Where are these girls’ parents?!
But why were they even there?!
Both weekends have the same lineup, and more importantly
[Image via Pacific Coast News.]
Bradlee Dean, heavy-metal rocker/conservative radio host and preacher, is suing MSNBC and Rachel Maddow for defamation.
According to Dean, Maddow twisted his comments on Muslim Sharia law and homosexuality in, what he believes, an effort to undermine Michele Bachmann's candidacy for the Republican presidential ticket.
A while back, Dean openly spoke on Muslim Sharia law's call for the execution of homosexuals. He then said in that sense they are more moral than most American Christians.
Muslims are calling for the execution for homosexuals in America, this was just released yesterday and it shows you that they themselves are upholding the laws that are even in the Bible, the Judeo Christian God. They seem to be more moral than even the American Christians do. Because these people are livid about enforcing their laws, they know homosexuality is an abomination. And I continually reach out to the homosexual communities on this radio show, and I warn them, which ones love? Here you have Obama condemning it behind the backs of the homosexuals but to their faces he's promoting it. I say this to my gay friends out there the ones that continuously nitpick everything I say. Hollywood is promoting immorality and the God of the Heavens in Jesus names is warning you to flee from the wrath to come, yet you have Muslims calling for your execution. If America won't enforce the laws, God will raise up a foreign enemy to do just that's what you're seeing in America today. Read Leviticus 26 America.
Dean later put his words into better context, insisting he doesn't condone any sort of execution.
So when Rachel Maddow brought him up during a segment, Dean felt she used it to paint him as an anti-gay activist who advocates murder.
Bachmann has also been an enthusiastic supporter of Dean and his work, so Dean feels this is an overall attack toward her campaign.
Okay, when we first learned of this, we weren't going to be surprised if Maddow had in fact taken his words a little out of context. Most pundits do, Liberal and Conservative alike.
But then we watched the whole segment, and she clearly adds in the part where he wanted everyone to know what he really meant with those words.
In fact, the segment isn't exactly focusing on him. She used him in description as she was questioning a politician's donations to his band. She assumed it would be the other way around. If the focus had been on him and his comments, she probably would have stopped there instead of going back to her original point.
We find Rachel Maddow guilty of judgmental eyebrow raises. But guilty of defamation?
What do U think?