![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldTorontoist's Steve Kupferman reported how Toronto Sun journalist Sue-Ann Levy spouted birtherism in a tweet while watching last night's debate and got schooled.
Noteworthy is the fact that prominent conservative Canadian journalists like Jonathan Kay criticized her soundly. Her editor released a note that was part disavowal, part apology.
Torontoist has a transcript of some of the most notable exchanges in the conversation Levy started. It makes for interesting reading. Her evasiveness, particularly, is disappointing: why didn't she say what she meant, whatever she meant, instead of hiding it all behind coy phrasings?
Noteworthy is the fact that prominent conservative Canadian journalists like Jonathan Kay criticized her soundly. Her editor released a note that was part disavowal, part apology.
Last night, during the broadcast of the third and final US presidential debate, Toronto Sun city columnist Sue-Ann Levy was on Twitter. As usual, her tweets were combative. Levy always espouses what most would consider to be a conservative point of view, and she’s not afraid of challenging those who hold different opinions. Most of the time, there’s nothing wrong with that.
Except on this particular occasion, Levy did what she periodically does: she wrote something misleading and ethically questionable, and then, when challenged, responded with ad-hominem attacks and attempts to change the subject.
The tweet that started it all is screencapped above. Note the hashtag, where Levy appears to imply that Barack Obama is a Muslim. This is a classic bit of far-right cant that emerged during Obama’s initial rise to prominence as a presidential candidate. It seems meant to characterize him as someone who doesn’t have America’s best interests at heart. (Because anyone who would believe it would also believe that all Muslims despise the US.)
In fact, it’s bullshit: Obama is a Christian.
Torontoist has a transcript of some of the most notable exchanges in the conversation Levy started. It makes for interesting reading. Her evasiveness, particularly, is disappointing: why didn't she say what she meant, whatever she meant, instead of hiding it all behind coy phrasings?
