There is no doubt that Rolling Stone is a magazine with an extreme liberal bias and that, unfortunately, that bias in journalism has become more obvious in the tone of their political articles. I say “unfortunate” because many of the articles contain excellent information and raise excellent questions and issues. The tone of these articles, though, demands caution.
Their recent article, Michelle Bachmann’s Holy War, is a case in point. It is full of some very interesting facts, but the tone often crosses the line into emotional name-calling and strong, vicious editorializing. They would probably reply that a response to this insane presidential candidate requires strong words, and I’d be tempted to agree. In spite of its bias, the facts that are presented warrant careful consideration.
Michelle Bachmann is a Republican presidential candidate in American politics and a front line spokesman for the Tea Party. To put it bluntly, her religious agenda is scary. She believes that “No Child Left Behind” and AmeriCorps are government conspiracies to brainwash children. She has railed against the U.N. International Baccalaureate program because it refused to accept that Christianity was superior to all other religions. What does she advocate for education. Well, she graduated from a law school committed to advancing Biblical standards in law and politics. She was involved in a charter school system where she was ultimately forced to resign because she imposed Christian and Biblical doctrine, “pushing the teaching of creationism and banning the showing of the Disney movie Aladdin because it promoted witchcraft”.
Bachmann has also been quoted as saying, after her husband insisted that she use her law degree as a tax attorney, “The Lord says: Be submissive, wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands”. One of her entourage has claimed to have spoken to God, who has directed him in his political aspirations. Her campaign, along with the rest of her life, is unsurprising lacking in people of colour or other racial or cultural minorities.
If we accept that Michele Bachmann is a representative of Tea Party policies and beliefs, one has to ask some interesting questions. Here we have a political faction which has a fundamentalist, extremist religious agenda, who wants to impose it on the whole of society. It seems to have ideas about the subservience of women. It is ant-abortion, anti-gay, anti-science and evolution, anti-free-education, anti-health-care, anti-immigrant and (in my opinion) anti-freedom. One of her campaign workers has expressed the opinion that blasphemy should be illegal. She belongs to a faction that supports gun possession and has the informal support of backwoods militias all over the U.S.
I am reluctant to say this, but, really, in what way does this differ from the Taliban, other than that they are not in power and have not yet resorted to violence or overt terrorism in order to take over the government? If you look at the bare policies, there are way more similarities than differences, with many of the difference only being a matter of degree. Both are willing to sacrifice democracy because they believe that the end justifies the means.
Once again, Canadians need to observe carefully and work to insure that we never fall into the same traps.
BTW, I know the controversy here, and if I disappear mysteriously tomorrow, you’ll know why…