Before I start this post, I want to point out that I’m not exactly sure I feel comfortable about the subject matter. I’m a blogger, which barely makes me literate and almost decrees that I use made-up internet words like “teh” and replace a certain number of the “s” at the end of words with “z’s” for comic effect and camaraderie with my readers, who most certainly do the same (unintentionally) in their every day lives.

Meanwhile, the person I’m going to be writing about has apparently worked as a writer for nearly 50 years. For a newspaper, of all things. I, meanwhile, had a poem published in a local paper when I was in high school and was mentioned in sports stories and statistic charts and that’s it.

I am not a literary giant, by any means.

But, here I am, about to write a blog tearing down a person who actually gets paid for their words. And while I most certainly disagree with the words that this man writes, I’m not entirely sure how I feel about calling him to task on them.

It’s a weird place to be in, I guess.

I’m assuming that at least a few of you have received, at some point over the past six to eight months, a forwarded e-mail from someone deep in your contacts list containing outrageous claims about Presidential hopeful, Barack Obama. I’m not going to link or re-post any of it here, but, sufficed to say, all of it has been discounted by the actual press, who actually checks their sources and facts (we assume). Among the claims made were that he was a Muslim and not a Christian, as he claims; that he was sworn in on the Koran and not the Bible; that he refuses to salute during the pledge of allegiance and so on and so forth.

All of these claims have been discounted and continue to be discounted in the press and by Barack himself.

So, you can imagine my surprise when I was trolling around on reddit and clicked on a link titled “Who is Barack Obama?” I thought I was going to gain some sort of insight or learn some substinative facts about who he is or what his political positions are.

But, by the time I got to the second paragraph and saw the phrase “liberal mainstream media,” I knew that I wasn’t going to get what I had initially expected. In the third paragraph, his full name, which is only used by extreme right-wing ideologues who are quick with a look of mock horror and disgust when questioned as to the true meaning of their insistence on calling him Barack HUSSEIN Obama, claiming that of course they’re not inferring anything by using his middle name and how dare you make such a claim.

Undeterred, I moved past it and read on, thinking that was the worst of it and that the writer would then move on to something that could actually be referred to as “news.” But in the fourth paragraph, the words “I did some research on the internet” damned the entire thing. People that say they did some research on the internet didn’t actually do research. Research is done by calling people who know more about a subject than you or reading the work of people with more knowledge than you, not by typing the subject matter of your piece into a google search with some choice modifiers (in this case, I’m assuming that two of the words were “radical” and “Muslim.”)

The next few paragraphs actually are fact-based, describing Obama’s upbringing and background. White mother, black father, born in Hawai’i…yadda yadda yadda. Of course, there are little warning signs. It’s explicitly pointed out that his mother became an “atheist” and that his father was a “black Muslim.” Little things like this seem to be innocuous, but they’re there for a reason, to scare you and instill a questioning feeling in your mind about these people. Atheists are not to be trusted and what’s worse than a black person? Well, a black Muslim, of course.

Futher down, the name of the Islamic holy text is in quotations. It’s not just a Koran, but a “Koran.” As if that’s not it’s real name or as if it’s not a real book whose teachings are followed by millions of people worldwide, most of them people like you and me who go about their everyday lives and try to be good people who have good relationships and raise good children.

In fact, he takes the time to point out that the Koran tells Muslims to convert all people of differing religions. Don’t all religions do this? Don’t large swaths of Christianity teach this? How is this a bad thing? Oh, because it also teaches that “infidels” must be destroyed if they refuse to convert. Hmmm…

Go find a Muslim, whether one of your friends is one or you have to ask a guy on the street, I don’t care. Ask them if they want to destroy you because you’re not a Muslim. I’ll bet you that they’ll look at you like you’re crazy and might have some choice words for you. Muslims are people, too. Just like you and I are people. No different.

The next sentence, ” The goal of Islam is to get rid of Western Civilization…” is just about the most blatantly fear-mongering pile of bullshit I’ve ever heard. Sure, some radical Muslims say that is their goal. We have some radical Christians in our country that took to blowing up Abortion Clinics a few years back and some radical Christians that picket military funerals. Do the rest of you who call yourself Christian identify yourself with them? Well, you can assume that it’s probably the same with Muslims the world over.

The way that this column ends is so amazing that I can’t even parse it, I’m just going to quote it:

“Since it is politically expedient to be a “Christian” when seeking major public office in the United States, Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background.

 

Also, keep in mind that when Obama was sworn into office, he did not use the Holy Bible, but instead the Islamic Koran.

 

Obama will not recite America’s Pledge of Allegiance, nor will he show any reverence for our nation’s flag.

 

While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag, and slouches.

 

America’s voters, beware! The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the U.S. from the inside out. What better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!

 

God Bless America…or ‘Allah?’”

Wow, right?

I mean, the level of tinfoil hattedness is off the charts right there. The only true statement in that entire passage was the that it’s “politically expedient to be a Christian,” that’s a sad fact about our political system. What was laid down as a system that would have no religious test for public office has been subverted to exclude those who’s religion seems weird or out-of-step with what people are comfortable with. Then to claim that, if elected president, Barack Obama would subvert our country and sell us out to his Muslim allies, and all of our midwestern housewives would be forced to wear burkas and we’d all have to eat falafel.

Actually, what he’s stating is that all Muslims are not to be trusted and that they hate you and your life and your children and want to kill the whole lot of you, because they’re evil and inhuman. All of which is utter and complete bullshit.

I decided that I had to call this guy on his fear-mongering. I wrote the author of this hatchet-job, Gordon Bishop to express my dismay and disgust and to question the veracity of his sources for this column.

Back up any of your comments in the latter half of that column with documented
facts. Just because you received a forwarded e-mail full of dubious statements
doesn’t mean that it’s true. Your libelous comments make me wonder if you know
how do any research, or even care to.

Admittedly, I wasn’t too kind. I was also not entirely disrespectful. I didn’t call him a “cocksucker” or a “racist pile of shit” or a “fear-mongering motherfucker who is poisoning the minds of decent men and women who trust your opinion.” I didn’t say any of those things, but I could have. But then I probably wouldn’t have gotten this a few days later:

Nates,

I have been writing a weekly column since 1959 — I stopped counting after I reached 5,000.

My credentials are endless. Here’s only two: I’m in Who’s Who in America and Who’s Who in the World.

Are you in these Who’s Who’s?

Bishop

But, how dare I, a simple plebe with no Who’s Who affiliation, question the great and powerful Gordon Bishop, columnist since 1959 and member of two Who’s Who lists, who cannot even find the time to count past 5000. How dare I. I should be flattered that Gordon Bishop took the busy time out of his day to even respond to me. I’m sure he has so much “research on the Internet” to do during a normal day that he barely has time to write his columns.

Of course, he didn’t answer my questions. He didn’t even address them at all. Again, he’s probably busy doing all of that research on the internet. That’s gotta be tiring.

Perturbed, I responded:

Congratulations on your credentials. They don’t answer my question about documentation of the spurrilous claims you made in your column. Neither does the fact that I’m not on some “Who’s Who” list. I’m an informed citizen who actually investigates things passing them off as truth. You’d think your nearly 50 years in journalism would have taught you to do the same.

-Nate

And that’s where it stands, so far. Gordon Bishop has not responded to my response, and I don’t really expect him to. He’s probably busy writing about how Hillary is a lesbian and John McCain eats thunder and craps lightning while killing Muslims with his bare hands.

How a man who writes libelous lies like that which are disseminated to the public at large through a news publication and gets paid for it baffles me. His failure to back up any of his claims with even the most tenuous of sources and get that piece past his editor is striking, as well. Usually, when you make such damning claims about a person, be they a public or private figure, you have to back up your claims. Saying that you “did some research on the internet” and leaving it at that is an amazing disservice to journalism.

I’m a blogger and even I could tell you that.