I agree with Ross
March 17, 2008 - 2:00 pm
PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.
I’m confused. I thought Dick Cheney caused Hurricane Katrina with his diabolical weather machine – not homosexuals. Apparently “new sh*% has come to light”, to quote Jeffrey Lebowski.
Seriously, the progressive answer to any and all criticism is moral relativism. Everything is equivalent – “I know you are, but what am I?” – very sophisticated.
Let’s try one. Hamas and Hezbollah randomly fire rockets into Israel and kill innocent men, women and children in the name of Allah – guns, bombs, any method will do. Israelis respond by targeting the terrorists responsible and occasionally cause collateral damage in the process (never mind that the terrorists often operate out of schools and hospitals in hopes that said collateral damage will be maximized, all the better for the news cameras). Not the same, is it? Ezra Klein would likely disagree.
The leftist Obama apologist are engaging, as usual in specious moral equivalence. They all seem outraged because “we all know”: that the crazy right-wing Christians have been an important part of the GOP and so on. What they studiously ignore is the difference between including religious extremists in your party and electing one as president.
Of course, many on the left have tried to paint Bush as a religious extremist because he spoke out against gay marriage, or because he refused federal funding for stem cells. But neither he, nor any other president of either party has ever been a 20-year member and admitted religious “mentee” of a church and minister who spews the kind of hateful talk Wright’s church does. And if they had, they would, properly so, have been denied the White House.
Whether you claim Jesus’s teachings to oppose gay marriage or to oppose carbon emissions, or “war,” religion is a big part of both the Right and the Left in America. The question is whether your presidential candidate buys into the hatemongering masquerading as religion that goes on in some churches, again, both on the right and on the left. Making one speech or appearance with a minister is not the same as accepting him as your personal spiritual inspiration for 20 years.
Obama’s claims that he just didn’t know that Wright is a major promulgator of “black liberation theology,” with its racist hatred and loony, paranoid theories, like the federal government introducing AIDS and crack to the ghettos to kill off blacks, are not credible. His denunciation of those views can only mean that he is not telling the truth or that his attendance at Wright’s church was merely a cynical politician’s move to gain credibility with a certain meme of supporter. Either way, it hardly reveals him to be the “post-racial,” “uniter” candidate of media myth.
It’s not a parody. Read the comments.
I don’t think it’s a parody, either, but it’s from a website subtitled “Liberal Intelligence”, so maybe the whole site is a parody–and not just an oxymoron.
Okay, there’s my cheap shot of the day.