And this guy is given credibility. Moderator Phil Donohue (usually a good liberal) let him get away with saying the slur only about 87 times in a bullying, confrontational way. I think using the slur in a neutral way to make a point would be acceptable, but here he clearly meant to intimidate the guy.

McCain was held as a prisoner of war by the Vietnamese for years in the Hanoi Hilton.  Though I don't approve of the word, I can at least understand where he's coming from.  I'd have a lot of leftover hatred, too, even if he's wrong at aiming that hatred at an entire people.

Donohue, however, has no excuse.  I'm waiting for the apology.

I do think McCain apologized by saying he had aimed the comment at only those who held him captive--and actually he's worked to make us closer to Vietnam.  Webb has worked for closer relations too.

That's the right way to treat former enemies.

Donohue has no excuse.  But his entire philosophy seems to be permeated with intolerance.  And he seems to be extremely close-minded when it comes to honest and well-intended criticism of his religion.

The pudgy little guy has a battle plan. That is, to intimidate into silence anyone who opposes the theocrats in their march to political power in America, and move their agenda forward. No minor comment or tiny opposition is too small not to be noticed and used.

His relentless, obnoxious screaming, his whiney pose of victimhood--- all is part of the greater plan to secure for the radical religious right (which includes some Catholics as well as extreme evangelicals) top dog political dominance and turn America into what I believe it was George Will called a Christianist nation.

In other words, this small video is only a snippet of what awaits us unless this nest of vipers is discredited and removed from any influence.

"but here he clearly meant to intimidate the guy" 

so true.  the fact that he kept using the racial slur to describe the joke instead of following the example of his larger point by calling it something else like "the racially insensitive joke", betrays what he REALLY wanted to say: "asians are easy to pick on in the media and i think that's what i'll do right now."

as a christian, i do notice that it is acceptable to publicly disparage christianity in ways that would be unfathomable for other sub-groups but the kid is right.  making fun of a group's universally accepted guilt in trangression is infinitely less offensive than making fun of a group's core identity.  that's the difference between what the student said and what Donohue said and that's why Donohue is a racist bully. 

of course, i'm preaching to the choir here...  don't mind me. 

would be the difference between what Virgil Goode said about keeping Muslims out of Congress and being critical of the way some Muslim cultures treat women. We have to be able to take aim and critisize religious practices and views we disagree with.

Why was Donohue so angry?  While even fair minded people could easily find Amanda Marcotte's use of words offensive, perhaps Donohue's real anger is that many outdated "religious" doctrines are being ignored, even by faithful Catholics.  When one is losing in many of the battles of the cultural wars, one does not like to be poked fun at.

Here's the most notorious of Ms. Marcotte's posts that drew Donohue's ire.  http://pandagon.net/...  The subject of her post is official Catholic doctrine on contraception, which she argues vehemently against.

In America, the contraception debate goes on only among the diehards.  Overwhelmingly, Catholics approve of birth control.

Birth control/contraception is supported by 93 percent of all adults, including 90 percent of Catholics and 88 percent of born-again Christians, the "very religious" and Evangelicals.  http://www.harrisint...  10/05 poll

Poll: Most Catholic MDs dissent from Church teachings

Flemington, New Jersey, Apr. 26, 2005 (CNA/CWNews.com) - A very large number of Catholic physicians support and medical treatments and ethical stances that are contrary to Church teaching and which have been the source of debate in the United States, says a new study released last week.

According to the survey, 87 percent of Catholic doctors said they would "prescribe birth control pills to any adult patients that request them and for whom they are medically appropriate." Of the doctors who were surveyed, 93 percent said they agreed.

John Zogby does extensive polling for a Catholic organization.  In one poll, 86% of U.S. Catholics polled agreed that people who have premarital sex can be good Catholics.  http://www.zogby.com...  79% said that gay and lesbian people can be good Catholics. 

"When "marriage" was defined legally and respondents were asked whether same-sex couples should be allowed to legally marry, 39% agreed. American Catholics showed the highest approval (62%) for civil unions, which provide the same legal rights and protections as marriage without being called "marriage." * * * On the issue of women's ordination, almost 62% of respondents agreed that a woman who feels called to the priesthood should be ordained.

In another poll, "Catholics [were] evenly split when asked if "all abortions should be illegal" (50% believe all abortions should be illegal, while 49% disagree and about 1% of respondents are undecided)."  http://www.zogby.com...

I agree with Teddy that part of this attack is politically motivated and that we must be vigilant.  However when I think back about, e.g., what is routinely viewed in the mass media by millions, there's just no comparison with, say, 1960 when Dick van Dyke and Mary Tyler Moore had separate beds.

But think of the real significance of these trends and the polling data above.  They threaten such core Catholic notions as papal infallibility on doctrinal matters.  And they suggest lots of the faithful think lots of the daily rules were just made up and don't spring from anything Godly or eternal.