It’s admittedly difficult for a political controversy to pick up steam when major news outlets pretend the story doesn’t exist. But John McCain’s embrace of anti-Catholic evangelist John Hagee is starting to look like the littler scandal that could.
Not that the major dailies are helping. The NYT today ran an 855-word story on Hillary Clinton questioning Barack Obama’s crisis-management abilities. At the end of the article, as an afterthought, the Times spent two paragraphs noting that some are raising questions about McCain’s Hagee endorsement. The Washington Post, meanwhile, hasn’t noted the controversy at all.
But now, at a minimum, we have an AP feed.
John McCain is refusing to renounce the endorsement of a prominent Texas televangelist who Democrats say peddles anti-Catholic and other intolerant speech.
Instead, the Republican presidential candidate issued a statement Friday afternoon saying he had unspecified disagreements with the San Antonio megachurch leader, John Hagee. Hagee endorsed him at a news conference Wednesday in San Antonio.
“However, in no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee’s views, which I obviously do not,” McCain said in the statement.
To report that “Democrats say” Hagee “peddles anti-Catholic and other intolerant speech” is a little silly. First, the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue has been leading the charge here, and he’s anything but a Dem. Second, there are some objective truths here, and by any reasonable measure, Hagee’s ugly rhetoric is clearly both anti-Catholic and intolerant.
McCain is trying to play a little game here, and so far, he’s losing.
“Hagee’s hate speech has no place in public discourse, and McCain’s embrace of this figure raises serious questions about John McCain’s character and his willingness to do anything to win,” said Tom McMahon, executive director of the Democratic National Committee.
McCain was pressed on the issue Friday morning in Round Rock, Texas. Hagee “supports what I stand for and believe in,” McCain said.
“When he endorses me, that does not mean that I endorse everything that he stands for and believes in,” McCain said. “I don’t have to agree with everyone who endorses my campaign.”
That’s true, but context matters. Hagee, a very prominent figure in the evangelical community, is anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim, and anti-gay. He believes Jews are responsible for bringing persecution upon themselves, he believes U.S. foreign policy should actively help bring about the Rapture, and he believes Americans’ sins led to Hurricane Katrina’s destruction. Confronted with these inconvenient facts, McCain won’t denounce or reject any of this.
Put it this way: Hagee is to Catholics as Farrakhan is to Jews. If Obama publicly embraced Farrakhan and said, “I don’t endorse everything that he stands for and believes in,” the uproar would be deafening, and justifiably so.
Even Time’s Joe Klein argued that McCain has a choice to make.
A McCain rejection of Hagee’s support would be seen as another sign of weakness by Rush and such. An acceptance of Hagee’s support would spell trouble for McCain with catholics and sane people everywhere. So, what’s it to be, Senator?
As Glenn Greenwald, who highlighted some decent coverage of the story from CBS News, noted, this controversy is slowly “picking up steam.” Frankly, I’m hard pressed to imagine how political reporters can overlook it — McCain, who condemned Bush’s relationship with the anti-Catholic Bob Jones University eight years ago, has cozied up to a notorious bigot. McCain’s getting slammed from the left, right, and center, and can’t think of a compelling response.
This one isn’t going away.