no other in the annals of conservative history. Helped in great measure by the press (Tim Russert: What do you think of Harry Belafonte’s comments, Mr. Obama?)
Fafaroo…
It’s hilarious to hear Oliver and others suddenly decrying guilt by association, after years of hearing about Bush’s various “buddies,” for whom he apparently crafts his foreign policy.
The fact is, a Christian church is often defined by two things: the congregation and the pastor. It is common for Christians to seek out, and advertise by word of mouth, a particularly skilled, moving, or compassionate pastor. The weekly message of the pastor–the sermon–is the single most time consuming and unique part of each service (most other parts being the same from week to week.) So it’s not out of line to associate a member of a congregation with the flavor of the sermons that he chooses to hear week after week. No, Obama did not say these things, and no, he probably doesn’t agree with many of them, but on the other hand the connection between him and these ideas is far stronger, in my opinion, than the “damning” photos we periodically see of a politician smiling while standing next to some unsavory person at a cocktail party.
Therefore, I don’t think it’s an unreasonable stretch to think that Obama’s patriotism becomes stained a little when he chooses to voluntarily sit and listen to the message, week after week and year after year, of a man who says, “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color” and “[t]he government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people…God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme”.
Number of racial slurs used by folks on the left in this thread: 4
Number of racial slurs used by folks on the right in this thread: 0
What do you think Obama’s church attendance says about him? Do you believe that he shares the same views as his pastor? Do you think that Obama believes that the goverment invented AIDS to kill black people?
Nice use of quote text, scratch. Can you prove that this is in fact what Reverend Wright has said week after week and year after year, that this is in fact the only message of Reverend Wright’s pulpit?
I submit that you can’t, and that Wright said a number of other things that are less controversial, that are, in fact, easy to agree with.
I submit that Obama sat there and listened to those messages as well, but nobody is saying that Obama is more electable because he believes in things like charity or generosity or any other Christian articles of faith that Wright likely preached about.
As Trinity is a gay-friendly congregation, I imagine Wright also preached about tolerance.
If you walk stridently away from everybody you disagree with, you get the Bush Bubble.
In his book, Rod Parsley, “spiritual advisor” to John McSame, said that America was in “spiritual desparation”. Does John McCain agree? He also said that America was founded in part to destroy Islam. Does McCain agree? Do you? Does McCain agree with his spiritual advisor that people (like McCain!) who commit adultery should be prosecuted?
As a matter of fact, Mr. Wright did not deliver this message “week after week and year after year.” He delivered each of these messages only once. Among decades of sermons, we have a couple of minutes of video of Mr. Wright saying something that you don’t like! And you’re turning those few minutes of sermonizing into an indicator of Mr. Wright’s character–never mind anything else that he or Trinity has done. Then by extension, you’re making this tiny sample of sermons representative of Mr. Obama’s character.
That, by definition, is an “unreasonable stretch.”
Enlightened Liberal…
Obama’s church attendance (in this context) says one thing to me: he is willing to sit week after week and listen to a man who believes that the U.S. created AIDS, etc. Nothing more, nothing less.
And actually, America in a state of spiritual desperation is a rather conservative viewpoint, and I’ll bet McCain does share that view, at least in a religious sense. Witness the debate about church and state, the role of parents vs. the role of schools, the quality of television and movie themes, etc.
I’d be interested in more details about the destruction of Islam you mentioned.
SpiderJ…
…but nobody is saying that Obama is more electable because he believes in things like charity or generosity or any other Christian articles of faith that Wright likely preached about.
Actually, I think this definitely is one of his selling points.
Our recent political history has many examples of people who were damned by one statement they or one of their associates made. Sometimes, these are just indiscretions or slips of the tongue. Other times, they are indicative of a deep-seated point of view that is repugnant to others. In the case of Wright, I believe it is the latter. And like it or not, Obama is closely associated with Wright.
Enlightened Liberal…
Not to dominate the board here, but as an aside, did you know that people in the U.S. military can be and are prosecuted for adultery?
Scratch, you’ve been coming here how long now? Week after week, year after year?
Am I now answerable for every fool thing you’ve ever written here?
Actually, I think this definitely is one of his selling points.
Sure. My point was that nobody’s looking to these sermons and making hay out of them even though there are likely more of them and even though Obama was in attendance when they were said.
You nor any other person has been able to tell me why Obama is “unelectable” because of his relationship with Wright but McCain is still A-OK despite his relationship with Hagee, Parsley, and any other Christian conservative who he previously denounced.
Here’s the real issue: Wright dared to say he has problems with America. In our hyper-nationalized paradigm, the “my country, right or wrong, but we’re never wrong” environment, this is tantamount to sacrilege. The funny thing is, I can guarantee you that many of the same people up in arms over the phrase “God Damn America” reacted with pitying confusion when Muslims started riots over insulting depictions of Muhammad.
As for Parsley…
http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/03/john-mccain-rod-parsley-spiritual-guide.html
Very good analogy, Quaker. And since you haven’t repudiated every stupid thing that a Republican has said here as soon as they said it, it indicates at very least that you have a deep-seated sympathetic view to the warblings of scratch, j, jt and others of their ilk.
Unless of course, you run for office as a Republican in which case none of the above applies.
“I don’t think it’s an unreasonable stretch to think that Obama’s patriotism becomes stained a little …”
What do you mean by stained? Neither you, nor anyone on the right, for that matter has ever spelled our exactly what you think Wright’s comments say about Obama’s belief in America. His patriotism is “stained”? What does that mean? You mean he doesn’t “love” America? You mean he doesn’t “love” America enough to be president?
What exactly is it that Wright is saying about America? What exactly is it about that message, that you believe so taints Obama just by hearing it?
All you’re doing is raising a vague doubt about Obama and then quoting Wright. In other words, you’re doing exactly what the republican strategist said you would do: Operating on a purely emotional, gut level instinct that you yourself can not actually define. And that’s the power of the right’s strategy. You are making inferences without ever asserting any actual specifics about Obama, to us or, more importantly, to yourself.
Oliver, pointing out that the Republicans will use latent prejudice against Obama is one thing. Your tactic here, however, is just as disgusting.
Haplo9, please don’t judge the man by his surrogates. There will be whiny liberals who do this kind of thing, but not all Obama supporters are such people, and Obama himself has certainly made clear he is not one of them.
Here’s the real issue: Wright dared to say he has problems with America.
Oh please! He said drugs in our inner cities and AIDS were part of a conspiracy by the white power structure against black people!
And I don’t know if I want to laugh or cry at the hypocrisy I see from people who take ANYTHING controversial said by people like Dobson, Robertson, Hagee, etc and say that they’re holding the strings of the GOP candidates. It’s rather stunning obviously.
What’s racist about it is the implication that black people march in such lockstep with each other that anything Obama’s pastor says must be felt by Obama himself due to their association…and that Obama is now suffering a death-blow because of that association, even though he has made it clear on a number of occasions that he disagrees with Reverend Wright’s “God Damn America” rhetoric.
Oh, but McCain certainly agrees with EVERYTHING that Rod Parsley and John Hagee say, right? Your little ‘play’ that followed is nonsense. Right here on this very blog, Oliver was trying to attach McCain and Hagee to the hip. Democratic strategists will be sure to bring it up in the general election. And why? Easy. It’s done to scare people into thinking that McCain is going to buy into the plan to turn America into a theocracy. Hell, after President Bush won in 2004, we had all kinds of “Welcome To Jesusland” nonsense going on.
So why should Obama get a free pass?
Oh that’s right. Because he’s a BLACK candidate! And we can’t talk about those kinds of things because he’s BLACK. To do so is RACIST! GMAFB.
As Trinity is a gay-friendly congregation, I imagine Wright also preached about tolerance.
I’ll bet James Meeks hasn’t. But of course, I suppose to bring that up would just be more racism!
Am I now answerable for every fool thing you’ve ever written here?
Yes Quaker, I’m afraid you’re answerable for both of them.
Once again, J is being stupid on purpose. Obama didn’t solicit the endorsement and the campaigning of Wright. On the other hand, McCain solicited the support of Hagee and Parsley. Since their association is of a political context, and only a political context, Oliver is right to ask if McCain believes, as does Hagee, that Catholicism is a “whore” and if McCain believes, as does Parsley, that the purpose of America is to destroy Islam.
Oh, but McCain certainly agrees with EVERYTHING that Rod Parsley and John Hagee say, right?
Well, that’s my point, Jay. If it’s fair to say that Obama must “hate” America because Wright “hates” America, then why isn’t it fair to say that McCain thinks America was founded to destroy Islam?
McCain not only didn’t walk away from Hagee, he walked towards him. Again, years after he had referred to Falwell as “an agent of intolerance.”
And I don’t know if I want to laugh or cry at the hypocrisy I see from people who take ANYTHING controversial said by people like Dobson, Robertson, Hagee, etc and say that they’re holding the strings of the GOP candidates.
The difference I think is that while the GOP actually has a history of vigorously appealing toward the “Christian Right” and keep insinuating their interpretation of God into political discussions (”God wants me to be president, bomb Iran, ban evolution, outlaw homosexuality, etc.”) there isn’t really a corrolary on the left. The “Aids is a Gov Created Anti-Black Conspiracy” movement doesn’t really have a significant foothold in the modern democratic party, try though the right will to paint it as such. Obama has vocally and publically distanced himself from Wright as much as the “Liberal” media which won’t shut up about it will allow, and McCain publically has embraced Hagee, Robertson, Zombie-Falwell, etc.
So why should Obama get a free pass?
So why should McCain? Why, in fact, has he been getting a free ride out of all this Wright nonsense? How many debate shows have mentioned the name Hagee? How many news broadcasts? How many anchors have stared into the camera to declare “The Debate Rages On about…” a Hagee quote thats, what, months old now?
Why have we been in a position where its more publically acceptable, if not outright expected for fundamentalist preachers to say outlandish outrageous things (I’m remembering we didnt spend this long “debating” Falwell blaming 9/11 on the gays) but now this one has, and its suddenly singularly remarkable? It seems for all the world that the only thing even keeping the Wright crap in the ether is the skin tone of the man spewing it, and yet suggesting race is a motivating factor is itself racist somehow?
Fafaroo…
I, and perhaps others, think that when a person voluntarily seeks out and absorbs the weekly speeches of another person, it means that he…you know….wants to hear that kind of stuff.
And I, scratch, think that when a person deliberately uses a couple of carefully selected minutes of video to characterize two decades of sermons, it means that you…you know…want to pretend something is true when you have no reason to believe it.
“I, and perhaps others, think that when a person voluntarily seeks out and absorbs the weekly speeches of another person, it means that he…you know….wants to hear that kind of stuff.”
Meaning what exactly? You still have yet to actually state directly what it is you think Obama believes about America because of the fact that Wright was his pastor. I think Obama has been pretty vocal and clear about his faith in America and his belief in the great goodness of this country. It is a core message in this stump speech and his books, that the story of his life, a profoundly positive and inspiring story, would be possible only in America. Are you saying that you don’t believe what Obama says, because of what he has listened to? Is that it?
At the same time, it should be obvious by now that Wright wasn’t saying God Damn America every Sunday. Have you stopped to think that Obama went seeking Wright’s message of Christ, and that the rest of it was a sidebar he tuned out?
And just to clarify, I don’t support “guilt by association” tactics in political campaigns.
But the Democrats made their bed. Now they have to lie down in it. Democrats have feasted over the last 10-12 years on guilt by association, especially when it comes to religious figures spouting off their mouths. They can’t hide behind racism now.
“They can’t hide behind racism now.”
I don’t think it’s “hiding behind racism” to point out that the subtext of the Wright-Obama criticism is that Obama is an angry black man who hates whites. If you want to deny that this is the veiled point of this constant harping on Wright, fine, but if you accept the fact this is the implied message some right wingers are trying to send, well, that’s a message designed to stoked racist fears and anxieties.
You are absolutely correct that the intention of linking McCain to Hagee was to play up and highlight McCain’s pandering to an extremely intolerant religious idiot. That was, and is, the entire point of it.
Just like Ward Churchill was used by the right to attack any one on the left who questioned the reasoning and planning of the war in Iraq. The point of that comparison was to smear progressives with the words “traitor” and “disloyal.”
The tactics are the same in all instances but the messages being telegraphed, or stated directly, are different.
He said drugs in our inner cities and AIDS were part of a conspiracy by the white power structure against black people!
I can’t possibly understand why people would be disposed to believe conspiracy theories like that. Surely there’s no historical precedent that would cause a less educated person to see that as somewhat plausible.
Obama didn’t solicit the endorsement and the campaigning of Wright.
Why would he have to solicit the endorsement of a man he considered a “father figure”?
Obama has vocally and publically distanced himself from Wright
Yes, something that both of them agreed would have to be done in the game of politics. So let’s not pretend that Obama’s distancing was forged completely from his character as a man. It was as much of his skill as a politician as anything else.
So why should McCain? Why, in fact, has he been getting a free ride out of all this Wright nonsense? How many debate shows have mentioned the name Hagee? How many news broadcasts? How many anchors have stared into the camera to declare “The Debate Rages On about…” a Hagee quote thats, what, months old now?
Do a Google search on ‘mccain hagee’ and try to say with a straight face that McCain got a free pass. Cripes, look how many times our host was all over the subject:
http://www.google.com/search?q=mccain hagee site:oliverwillis.com&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
McCain didn’t get a free pass and he’s likely to run into this stuff again once the general election campaign starts, I guarantee it.
Do a Google search on ‘mccain hagee’ and try to say with a straight face that McCain got a free pass.
Allrighty.
First, since we’re talking about media coverage, let’s go over to Google News and search there instead of searching the entire Internet.
mccain hagee gets 807 hits.
obama wright get 12,357 hits.
Free pass. Straight face. No problem.
That’s a good point fafaroo- when attacking McCain, it’s pretty clear that we are questioning McCain’s pandering to a radical (and electorally beneficial) social group. But what is the right trying to say through the Wright mocktroversy? Well, they don’t say exactly. They imply and hint but they don’t SAY what is the problem.
Hence my questions: Do the haters think that Obama believes that AIDS is a white plot to eliminate blacks? They don’t say yes, they don’t say no. Certainly anyone sane would say no, but they won’t take a stand.
Personally I think the leaders of these smears want to let each person paint their own meaning into Mr. Wright’s words. I think there is a calculated campaign to insert innuendo about the opponent. If you are inclined to hate blacks, you insert a message of black nationalism. If you hate liberals, you interpret the remarks as symbolic of hidden liberalism. If you are pro-war, you see his remarks as symptomatic of an anti-patriotic message.
That’s the brilliance of these smears, they don’t SAY what the problem is (like we do when we bring up Hagee or Parsley). They let each Republican’s prejudices write the script.
Quaker, interesting search. I did a similar search just now. Search
mccain hagee -obama -wright 172 hits
obama wright -mccain -hagee 8389 hits
So a tiny number of articles (<25%) mentioning McCain’s association with Hagee DON’T mention Obama and Wright, while most Obama/Wright (70%) articles ignore McCain.
“Do a Google search on ‘mccain hagee’ and try to say with a straight face that McCain got a free pass. ”
Is it just me or whenever J challenges someone to check something on the web it proves EXACTLY the opposite of what he is trying to prove?
Do a Google search on ‘mccain hagee’ and try to say with a straight face that McCain got a free pass.
…you’re absolutely kidding me. Okay, I’ll consult this mystical “Google” you speak of.
Hmm… now it seems to me that of the top 50 results I’m seeing the first Newsmedia link (at around the #12 spot) is the Washington Post’s Blog mentioning the endorsement and little else, not talking about the controversial statements.
The First Actual News Article I’m seeing on it is This AP story about McCain regecting Hagee’s hating on Catholics. I notice too that at the halfway point of the article, Hagee is no longer mentioned.
Past those, in the first 100 entries I only found another article on the Washington Monthly, and two further blog posts on Time and Newsweek. Compare this with a Google on “Obama Wright” and on Page 1 I find 11 major news outlets (and not their blogs) with articles written.
I’d Go further, but I see people have already been listing the numbers of articles on Google News and such, and I’m hoping the point is at this point proven.
I’ll bet James Meeks hasn’t. But of course, I suppose to bring that up would just be more racism!
Perhaps. But it would be just as irrelevant.
First, since we’re talking about media coverage, let’s go over to Google News and search there instead of searching the entire Internet.
Right, so Salon and Slate are not “the media.” Funny how the Internet isn’t a part of “the media” when it doesn’t conform to your point of view. You’re not the first person to do that. I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell. Cheap. Interested?
And the Google news search doesn’t seem to be all that accurate. I search on news stories in the last week for mccain hagee and it gave me 1499 results, yet for the last month it gave me 1048 or 985. Whatever. Of course, I have trouble seeing how over 1,000 stories in the last month is a “free pass.” But I guess when you automatically see racists in the mist because somebody is critical of Wright said, anything is possible.
In addition, this is not a comparison. EL claims that McCain got a “free pass.” He was obviously wrong.
Deal with it.
Is it just me or whenever J challenges someone to check something on the web it proves EXACTLY the opposite of what he is trying to prove?
Right. McCain got a free pass.
And Superman is real. And there really is a pot of gold at the end of rainbows.
Cripes.
Of course, I have trouble seeing how over 1,000 stories in the last month is a “free pass.”
do those 1,000 hits tell you whether they are favorable or not? Hardly a scientific analysis.
Jay, maybe McCain hasn’t gotten a “free pass” but even you have to admit that he has not been under the same scrutiny that Obama and Wright have been under. Free pass or not, it ain’t exactly fair and balanced.
What exactly are the statistics on AIDs and the black community, or the impact of the War on Drugs and the Black community.
“They represent 54 percent of the new HIV/AIDS cases in America, 70 percent of the new cases among American youth are Black, and nearly 67 percent of the new HIV/AIDS cases among American women are Black, and 43 percent of the new cases among men are Black. Most importantly, the majority of those still dying from AIDS in America, totaling more than 18,000 last year, were Black.”
War on Drugs:
“According to a 2006 report by the American Civil Liberties Union, African Americans make up an estimated 15% of drug users, but they account for 37% of those arrested on drug charges, 59% of those convicted and 74% of all drug offenders sentenced to prison. Or consider this: The U.S. has 260,000 people in state prisons on nonviolent drug charges; 183,200 (more than 70%) of them are black or Latino.”
EL claims that McCain got a “free pass.” He was obviously wrong.
I beg your pardon Jay but I was the one who said “Free Pass,” and I fail to see how “several non-media affiliated websites” is actually equal to the 24-hour news apparatus we have in this country. Its nice to see though that you have to make such ridiculous analogies since you can’t even pretend that CNN/NBC/FNC/etc. is giving Hagee-McCain anydamnwhere near the same amount or style of coverage they’re giving Wright-Obama, which was the main point I was trying to make, and which you cannot even refute.
You have instead tried to dispute something neither I or my friend John Strawman overhere were even saying, which seems to be some variant of “John McCain gets a free pass on Hagee, which is to say that nowhere in the entire world of information is there a single mention of their connection, at all, ever.” This is of course not only a lie, but a lie to which the truth is meaningless. Christ if you’re trying to cite the entire internet as a source you may as well indict the Smurfs for 9/11. Pretending we’re saying things we’re not and that the evidence says things that it doesnt, coupled with your own personal redefinition of terms comes off as not a little bit delusional, and to close by claiming we believe in comic books and leprechauns and bridge sales doesn’t make you seem less of a dick.
Good post Rex. I think we can all agree that a story about Obama that is being covered at a 50/1 ratio to a similar story about McSame is prima facie evidence of a “free pass”, no matter what semantic argument is made.
Jay, Google was your metric, not mine. I just took the extra step to focus on actual news sites, and not include comment-driven sites.
Second, Slate is actually included in Google News–see for yourself. Salon does not appear to be a site Google News tracks.
Is your argument still that one can’t say McCain gets a free pass?
And since you were so kind to suggest it:
Google News search
site: Slate.com
mccain hagee - 1 result (titled ‘Wright or wrong’)
obama wright - 11 results
“Cripes, look how many times our host was all over the subject …”
Hey, we all love the site and our host but are you suggesting that Oliverwillis.com is driving the national debate and should be included as part of the mainstream media? Seriously? (sorry oliver)
“Funny how the Internet isn’t a part of “the media” when it doesn’t conform to your point of view …”
Slate and other websites might be part of the media but let’s not pretend that an article, or even a series of artciles, on Slate has anywhere near the same impact as constant repetition of video clips on network and cable news shows. I don’t remember seeing the Hagee/McCain thing running non stop on a loop for three weeks straight on any of the major broadcast news shows. Hell, I remember Hagee/McCain as a by and large internet-based controversy that never really filtered up the national broadcast media. Certainly no where near the way the Wright/Obama thing has.
In today’s media environment, “Free Pass,” doesn’t mean no one ever covers a controversy. Almost every dust up will make the news in some way shape or form during election season if only because the news shows have 24 hours of air time to fill, 24/7. “Free Pass” in this day and age, then, means a controversy is off the news shows in one or two cycles. That’s what happened with Hagee/McCain. It killed 5 minutes of news time for a day or two and was gone. Wright/Obama has dominated the broadcast media, from news shows to the talk shows, for weeks now. Weeks.
Hagee/McCain? Free Pass.
Wright/Obama? not so much.
Jay, Google was your metric, not mine. I just took the extra step to focus on actual news sites, and not include comment-driven sites.
And Internet traffic to many websites is higher than that of many cable news shows and what you refer to as “actual news sites.” Unless you’re one who believes more people read YNetnews than Daily Kos. In addition, I didn’t raise a comparison between McCain and Obama. That’s something you did and it’s completely irrelevant. Showing that the Obama/Wright story has gotten more coverage doesn’t lend credibility to the statement that McCain got a “free pass.” It’s not surprising that Obama’s relationship with Wright has gotten a lot of coverage. There’s several reasons:
1. Obama is locked in a tight race with Hillary Clinton. McCain pretty much had the nomination locked up when the stories came out about John Hagee.
2. Obama has enjoyed a love affair with the media for the longest time and he’s largely been up front about other things the media would have obsessed over. This is one he didn’t take care of quickly enough.
Its nice to see though that you have to make such ridiculous analogies since you can’t even pretend that CNN/NBC/FNC/etc. is giving Hagee-McCain anydamnwhere near the same amount or style of coverage they’re giving Wright-Obama, which was the main point I was trying to make
If that’s the point you were trying to make, then that’s what you should have said! Your statement stood on it’s own and it doesn’t hold water. And if you’re willing to put your money where your mouth is, I’ll guarantee we have not seen the last of the McCain/Hagee coverage and that it will only ramp up once the general campaign gets under way.
If you want to see examples of what conservatives REALLY think, you only have to look so far as Glenn Reynolds.
Here’s the Salon article about it.
If that’s the point you were trying to make, then that’s what you should have said!
…I’m sorry but I thought that I had done. I didn’t think when I suggested McCain was getting a “free pass” that anyone would have read that as me saying that nobody anywhere was saying anything at all about it. Did you think I was somehow under the mistaken impression that by bringing it up I was the first person to say anything about it anywhere in the history of forever-ever? Is that what you thought I was thinking? Sweetened Fanciful Moses-style Flavoring man, Just becase it pleases you to think I’m an idiot doesn’t mean I actually am one.
And if you’re willing to put your money where your mouth is, I’ll guarantee we have not seen the last of the McCain/Hagee coverage and that it will only ramp up once the general campaign gets under way.
Fine, know what? You’re entirely on my friend. One month from today we find which has had the most mention in major media for the past week, McCain-Hagee or Obama-Wright. Loser buys lunch for the Winner. Shake?
Um, yes it does. Obama/Wright story? Covered endlessly. McCain/Hagee? NOT covered endlessly.
That’s exactly what a “free pass” is, Jay.
Give it up, Jay. Google News searches include Media Matters, Huffington Post, Tapped, and Talking Points Memo.
All those sites you think aren’t included in the Google News search results are generously represented.
Jay, you are fucking retarded. It seems like everything you say here is designed to prove that.
Comparing what Wright said to what Hagee and other Christians conservatives said is pure bullshit.
The ‘Chickens are coming home to roost.’ quote wasn’t from Wright, Wright was just quoting a fucking expert. The CIA itself calls 9/11 blowback.
The CIA has been involved in the drug trade. (Or do you not remember Noriega? In which case you are in the same group as Oliver North, Ronald Regan, etc.) And Oliver already posted the information about syphilis.
On the other hand, if you think the Catholic church is the Great Whore of Babylon as written about in the Bible, then you are fucking insane.
Or if you think lesbians caused 9/11, you are fucking insane.
Do I agree with all of what Wright said? Fuck no. But he’s nowhere near as insane as the Christian Right, many of which brag about how much access they have to the president.
And this, kind ladies and gentlemen, is exactly why I feel Hillary is the better choice.
This issue will absolutely plague, hamstring, and maybe cripple Obama in a General.
It’s odious, it’s despicable, but there it is. It wil be played up to the NewsMax by the Right, they know they have an absolute gold mine of vitriol and racism and anti-Lib’rulism and hate, and that is what they know how to mine the best.
And this, kind ladies and gentlemen, is exactly why I feel Hillary is the better choice.
Okay, why, exactly? How does any of this make her a “better choice?”
You don’t think the fRightwingers have a gold mine of vitriol against Clinton when the time comes? You don’t think we’ll be living in the ’90’s all over again? You don’t think Gennifer Flowers and Susan MacDougal and Whitewater, “Travelgate”, Vince Foster and all the rest won’t suddenly re-emerge like Zombie Batman? The GOP is gonna play nice with the nice lady but not with the nice colored boy?
Gimme a break.
Clearly, Wellstone, we’ve seen which direction you’ve chosen.
Tell you what wellstone, why don’t you let Democratic party voters choose the candidate instead of letting the VRWC conspiracy choose our candidates?
I agree with duros that you’ve forgotten who was in office when the VRWC really ramped up. You’re blinded by Obamahate.
Oh Oll, all these white wingers are just mad that you get to put “N—-r” on your blog and they can’t