As we head into 2024, the race to the White House is in full force, prompting Democrats to launch their attacks toward the GOP because they know that is their only hope to persuade voters.
This week, Salon Magazine penned an article titled, Worry less about TikTok and Bin Laden — fret more that Mike Johnson shares the terrorist's view," painting House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) as a more dangerous than a terrorist group.
Senior Writer Amanda Marcotte claimed that the Islamic terrorist leader has a "far better shot than bin Laden ever did of ending American democracy." She also accused the entire Republican Party of "attempting to finish the job bin Laden started by decimating our democracy."
Bin Laden— who was the ringleader of the 9/11 attacks— was part of a TikTok trend of young Americans who think the term terrorist for him is misleading and part of a false "moral panic."
"By calling America 'dark,' 'depraved,' and 'irredeemable,' the GOP speaker may as well be citing Al Qaeda's leader," the publication wrote.
"There are lots of problems with TikTok, for sure — it also has a serious disinformation problem — but no, there's no real reason to believe it's radicalizing the youth into sympathy with Islamic terrorists," the liberal writer said.
Yet, she dove in, claiming that Johnson and the rest of the GOP could have a much more radical effect on the country.
Marcotte explained that people have yet to focus on the "much more serious story" of how Johnson "has a habit of expressing America-hating rhetoric that sounds like it could have come straight out of Osama bin Laden's mouth."
"Johnson's words echo those of bin Laden's Letter to America," the article read. "We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest."
She compared Johnson's appearance with "rabidly homophobic" pastor Jim Garlow, who questioned judgment for collective sins. He described the current culture as "so dark and depraved that it almost seems irredeemable."
More from Marcotte's article:
Johnson, like bin Laden, rejects American secularism, saying it's a 'misnomer' to believe in the separation of church and state. His career has been devoted to forcing his brand of Christianity on all Americans, from taxpayer funding for exhibits that claim dinosaurs rode Noah's ark to laws prohibiting sexual behavior that doesn't adhere to his rigid fundamentalist rules. He repeatedly insists that, despite their words to the contrary, the Founding Fathers wanted religion to guide government policy. The main difference of opinion between the two religious radicals is what flavor of far-right religious oppression they prefer: Christian or Muslim? One can, of course, point out that bin Laden was a violent terrorist who funded a deadly attack on the U.S. on September 11, 2001, which Johnson has not done. But it's also true that Johnson has signaled sympathy towards that other terrorist attack on American democracy, Donald Trump's insurrection of January 6, 2021.
Marcotte accused Johnson of being Trump's "coup" leader, claiming that the release of the January 6 security tapes allowed "MAGA propagandists" to "cherry-pick and distort the contents to create a false narrative valorizing the insurrectionists."
She concluded her piece by saying that Johnson has "a far better shot than bin Laden ever did of ending American democracy and replacing it with a theocratic government."
Join the conversation as a VIP Member