Well, my point was that the sentence (to which you objected) strengthened the hypothesis that Mr. Wilson associates with bigots because he is a bigot himself.
[Joe Wilson] has close ties and a 100% approval rating from the Family Research Council, an evangelical organization headed by Tony Perkins, a former politician who has worked with David Duke of the KKK and spoken before the Council of Conservative Citizens, a major white supremacist organization that battled desegregation.
When I read that sentence, "evangelical" is not the word that sticks out. Nor do I connote to it the overtones of some of the other terms that do catch my eye. I believe your objection to the sentence as it is structured has missed the main point and instead targets something rather tangential.
no subject
[Joe Wilson] has close ties and a 100% approval rating from the Family Research Council, an evangelical organization headed by Tony Perkins, a former politician who has worked with David Duke of the KKK and spoken before the Council of Conservative Citizens, a major white supremacist organization that battled desegregation.
When I read that sentence, "evangelical" is not the word that sticks out. Nor do I connote to it the overtones of some of the other terms that do catch my eye. I believe your objection to the sentence as it is structured has missed the main point and instead targets something rather tangential.