By Bo Gardiner [Excerpts. The complete article was published at Patheos on 10/23/2016.]
Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein continued her march into absurdity this week, and her claims are worth responding to with facts.
Exposing Big Satire
On Friday, Stein and her party announced that the global corporate conspiracy extends beyond the likes of Big Pharma and into the venerable world of political satire, launching an expose of popular left-wing comedian and TV host John Oliver, who picked apart her policy ideas during a recent segment on Last Week Tonight. She posted this meme on Facebook accusing the former Daily Show star of “secret connections to corporate corruption”:
Oliver had criticized her statements on vaccines and portrayed her mechanism for eliminating student debt as unworkable. The meme links to her campaign site, where the “rebuttal” is all ad hominem and no fact, complaining that Oliver’s satirical critique was a “demeaning,” “bitterly sarcastic rant.” So a politician regularly demeans those who don’t support her in bitter, sarcastic rants, but demands immunity from such criticism from the public?
Stein’s campaign then takes the very, very low road of seeking to destroy Oliver by accusing him of being dirty, by definition, due to his income… an income progressives gladly provide him for his brilliant nightly takedown of the right. Finally, and most absurdly, a national presidential campaign lowers itself by blaming declining donations on a comedian and with Trump-like juvenile whining:
By Bo Gardiner [Excerpts. The complete article was published at Patheos on 10/20/2016.]
It’s a nearly forgotten yet proven fact that in the 2000 presidential race, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader openly expressed a preference for George W. Bush in the White House over Al Gore.
It should be no surprise, then, that the Greens’ current presidential and VP candidates, Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka, have begun expressing their preference for a Donald Trump victory. Last week on C-SPAN, Stein said:
[Excerpts from my post at The Friendly Atheist]
By Bo Gardiner
I’ve disagreed with Richard Dawkins before on his insensitivity to women, feminism, and majority privilege. Some of it he’s apologized for, so I’d like to think we’re starting to be heard. I know all too well from environmental campaigns the importance of acknowledging our successes.
There is nothing wrong with those words. The question deserves answers, not attacks.
It’s not unusual for renowned atheist Richard Dawkins to rub people of faith the wrong way. It’s not unheard of for him to get on the bad side of feminists. But it’s not every day that he pisses off the intersection of the two groups. But this week, with a series of tweets, that’s exactly what Dawkins did.
He started the hullabaloo off with this humdinger: “Islam needs a feminist revolution. It will be hard. What can we do to help?”
When I first saw her headline — “Richard Dawkins Fails Spectacularly on Feminism and Islam” — I sighed and thought “Oh dear, what has he said now?” But when I arrived at his tweet, I kept scanning, looking for the bad part. I couldn’t believe it when I realized that was it. The entire article was a critique on those 15 words, and, in my opinion, it didn’t advance feminist goals, progressive goals, or Humanist goals.
Let’s work through her tally of problems with it.