« Russia Holds Elections Against The Backdrop Of The Global Recession | Main | The February Sweeps That Wasn't & The Decline Of The Print Media »

THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Where Moonies & Conservatives Meet

Since it first started publishing in 1982, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, which was founded by convicted federal prisoner and felon founder Rev. Sun Myung Moon of the Unification Church has been a darling newspaper for many conservatives and Republicans. Conservatives continue to look the other way when Moon declares himself to be the "Messiah", and some adoring members of congress have even allowed Moon's church to hold some activities in federal buildings which seem to violate the separation of church and state. Senator Orrin Hatch, Senator Charles Grassley and the defeated former Senator Sam Brownback are some of the biggest supporters of THE WASHINGTON TIMES and often are given space to write goofball right wing opinion pieces that would make most normal persons only cringe.The_Washington_Times_front_page.jpg

Moon has been a long time supporter of the Republican Party and was known to even strongly defend Richard Nixon during his crisis over the White House involvement in the Watergate Scandal. And Moon was another big supporter of Ronald Reagan, whose foreign policy was characterized by one illegal activity after another such as the misuse of Agriculture Department CCC funds meant only for international disaster relief to allow Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to buy billions of dollars of arms to build up the Iraqi military from U.S., French and Brazilian arms contractors. It something really stinks, then Moon is there to give it his blessing.

In 1982, when Moon founded THE WASHINGTON TIMES he claimed that the mission was to support anti-Communist goals as well as to create "an instrument in spreading the truth about God to the world". And of course part of that "truth" according to Moon is that he's the claimed "Messiah". A Capitol Hill location was once used by Moon for some sort of strange coronation ceremony where Moon was once coronated as the "Messiah" attended by some right wing members of congress and their families. Strangely, many of these same members of congress continue to insist to voters back home that they are somehow Christians, although they now seem to accept cult leader Rev. Sun Myung Moon as their "Messiah". None of these members of congress have been upfront with their voters back home that they have replaced Jesus with Rev. Moon as their new "Messiah".

And also unfortunately, THE WASHINGTON TIMES has also acted as a sort of recruiting grounds for some young journalists who then later take up work at more respectable papers such as THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE POST or THE NEW YORK TIMES. What was so decent about THE WALL STREET JOURNAL was that it not only represented very good financial news, but the editorial page was historically slightly liberal in orientation, however as a larger influx of WASHINGTON TIMES talent seeks employment at papers like THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, it biases the reporting more to the same sort of right leaning doctrines of THE WASHINGTON TIMES and only pollutes the pool.

The newspaper business is very tough these days with advertising revenue way down and threatening many city newspapers very survival. Some cities such as San Francisco could conceivably even be without a daily newspaper if this economic distress continues much longer. Newspaper bankruptcies are a real epidemic these days. However the cult religion of Rev. Sun Myung Moon has found a perfect recruiting ground by influencing many conservatives and Republicans over to his way of thinking with his radical anti-Communist and far right politics with THE WASHINGTON TIMES. And unfortunately this has made many on the right far more accepting of the wild and strange cult religious practices of Moon and his followers, or of Moon's illegal activites that landed him in a federal prison to begin with.

Former conservative-turned-liberal writer David Brock who once worked at THE WASHINGTON TIMES has related how the paper rewarded writers who biased stories towards the right and spun news into political propaganda for the right. Surprisingly, for a bunch of anti-Communists, the staff of this newspaper operate much like the official news media of Communist North Korea or other other Communist nations. Moon was a former prisoner of the North Koreans, and has managed to hone their own propaganda style to a fine point.

The biggest fault of journalism that starts out looking for an ideological angle at which to publish news loses the critical angle of objectivity that should be a major component of most good mass media journalists. Everything is written as viewed through a prism of furthering the political right over at THE WASHINGTON TIMES, and not an honest reporting of the news. And further, Moon uses the paper to add some legitimacy to his cult religion as well. Many WASHINGTON TIMES readers will like the opinions of the paper and begin to become less suspicious when Moon replaces Jesus with himself as the "Messiah" or offers up other outrageous teachings.

Strangely conservatives will often oppose liberal culture such as some music, art, politics, movies or other culture because they fear that such culture will liberalize the opinions of society on political or moral matters. Yet many conservatives will freely rally to a newspaper founded by a religious cult member who seeks to undermine the status of Jesus as the founder of the Christian faith and replace him with a convicted felon as the "Messiah" who never claimed to heal the sick, raise the dead, or perform any miracles that have been attributed to Jesus by his historic followers.

Cultural liberals never have really sought to undermine the role of Jesus as the founder of the Christian faith. But they have challenged many of some moral views or other opinions often espoused by traditional structured religion. And if anything their sense of justice and fairness often reflected great influence from the teachings of Jesus. Some conservatives by contrast wish to dump Jesus altogether, and follow some self-declared "Messiah" like a Rev. Moon only because they agree with his politics. Intellectually, spiritually, culturally and morally, this cannot be the most wise path of all paths to follow.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 2.7/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 2.7/5 (3 votes cast)

Comments (13)


Is this person real, this Paul Hooson.

convicted federal prisoner and felon founder Rev. Sun Myung Moon


goofball right wing opinion pieces

are really laying on the 'guilt by association' thick.

This dude needs to look to the 'real' messiah (yes, I can use quote marks too), who is: Barky (i.e, the One, the O man, etc.).


We can understand why Paul feels so strongly about the Rev. Sun Myung Moon declaring himself to be the messiah - it contradicts Obamas claim.


Not only is he trying to lay down thick the guilt by association, he does not even have the intellectual honesty to examine the New York Times is such a way, a sort "call it as I see it" attitude he claims to have.

To Paul the New York Times is fine with is slanted view and filtered liberal agenda of reporting news. Paul is fine that American soldiers have had their lives and missions put at risk because the New York Times would reveal top secret information. Paul is just fine that the liberal slant of the New York Times would be critical of Bush "talking down" the economy but heaped angelic praise and fervor for Obama and his "talking down" of the economy.

You see, Paul is the typical left wing apologist and hypocrit. Is this because his beloved New York Times, whose track record of honesty can be certainly questioned, is sinking fast and facing bankruptcy while the Washington Times endures?

Or is Paul too afraid to apply his "call it as he sees it" attitude and come up with a feature on the George Soros funding machine?

Maybe this is the jumping point where Paul will begin to argue that state run newspapers is best for America...


good lord, paul. where in the hell did you pull this piece of guilt-by-asosciation piece of drivel from?

as far as moon, goes, i've been pretty involved with conservative politics for 20 years, and i don't know anybody who actually follows him or really knows that much about him. let alone calls him their messiah.

do conservatives like the times? in general yes, because it provides a counter to the typically left-leaning media. you complain about the bias in the times, what about the NYT, the LA Times, Newsweek, Time, etc? You know, so called news outlets that don't even try to hide their leftward tilt.

unless, of course, you think that anything conservative should be suppressed and discredited through whatever means necessary. you don't believe that do you, paul?



Although philosophically we are not often in agreement, I greatly respect your writing style and your presentation of your arguments.

But this? "What was so decent about THE WALL STREET JOURNAL was that it not only represented very good financial news, but the editorial page was historically slightly liberal in orientation, however as a larger influx of WASHINGTON TIMES talent seeks employment at papers like THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, it biases the reporting more to the same sort of right leaning doctrines of THE WASHINGTON TIMES and only pollutes the pool."

The only thing to say after seeing that is: Lee Ward, stop impersonating Paul! It upsets the readers, and insults Paul.

Paul Hooson:

I have a couple of huge problems. One is anyone who seeks to replace Jesus by declaring themself to be the "Messiah", especially some convicted felon. Secondly, Moon's paper certainly does not attract all conservatives, especially not many respectable ones, but a few crackpots like Orrin Hatch, Charles Grassley and former Senator Sam Brownback who love to publish screwy opinion pieces. Responsible conservatives need to stay clear of the crackpots, they only hurt their cause. There's a huge difference between someone like a George Will who is a very intelligent and honest man and someone like a Rev. Moon, although they might agree on a few issues here or there.

Grassley ran some screwball piece the other day at the WASHINGTON TIMES lamenting that a few guys might be watching adult content on their computers while at work. Well, that sounds like a workplace related issue for employers to enforce rules on proper conduct at work such as a no goofing off policy, not Charles Grassley. That's not under his control to enforce workplace conduct.


You know, if Republicans spent as much time thinking up good policy as they do thinking up insulting names for the president, they may not have ended up having their entire ideology emphatically rejected by the populace.


Allen, I don't think it's the ideology that got rejected. It's the fact that the RNC is run by a bunch of "moderate" conservatives that couldn't pick a decent candidate if their lives depended on it. McCain, really, oh ok..... The ideology is not at fault, the fact that the RNC doesn't hold to it is.


paul, what do you consider a "screwy" opinion piece? and i find it interesting that you hold up will as a conservative, whereas many conservatives call him a moderate or a RINO.

here is an interesting thing i have noticed. the right is more honest in describing their opponents politics as being far-left, liberal, conservative democrat, etc. liberals, on the other hand seem to be pointing to the more moderate members of the right and saying "this is a good conservative, the rest are bad, right-wing extremists"

allen, conservative ideology was not rejected, the particular politicians who did not actually follow that ideology was rejected. helped along by what i believe was a largely mis-informed electorate.

why did people vote for obama? they were tired of bush, they were tired of republicans saying one thing and doing another, they were worried about the economy. that last is what really gets me. people trust the democrats more on the economy, yet i they have never really proved to be particular good at it.

it's amazing the number of people i talk to today who voted for obama and now say they wish mccain had won. and i live in a fairly liberal place.

just some food for thought....

Paul Hooson:

Ke, I used the example of Senator Grassley running an opinion piece at THE WASHINGTON TIMES a few days ago lamenting that a few guys goof off at work and view adult content while on the job. First of all, Grassley has no control over such work place goofing off, as that's an employer issue. Secondly why even run such a naive and silly piece when so many serious discussions need to be run about serious economy or foreign policy matters. Grassley is a small minded man indeed.

I had to handle my own problem of my employees who goofed off on the job with illegal gambling or drinking on the job by firing them. Each employer has to deal with problem employees. That's not a job for Grassley. And equally, Orrin Hatch and Brownback have a history of other silly editorial pieces.

It seems that THE WASHINGTON TIMES is trying to preach morality with such silly little petty pieces written by some small minded members of congress unable to deal with the real issues.


huh...i agree that grassley's op-ed seems like a work place issue. but i haven't read it, so i don't know what point he was trying to make.

but shouldn't even people you disagree with be allowed to publish their ideas?

just what is the point you were trying to make with this post? that you don't agree with conservatives? that's a given. that you think grassley is silly? that you have a problem with Moon and Moonies?

what you seemed to be saying was:
1) Moon is a nutcase
2) Moon backs a conservative viewpoint
3) he owns the Times
4) some of the people who write op-ed pieces in the Times are silly

therefore, the times is a worthless ideological rag that isn't worth reading. do i have it about right?

if so, what about the NY Times, the LA Times, Newsweek, and Time? i could say pretty much the same things about them. except instead of Moon being a conservative nutcase, i could say that whoever owns/runs the above publications is a liberal nutcase.

as far as small minded members of congress, i give you Frank, Dodd, Shumer, Waxman, Pelosi, Reid, etc. they are the ones in charge of congress at the moment, and they're the ones doing a pretty shitty job.

Paul Hooson:

Ke, my opinion is that unlike THE NATIONAL REVIEW or other responsible and intellectual conservative publications that THE WASHINGTON TIMES is a magnet for screwballs, both as publishers and writers.

Support of Nixon during the Watergate hearings is reasonable.

What happened? John Dean fell in love with a prostitute. He lied to coopt an classified intelligence gathering unit to burgularize the Democratic party headquarters to remove records of when the Democrats had hired his wife to entertain people from out of town.

John Dean's then further lied, claiming that the president had directed him. The Democrats lied, claiming that the president had committed a crime, ignoring the criminal practices they had engaged in (hiring prostitutes, bribing people with protitution services.

As he did in 1960 when Democrat cheating in Chicago and West Texas handed the presidency to Kennedy, Nixon did what was best for the country.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.