Teddy at FDL reports that Rep. Danny Davis is in line to replace Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate.

But if Davis really wants that seat, then he really needs to finally answer exactly why he took part in that bizarre coronation ceremony for the Rev. Sun Myung Moon back in 2002.

Davis not only took a leading part in the ceremony, he's been unapologetic about it since. All of which raises serious questions about Davis' judgment: If he so readily succumbs to the ministrations of one of the world's craziest right-wing ideologues, who else will he sucker for?

Eric Zorn at the Chicago Tribune is wondering the same thing. Back when this story first emerged, Zorn contacted Davis and asked if he had made a mistake.

"A mistake?" he asked, chuckling in that distinctive, friendly baritone. "No, not a mistake. This was about the promotion of peace. That's all. We were recognizing Rev. and Mrs. Moon as parents. I find it difficult to see that as far out in any way."

Yeah, except that Rev. and Mrs. Moon see themselves as the parents of the entire world. That ceremony was about crowning them as the world's rulers. Read John Gorenfeld's book, Bad Moon Rising, for the complete details.

Surely Illinois can do better than this.

Poynter:

Why did Washington Times Foundation give $1M to Houston

"One Rev. Sun Myung Moon-watcher's theory: The donation was made to the Greater Houston Community Foundation to help persuade President Bush to grant Moon a pardon for a 1982 felony tax evasion conviction that had put him in prison for 13 months."

Fish Bowl DC:

"That's one theory thrown out there by the Houston Chroni(what?)cle's Rick Casey and it's worth a read to see Casey's construction of a potential back channel donation of nearly a million dollars from The Washington Times Foundation to the George Bush Presidential Library. Was it an attempt to persuade Bush 43 to grant Moon a pardon for his 1982 felony tax conviction (that one that had him behind bars for 13 months)?

Cohen's Moonie arranged Marriage is also ethically challenged

A lot has been written about Richard Cohen's "reparative therapy" method that's supposed to cure you of being gay. Let's take a look at how this man got married.

"He has been married for nearly 23 years--an arranged marriage that he said was suggested by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon when he and his wife were members of the Unification Church, to which they belonged for 20 years."

His ties to Moon explains a lot, but even more troubling is this:

He is not licensed as a therapist, he explained, because he "didn't want to jump through the hoops and deal with the heterophobia and anti-ex-gay attitudes." He circumvents the licensing requirement by asking for donations to his foundation. "I am not doing therapy per se," he said. "I'm coaching." In 2002, Cohen was permanently expelled from the American Counseling Association (ACA) for multiple ethical violations.

Permanent expulsion is a rarely used sanction, according to David Kaplan, chief professional officer of the Alexandria-based organization. Kaplan said Cohen was found to have violated six sections of the ACA's ethics code, which bars members from actions that "seek to meet their personal needs at the expense of clients," those that exploit "the trust and dependency of clients," and for soliciting testimonials or promoting products in a deceptive manner."

The man is thrown out because of ethical violations yet is given tremendous coverage as some sort of a healer by our liberal media. Just another snake oil salesman.

DOWNLOADS: (922)

PLAYS: (1746)

Embed

The Moonie-run Washington Times recently announced it was laying off 40 percent of its workforce, and shifting to free distribution.

Pretty soon it will have all the reach and influence of a nickel shopper. Which is only slightly less than its reach and influence now -- outside of Planet Wingnuttia, of course.

One can't help wonder if the Times' chief problem has been that its subscription base -- mostly Republican congressmen and their staffs -- keeps shrinking. Or if all those years of race-baiting under Wes Pruden and Robert Stacy McCain finally caught up to them. Or whether the paper's problem was that it sucked as an informational source because it was a propaganda sheet and everyone knew it. Not that its competition at the Post has performed so well in that regard, but the Times was singularly unreliable. No one read it because it wasn't credible.

In a difficult economic environment for media, sucking at what you're supposed to exist for is a recipe for disaster. And in the end, the Times just became a big cash drain on Rev. Moon's vast resources.

Eric Boehlert had a great piece about this:

At this time of reflection, it's worth pondering two rather astonishing facets about the Times and its bizarre life and looming death. The first is the deep irony of how the Times, a clarion voice of partisan right-wing values, was run as a charity for nearly three decades and whose business model made a mockery of the free-marketplace system supposedly cherished by conservatives. The second is the even deeper irony of how the Times was owned by a delusional prophet whose apocalyptic visions made an even bigger mockery of the Christian values supposedly cherished by conservative activists.

Indeed, the woeful Times has for decades stood at the center of a Beltway marriage-of-convenience for the ages, as conservatives nearly developed cataracts turning a collective blind eye to the glaringly obvious contradictions that Moon's worldview created with conservatives. (FYI, Moon proclaims to be more powerful than God, that Jesus was a failure, and that dictatorial rule is best. Hmm.....)

But we're wondering where Bill O'Reilly has been on this. He hasn't mentioned the gradual demise of the Washington Times on his show at all.

Back in January, when the Seattle P-I -- which had been run into the ground by the right-wing Hearst chain -- was failing, O'Reilly was eager to announce the news, because he saw it as a sign that these media-company failures were the product of Americans rejecting the "radical left":

The far left in America is on a rampage emboldened by the Democratic victory. They're attacking on all fronts, demanding gay marriage, a ban on harsh anti-terror tactics, and many other very liberal policies. But most Americans reject the left-wing extremists.

For example, the nutty-left Seattle Post-Intelligencer newspaper has announced it's going out of business unless someone buys the concern over the next few weeks. Not likely to happen.

Now, we've been harshly critical of that paper. Critical mass was reached when its publisher, Roger Oglesby, refused to cooperate with the FBI when agents trying to locate two men deemed acting suspiciously on a ferry.

"Factor" producer Jesse Watters confronted Oglesby over his and the paper's outlandish left-wing zealotry, and now it's clear that even in liberal Seattle, the folks want no part of the operation.

Well, as we noted then, the P-I had been right, and O'Reilly was wrong: He and his fellow right-wingers were just whipping up needless hysteria.

More to the point, the P-I failed not because it was a "radical left" operation -- it wasn't. It was simply the loser in a long-running battle with the Seattle Times, in a market that could no longer support two papers. It was a victim of the Bush Recession -- as was, ultimately, the Washington Times.

In contrast to the P-I, the Times never had an established or deep readership. It was, moreover, more obviously ideological; the P-I, O'Reilly's characterization notwithstanding, was doggedly middle-of-the-road. You can make a much better case that obvious bias killed the Times than you can the P-I. But in truth, both died at the hands of the changing media economy.

Still, you have to wonder if O'Reilly will come up with a new theory to cover this one. Lessee, the Washington Times died because it was secretly taken over by a cabal of liberals ...