Which is kind of the point of the post, now that I think of it. A Catch-22.
Thus, I had to make do with Pat Robertson. What does he have to do with “Choice Chick”? Not much, but anyone who pays attention to media coverage of this kind knows that a photo or cartoon of Pat Robertson is always appropriate with any story on religion, politics or whatever. Ditto for Jerry Falwell. Also note the web site address in the image. Please address fan mail to that site, not us.
But you remember “Choice Chick.” This is the hip political cartoon from the non-partisan Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the cartoon that attacks President Bush, John Ashcroft, Rick Santorum and other Republican leaders by name. This is interesting, of course, because some would say that it goes beyond the issue-only commentary that is supposed to be the stock in trade of these kinds of non-partisan groups.
At the moment, the religious left is raising questions about the issue-oriented work of people on the religious right and linking this to questions about tax laws. Watch for news about people actually taping sermons in conservative churches, capturing prayers and other controversial forms of speech that cross the line and endorse “Christian candidates.” Also watch for more coverage of the “I Vote Values” campaign to register voters in churches and other controversial locations.
But, apparently, we are not going to see mainstream coverage of “Choice Chick.” Sure, the world of conservative blogs has gone crazy with this. And, Kathleen Parker of the Orlando Sentinel has mentioned the cartoon, without linking it to the tax debates.
A new animated, pro-choice ad sponsored by the Planned Parenthood Action Fund features a feminist super-heroine, “Choice Chick,” who rails against Bush as the “evil menace” and his “evil army of judgebots” for chipping away at women’s rights.
“Choice Chick” will save the day, with the help of sidekicks John Kerry and John Edwards, and of course, your generous contribution.
That’s all folks. It’s your basic column on Bush bashing and, of course, we here at GetReligion.org are only interested in news coverage of those who are bashing Bush for reasons of biblical literalism and stuff like that. This is rather ho hum, not a new Creeping Fundamentalism entry.
But am I alone in wondering why the tax questions about “Choice Chick” are not drawing serious coverage? Think of it as a breaking story on the “Da Vinci Vote” front lines. Has anyone else seen a good story on the tax implications of this subject? Or of the churches? Churches on the left or the right?