we need to have this discussion (baldwin discredited?)

i'm watching this film now, and i noticed something about the featured review on this site:

"Meanwhile all of the Republicans--in one way or another--are subtly discredited. Example: The interview of Stephen Baldwin centers on religion and not politics."

what implies that baldwin said anything substantive that wasn't religious? i mean, this is his website:
http://www.allthatknowhim.org/

the assumption that this film is biased is really odd to me. maybe it is biased, but i feel like it makes a good faith effort to get as many perspectives on film as possible. i don't think there's any bias evident in showing a man, who has an entire website comparing himself to job, commenting about how his faith drives his activism. that idea is just ludicrous to me.

i hope the reviewer sees this comment and returns to explain why he picked that particular example. i thought it was interesting that the film included comments and footage from the rage against the machine concert outside the rnc. was this the same event that was broken up by police for unclear reasons? i was surprised that the film didn't include some kind of addendum about that.
http://minnesotaindependent.com/7129/day-two-diary-part-two-armies-of-the-night