Making fun of Obama supporters, Rick "Shark and Shepherd" Esenberg sniffs:
But don't you think that this kind of mindless hero worship is embarassing?
The real question is whether Rick is embarrassed by his increasingly outlandish -- and now hypocritical -- attacks on Obama. Specifically a piece last week chastising Obama for not dissing Louis Farrakhan (whose work with ex-cons was praised by the leader of Obama's church) in adequately strong terms:
Hillary tried to push him on it but gave up too soon. What she should have done is ask a follow-up: "Will Louis Farrakhan have a place at the table in the Obama administration? He will be persona non grata in mine."
Maybe she felt that, the Democrat coaliton being what it is, that would be going too far. That's hard to believe (I think she just blew it), but McCain won't hesitate to draw that line.
How would Obama answer? I don't see how he could do anything other than say that Farrakhan won't be invited to the White House. But, if David Duke endorsed McCain (he has, in fact, said he sees no difference between McCain, Clinton and Obama; they are all equally terrible in his view), you'd see no hesitation or equivocation about rejecting him, his support and his statements. His very existence would be regretted and McCain might even allow as he wishes that Duke had never uttered - or even heard - his name.
What gets embarrassing for Rick is that John McCain is being endorsed -- an endorsement he actively sought -- of the leader of a rightwing megachurch, one John Hagee, who combines homophobia with a dash of Catholic hatred. He also wants to bring about a cataclysmic war in the Middle East, which would fulfill the Book of Revelation ... and bring about the Destruction of Israel. The American Prospect profiled him here.
The difference is that while Obama has not sought the endorsement of Farrakhan -- the only way Farrakhan would have a seat at the table is by crashing the party -- McCain has actively courted Hagee. And McCain's efforts to deal with his "Hagee problem" are far weaker than Obama's words on Farrakhan. At least that's according to that "hard left" group, the Catholic League.
From Matthew Yglesias:
The issue here has to do with the role of extremists in public life. Barack Obama never sought support from Louis Farrakhan, never appeared on stage with Farrakhan, never pronounced himself proud to be backed by Farrakhan, but was nonetheless asked on national television to specifically disavow the man. People don't want to put a political coalition that includes Farrakhan in office.
McCain and his staff actively sought out Hagee's endorsement, he appeared and campaigned with Hagee, he said he was proud to be backed by Hagee. Hagee is, in short, part of McCain's political strategy. Now he tells us he doesn't agree with Hagee about everything. Well, which things? Are we supposed to believe that McCain's not into the bigotry, or the foreign policy aimed at apocalypse, but just likes Hagee because of their shared opposition to gay marriage? Is McCain going to be courting Osama bin Laden's endorsement? It's reminiscent of McCain's on-again, off-again quest for the support of "agents of intolerance" like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. McCain's trying to wink with one eye to a segment of the electorate, wink with his other eye at his fans in the media, and somehow maintain a reputation for straight talk throughout all this.
What are those words of Esenberg's again?
But, if David Duke endorsed McCain ... you'd see no hesitation or equivocation about rejecting him, his support and his statements.
Hatemongers with zero political support? Rejected! Hatemongers with a broad reach in the evangelical community? Come aboard!
The Hagee problem was raised by commenters, including the intrepid Seth Zlotocha (who's apparently given up blogging for commenting at the Shark). And Esenberg reveals he's so busy bashing Obama that he has no idea what his own guy is up to:
As for Hagee, I don't know anything about him but it appears that he is a nutjob and McCain ought to dump his support.
Does a politician dump someone's support after actively seeking it out?
Rightwingers like Sykes and Esenberg like to assert Obama's "Farrakhan problem" is not going away. Probably not, because this invented problem is going to be thrown out by these hacks and others until election day.
But McCain's actual Hagee problem is the tip of the iceberg. The fact is, Hagee's views are hardly unique in the base of the Christian right. Hatred of the Catholic Church, i.e., the whore of Babylon, in particular is rife.
It's a reality that politically convenient papists like Patrick McIlheran, Charlie Sykes and John McAdams like to ignore, instead getting up in arms about bloggers for a Democratic candidate who've said unkind things about Catholicism. And while moderate Republicans like the Recess Supervisor like to think a McCain candidacy could pave he way for the GOP to offload the religious right (or the religious right to split off) that's apparently not McCain's plan.
Give Catholic haters a seat at the table -- Vote McCain!
Clarification: Post edited to make clear Hagee isn't so much an anti-Semite as a simple guy who wants to bring about a war that would destroy Israel...apparently in fulfillment of the scriptures.
The ol' Straight Talk Express has sure done a number of u-turns since 2000, when Senator McCain condemned the similarly idiotic sectarian policies of Bob Jones University as "not American." If the Straight Talk Express was anything but a metaphor, there'd be clear probable cause to pull it over on suspicion of drunken driving.
Posted by: iT | March 02, 2008 at 07:25 AM