Regular readers are, by now, all too familiar with John McCain’s inexplicable association with radical preacher Rod Parsley, but it’s encouraging that at least a couple of news outlets are starting to pick up on the significance of this. Today, ABC News is on the case.
You’ll notice, of course, that despite Parsley’s record of sheer lunacy, McCain nevertheless said he was “honored” to have Parsley’s support. Indeed, McCain — who denounced Obama a couple of weeks ago for some of his associations, and demanded that Obama “apologize” for people he knows — called Parsley “one of the truly great leaders in America,” “a moral compass,” and a “spiritual guide.”
Rod Parsley is, by most decent standards, something of a religious fanatic. And yet, McCain not only treats him as some kind of hero, McCain also reached out for his political support, and has refused to distance himself from either Parsley or Parsley’s record of insane rhetoric.
This has to matter. Reasonable people can probably assume that McCain does not share Parsley’s radical worldview, but as Kevin explained very well, “[M]ainstream American needs to understand that this kind of stuff is out there. And not just out there, but tolerated and catered to by the modern Republican Party. It’s toxic, and the people who spew this stuff need to be made toxic too. It’s time for McCain to reject and denounce.”
Now, the ABC News report emphasizes Parsley’s obvious hatred of Islam. Yglesias makes the case that, regardless of merit, this isn’t necessarily a political disaster for McCain.
[A]nti-Muslim bigotry has a large constituency in the United States so it’s not a political weakness to be affiliated with it. Similarly, it’s true that having a president who likes to associate himself with anti-Muslim bigotry would be a disaster for American foreign policy and national security, but since the essence of McCain’s foreign policy vision is that he wants to maximize the number and duration of wars this won’t actually be a problem for him. Ross shows that McCain is a huge hypocrite, but basically we know that already.
Fair enough. But let’s not forget that the extent of Parsley’s hate goes well beyond one religious minority.
Parsley has written several books outlining his fundamentalist religious outlook, including the 2005 Silent No More. In this work, Parsley decries the “spiritual desperation” of the United States, and he blasts away at the usual suspects: activist judges, civil libertarians who advocate the separation of church and state, the homosexual “culture” (“homosexuals are anything but happy and carefree”), the “abortion industry,” and the crass and profane entertainment industry.
Best of all, his rhetoric frequently includes what sounds like appeals to violence, telling his followers, “I came to incite a riot! Man your battle stations. Ready your weapons.” (One wants to assume he’s speaking metaphorically, but it’s not entirely clear.)
Indeed, while the ABC News report highlights Parsley’s unhinged attitude towards Muslims, my friends at Right Wing Watch put together their own video with some more of this clown’s greatest hits.
A few weeks ago, Tim Russert said the media would pay more attention to McCain’s radical preacher allies “if there was video.” Well, guess what, Tim, you’re in luck. All you have to do now is put it on the air.
Post Script: I realize the obvious response from Republicans is that the Jeremiah Wright situation matters far more, because Obama was a member of Wright’s Christian congregation. McCain belongs to a church, but neither Parsley nor John Hagee were ever McCain’s pastor.
I’ve never found this compelling. McCain sought out the support of crazy people, whom most decent people would find pretty offensive. He knew, or at least should have known, about their insane worldviews, but nevertheless cozied up to them, asked for their support, campaigned with them, publicly praised them, and refused to denounce them.
No, he never sat in their pews. But how does that make it better? If Obama sought out Louis Farrakhan, campaigned with him, praised him, capitalized on his endorsement, and then hesitated to denounce him, would the media give him a pass? Would Dems be able to argue that it doesn’t matter because Obama was never a member of Farrakhan’s house of worship?