After reading this, I feel ashamed for my non-passionate attempt at commenting on the resignation of Obama’s Muslim Outreach coordinator, and doing so tangentially. I guess I’m just so passed the point of expecting more. He said it best:
I think that this is outrageous — and those on the left who appreciate Obama and what he may mean for this country must become as tenaciously committed to what is right and what is good — and fighting for that — because those on the other side of these debates are trying to compel Obama to dilute himself.
Thank you for expressing my rage for me, Steve Clemons. So, yeah, what he said…
Related posts:
- Abu Mazen’s Gamble
- A Promotion for Abu Mazen?
- KABOBpoll II Closes: Where are Abu Mazen’s Balls?
- Abu Mazen Seeks Cabinet Post for Hamas
- With Friends Like These: Ludacris Political Dis Track and Obama’s Friendly Liabilities
And this post merely continues your “non-passionate attempt…”
We can all tell you are deeply enraged. Deeply.
Posted by Mitch | August 6, 2008, 4:02 pmBut what about that “8 year old connection” with Jamal Said in your link? Why is he a “frequent speaker before several groups in the U.S. that scholars have associated with the Muslim Brotherhood”
I imagine that any prominent moderate Muslim will come into contact from time to time with the other sort but it sounds on the very limited information that there is more to it than that.
The associations will certainly feed the view among non-Muslims that moderate and extreme Muslims have similar goals, it is only the methods that differ.
No matter how decent or well meaning a Muslim may be there is always this looming brick wall. Defining society’s laws according to the teachings of a 7th century figure and defining them according to the needs and aspirations of today’s citizens are fundamentally incompatible.
Posted by xoggoth | August 8, 2008, 3:01 amBy letting his outreach coordinator go, Barack Obama is letting the Muslim American community go with him.
No, I have no shame.
Posted by yaman | August 8, 2008, 3:30 amxoggoth said:
“Defining society’s laws according to the teachings of a 7th century figure and defining them according to the needs and aspirations of today’s citizens are fundamentally incompatible.”
To say that Muslim Americans seek to base society’s laws on the teachings of a 7th century figure is about as accurate as saying that Christian Americans seek to base them on the teachings of a 1st century figure. Your double standard smacks of concealed bigotry. America was enshrined upon freedom of religion for Muslims as much as Christians or others. Muslims are free to have their politics informed by their religion (as they view that religion today, not 14 centuries ago) just as other relgious group’s adherents are.
And if we’re honest, we should all acknowledge one other fact — the WSJ article is journalistic garbage. Who are these unnamed “scholars” that have associated these groups with the Muslim Brotherhood? What’s the nature of the association? What do these groups actually stand for? What does it mean that he may have spoken in front of them? What words did he speak?
Here endeth the lesson.
Posted by Maqbool | August 11, 2008, 2:43 pmXoggoth, so what if he has connections to Muslim Brotherhood. Isn’t that what Obama stands for? Talking to people we don’t like?
Do you even know what MB stands for? Has MB been responsible for the deaths of any Americans?
Do you have any clue how many Muslim Arabs in America have ties, by family or clan to one Islamist terrorist group or another? We’re talking tens of thousands.
Hezbollah alone has substantial American assets.
The point is, so what? What do you want to do, round tens of thousands of Americans up? Arrest them? Deport them?
Posted by Anonymous | August 11, 2008, 8:03 pm