Not since Michael Weinstein declared Sarah Palin a “misogynist” have those two names been placed together with such controversy as they were this week. Now, amazingly enough, Weinstein’s example is being used to defend…Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin is apparently being taken to task by some for appropriating (or misusing) the term “blood libel.” From a public video:
Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.
From the Christian Science Monitor, Read more…
The attempted assassination of US Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) generated an interesting “distancing” exercise on several fronts, with regard to allusions of weaponry and political vitriol. There are indications the “targeting” symbology from the political action committee of Sarah Palin has been removed. Keith Olbermann “apologized” for any implications of calls for violence in his own prior speech while saying “violence…has no place in our Democracy” (Thomas Jefferson might take issue).
In a fascinating display of naiveté, an internet blogger even attempted to play the “distancing” role for Michael Weinstein. Said Christine Woodman: Read more…
According to the Advocate, a homosexual advocacy publication, Michael Weinstein’s Military Religious Freedom Foundation is on a new crusade: supporting the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Comically, Weinstein, who has been taken to task for his displays of Constitutional ignorance, again displays his lack of knowledge with regard to the ongoing controversy. The Advocate asked him…twice…what power the President had to repeal the policy on homosexuals in the military. Twice, the former White House counsel talked vaguely about executive orders without explaining how an executive order can overturn a law passed by Congress (Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 37, § 654). (Answer: it can’t.)
When asked about who the MRFF is “fighting,” Weinstein again displayed his tendency to make up his own definitions of religious groups–and then to assign people to them as he saw fit.
We’ve got this fanatical religiosity in fundamental Christianity… Read more…
Recent Comments