in case you were still unclear on this, Bill Donohue is a truly repulsive human being.
This really isn’t about whether Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen should or should not have been hired or fired by the Edwards campaign. This is about whether a genuine racist and anti-Semite should be treated by the mainstream media as some kind of authority on all things Catholic, simply because he’s entitled his little fringe group the “Catholic League.”
I’d suggest that the answer should be “no.” When is the media going to wise up to this phony?
UPDATE: Also, if you’re looking for more repulsive humans, check out some of Amanda Marcotte’s new correspondents. Kudos to her for printing this stuff — that took some guts.
Please share widely!
If you’re a producer who’s not simpatico to socially conservative Catholics, this guy’s a boar.
<
p>
If you’re a producer who is simpatico to socially conservative Catholics, this guy isn’t winning you any friends.
<
p>
The “gook joke” didn’t disturb me nearly as much as his bullying and patronizing did.
and C.J. Doyle of the MA based “Catholic Action League” and Carol McKinley of Faithful Voice, and …
<
p>
They need “balance.”
<
p>
Besides people frothing on about the priest abuse scandal being a creation of the liberal media makes for good ratings, right?
…they need controversy. Passionate controversy. That is what draws (some) viewers, and it is the (some) viewers that build ratings, that they can sell to idiot advertisers.
<
p>
In an advertising-driven medium, in which advertising rates are determined by ratings, it is only the numbers of viewers that the senders can attract that matters. It doesn’t matter about the “quality” of the listeners (example: a few months ago, it was reported that the median age of WRKO listeners was 59 male and 63 female, not exactly the prime target for advertisers) but the number.
<
p>
And, for a reason that eludes me, passionate blood-warming controversy seems to attract right wingnuts more than it does left wingnuts. Why? I have a few speculations, that I might assemble into hypotheses, but I won’t present them here.
<
p>
Regarding the difference between right wingnuts and left wingnuts, I’ll give merely one example: I find Randi Rhodes positively annoying. She has a fifteen minute program that Air America Radio has extended to three or four hours. Give me a Stephanie Miller (not Air America) any day. She and her crew do the same thing that Randi does, but with humor. Right wingnuts just want to rant. Left wingnuts, well, maybe, but not so much.
…The reason that the Glob reporters go to the idiot Camenker is that they have so many words to fill to make out a story. The Glob reporters have Rolodexes of people they can get quotations from. And they go to their Rolodexes to find people that they can get quotations from, and they get the quotations, and include them in their stories. I know how the game is played.
<
p>
It really is as simple as that. The question that you should be asking yourself is exactly how people like Camenker get into the Glob reporters’ Rolodexes. Who is financing him, and why. It doesn’t take a lot of money to finance a Brian Camenker, or a Charles Johnson (the right-wing wacko who runs the Little Green Goofballs website) for that matter, but who is financing them? Follow the money trail.
<
p>
Always–follow the money.
I know several presentable, intelligent alternatives to Mr. Cammenker, for instance – people who aren’t racist bigots who have genuine, deep, thoughtful concerns about social issues. You will NEVER find them in the Glob. Because people might think they make some sense.
<
p>
In the name of ‘balance’, they choose to highlight the absolute wacko fringe – think Dobson – instead of people open to discussion with controversial ideas – think Sowell or Hewitt.
<
p>
All conservatives are not NASCAR and tobacco addicts married to their sisters. Now THAT is a controversial premise for the Glob!
Thanks for linking to us David!
It’s we who should be thanking you.