Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn right. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn right. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Chủ Nhật, 19 tháng 2, 2012

Was MSNBC right to fire Pat Buchanan?

The cable news channel parts ways with its veteran conservative commentator after his latest book gets slammed as offensive MSNBC announced Thursday that it was dropping longtime political analyst Pat Buchanan, following a bitter controversy over his book, Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? The cable news channel had suspended Buchanan four months ago after critics said the book — with chapters such as "The End of White America" — was homophobic, anti-Semitic, and racist. Buchanan called the decision "an undeniable victory for the blacklisters" who lash out at anything challenging liberal orthodoxy. Did MSNBC make the right move, or was it wrong to silence Buchanan?

It's about time: MSNBC should have gotten rid of Buchanan a long time ago, Ari Rabin-Havt, executive vice president of liberal watchdog Media Matters for America, tells the Associated Press. "He's been making the same racially insensitive, anti-Semitic and homophobic statements for the past 50 years." This book "was not his first, nor his worst offense," but it's certainly more proof Buchanan does not deserve a public platform on any cable news channel.
"Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan dropped from MSNBC"

MSNBC should be ashamed: "I disagree with Pat Buchanan" on just about everything — from World War II to marriage equality to immigration, says Andrew Sullivan at The Daily Beast. He's a "sometimes outrageous, a flame-thrower," but he's also an intellectually honest and decent man who has "thought carefully about his extreme out-of-the-mainstream views." Shame on MSNBC for trying to silence him, and taking "another step backward from real debate on cable 'news.'"
"The hounding of Pat Buchanan"

This is actually a win for conservatives: Buchanan wasn't a legitimate spokesman for the right, says David Zurawick at the Baltimore Sun. He was a snarling troll that the increasingly liberal MSNBC presented "as the nasty, mean-spirited face of conservative values." Whenever he said something veering toward hate speech he "confirmed the worst stereotypes that liberals believed about the right." Without him maybe MSNBC will focus on honest debate, instead of cynically airing propaganda.
"MSNBC drops Pat Buchanan — and that's good for cable TV, country"

View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Other stories from this topic:

Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter

View the original article here

Thứ Sáu, 17 tháng 2, 2012

Will Catholic Bishops and the Religious Right Save Obama?

What is most striking about the showdown over contraceptive freedom is not the political victory that President Obama earned by standing up for women's reproductive rights, although his Republican adversaries are certainly helping him to make the most of it. Those adversaries don't seem to realize they have fallen into a trap, whether the White House set them up intentionally or not.

While the Catholic bishops and their allies on the religious right insist that this is an argument over the First Amendment, their true, longstanding purpose now stands revealed to the public. They would begin by imposing their dogma on every woman unlucky enough to work for an employer who shares it — an agenda that is deeply unpopular even among the Catholic faithful, let alone the rest of the American electorate. Then they would impose it on everyone, as the theorists of the religious right suggest every time they deny the separation of church and state.

The bishops have nothing to lose except their flock, whose respect for the hierarchy has plunged anyway over its resistance to reform and its failure to punish abuses far graver and more sinful than contraception. If they had to stand for election, not many of them would be left standing. And if they had to face a referendum on this current matter, they would lose resoundingly to the president, according to the latest survey data.

In a poll taken last Friday for the Coalition to Protect Women's Health Care, Public Policy Polling found that 57 percent of Catholic voters endorse the Obama "compromise" that would ensure continued prescription birth control for women working in religious institutions, without requiring those institutions to pay directly for that coverage. Only 29 percent sided with the bishops, the religious right and the Republicans , while 5 percent actually think the religious institutions should pay for contraceptive coverage regardless of their doctrine. The cross-tabs of the PPP poll show that Latino Catholics, Catholic independent voters and Catholic women support the Obama solution by wide margins. (The most recent poll by Fox News Channel shows the same overwhelming approval for the president's position among the general public, with 61 percent of voters on his side versus only 34 percent against.)

Those statistics are no threat to the bishops, of course, but represent a profound problem for the Republican leaders and candidates who have signed up for this male geriatric crusade against modernity. Mitt Romney, for instance, seems to believe that by stoking evangelical paranoia about a supposed "war on religion" by Obama, he will subdue evangelical paranoia about his Mormonism (which, by the way, expressly permits birth control). His pandering commenced when he announced his 2012 candidacy, but grew still more intense this week when he accused the president of perpetrating an "assault" on religion.

Such tactics are unlikely to placate the prejudices arrayed against Romney — and even if they did, he will pay a very high price next fall for joining the angriest and most extreme culture warriors on this issue. Congressional Republicans will be courting the same danger if, as promised, they propose legislation that would overturn the Obama compromise and deprive women working for religious institutions of equal rights to contraceptive services.

The president should hold fast. He has proved that it is possible to uphold the principle of full access to birth control, which has been the pro-family social policy of the American majority for half a century, while respecting the religious convictions of all Americans. The wild ranting of his enemies is only helping him now — and may yet ruin them in November.

Joe Conason is the editor in chief of NationalMemo.com. To find out more about Joe Conason, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM


View the original article here

Thứ Năm, 9 tháng 2, 2012

Is America right to still hate Michael Vick?

According to an annual Forbes list of the country's most hated athletes, Americans still aren't ready to forgive the QB for his dogfighting scandal

Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Michael Vick is the country's most loathed sports star, at least according to Forbes' annual list of America's most disliked athletes. (Sixty percent of those surveyed dislike Vick.) Also on this year's list are Tiger Woods, LeBron James, Alex Rodriguez, former Mr. Kardashian Kris Humphries, Detroit Lions lineman Ndamukong Suh, and NASCAR's temperamental racer Kurt Busch. The electrifying Vick has already served time in federal prison over his role in an illegal underground dogfighting ring, and after returning to the NFL in 2010, Vick was honored as the league's comeback player of the year. Is it time for America to forgive him?

Real football fans have already forgiven Vick: Vick's past crime "still resonates with many Americans," says Jonathan Tamari at Philly.com. And "casual fans overwhelmingly still don't like him." But if you look closer, 60 percent of "hardcore" NFL fans actually like the Eagles QB. "Big football fans care more about his play than" his criminal past. And on the field, Vick is a star.
"Vick, TO among most disliked athletes"

But Vick's problems go beyond dogfighting: Vick made a "big splash" with his return in 2010, but he "underperformed in 2011," says Doug Farrar at Yahoo. Don't forget: Vick is getting older, and he's spent quite a bit of time on the injury list. Vick's mobile, fleet-footed style — which once made him one of the league's most exhilarating players — is finally "catching up to him," and has left him quite banged up. Is it any wonder Americans aren't enamored with him?
"Most disliked athlete? America still hasn't forgiven Michael Vick"

Vick isn't even the most interesting part of this list: The real shocker is Lions defensive lineman Ndamukong Suh, says Will Brinson at CBS Sports. "Suh's lack of popularity is a total 180-degree turn, as he was on the list of most popular athletes just four months ago." (Of course, that was before he stomped on an opposing player during a nationally televised game on Thanksgiving Day.) "Fortunately for Suh, an incident-free 2012 will go a long way towards cleaning up his image... Vick, who served actual prison time, as well as Tiger, who suffered through a public infidelity scandal... have a much higher hill to climb if they want to regain their popularity."
"Suh, Vick, Plax highlight most-disliked athletes"

View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Other stories from this topic:

Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter

View the original article here