[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZIY6a90o40]
Right-wing bloggers and simple-minded sensationalists are all smiles after Obama’s most recent slip up. They now have additional ‘proof’ that he’s a closet Muslim (although some people didn’t need any further convincing). While this petty opportunism exhibited by his critics is indeed deplorable – the only thing he hasn’t done to distance himself from Islam is insult it outright – Barack’s denials are worth taking a different look at… in case you haven’t already.
Here’s the complete segment of that ABC interview (you can read the transcript here). While it seems clear his words were taken out of context, it’s hard to miss the otherwise smooth talking politician bumbling like a fool as soon as this ‘sensitive’ issue is brought up. He fails to make any good point and simply comes off as someone who’s been flustered. I can’t blame him.
For someone who prides himself on being an agent of change and tolerance, he’s merely helping to reinforce the false notion that Islam is something to be afraid of. I’m confident he doesn’t believe that, but the cognitive dissonance must be taking its toll… All he has to do is to say (repeatedly) that even though he is Christian, there is NOTHING wrong with being Muslim. His apologists jump to his defense and remind us that at least for now, such things cannot be said in US politics – in other words: it isn’t really OK to be Muslim.
The Republicans get that message out (the reception of Giuliani’s speech at the RNC should convince anyone who needs convincing), but they also succeed in portraying their candidate as a man of principle who puts his ‘country first.’ Sarah Palin merely reinforces that air of conviction. While I’m NOT convinced by that nonsense, the geniuses who re-elected W will be. They’ll mistake that arrogant facade for resolve, and they’ll see Obama’s increased use of negative campaigning as a sign of weakness – only the strong can lead the US of A in the ‘war on terror.’ We gotta stay on the offensive!
What really saddens me about Obama is his apparent lack of principles… He must have some solid principles – they’re just not getting communicated effectively. His fans will argue that the media is responsible for that, but clearly the onus is on the campaign itself and ultimately the candidate.
‘Change’ is essentially meaningless. Yes, I fully support the implicit change in electing a Black president with a name like Barack Hussein – that would truly be a great thing for this country that anyone should be able to appreciate. But if Barack was a White guy called Barry his promise of change would mean absolutely nothing (at the very least, it would fall on deaf ears).
As far as Muslims (and Arabs) are concerned, many will vote for Barack in November despite the fact that his campaign is taking them completely for granted. Many others (especially Arabs) will vote Republican for pocketbook issues, particularly if they believe both to be equally bad for the situation in the Middle East (neither will change anything as far as the state of Israel is concerned). Surely the campaign’s efforts to fight the smears won’t win over too many voters.
But even if the impression the Obama campaign gives off is true (they don’t care for the Muslim vote), they still need to step their game up with the rest of the electorate, but it may be too late for that. The Republican political machine is in full effect, and a race that was arguably the Democrats’ to lose has changed considerably. Sarah Palin has completely stolen the spotlight from the Obama campaign. If she doesn’t get dragged through the mud in the next couple months, hope may be lost – not good for the ‘change’ so many want to see.
Related posts:
- Who is More Unelectable than a Black, a Woman, a Hispanic or a Mormon?
- Obama Campaign Outraged By KABOBfest, Attacks Cover As Tasteless, Offensive
- Zionism Must be Defended (or, Barack Obama’s AIPAC speech)
- With Friends Like These: Ludacris Political Dis Track and Obama’s Friendly Liabilities
- Pragmatically Speaking, Democrats Should Nominate Obama
Yes, I fully support the implicit change in electing a Black president with a name like Barack Hussein… if Barack was a White guy called Barry his promise of change would mean absolutely nothing.Kalash, you're a racist of the worst sort – the kind that isn't ashamed of his racism. Sarah Palin has completely stolen the spotlight from the Obama campaign. If she doesn't get dragged through the mud in the next couple months, hope may be lostYou're actually praying that Palin is "dragged through the mud". Brilliant. This is precisely the kind of "change" this country needs, right Kalash?When 99% of Americans think of "change", they imagine a post-partisan environment, where everyone works together to solve this nation's problems – including exterminating the threats to this country.When Islamofascist and Communist radicals think of "change" for America, their vision is a bit… different. But I digress. Kalash will tell us all about the radical "change" he so desperately seeks.
Posted by Anonymous | September 10, 2008, 8:07 amNew Survey on 9/11
Israel was behind the attacks, said 43 percent of people in Egypt, 31 percent in Jordan and 19 percent in the Palestinian Territories. The U.S. government was blamed by 36 percent of Turks and 27 percent of Palestinians.
And once again, Arabs demonstrate their astute intellect. To be fair, the more Arabs bomb Arabs, the more they all come to their senses.
Posted by Anonymous | September 10, 2008, 12:21 pmYeah anon, arabs are so stupid. they’re genetically inferior to non-arabs.
Posted by Pali-American | September 10, 2008, 1:01 pmNot genetically inferior – culturally inferior. This is why getting bombed by their own kind wakes them up to how depraved and debased their own culture is, and they snap out of it.
Posted by Anonymous | September 10, 2008, 2:37 pmAnon 2:37,
Really? “Culturally inferior”? So there is “an” Arab culture, and that culture is inferior to which culture?
Posted by Pali-American | September 10, 2008, 3:52 pmJanuary 22, 2008 CBN interview:
OBAMA: I want to make sure that your viewers understand that I am a Christian who has belonged to the same church for almost 20 years now. It’s where Michelle and I got married. It’s where our kids were dedicated. I took my oath of office on my family Bible.
…
I think that those who are of the Muslim faith are deserving of respect and dignity, but to try and feed into this fear-mongering and try to question my faith commitments and my belief in Jesus Christ, I think is offensive.
July 29, 2007 CBN interview:
OBAMA: Whatever we once were, we’re no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of non-believers.
***
I think you’re overstating things a bit here. Obama might not be taking every opportunity to shout “ISLAM IS OK” at the top of his lungs, but he’s been more than clear that he sees Muslims as honorable people, and Islam as an important part of the fabric of American society.
More importantly, though, as an “apologist” for Barack Obama (and the American political system), I dispute the idea that these sorts of things can’t be said in US politics. Obama himself has said on many, many occasions that Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups adhere to a perverted version of a peaceful religion. Our own President Bush has, in the seven years to the day since 9/11, taken pains to distinguish moderate, peaceful Muslims from the targets in the war on terror. Right now may not be the easiest time to be Muslim in America, but our politics, taken as a whole, is hardly the xenophobic shop of horrors this post makes it sound like.
I think this attitude is reflective of a very bad political tendency among Arabs in the US. For whatever faults he has, Barack Obama’s presidency would represent change in this country: an election of a leader who built an unprecedented grass-roots political movement from the ground up; a respite from eight years of cronyism and anti-intellectualism in the White House; and a new surge in America’s diplomatic clout and its positive perception around the world. And yet, for some reason Obama is dismissed as being more of the same because he doesn’t repeat enough times that Muslims are good people, too? This is the Arab Americans’ self-fulfilling political prophecy at its worst, I think.
Posted by publius | September 10, 2008, 9:53 pmpublius- the quotes you provided are nice, but they just don’t cut it for me… for someone like Obama, who is so well spoken, they simply come off as weak. Frankly, that’s not enough.
In other words, I don’t think he’s been clear in conveying that Islam should be respected, not feared. Nobody’s saying he should shout anything at the top of his lungs – he merely has a responsibility to counter the ‘fear-mongering’ he deplores by standing up for what’s right (at least if his promises of change are to be taken seriously). Is there something inherently wrong with Islam? His failure to take a clear stand on such an important issue is telling.
Since that tragic day 7 years ago, this country has suffered from extreme xenophobia and an arrogant foreign policy that have tarnished its image abroad. The people were left confused, and scared (for the wrong reasons). Sorry, but W has not done squat “to distinguish moderate, peaceful Muslims from the targets in the war on terror.” If anything, he is one of those directly responsible for the problems of Islam in the US today.
Regarding an Obama presidency, I agree with the potential change you outlined… However, I also believe that his ethnic background and his upbringing are largely responsible for that. We also know that he is not the first presidential candidate to promise ‘change’ which is why he’s often dismissed as just another politician (his toeing the line on Islam and the ‘war on terror’ only reinforce such perceptions). Since the primaries ended, his campaign has been another example of the calculating politics that have become trademarks of the Democrats… it begs the question – what are his principles?
If he believes Islam is to be respected not feared, he should say so clearly. (I agree that is doable in US politics, even if it’s difficult.) Instead he plays by the rules that have been put in place over the past 7 years by his political rivals.
I find it hard to believe that you (or any reasonable person) think Obama has been handling this Muslim ‘smear’ in a good way. Sure, he may be doing what he thinks he should to win, but he’s not taking a stand and he’s not coming across as the man of principle (the agent of tolerance) he claims to be.
We need a change from the pathetic politics of good guys vs. bad guys (Democrats vs. Republicans -depending on which side you’re on). I believe the US political system is one of the best in the world, but I also believe our two-party structure keeps it from fulfilling its potential. I can’t hate on anyone voting for Ralph Nader or Ron Paul…
[BTW, the post was about Muslim Americans (some of who happen to be Arabs). Feel free to elaborate on your "self-fulfilling political prophecy" comment, but remember that Arab Americans are more politically active today then they ever have been in the past. We may not be moving as fast as we should, but we're getting more involved.]
Posted by Kalash | September 11, 2008, 12:36 amWow… an argument about “cultural inferiority” that then descends into the nature of the fairy tale nonsense – culled from poorly written books from people who didn’t even know America existed – one of the candidates believes in….
Can we all grow up and start talking about policy and leave the elves and djinn and maniac Gods from backward desert tribes a rest, please?
Posted by Anonymous | September 11, 2008, 5:31 amI’m still not convinced. With all respect, I think “extreme xenophobia” is an inaccurate and alarmist description of the state of the American psyche now. If we had closed the borders, or interred and deported Muslims/Arabs the way we treated Japanese during World War 2, that would be one thing. But Muslims and Arabs in this country are (of course with some tragic exceptions, though they are decidedly in the minority) able to lead normal lives and live as respected members of American society.
I think you’re twisting the issue by bringing up Bush’s foreign policy. We’re talking about American political rhetoric, not policy. While you’re right that Bush’s foreign policy has tarnished our image and radicalized Muslims abroad, that’s a separate question from whether he himself distinguishes radical Islam from peaceful, moderate Islam in his own commentary on the war on terror. The effects of his actions might not make moderates (or anyone) happy, but that doesn’t negate the fact that in his public statements since 9/11, he has made that distinction, as have many other American politicians (including Obama, in virtually every one of his public comments on the war on terror).
You’re just wrong that he hasn’t taken a clear stand on whether Islam is deserving of respect – you link to his own website, which criticizes the smears against him as perpetuating “unfortunate falsehoods about the Muslim-American community that are offensive to people of all faiths.” His views are clear to anyone who takes the time to google him or read his website. You say no reasonable person could think Obama is handling the smear well; I respond that I don’t see how any reasonable person listening to Obama could think that he actually agrees Islam isn’t deserving of respect. Even if he doesn’t say this verbatim in every speech, it’s implicit in his message and his condemnations of fear-mongering which he makes every day.
I think it’s very myopic to condemn Obama as lacking principles just because he hasn’t become a vociferous champion of moderate Islam. Every day, he speaks about his ideology and the core political values he would promote as president: politics free from fear-mongering, a political discourse based on issues and not personal attacks, etc. Of course some of his positions have been refined since the primaries – this is to be expected when the electorate shifts from a liberal subset of the population to the entire population of 300 million. I want a candidate who responds to that shift. But the underlying policy proposals he has made, particularly with regard to major issues like Iraq, health care reform, education and the economy, are virtually unchanged, because they are rooted in his judgment and principles. This “calculating” criticism is a little overstated, I think.
In terms of the “self-fulfilling prophecy,” I was referencing my general sense that some Arab and Muslim Americans (and for that matter, a lot of other Americans) are likely to withdraw from the political process because no candidate fits their exact specifications. I think it’s very unfortunate, because an Obama presidency would undeniably be friendlier and more attuned to the interests of Arabs and Muslims in this country – there’s simply no question about it. To attack Obama as lacking principles over the volume (not the question) of his support for moderate Muslims is, I think, melodramatic and counterproductive.
Posted by publius | September 11, 2008, 6:29 amOh publius, how naive you are.
Kalash doesn’t want a reassurance from you or Obama that Islam will be “respected, not feared”. He wants Obama to convert and promote Islam, and the agenda of Islamism shared by the Islamists and Communists on this blog.
The fact is 19 Muslim Arabs, coordinating as part of an international Islamist network acting in the name of (radical) Islam, attacked this country one year ago. Seven years later, the vast majority of the Muslim world still believes the Americans and Jews destroyed the Towers as a pretext to crusading against the Muslim world.
In order to reach an understanding you must first agree on basic facts. Barack Obama does not believe that the CIA and Mossad attacked this nation, but that this was the work of a network of radical Islamists.
Ask Kalash what he believes. I won’t put words in his mouth. Let’s hear it Kalash. Who attacked this nation 7 years ago? Who destroyed those towers and why?
Posted by Anonymous | September 11, 2008, 7:47 am…
Kalash believes none of those things, and there’s nothing in any of his posts to indicate that. As a rule I ignore posters who (a) don’t bother to identify themselves in some way, and (b) make ridiculous assertions. This deserves an exception.
All Kalash is saying is that he wants Obama to be more assertive in defending moderate, peaceful Muslims. That’s fine. Our disagreement is over what amount of disdain he deserves for not being more outspoken; it has nothing to do with your ridiculous accusations.
Posted by publius | September 11, 2008, 11:44 amReally?
I have an open mind. Let’s give Kalash a chance to respond.
Let’s hear it Kalash. Who attacked this nation 7 years ago? Who destroyed those towers and why?
Posted by Anonymous | September 11, 2008, 1:02 pmDo I hear crickets…
Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2008, 1:45 pmAlright then publius… I guess we can agree to disagree (even though I know you feel what I’m sayin on a certain level).
I’m not gonna humor you jokers who don’t even have the decency to identify yourselves… especially if you’re just talking nonsense
Posted by Kalash | September 14, 2008, 1:07 amCrickets indeed…
Posted by Anonymous | September 14, 2008, 8:57 am