Civilization vs The Big Babies

by digby

I just saw that fatuous gasbag Bill Bennett on CNN talking about the cartoons and was reminded once again of the seemingly limitless hypocricy of the wingnuts. I realize that it is futile to point this out to them since they have completely abandoned all claims to intellectual integrity, but we should document these atrocities anyway if only to keep things straight in our own minds. Luckily, intrepid bloggers are on the case.

First we have Kip from Long Story Short Pier subbing for Julia:

So lemme see if I got this right:

* The editorial page of a newspaper—a community organ—is a perfectly appropriate place to print ill-conceived, unfunny cartoons for pretty much the sole purpose of mocking the faith of some members of that community, and it’s irresponsible to voice even quasi-official disapproval despite the shockingly murderous backlash because, hey, free speech, they should grow up and suck it up and learn to deal;

* However, a memorial service—for a woman whose life has been dedicated to the fight for peace and justice and damn well grabbing the arc of the universe and bending it with her own bare hands—is a staggeringly inappropriate place to say much of anything at all about the fight that was her life, and the very particular strife and injustice yet afflicting her world and her country, because, hey, the president might be embarrassed, and how dare they carry on like that.

Being ‘appropriate” is so difficult these days isn’t it? Embarrassing a craven opportunistic president whose sole claim to civil rights credibility is having his picture taken with black children and appointing every black conservative in the country to his cabinet, is a terrible, terrible faux pas. Printing cartoons guaranteed to inflame millions of people in order to make an obscure point is the height of principled behavior. Ok.

And then there’s this gem from Arthur:

The Bush war propagandists proclaimed with deafening unanimity: “Newsweek is directly responsible for the rioting and the deaths that occurred in Afghanistan after its story appeared. Freedom of the press doesn’t mean you can or should publish anything you think is a ‘story.’ We’re at war! It is the war between civilization and barbarism! Newsweek hurt America and helped our enemies. They’re on the other side! That’s the evil leftwing media for you!” In terms of what follows, let’s remember just two examples I noted in my first post about the Newsweek story: Drudge’s huge headline: “THE NEWSWEEK RIOTS,” and the phrase that, predictably, Michelle Malkin injected into every war propagandist’s discussion: “NEWSWEEK LIED. PEOPLE DIED.”

The allocation of blame and moral culpability was of particular interest, especially given the rightwing propagandists’ usual praises for personal and moral “responsibility.” As one perceptive commentator noted:

What is singularly lacking from the rightwing hatefest currently sweeping across the Internets is condemnation of the killers themselves. … The rightwing line is therefore that these murder[er]s are within their rights, are acting with justifiable outrage in killing people because of what was allegedly done, or not done, to their precious book.

He went on:

As everyone from Glenn Reynolds to the fools at Powerline to the moronic Michelle Malkin line up to condemn Newsweek, the only thing that matters to them is that they can score a few points against what they perceive to be the dreaded leftwing media. If that means turning a blind blog to the Islamic terrorists murdering people just because of a true-or-false account of damage being done to the Koran then that’s just fine by them.

Score one for the case of Islamic terrorism courtesy of the rightwing scream machine.

[…]

But in the case of the cartoons, the war propagandists now tell us that every news organ in the world is obliged to print them. Nothing less than the future of civilization is at stake. I do not exaggerate: “This really is a case of civilization against the barbarians.”

(Read the whole thing.)

Can you believe it? The comparison to the Newsweak flap could not be more apt. The entire wingnut apparatus went completely around the bend, blaming Newsweak for killing people because they printed a tiny blurb reporting that Korans had been desecrated. No pictures. No “depictions.” The story was old news and had been reported before. But when cynical political actors in the mid-east stoked the hot coals of Muslim anger, the right didn’t blame the leaders or the rioters — they blamed Newsweak. Indeed, they claimed the magazine was personally responsible for the carnage. And the poor rioters were just responding as one would expect to such a heinous insult to their religion.

I wonder what it’s like living with no intellectual consistency at all? Do you suppose they find it confusing? But, I guess they don’t really need any. They’re good team players. Just like the “barbarians.”

And speaking of cartoons: what about the garment rending just last week over Tom Toles’ political cartoon depicting “the army” as a man without arms or legs? Yes, nobody rioted. They just whined and pouted and stomped their tiny feet about how “mean” it was.

It wasn’t a case of civilization against the barbarians, it’s true. It was a case of civilization against the whiny ass titty babies.

Update: Oh, and that poker addicted racist calumniator is hardly one to to be going here:

ZOGBY: The policy of the Catholics during the Inquisition is not synonymous with my church, nor is the policy of the Islamic extremists synonymous with the Prophet Mohammed. Let’s be fair and use one standard. I agree, we have a double standard and frankly I think the way this story is cast is the wrong double standard.

BENNETT: Here’s the standard. Catholicism is as Catholicism does, Judaism is as Judaism does, and by God Islam is as Islam does and what it’s doing right now I wouldn’t wanted to associated with

.

As a practicing Catholic, he probably needs to stop and think about that a little bit. You don’t have to go back to the Inquisition to see that he’s on very slippery ground. Bennett complained about the priest scandal, but he very much remained “associated” with his church. Decades upon decades of covering up for and enabling these priests by the highest members of Bennett’s church aren’t wiped away by throwing a handful of sick men in jail. To this day the Church has refused to adequately deal with that horror. Bennett has some nerve lecturing to John Zogby about the morality of his religion when the shards of his glass house are lying all over the floor. Muslims should not be held to any higher standard than he is.

(To be clear, I’m not saying that Catholicism is inherently “evil” either. All religion has a dark side. But it’s outrageous to cast aspersions on Islam’s “theology” with the inquisition, witch burning and covering up for pedophile priests all being part of Christian history — and in each case there was ample “theology” that could be called up to support their actions. It ain’t the faith, it’s the humans who interpret it and abuse the power it gives them.

.