And so it begins...

After enduring eight years of progressive kvetching about George W. Bush, it was almost inevitable that nothing Barack Obama said or did, or with whom he associated, was going to provoke the slightest hint of protest from the largest, most sycophantic media apparatus in the history of mankind. Nay, it quickly became very apparent that not only weren’t very many denizens of the Fourth Estate all that interested in the man’s background, more than a few seemed all-too-eager to dispense with any pretense of intellectual curiosity in favor of attacking anyone and any idea that might call attention to a profoundly flawed candidate.

To illustrate, consider the infamous conversation between Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose, less than 72 hours before the oceans were to commence falling:

Breathtaking, wasn’t it? This was after a long, hard-fought campaign, so can any reasonable person not say that we knew more about Sarah Palin within 72 hours of the GOP convention then Barack Obama after his year-long beatification? If the man truly was the “one we’ve been waiting for,” I have to question why such a concerted effort was (and continues to be) made to keep this man practicably understood in terms no more specific than that of your common realtor (albeit a “supremely intelligent” one with mysterious healing abilities).

Of course, not everybody was so convinced that the Lightbringer was walking among us, not the least of which was the Clinton campaign, who did everything in their power to get somebody, anybody to give a damn about the fiery little preacher Senator Obama had proudly referred to as one of his biggest influences:

Of course, after it had become apparent that Obama had won the primaries, enough of the MSM did pay attention to persuade the candidate that perhaps having a spiritual adviser who spit on the very soil that borne him wouldn’t play too well with all those “bitter clingers.”

But, there was one particular Obama fan, WaPo’s go-to gal on matters of faith, Sally Quinn, who referred to Wright as “one of the best theologians in the country:”

You see, in a world so utterly desperate for Obama’s healing touch, anti-Semitism is a small price to pay to achieve our ideological salvation. Besides:

In May of 2008, Quinn went on PBS’s Charlie Rose show and decried Barack Obama’s decision to distance himself from Rev. Jeremiah Wright, since Wright was an incredible man being ruined by “latent racism.” She even blundered into expressing that this shaming of Wright “has been absolutely devastating to me — to him, sorry.”

And so it was that one Sally Quinn not only advocated against Obama’s wise decision to throw his spiritual mentor under the CTA #2 Hyde Park Express, but seemed to think that a candidate had every right to maintain a strong relationship with his pastor.

That is, until Rick Perry came along…

Perry’s critics are concerned about his distinctly Christian approach to public prayer as well as his association, through ‘The Response,’ with several problematic pastors, among them John Hagee, controversial for his comments on Israel, the Roman Catholic Church and Islam, and C. Peter Wagner, who has suggested that the Catholic veneration of saints is an evil practice.

There is so much hypocrisy and disingenuousness in those two sentences, one hardly knows where to begin. Setting aside Quinn’s painfully obvious double-standards towards Hagee, her almost unforgivably deliberate ignorance as to the centuries-long schism between the Protestants and Catholics legitimately calls into question just why the hell this dunce is given the authority to write anything “On Faith?”

But the kicker here, the latest example of how the MSM is going to attempt to memory-hole the last 4 years, is her parting question:

Should politicians be judged by the religious company they keep?

Lady, I’d ask if you even bother to read what you write, but I know better, and I sure as hell know a cut-rate hypocrite when I see one.