The equalization game continues, as H. supporters continue to dredge up "questionable" McCain associations. Alan Colmes, and The Nation columnist Katha Pollitt are pointing their fingers at two religious figures that have endorsed John McCain, televangelist John Hagee and preacher Ron Parsley. Both are outspoken, and sometimes outrageous in their sermons, but neither can be compared to Reverend Wright, nor can the association between them be compared to the association between H. and Wright.

Let's take a look at John Hagee. He has "famously attributed Hurricane Katrina to God's wrath at homosexuals," and this, H. supporters believe, somehow cancels out Wrights outrageous rant about "America's chickens have come home to roost." Well, these two are hardly equivalent. John Hagee was speaking out against behavior and so was Reverend Wright. I endorse neither statement, although Wright's actually probably has more truth to it than Hagee's. But Hagee was extorting people to follow the word of God and trying to help them be better people in God's eyes. In the bible, homosexuality is a sin, after all. We don't have to believe it, but I find no offense in him saying it. Wright on the other hand, was stirring up pure hostility and offering nothing of a constructive nature whatsoever. Hagee's statements were not vitriolic in the sense that Wright's were. In the racially tense South Side of Chicago, Wright was stirring up civil disobedience, calling the American government a "liar," and destroying in one swoop any presumption of civil authority. How many crimes may have been committed because of Wright and his divisive sermons? And then he ends by cursing the U.S.A. right from the pulpit, using language that most people would never use before small children. No, Hagee's and Wright's statements are hardly equivalent.

Another set of statements that Wright defenders and H. supporters use to equalize Hagee, Parsley and Wright, are the beliefs by both Hagee and Parsley that Islam is evil and their claims that "the Koran commands Muslims to kill Jews and Christians." Parsley goes further to state that America was founded to "destroy Islam," which is a bit of a crackpot statement, but a logical extension of his beliefs about Islam in general, which is evidenced by the Koran itself. This is somehow supposed to equal out Wright's excoriation of Jews and Israel. Once again, these statements and/or beliefs are hardly equal. Wright's beef against the Jews has no factual basis whatsoever. He merely spews the same one-sided lies that we hear from people like Louis Farrakhan, whom he has honored in his church. Hagee and Parsley, on the other hand, are correct in their claim that "the Koran commands Muslims to kill Jews and Christians." From TheReligionOfPeace.com:

The Koran contains 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers, and kill the infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

For the actual passages that explicitly state such things, visit TheReligionOfPeace.com.

So, once again, Hagee and Parsley are actually stating some things that are known to be true, or at least backed up by evidence. In addition, Parsley calls Allah a "demon spirit," which Alan Colmes seems to think is just as hateful as anything Reverend Wright has said. Why would Parsley think that, when his prophet Mohammed was a man who condoned war and bloodshed, was married to 11 women at one time (one as young as 9 years old), raped women captured in battle, added new, sometimes contradictory verses to his holy book any time he wanted to change the rules, and founded a religion which is directly or indirectly responsible for humans dying every single day, to this very day? I could see some basis for that statement. Wright, on the other hand, is spewing pure propaganda which is not borne out by evidence. Of course, many people may believe that Jews and Palestinians for example are equally culpable for the disorder in the Middle East, but I don't. And I do not find it to be "hate speech" to say so. That is an opinion found only on the left. All people, on the other hand, should condemn anti-Semitism. This is no double standard. Saying that Jews are evil is a bigoted statement with no evidence to back it up. Saying that Muslims are commanded by the Koran to kill infidels is not bigoted; that's what the book actually says.

These are the most glaring examples of equalization defenses put out by Wright defenders and H. supporters, and upon closer examination, they fall flat. Add to this Wright's obviously racial eugenics rants and the fact that McCain's relationship with his two "questionable preachers" is not nearly as close nor as long-lasting as H.'s relationship with Reverend Wright, and you can see why the Reverend Wright issue has far more relevance than either Hagee or Parsley and John McCain. Can you say apples and oranges?