What’s rather stunning is that the left, especially those in the media, do not tolerate this kind of kookiness from the right. When Pat Robertson suggested that 9/11 was punishment for America’s misdeeds he was pilloried in the press. And rightfully so, in my humble estimation. But Obama’s reverend makes the same sort of claims, and worse, and the mainstream media is falling all over themselves to forgive and forget.
This is a blatant, almost ridiculous, misstatment of the issue here. Pat Robertson said stupid things. Jerry Fallwell said stupider things. John Hagge says some really far-fetched, unbelievable things. And Rev. Wright said some pretty stupid, tin foil hat things. But ALL of them have been, in your words, “pilloried” by the media. (except Hagge to this point...although a full vetting of this cornball would be welcome too). Frankly, I’m not sure how one can make an honest argument otherwise.
But that’s not the issue. The issue is whether or not those who receive a political endorsement (or GASP, are friends with those individuals) are responsible personally for those individuals’ ridiculousness or are automatically assumed to share their viewpoints. I say no. Obviously, you’ve decided that they are.
Are the conservatives that are directly or indirectly tied with Pat Robertson or Jerry Fallwell responsible for the nonsense that they once spewed or continue to spew? Are those conservatives assumed to have the same beliefs as Jerry and Pat? Does George Bush think that 9/11 was caused by gays? Or does John McCain believe that the Jews extermination during the Hollocaust can be explained due to the fact that they didn’t do what they were told, ala J. Hagge. Am I to assume John McCains’s position is that Catholics comprise a church described by Hagge as the “great whore” of revelations? Or maybe I’m to assume that he believes that the people of Katrina suffered because God didn’t like them? Maybe I can just assume the John McCain’s wikipedia entry is fundamentally similar, in all accounts, to Rev. Hagge’s.
But of course it’s not. I’m willing to admit to assume so is ridiculous. Why can’t conservatives stop clamoring for this type of association with B.O.?
A know B, B thinks C, so A thinks C. Does not compute.
Jay - 09:03am on 03/19/2008
Spin away Jay. Nobody’s buying your bullshit, I doubt that even you are buying into it, it’s just talking points to deflect the fact that you’re boy belongs to a racist, hate-America church. Way to vet your candidates, jackass.
Hoss - 01:03pm on 03/19/2008
Spin away Jay. Nobody’s buying your bullshit, I doubt that even you are buying into it, it’s just talking points to deflect the fact that you’re boy belongs to a racist, hate-America church. Way to vet your candidates, jackass.
Well that wasn’t sophmoric at all. And, not shockingly, you failed to answer ANY of the questions I posed.
Vet my candidate? You’ve got to be kidding me. Did you read my post. Obviously, you would rather spew expletives than actually answer the question that I proposed about Hagge. He’s just as much a nutball as Rev. Wright. But apparently the GOP and it’s base are perfectly OK with the association just as long as he doesn’t question US policies.
What’s hilarious is that I don’t care either way but you do...only its just one-way.
What’s rather stunning is that the left, especially those in the media, do not tolerate this kind of kookiness from the right. When Pat Robertson suggested that 9/11 was punishment for America’s misdeeds he was pilloried in the press. And rightfully so, in my humble estimation. But Obama’s reverend makes the same sort of claims, and worse, and the mainstream media is falling all over themselves to forgive and forget.
This is a blatant, almost ridiculous, misstatment of the issue here. Pat Robertson said stupid things. Jerry Fallwell said stupider things. John Hagge says some really far-fetched, unbelievable things. And Rev. Wright said some pretty stupid, tin foil hat things. But ALL of them have been, in your words, “pilloried” by the media. (except Hagge to this point...although a full vetting of this cornball would be welcome too). Frankly, I’m not sure how one can make an honest argument otherwise.
But that’s not the issue. The issue is whether or not those who receive a political endorsement (or GASP, are friends with those individuals) are responsible personally for those individuals’ ridiculousness or are automatically assumed to share their viewpoints. I say no. Obviously, you’ve decided that they are.
Are the conservatives that are directly or indirectly tied with Pat Robertson or Jerry Fallwell responsible for the nonsense that they once spewed or continue to spew? Are those conservatives assumed to have the same beliefs as Jerry and Pat? Does George Bush think that 9/11 was caused by gays? Or does John McCain believe that the Jews extermination during the Hollocaust can be explained due to the fact that they didn’t do what they were told, ala J. Hagge. Am I to assume John McCains’s position is that Catholics comprise a church described by Hagge as the “great whore” of revelations? Or maybe I’m to assume that he believes that the people of Katrina suffered because God didn’t like them? Maybe I can just assume the John McCain’s wikipedia entry is fundamentally similar, in all accounts, to Rev. Hagge’s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagee
But of course it’s not. I’m willing to admit to assume so is ridiculous. Why can’t conservatives stop clamoring for this type of association with B.O.?
A know B, B thinks C, so A thinks C. Does not compute.
Spin away Jay. Nobody’s buying your bullshit, I doubt that even you are buying into it, it’s just talking points to deflect the fact that you’re boy belongs to a racist, hate-America church. Way to vet your candidates, jackass.
Spin away Jay. Nobody’s buying your bullshit, I doubt that even you are buying into it, it’s just talking points to deflect the fact that you’re boy belongs to a racist, hate-America church. Way to vet your candidates, jackass.
Well that wasn’t sophmoric at all. And, not shockingly, you failed to answer ANY of the questions I posed.
Vet my candidate? You’ve got to be kidding me. Did you read my post. Obviously, you would rather spew expletives than actually answer the question that I proposed about Hagge. He’s just as much a nutball as Rev. Wright. But apparently the GOP and it’s base are perfectly OK with the association just as long as he doesn’t question US policies.
What’s hilarious is that I don’t care either way but you do...only its just one-way.
Way to vet your candidate Jackass.