There's probably a conspiracy here, but it has a lot more to do with Time considering its audience to be utterly braindead rather than a conscientious attempt to shill for anybodies foreign policy disaster.





Having dragged the "Historical Jesus Revealed!" pony from the stable, ridden it to death, fucked it, eaten it, and danced on its soul, somebody had to come up with some pale puree of journalistic crap to cover for the fact that Time is teetering at the point of complete and total collapse. Seriously. Given the choice between sitting down for some serious time with Swampland and shoving a fork into an electrical socket, I'll choose the fork (and will see Jay Carney in hell).


Enter David Van Biema and "The Case for Teaching the Bible." Or don't. Rachel Sklar summarizes it as, "Of course the Bible should be taught in schools. Duh. It's religion that shouldn't be." I think it's probably missing the addendum, "but some opportunistic cunt will use it as an excuse to teach religion, but why let a few bad apples spoil an utterly reasonable chance for abuse and mass indoctrination?" The article is total fucking tripe, every word including 'is', 'and', and 'the'.


But its a warm and reasonable tripe, giving Christian supremacy in culture a soft but firm pat on the head while acknowledging its chance for abuse, soothing outraged liberal readers. You'll either agree or disagree, but boy won't the respectful water cooler discussions the next morning be something.

Regardless, it's an easier thing to latch your brain onto than, "and then the country we liberated fell back into the hands of radical fundamentalists, paving a way for executions, religious warfare, and unlimited export of heroin". That's a downer, and doesn't sell magazines. Hence why we're soft peddling this kind of thing to American audiences.

Journalism as it should be: the warm glass of milk before bed.