<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Eye on Winer &#187; Rev. Wright</title>
	<atom:link href="http://eyeonwiner.org/archives/tag/rev-wright/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://eyeonwiner.org</link>
	<description>Keeping an eye on Dave Winer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 04:39:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>An Apt Comparison</title>
		<link>http://eyeonwiner.org/archives/2008/an-apt-comparison</link>
		<comments>http://eyeonwiner.org/archives/2008/an-apt-comparison#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>EyeOnWiner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rev. Wright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eyeonwiner.org/?p=386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today Dave compared the media&#8217;s handling of the Karla Faye Tucker case to their handling of Rev. Wright. In so many ways, the comparison could not be any more appropriate. Dave&#8217;s logic on Rev. Wright goes like this: people were attacking Obama with clips from this pastor. Because Obama is &#8220;good&#8221;, Wright must also be [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today Dave compared the media&#8217;s handling of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Faye_Tucker">Karla Faye Tucker</a> case to their handling of Rev. Wright. In so many ways, the comparison could not be any more appropriate.</p>

<p>Dave&#8217;s logic on Rev. Wright goes like this: people were attacking Obama with clips from this pastor. Because Obama is &#8220;good&#8221;, Wright must also be good. Because he&#8217;s good, those clips must be &#8220;taken out of context&#8221; and the reports about them misleading. Because Wright was kind and human during a TV interview (that he did specifically to try to help Obama), that proves he&#8217;s good.</p>

<p><span id="more-386"></span></p>

<p>Surprising to nobody, but in the interest of disclosure: I don&#8217;t plan to vote for Obama in November. That said, I don&#8217;t particularly care about the Wright clips. I find them disturbing and the product of a patently silly line of reasoning, but I don&#8217;t attribute any of those qualities to Obama simply because he sat through some of Wright&#8217;s sermons. That&#8217;s a pretty ridiculous logical gap to be leaping.</p>

<p>That said, the media didn&#8217;t get the Wright story &#8220;wrong&#8221;. Wright said all of the things that they claim he said and, whatever Dave might insist, &#8220;context&#8221; did nothing to make them sound any better. So he goes on TV, puts on his &#8220;I love everybody&#8221; face, and makes nice with a soft interviewer. That doesn&#8217;t mean he&#8217;s actually good/smart/nice/kind/loving. It means he can appear that way on TV. It doesn&#8217;t mean that he doesn&#8217;t have some crazy, backwards beliefs. And it most <em>certainly</em> doesn&#8217;t mean that he never said (or didn&#8217;t mean) the things he preached in the video clips.</p>

<p>But, in Dave&#8217;s world, once you go on TV and make nice with the camera, your sins just melt away &#8212; which is what makes the Tucker example so perfect. Tucker committed an act of unspeakable depravity. She took the lives of two innocent people, and did it in such a vicious and violent way that the State of Texas (and a jury of her peers) felt the only acceptable punishment was death.</p>

<p>The fact that she went on TV and claimed to have found Jesus and changed her ways didn&#8217;t change anything. She had still killed two people. Even if we assume that she wasn&#8217;t lying to try to save her own life (something some people will never be convinced of), so what? What&#8217;s done was done, and there were consequences. (Also, for full disclosure, I don&#8217;t support the death penalty for a number of reasons that are beyond the scope of this post)</p>

<p>That&#8217;s precisely the case here. Rev. Wright said some things that made people uncomfortable. Him making nice on TV doesn&#8217;t change that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eyeonwiner.org/archives/2008/an-apt-comparison/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

