Alex Blaze

Washington Post shills for the far right, unsurprisingly

Filed By Alex Blaze | August 29, 2009 12:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, Media
Tags:

If you haven't read the Washington Post profile that fawns over NOM executive director Brian Brown, please protect your keyboard from vomit if you click over the link to go read it.

I don't really get what the news value is in the piece, nor do I understand why it had to be so sycophantic, boo-hooing with him over how some people think that his work is homophobic (he's only saying that gays cause scary weather... what's so crazy about that?). None of the usual reasons for the Washington Post's typically worshipful stance towards conservatives or people in power apply here - it's the XD of an advocacy group we're talking about, not a pol.

The only thing I can think of is that WaPo staff writer Monica Hesse is herself a conservative with an axe to grind. It's the answer supported by Occam's Razor if we're looking for a reason why a supposedly-objective journalist would repeatedly refer to one side of a national debate, a hard-right activist who makes Pat Robertson seem mainstream, as the only "rational" person in the debate. The parts where Hesse insists that Brown's argument is based on "history" (it's as much history as saying that the Laffer Curve is based on "economics" or that the rush to the Iraq War was based on "the best intelligence available") and where she goes into mantra mode, repeating over and over that he's "rational," are the real kickers.... Did she get a chance to rim Brian Brown while she was conducting the interview, or is she making up for lost time?

Consider:

Brown worries about that, about being squeezed out of the debate.

"The racial bigot comparison is the most troubling part of the argument," Brown says. It's horrible, offensive, deliberately incendiary. He thinks it is "irrational," a word he uses often.

It is irrational when the opposition points to polls suggesting that most young people support gay marriage. "People mature," he says. Their views change.

It is irrational when people believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage is an inevitability: "We have the people. We have not had such an organized force" before, Brown says.[...]

"I think it's irrational that up until 10 years ago, all of these societies agreed with my position" on same-sex marriage, he says, and now suddenly that position is bigotry. "The opposition is trying to marginalize and suppress us," he says. "Usually, that happens with positions that are actually minorities. But we're the majority."

Does he ever think that what he sees as an abrupt historical shift is, perhaps, progress? Does it hurt his feelings when people accuse him of prejudice?

"I think," he says, "it's irrational."

Oh, yeah. That's some objective journalism there. It goes well with some of her other articles on gay culture and polyamory. They're actually not that bad, which makes me think that this profile of Brian Brown has less to do with Hesse's political beliefs, and more to do with sycophancy to power and a desire to speak to Real Americans, which are defining features of the Washington Post.

You see, whether Monica Hesse really likes gay people or not in real life doesn't matter, nor does Brian Brown's homophobia. What matters is that he represents the beer-guzzling Real Americans, a caricature that beltway journalists buy into any chance they get. Of course he's rational and sane and mainstream - he's against same-sex marriage! While Hesse takes a few pot-shots at Falwell and Robertson, if she were writing a profile of them fifteen years ago she would be calling them mainstream and rational. The characters change, but the themes stay the same.

And, of course, the WaPo will continue to think that it's sittin' in the middle, particularly because of blog posts like this one. Rightwingers complain about them all the time, and the left does too, so if you forget about the fact that the rightwing always complains, it's a nice little formula that puts their paper in the center of the political spectrum.

At least we can add Brian Brown to the list of homophobes who have gay friends:

His faith is important to him, but in his arguments he is ever the PhD candidate, addressing questions and dismissing counterarguments with fascination.

"I have gay people who are friends and family," he says. "We can disagree on all sorts of things and still care about each other." And later, "Of course, I have to take their arguments seriously. This issue is important. Ideas have consequences."

Awesome! No one who's homophobic would ever say that they have gay friends! Now he joins the ranks of pro-gay advocates like Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin, Rick Warren, and everyone else caught being a homophobic douchebag publicly.


Recent Entries Filed under Media:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


The article is disgusting, but it's heartening to read the comments at WaPo, which (at least at this time yesterday) were about 5-to-1 anti-NOM and pro-gay.

Red Seven, and update on your stats.... the comments are 99.5% in disapproval of the article and NOM. The usual haters barely made a showing.

I take this as a great sign of things to come. If you haven't read the article, please do so, then sample the comments.

Yeah, the comments are actually fairly good on there! Why is it that they can see through the BS but the WaPo couldn't?

In the article, a few paragraphs down:

"Apparently no one at NOM had realized that 2M4M, the hip-sounding tag they'd chosen for the initiative, is also the abbreviation favored by gay couples looking for a threesome."

I almost fell out of my chair laughing. But I guess we always knew prominent right wingers to be intelligent, fact checking individuals...

They're working on trying to fix that, that's why NOM is this week launching their new campaign: "Be Daring--Support Marriage!" They're already stamping out little plastic bracelets with the initialism on there ready to hand out to good little conservative school kids. There will be more B.D.S.M. merchandising to come. They're expecting it to be the most successful Conservative Christian 4-initial solidarity and awareness campaign since that busy Jerusalem sign maker spelled Jesus' name wrong, and got his title mixed up. They're hoping it way outsells those half-assed WWJD people!

Can't wait for the BDSM Christmas album featuring a reunited Creed!