Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT Calls the MSM DOUBLE-STANDARDS. "Shine the SPOT on McCains WHITE Pastors Too."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 07:57 AM
Original message
NYT Calls the MSM DOUBLE-STANDARDS. "Shine the SPOT on McCains WHITE Pastors Too."
Edited on Sun May-04-08 08:00 AM by futureliveshere
I really do not have to say much, except its high time that the MSM starts looking at the other non-Wright or shall we say non-Black pastors too. Not that it means that Rev. Wright was justified. But its just plain old simple double standards when we don't even examine in the same harsh spotlight the crazy White Pastors. Unlike Barack Obama who for the last 15 months or more has been consistently maintaining a distance from the Reverend, these are pastors whose endorsement McCain has actively sought and trumpeted.

Here are snippets from The All-White Elephant in the Room

BORED by those endless replays of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright? If so, go directly to YouTube, search for “John Hagee Roman Church Hitler,” and be recharged by a fresh jolt of clerical jive.

What you’ll find is a white televangelist, the Rev. John Hagee, lecturing in front of an enormous diorama. Wielding a pointer, he pokes at the image of a woman with Pamela Anderson-sized breasts, her hand raising a golden chalice. The woman is “the Great Whore,” Mr. Hagee explains, and she is drinking “the blood of the Jewish people.” That’s because the Great Whore represents “the Roman Church,” which, in his view, has thirsted for Jewish blood throughout history, from the Crusades to the Holocaust.

Mr. Hagee is not a fringe kook but the pastor of a Texas megachurch. On Feb. 27, he stood with John McCain and endorsed him over the religious conservatives’ favorite, Mike Huckabee, who was then still in the race.

Are we really to believe that neither Mr. McCain nor his camp knew anything then about Mr. Hagee’s views? This particular YouTube video — far from the only one — was posted on Jan. 1, nearly two months before the Hagee-McCain press conference. Mr. Hagee appears on multiple religious networks, including twice daily on the largest, Trinity Broadcasting, which reaches 75 million homes. Any 12-year-old with a laptop could have vetted this preacher in 30 seconds, tops.


Here the article puts McCains involvement with the pastor in perspective.

Mr. McCain says he does not endorse any of Mr. Hagee’s calumnies, any more than Barack Obama endorses Mr. Wright’s. But those who try to give Mr. McCain a pass for his embrace of a problematic preacher have a thin case. It boils down to this: Mr. McCain was not a parishioner for 20 years at Mr. Hagee’s church.

That defense implies, incorrectly, that Mr. McCain was a passive recipient of this bigot’s endorsement. In fact, by his own account, Mr. McCain sought out Mr. Hagee, who is perhaps best known for trying to drum up a link:www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=11541|pre-emptive “holy war”] with Iran. (This preacher’s rantings may tell us more about Mr. McCain’s policy views than Mr. Wright’s tell us about Mr. Obama’s.) Even after Mr. Hagee’s Catholic bashing bubbled up in the mainstream media, Mr. McCain still did not reject and denounce him, as Mr. Obama did an unsolicited endorser, Louis Farrakhan, at the urging of Tim Russert and Hillary Clinton. Mr. McCain instead told George Stephanopoulos two Sundays ago that while he condemns any “anti-anything” remarks by Mr. Hagee, he is still “glad to have his endorsement.”

I wonder if Mr. McCain would have given the same answer had Mr. Stephanopoulos confronted him with the graphic video of the pastor in full “Great Whore” glory. But Mr. McCain didn’t have to fear so rude a transgression. Mr. Hagee’s videos have never had the same circulation on television as Mr. Wright’s. A sonorous white preacher spouting venom just doesn’t have the telegenic zing of a theatrical black man.

Perhaps that’s why virtually no one has rebroadcast the highly relevant prototype for Mr. Wright’s fiery claim that 9/11 was America’s chickens “coming home to roost.” That would be the Sept. 13, 2001, televised exchange between Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, who blamed the attacks on America’s abortionists, feminists, gays and A.C.L.U. lawyers. (Mr. Wright blamed the attacks on America’s foreign policy.) Had that video re-emerged in the frenzied cable-news rotation, Mr. McCain might have been asked to explain why he no longer calls these preachers “agents of intolerance” and chose to cozy up to Mr. Falwell by speaking at his Liberty University in 2006.


And now the main point of the article (for me)

None of this is to say that two wacky white preachers make a Wright right. It is entirely fair for any voter to weigh Mr. Obama’s long relationship with his pastor in assessing his fitness for office. It is also fair to weigh Mr. Obama’s judgment in handling this personal and political crisis as it has repeatedly boiled over. But whatever that verdict, it is disingenuous to pretend that there isn’t a double standard operating here. If we’re to judge black candidates on their most controversial associates — and how quickly, sternly and completely they disown them — we must judge white politicians by the same yardstick.


That last paragraph my friends is the honest truth. I have been maintaining for the last couple of days, after Obama's press conference the other day, that the last few days non-stop repititive ad-nauseum coverage of the Rev Wright affair has been GOOD for Obama. Yes, good for him. That is because, since the press conference the narrative has changed. Now it is more about Obama's words not his pastors any more. His press conference snippets are constantly being re-run on MSM. He couldn't have asked for a more extensive coverage of his emotional but necessary words. Yes, they are accompanied by the various talking heads (TH) asking breathless questions of doom and despair. But the public will remember the candidates words, not the THs for the most part. Finally this kind of biased press coverage will make most of the right-thinking people in the general public react two ways, "enough already" and "what about the crazy white pastors who support McCain". This is the proof of that. Now lets spread the word and make sure enough people see this article and understand the importance of balanced coverage of the presidential candidates.

Lastly, it is a real relief to bash MacCain and quote a press article while doing that. Hopefully we will see more of such articles as the democratic primary winds down and everybody starts focusing on the GE.

edited title to give context
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. None of them should be in this primary.
They have a right of free speech no matter what race or religion. Just keep it away from our primary debates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Too late for that since Obama's pastor is ALL over the primary.
I have very rarely seen Hillary not talking about this when she gets the opportunity.

This article is not talking about the pastor per se. But about the biased coverage of the pastors which the op-ed attributes mainly to racial stereotypes in society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yep, another thing we can "thank" Hillary for.
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janetblond Donating Member (437 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Mainstream Media's subliminal messaging ...
ON MSNBC ...
Have you noticed how the "RACE for the WHITE house" caption is placed?
"RACE" and "WHITE" are together in bold letters.
I wonder if that was Joe Scarborough's idea?
NOT funny!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Divide and conquer TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #10
17. Thats the Rethug mantra for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
2. Listening to Larry King (repeat?) this morning
what strikes me is the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton herself, calling into question Obama's judgment -- when she herself stays with a serial adulterer, philanderer for over 25 years. She needs to get a mirror and gaze into it deeply.

The people are sick of hearing about Wright. Move on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. Wright was the front page of CNN.com yesterday.I'm sure CNN posts
what people are sick of hearing about because they don't care about money or ratings.

:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Oh no, people are very interested to see & hear right now.
But the narrative will change in a few more days, as more and more people get turned off. Come on, we have the worst case of ADD in the world over here. Sad, but true.

And don't you feel that there is more focus being paid to Obama's denouncement than the Rev. Wright's words for the last couple of days?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YEM Donating Member (553 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. Did the others name their book after one of the nuts?
I missed that part
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Are you seriously defending McCain over Obama on DU?
Are you a democrat? What is wrong with you? Where did I bring up Hillary in this discussion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. mccain thanks you for your support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. yup
Clinton, Hillary Rodham. An Invitation to the White House: At Home with History. Simon & Schuster, 2000. ISBN 0-684-85799-5.

She could write that one if she wasn't writing about her relationship with him, she couldn't extend that invite, now could she.

She has no white house history but his white house history and, as the title implies, she is at home with all of his history.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Sorry, but I am not clear about your post.
Could you elaborate a bit? Whose relationship with Hillary are we talking about here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Bill's
the only way she can write such a book is as wife of Bill.

Bill has lied to the public and to her for years about his fidelity. Would you like the 1992 "60 minute" clip where she defends him and denies the rumors of his outside of marriage behavior?

And yes, it is his personal business and her's, but it does go to judgment, as in her's.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Aah, ok gotcha. Not very relevant to the OP, but gotcha
and of course I agree with what you are saying. Judgement calls on the other 2 candidates for issues MUCH bigger than Wrights is waiting in the wings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-04-08 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. I haven't read the book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC