If This Is Liberal
The idea that the Fourth Estate looks out for anything other than corporate bottom lines gets more and more laughable by the day. From glossing over McCain “gaffes” as “grandpa forgot to take his pills again” moments, as opposed to being a balding Bush clone (no wonder McCain called the media his base in 2000), to today’s drive-by in the New York Times commenting on hostility toward Obama in the Muslim world for being a heretic. The argument rests of a faulty premise that anyone who made it past the third grade would understand the error in. To leave a religion, you would need to have first been a member of it. It is claimed that since Obama’s father was a Muslim, he is therefore also a Muslim. Small problem: the Qur’an never states such a thing. Well, unless you count this:
As explained upon in the oral traditions:
So either Sen. Obama is in the clear, or Sens. Clinton and McCain also need to worry about being labeled as heretics. After all, we’re all Muslims. Or, perhaps, we should go with the more obvious answer: people are members of the faiths to which they are active adherents. Believe in Jesus as your savior: Christian. Recite the Torah: Jewish. Could go on, but the picture is very clear at this point.
The whole underlying issue is a form of cultural acceptable bigotry. If someone had approached the Times wanting to run an editorial critical of Lieberman’s Judaism in 2000, they would have been laughed out of the room. If Richardson had won the nomination this year, ditto with blasting his Hispanic heritage. Many on the right would love to deploy direct racial appeals (this is what the Wright controversy really was), but instead must settle for shameless, and clearly false, claims about Sen. Obama’s faith.