Media Matters has a very interesting piece by Jamison Foser up comparing Tim Russert's questioning of Barack Obama about Louis Farrakhan's support of his candidacy to his questioning of white, Republican politicians of support for their candidacies by people like Pat Robertson.
This is from Foser's article:
The double standard couldn't be clearer. The only question is, what it is about Barack Obama and Rudy Giuliani that makes Tim Russert treat them so differently?
Why does Tim Russert think Barack Obama and Colin Powell are uniquely required and qualified to talk about Harry Belafonte? Why does Tim Russert think Barack Obama has to explain praise from Louis Farrakhan that he did not accept, but Rudy Giuliani doesn't have to explain an endorsement from Pat Robertson that he did accept?
Foser doesn't answer the question he poses, but we will: Obama is a black, Democratic politician and Guiliani is a white, Republican politician. Now, maybe we are doing Russert a disservice. Maybe he would answer that Robertson is not as inflammatory as Farrakhan.
Well, here is a simple test for Russert. John McCain sought and got the support of John Hagee, a white, evangelical preacher from Texas. Now Hagee says some very interesting things about the Roman Catholic church. This is from a CBS News story about Hagee:
He has also denounced the Roman Catholic Church as "the great whore of Babylon" and "a cult." He blames it for the Holocaust and predicts its imminent demise.
"This is the apostate church," Hagee said. " … this false religious system is going to be totally devoured by the anti-Christ."
So when Russert has McCain on Meet the Press in the near future, will he pressure McCain to renounce and reject Hagee, or, once again, will he treat a white, Republican politican different than he treats Barack Obama?