PARSING BIGOTRY.

PARSING BIGOTRY. Having fallen behind on my oppo reading, I somehow missed this post by Ramesh Ponnuru at The Corner, who claims my TAPPED post on Bill Donohue's graceless response to the right's big Supreme Court victory last week on abortion to be fraught with rage:

"This Rageful Bigot" [Ramesh Ponnuru]That's what Adele Stan calls William Donohue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. Follow her links, though, and I think you'll find that the Donohue article Stan is criticizing is rather less rageful than Stan's own post. It's also not in the least bigoted.

First, I find it interesting that Ponnuru provides a link to my post, but not to the Donohue piece I discuss in that post. Perhaps he expects his readers to take him at his word.But even more interesting is Ponnuru's lawyerly wording of his own post. While I call Donohue, the person, "a rageful bigot," (and one who should be disavowed by such supporters as Mary Ann Glendon, George Weigel and Dinesh D'Souza), Ponnuru counters only that Donohue's article is neither rageful nor bigoted. Rather artful, I'd say.But where Ponnuru trips up is when he urges his readers to follow the links in my post. If you click on the word "worse," you'll get this transcript of a 2004 appearance by Donohue on MSNBC, wherein he describes Hollywood as "controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular." Having described "Hollywood" as such, Donohue went on to say, "Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions. I believe in traditional values and restraint. They believe in libertinism. We have nothing in common."--Adele M. Stan