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.
Since then, Mr. McCain has been shocked to learn that his clerical ally has made many other outrageous statements. Mr. Hagee, it's true, did not blame the American government for concocting AIDS. But he did say that God created Hurricane Katrina to punish New Orleans for its sins, particularly a scheduled "homosexual parade there on the Monday that Katrina came."
Mr. Hagee didn't make that claim in obscure circumstances, either. He broadcast it on one of America's most widely heard radio programs, "Fresh Air" on NPR, back in September 2006. He reaffirmed it in a radio interview less than two weeks ago. Only after a reporter asked Mr. McCain about this Katrina homily on April 24 did the candidate brand it as "nonsense" and the preacher retract it.
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 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.
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.
When Rudy Giuliani, still a viable candidate, successfully courted Pat Robertson for an endorsement last year, few replayed Mr. Robertson's greatest past insanities. Among them is his best-selling 1991 tome, "The New World Order," which peddled some of the same old dark conspiracy theories about "European bankers" (who just happened to be named Warburg, Schiff and Rothschild) that Mr. Farrakhan has trafficked in. Nor was Mr. Giuliani ever seriously pressed to explain why his cronies on the payroll at Giuliani Partners included a priest barred from the ministry by his Long Island diocese in 2002 following allegations of sexual abuse. Much as Mr. Wright officiated at the Obamas' wedding, so this priest officiated at (one of) Mr. Giuliani's. Did you even hear about it?
There is not just a double standard for black and white politicians at play in too much of the news media and political establishment, but there is also a glaring double standard for our political parties. The Clintons and Mr. Obama are always held accountable for their racial stands, as they should be, but the elephant in the room of our politics is rarely acknowledged: In the 21st century, the so-called party of Lincoln does not have a single African-American among its collective 247 senators and representatives in Washington. Yes, there are appointees like Clarence Thomas and Condi Rice, but, as we learned during the Mark Foley scandal, even gay men may hold more G.O.P. positions of power than blacks.
A near half-century after the civil rights acts of the 1960s, this is quite an achievement. Yet the holier-than-thou politicians and pundits on the right passing shrill moral judgment over every Democratic racial skirmish are almost never asked to confront or even acknowledge the racial dysfunction in their own house. In our mainstream political culture, this de facto apartheid is simply accepted as an intractable given, unworthy of notice, and just too embarrassing to mention aloud in polite Beltway company. Those who dare are instantly accused of "political correctness" or "reverse racism."
An all-white Congressional delegation doesn't happen by accident. It's the legacy of race cards that have been dealt since the birth of the Southern strategy in the Nixon era. No one knows this better than Mr. McCain, whose own adopted daughter of color was the subject of a vicious smear in his party's South Carolina primary of 2000.
This year Mr. McCain has called for a respectful (i.e., non-race-baiting) campaign and has gone so far as to criticize (ineffectually) North Carolina's Republican Party for running a Wright-demonizing ad in that state's current primary. Mr. McCain has been posing (awkwardly) with black people in his tour of "forgotten" America. Speaking of Katrina in New Orleans, he promised that "never again" would a federal recovery effort be botched on so grand a scale.
This is all surely sincere, and a big improvement over Mitt Romney's dreams of his father marching with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Up to a point. Here, too, there's a double standard. Mr. McCain is graded on a curve because the G.O.P. bar is set so low. But at a time when the latest Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll shows that President Bush is an even greater drag on his popularity than Mr. Wright is on Mr. Obama's, Mr. McCain's New Orleans visit is more about the self-interested politics of distancing himself from Mr. Bush than the recalibration of policy.
Mr. McCain took his party's stingier line on Katrina aid and twice opposed an independent commission to investigate the failed government response. Asked on his tour what should happen to the Ninth Ward now, he called for "a conversation" about whether anyone should "rebuild it, tear it down, you know, whatever it is." Whatever, whenever, never mind.
For all this primary season's obsession with the single (and declining) demographic of white working-class men in Rust Belt states, America is changing rapidly across all racial, generational and ethnic lines. The Census Bureau announced last week that half the country's population growth since 2000 is due to Hispanics, another group understandably alienated from the G.O.P.
Anyone who does the math knows that America is on track to become a white-minority nation in three to four decades. Yet if there's any coherent message to be gleaned from the hypocrisy whipped up by Hurricane Jeremiah, it's that this nation's perennially promised candid conversation on race has yet to begin.
Frank Rich writes a regular column for The New York Times.
© 2008 The New York Times
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
26 Comments so far
Show AllUmm, to ACC & roncypert: No, it is not a criminal act to suggest that someone somewhere do something. Remember the First Amendment? It is only a criminal act when it is the equivalent of "shouting fire in a crowded theater." So if there's a mob brandishing lit torches, saying "on to the mosque!" is inciting to riot or some such.
This matters to us on all sides of this melee, since many of us have from time to time said or written things that someone someday might interpret as wishing harm to someone.
It may be immoral, stupid, offensive, or infuriating -- but not a crime.
"Try to imagine life in these United States without fundamentalist Christianists and American Zionists"
One of my favorite pastimes.
Try to imagine life in these United States without fundamentalist Christianists and American Zionists.
Now back to miserable reality.
In fact, now I think on it, the greatest misinterpretation of Christianity leads to a denial of life, not a fear of death. There are no rewards in life, according to this reading, only in the afterlife.
"The entire Christian religion is predicated on fear of death."
Not necessarily 'is.' Certainly 'can be.'
Depends on who you are.
I disagree alaskamaid. The wages of sin is death. Christianity is all about leaving death behind and embracing eternal life offered by God through faith in His son Jesus Christ
It is the fear of death that keeps one bound in sin and ignorant of Christ. Those who embrace Christ leave their sins behind and no longer willingly participate with the sin nature because it was crucified with Christ.
I believe the statistic is around 14,000 Christians murdered (martyred) monthly on a global basis. All because of their unwillingness to deny Christ.
The entire Christian religion is predicated on fear of death. Therefore it is natural that 'Christians' project that fear onto 'heathens' by (what else) killing them in the name of God (or worse, in the name of Christ).
See, we're alive and you're dead ! Our religion rocks !
Hi Siouxrose! Personal gods have a tough job. All they can do is reflect the imaginations of their worshippers.
Compassion, I fear, takes more imagination than too many can exercise. I mean, Christ's compassion is infinite, no? The test is to honeslty know what your own limits are.
CLEMSY: Amen to you, brother! I am so tired of these Holier than thou types who can't see the BOARD before their own eyes as they stand behind a policy of carnage and think it's winning them brownie points among some kingdom beyond. Taking Christ's alleged words literally, they entirely miss the point of compassion, turning the other cheek, and doing unto others as one would have done unto self. I wonder how many at these fundamentalist churches would be happy to have a bomb dropped among them? That's the gift they seem determined to grant the Iraqis in pursuit of the LIE of freedom, or the false promise of DIVINE liberation.
Matthew,
You are entilted to your convictions. However, hagee is demonstrably a contradiction to those convictions. Any man who promotes war and tells the poor to go ahead and starve is no Christian by any logical definition.
Of course, where religion is concerned, logic is the first casualty.
Oh yes... your comments re mary and her "co-divinity" with Christ is inaccurate as far as Catholic doctrine goes.
As far as mine goes, any goddess is as good as any god as long as true comapssion is the end result.
If one is not so pre-obsessed with blindly defending a fallible institution, it might be recognized that John Hagee is pointing both believers and unbelievers in the direction of true righteousness and that is Christ Himself. The problem with the overall millenia-trend of the Roman Church is that to begin with it makes a false claim of ownership of the true church, which incidentally is all the believers, or those who have faith in Christ for their salvation, which does not necessarily have anything to do at all with the Roman Catholic Church...yet God knows the heart of each individual and no doubt there are numerous true believers that do not hold to the idolatrous practice of equating Mary with Christ...it is true that Mary is blessed among women as the Scriptures say, but to attribute co-equal divinity among Mary along with Christ is blasphemous! How does the true church expand??? One believer witnesses to another the truth of the gospel...and thus faith gives birth to the fulfillment of Christ's vision. Hagee is merely exposing one aspect of avoiding a false gospel...whereby you must submit to the traditions of man which are idolatry if the attempt is made to dictate to man the requirement of salvation which is in contrast to the truth of the Scripture. Some may say that ordinary man cannot make such discernments and in response to those critics, I say that there is no mediator between God and man save that of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself who sits at the right hand of God Almighty and is ready at any moment to come and judge the quick and the dead...consider which group the reader belongs...is the reader quick to ascertain the life giving truth of the scriptures or the death dealing deception of the the devil? You decide, but remember this, when John Hagee breathes his last on this earth, the next instant he will be in the presence of the Lord God Almighty, Father, Son and by the power of the resurrection all those of us who believe.
In Christ,
Matthew R. Truax
Frank Rich said: "Any 12-year-old with a laptop could have vetted this preacher in 30 seconds, tops."
Reminds me of a Groucho Marx line:
'Why... a child of FIVE could do this... FETCH me a child of FIVE!'
Jeanette Doney said: "GOP didn’t abandon their guys. Obama does." And there, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with the GOP, and no small fraction of the American public. Doney and others seem to equate BACKBONE with intelligence. If you refuse to bend, Doney, maybe it means you're right and history is wrong. And, maybe, it means you're gonna BREAK instead...
Anytime someone chooses their ego over reality, RUN. Eventually, THAT person is gonna break, and you don't want to be near them when it happens. Bush's comfort is that the American economy is LARGE enough to bend for him. It's bent to the tune of $5 trillion in added debt, PLUS whats coming from Iraq (and YOU thought he'd paid for that? silly you). Bush wont bend. Stalwart Republicans never do. But the debt, and the international HATRED, they've gifted to their children is gonna BREAK us.
When it does, it'll be real comforting hearing them talk about what 'real' backbone looks like.
As when J Edgar Hoover remarked of surveillance information on Dr Martin Luther King, Jr, "this'll ruin the burrhead," the mainstream media and Hillary Clinton campaign are using out-of-context remarks to discredit a black minister and, by proxy, candidate. This guilt by association game is clearly special pleading, since the rules are different. Hillary's long involvement in a secretive, elitist, invitation-only fundamentalist outfit is not even discussed, while Wright's entire career is reduced to a few soundbites.
Not every Catholic wants birth control or even abortion outlawed, not every Methodist believes in alcohol prohibition, and not every parishioner of Trinity UCC in Chicago agrees with every utterance of Pastor Wright. Enough is enough.
"GOP didn't abandon their guys" because lilly white America is fine with what their wacko preachers have to say.
Obama, still being a politician, did what he had to in order from avoiding becoming a historical footnote...
...because of white attitudes.
Besides, Wright's ego is what became the obstacle.
During eight of those twenty years the media has been harping on Mr Obama was a Illinois Senator in Springfield which is a few hundred miles from Chicago where the Rev's church is . The media knows this but they mainly have a problem with this candidate in that if elected he will appoint the next head of the FCC . The next FCC director may destroy some of the control the GOP/media has over public opinion . W.J.C/H.R.C signed the law giving the GOP/corporatist the ability to own unlimited amounts of media which the GOP/corporatist bought up . The masses have always been controlled by allegations . The Greeks and the Romans wrote allegations on walls to influence the masses . Todays mass media is a very powerful tool in the political arena and those in control are not about to relinquish any of it .
weak poetry, strong sentiment
Bomb, Bomb Iran: A McCain Hagee-ography
“This Somonour bar to hym a stif burdoun†(Chaucer’s General Prologue, line 675)
What must I make of John Hagee’s call for
death as a promise of life—-of his dance
with a devil in a biblical trance,
of his knocking injudiciously on Armageddon’s door?
What can I gather from the words of they
who ignite the reptilian passions
of the righteously ignorant, night and day,
with our shared air waves’ amplitude-modulated truncheons?
The Mount has lost what once it signified;
its commanding ethic but written lore;
the Peacemakers and their Beatified
Brethren no longer, if ever they did, have the floor.
Voices are raised and rail in tedium
against The Other—-somehow his word faith
sanctifies Hagee’s nuanced odium;
policy is shaped on intolerance’s lathe.
National policy—-now influenced
by an intolerance-peddling rev’rend
whose anti-semitism is re-nuanced
as christian zionism—-claims to defend.
As exceptionalism must demand,
the “national interest†of this “homelandâ€
has become the litmus, indeed, the brand:
the fires of righteous hatred nicely fanned.
And McCain has actively sought this voice
to make holy his own continuum,
Bomb, bomb, bomb; we must bomb, bomb Iran.
Pascal’s wager immixed with Hobson’s choice.
John Hagee's Christian Zionist organization has direct ties to he White House. High ranking members of the Republican Party attended it's opening ceremony, although the President only sent a note.
This man, and his organization, are suspected of being responsible for the U.S. dragging its feet while the Israelis bombed Beirut back to the 1980's. This is a from a NY Times article at the time:
"At a dinner addressed by the Israeli ambassador, a handful of Republican senators and the chairman of the Republican Party, Mr. Hagee read greetings from President Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel and dispatched the crowd with a message for their representatives in Congress. Tell them to let Israel do their job of destroying the Lebanese militia, Hezbollah, Mr. Hagee said.
He called the conflict a battle between good and evil and said support for Israel was God's foreign policy.
The next day he took the same message to the White House.
Many conservative Christians say they believe that the president's support for Israel fulfills a biblical injunction to protect the Jewish state, which some of them think will play a pivotal role in the second coming."
John Hagee believes war with Iran and Russia are necessary to pave the way for this second coming.
And Jeremiah Wright tweaks noses for saying that American foreign policy has consequences?
We really need to wake up and shake off the Christian Fundamentalist nightmare that everyone is now accepting as normal.
It is, after all, white, rich and republican.
Surrounded by republicans, and having read the conservative blogs in the past year to see what way the wind was blowing, McCain was like the chaff beneath the other candidates. Then one by one the other candidates began to sink, and McCain rose slowly to the top. There were groans, disbelief, and a lot of negative comments about him. And then he was proclaimed the GOP candidate. And seemingly as one, the voters gathered around to worship at his feet.
Observing all this, I felt as I had in '04 when John Kerry suddenly rose to the top of the pack seemingly overnight. I wasn't paying as much attention to things then.
You can bet McCain's VP will either be another malleable personality, or one of the pack, if not Cheney.
Obama has repeatedly demonstrated his loyalty to the interests of the extremely wealthy, but somehow, they seem not to trust him. Perhaps it's because he has made the mistake of occasionally saying something truthful, like his response to the question about which candidate MLK would be supporting if he were alive (paraphrasing) 'He wouldn't support any of us. He'd be organizing to put pressure on all of us'
Hillary does have a longer record of service to the Waltons, the Tysons, et al, and maybe they feel she is more likely to demonstrate the virtues of an honest politician, i.e. one who stays bought. She remains, however, unlikely to receive the nomination of her nominal party. Will she be further disappointed when McCain does not select her as a running mate? Will you be among those not shown on television protesting at his inauguration?
The Wright would-be scandal seems to be more about patriotism (in the Republican frame of "my country right or wrong") than about race.
Would Obama's ex-pastor have been white, a "God damn America" clip would probably have been just as controversial.
The fact is that it is actually a sign of true patriotism -that is, one inseparable from one's moral conscience- to curse at one's country when it fails so many of its professed values and betrays so many of its children (see poverty rates, health-uninsured rates, incarcation rates, crime rates, capital punishment rates, crumbling infrastructure, education, global warming, unchecked militarism, insane foreign policy, etc).
The way things are, there is something obscene about someone just saying "God bless America".
It's the 21st century translation for "Let them eat cake". "Let your grandchildren eat cake".
Frank Rich is only partly right; people despise Rev. Wright not just for his race but also for his views. If a black pastor were to rail against homosexuality (as many do) they would not be hated so much. Likewise, if a white preacher who happened to be friends with a Prez candidate said the things that Rev. Wright said -- the same things, not some supposedly equally absurd comments from a right wing perspective -- he or she would be vilified too.
roncypert:
You're right: technically it was a criminal act. If an ordinary person such as you or I made such a suggestion in public prosecution could -- and very well might -- follow. But this was Pat Robertson (didn't he call for Chavez to be assassinated too? It was one of those idiot televangelists -- anyway, also a crime). Public threats are against the law. Even a private citizen threatening the life of another private citizen is against the law. But, as I said, it's Pat Robertson. When you're one of God's annointed, you can get away with murder. So to speak.
Ideology is blind.
We shouldn't leave out Pat Robinson's calling for someone to nuke the State Department, which he did on his television program/network.
I deemed that to be criminal; however, as is too often the case, no one else did, apparently.
GOP didn't abandon their guys. Obama does.
It is an electronic lynching, pure and simple.
I am under no delusion that such a lynching is reserved for just black candidates. Such treatment is de rigeur for all comers as we self destruct. If anyone can pull us back from the abyss, I think it would be Obama--Heaven help us if he is not elected.
Otherwise it will not be pretty as we try to blame the Arabs for our decades of wasteful energy use and failure to make any plans for what has been known was coming. Hillary has already let us know that she would break up OPEC.