ABC news on Obama and Islam
 

During the campaign as much as I posted I stayed away from this subject...so this story is somewhat shocking to me. I knew that he was misleading folks about his past, but this is pretty much "in your face" to those who believed in him and defended him...

"During a conference call in preparation for President Obama's trip to Cairo, Egypt, where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said "the President himself experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before he's been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you know, growing up in Indonesia, having a
Muslim father -- obviously Muslim Americans (are) a key part of Illinois and Chicago."

"The candidate's comment at a Boca Raton, Florida, town hall meeting on
May 22, 2008, was typical: "My father was basically agnostic, as far
as I can tell, and I didn't know him," he said.

In September 2008, candidate Obama told a Pennsylvania crowd, "I know
that I'm not your typical presidential candidate and I just want to be
honest with you. I know that the temptation is to say, 'You know what?
The guy hasn't been there that long in Washington. You know, he's got
a funny name. You know, we're not sure about him.' And that's what the
Republicans when they say this isn't about issues, it's about
personalities, what they're really saying is, 'We're going to try to
scare people about Barack. So we're going to say that, you know, maybe
he's got Muslim connections.'...Just making stuff up."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...ould-have.html

Yea...during the campaign the Obuma people did every thing they could to curtail anybody from saying his middle name HUSSEIN. And the lap-dogs- water- bucket- carrying- main- stream media complied. *sigh*

Keedy

Can this article be trusted? It's from ABC, they're lap dogs and part of the water bucket carrying mainstream media.

I want to make a statement about this post but now I realize why waste my time.

There will be no end to the right wing rant, innuendo and silliness.

I think I will restrict myself to chasing that white ball around and lay off the politics.

So What?
 

You continue to do exactly what candidate Obama said those that opposed him would do. Why?

Bucco, as you know, I voted for Barack Obama because I thought he was the better of the two candidates I had to choose from. So I was one of those that defended his qualifications for the job of President. So far, while there are some things I would have liked him to do differently, I think he's doing a pretty good job--better than I think his opponent might have done had he been elected and faced the same problems as has President Obama.

But back to religion. Why should anyone be upset over the religion of a candidate, even one who was successful in being elected to the U.S. Presidency? There are roughly 2.1 billion Christians in the world and about 1.5 billion Muslims. Within 20-30 years, it's pretty well accepted that Islam will be the largest religion in the world. Most of western Europe will be majority Muslim. Even in the U.S., in only the last 10-15 years, the number of Muslims has increased geometrically. Islam is growing more rapidly than any other religion in the U.S. In the last 15-20 years, the number of people who identify themselves as Muslims have increased at a rate about 25 times the rate that those who say they are Christian have grown. The number of mosques in the U.S. has increased 25% in less than ten years. Average mosque attendance at Friday prayers has nearly doubled. The number of Americans who call themselves Muslims has increased from only about 500,000 to over 6 million--in less than ten years!

Is there some legitimate reason that we should be upset over President Obama's childhood experience with Islam? With a father who practiced the religion, but abandoned his son on at least two occasions and didn't really serve as his father for more than a couple of years of his life? President Obama is a practicing Christian now--at least when he attends church, it is a Christian church. But regardless of his religious preference, has that in any way affected his performance as President? Are there any decisions one can point to that seem to be influenced by his religion, whatever it is? Is his experience with Islam any more alarming today than John Kennedy's Catholicism was back in the early 1960's? Was the performance of either affected by his religion? The Pope didn't impact on Kennedy's performance, as his critics said would happen. And so far, I see no evidence that Muhammed has affected Obama's governance of the country.

I think you've been one who have encouraged our elected representatives to perform consistent with the Constitution. Have you forgotten the First Amendment? Among other things, the First Amendment to the Constitution expressly prohibits anything that would interfere with the free exercise of religion. Our belief that the founding fathers felt strongly that the affairs of church and state should be expressly separated flows from that Amendment to the Constitution.

But you continue to do exactly what the President said would be done by those that oppose him. You continue to make statements designed to alarm people based on Obama's supposed experience with Islam. You're not at all specific, but your implication that his religion--whatever it is--is bad for America.

I'm left to disagree with you...again.

Sad, but true........why do I bother to read this thread?

Speaking of rants....I still don't understand how Obama could spend 19 years attending a church whose preacher rants such hateful and anti-american drivel. I can't remember the details (but a quick check would be easy) but it was making the news for awhile until it mysteriously went away. I worry more about that then his muslim associations.

The answer is simple - Obama is a Christian in name only, just as he is a Muslim in name only. He is first and foremost a politician. He attended 'Reverend Wright's church to provide himself with 'street cred' in the African-American community. I suspect that he listened to few, if any, of Rev. Wright's sermons. He is certainly not the first politician to use Church affiliation to advance his campaign.

Politicians from both major parties have appealed to different religious groups for support by downright lying. Give Obama a pass on this one - far too many of our leaders have done exactly the same thing. If you want to condemn them, then condemn universally from the Republicans who are suddenly Evangelicals to the Democrats who are now followers of African American churches and appear regularly in their pulpits during campaign season.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ANYONE'S RELIGION INCLUDING THIS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

The reason for the thread and post was the HYPOCRISY in the statements NOT the religion.

How this became an issue of attacking the religion is well beyond me. It was about the HYPOCRISY !

It was about saying one thing during the campaign and something totally different now !

This is the same as the campaign I suppose...thought we were passed that.

Seems if you oppoose President Obama and call him on anything you gotta be a racist or something else.

Since you took the time to post and "look down" on my thread with such an elitist attitude, you surely will be glad to post as to what is the silliness about this post which shows the campaign rhetoric for what it was.

If you feel the need to make it about religion, then it is your problem. This is not about that and that defense, used often during the campaign, just does not fly. It simply speaks to the shallowness of those making those claims.

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESIDENTS RELIGION, but I think you knew that..this is what was done during the campaign. That snobby attitude of ...oh, if you oppose him you are some kind of name...you can actually fill in the blank.

I dont expect you to believe this, since the truth for you is what YOU want it to be, but I never ever thought anyone would twist this to mean anything more than what it is ! Another example of hiding the past or changing it to serve the needs of the present !

I could care less if he is Muslim, Jew, Christian or Agnostic. I just so disagree with his policies that I honestly believe he will be one of the worst presidents ever. I disagree with his wealth redistribution, his spending, his involvement with GM, gitmo, his national health plan, his tax plan, his foreign policy, disarmament, and everything else he stands for. I disagree with VK and think he has yet to do a single thing I could support. He will lead us to higher interest rates and inflation that makes Jimmy Carter look tame, and he will lead us on a direct path to socialism. In my book he is already a miserable failure. And no, I am not a racist. I could care less that he is black, I just completely disagree with his policies. I feel exactly the same way about Nancy Polizi, but still love other women. :a20:

Honestly, you need to look at yourself and not me. My post says nothing about religion. And no one who knows would make the ellitest charge.

The post implied that perhaps Obama had tried to hide is religion during the election cycle and now it was coming out.

Only you know your motives, not I. But reread your posts....what do you find.

"This is my ENTIRE post...
__________________________________________________ ___

During the campaign as much as I posted I stayed away from this subject...so this story is somewhat shocking to me. I knew that he was misleading folks about his past, but this is pretty much "in your face" to those who believed in him and defended him..."
__________________________________________________ _______-

The balance of the posting is a quote from the article which clearly points out the hypocrisy !

Now, you explain to me "There will be no end to the right wing rant, innuendo and silliness."

To whom is that aimed ? What is the silliness ? Is it the quotes in the article or what ?

BHO being the perpetual campaigner and speaker of what one wants to hear
 

is merely using his personal campaign amplifier (that would be the ga-ga media) at this point in time (a BHO phrase!) to get a little focus on his involvement (as neutral as I can make it) with Muslism to his benefit for his current trip to the Arab countries.

He is the epitome of flying the flag of whoever is in front of him that has potential gain for HIM.

His comments on NBC last night about his upcoming speech and this moment in time and his message to those who have been trying to kill Americans is sort of ridiculous, considering they have been at what they do and how they do it for Centuries. And now the great orator thinks he is going to sweet talk the mis easterners the same way he has the crowd here in the USA...how naive is that?
It is another indicator of how he uses words for effect regardless the reality of their content.

We will see from whence he comes...roots or not....religion or not....partisan or not....when the Muslim radicals hit the USA with the next 9/11 type attack....which they have promised. Remember they are much more patient in their beliefs tha Americans. Recall how many years between major attacks to accomplish their promises. We all (I hope) pray to GOD there will not be another event, but they have done nothing to diminish their promise to kill as many Americans as possible....that is what is important.

The value of BHO muslim background? If it pprovides him gain it will be used. Look at the press of recent days....I rest my case!!!

BTK

I agree with you Shirleevee. For me it's, like driving by an accident. I don't want to look, but end up doing so. When I do, I wish I hadn't.

I, for one, would love to hear why you feel this way ??????

Me too. Please explain yourself. Speaking of accidents: You know what they say about hit and run.barf

Keedy

I think the "accident" post referred to reading the "anti Obama post of the day". Every day it is a new post. It doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do, there are people who will hate it. This is just todays post. The fact that someone has experience with something doesn't mean they are a devout supporter by the way. It means they have encountered it or have knowledge about it.

In the words of the immortal Duane Schneider, "Always remember and never forget,";

If you criticize a Muslim for knocking down a building, you are anti-Muslim.

If you shoot a minority who is trying to kill you, you are a racist.

And ON AND ON AND ON

That is the style of warfare used today, even by some allegedly well meaning Americans.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

This post actually makes some sense !!!!

First, in my opinion anyway, there are just as many if not MORE posts concerning our congress, and I am not sure what is wrong with having discussions and pointing out areas where you disagree on something. I absolutely do not think that even most of the negative posts are anti Obama, however after getting taken down many times during the campaign, I AM SURE THAT EVEN A DISCUSSION POINT IS TAKEN AS ANTI OBAMA. I might add here as was pointed out to me a few times on here.....when you are in the WH, this is the way it is (Do you recall that kind of rhetoric at all recently?)

Secondly, you are absolutely correct when you say "The fact that someone has experience with something doesn't mean they are a devout supporter by the way. It means they have encountered it or have knowledge about it."

I felt it was STRIKING the difference now however versus the campaign. There was a lot of talk.....LOTS AND LOTS of talk about this (by the way I was not involved in any of it) and Obama and his campaign were pretty clear and not misunderstood in their message. It is not the message he is giving now was my point. Sure we do this in politics but this was pretty serious during the primary as well as the general election...not a little thing with many americans !

LOL This is so funny. For 8 years they say that dissent is patriotic. Now they say we should put on our funny pink eye-glasses and work together.
Well, as long as I have breath in these old lungs, I will say what I think is wrong. By the way...I posted alot of dissent during the last 8 years and I voted for the guy. I did not like the spending, immigration and a few other policies.
There is a balance in this country. You know what absolute power does...don't you?
Keedy

I seem to recall the last 8 years when dissent was considered (loudly) as UNAMEARICAN.
Remember the Dixie Chicks? Or Valerie Plame?

Come on Kayaker, you can do better then that. That was basically a culture thing. She was upsetting her fan base, mostly the country and western crowd.
I have a better one: How about the New York Times printing classified information that our enemies could use against us? Another reason their circulation is diminishing.

Oh Yeah!
 

I'm with you Bucco! Let's not hide the past! Let's bring Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield to trial for war crimes. I'm all for drudging up the past! :laugh:

ahem....
 

In case you haven't noticed... the election is over! ;)

OK, I'll see your NYT article, and raise with Fox News Channel correspondent Geraldo Rivera getting kicked out of Iraq for revealing troop movements. :pepper2:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...j.irq.geraldo/

During the campaign when your pro Obama was simply anti Bush over and over.....I told you then and repeat....

I hope for such a thing involving the last adminsitration HOWEVER it must be public and every single word uttered on national television. And then let the chips fall where they may...I AGREE WITH YOU TOTALLY AND 100% !

As always you consistently misinterpet anyone who opposes the current adminstration and congress and go right to the Bush card. I say, bring it on...any laws broken, make them pay, but do it in the light of day in contest for all to see !

Actually the more I think about it...Chelsea24's idea of an open investigation into what she calls "war crimes" of the previous administration would be great but in my mind....EACH AND EVERY WORD IN CONTEXT must be delivered raw and undedited to the american public.

If there were war crimes committed then whatever the punishment is...do it...let BOTH sides present ALL the facts. Who knew what when...who approved it when and what, etc.

Not sure where this all came from...the thread was about hypocrisy in the Obama campaign....turned into chasing a ghost on being mean to muslims...then it turned into "just another negative about Obama" meaning I suppose that we cannot criticize this particular President...then it was about the past, and here I agree. I have been saying for over a year it is about the past, not so much the muslim stuff..that never interested me at all...but it is about the past.......

much like the Bush stories for 8 years about the 2000 election andhow he and his brother Jeb brought that home...or could be the Bush drinking IN THE PAST....or any number of things.

Bring on those hearings !!!!!!!!!!!!

OK I'll see you Geraldo and see Vice President Biden telling the world where Cheny's bunker is located.:beer3:

Hey this is fun! I was saying that for 8 years to the sore losers who voted for Gore:beer3:

Keedy

It is impossible to prosecute politicians for things done
 

wrong (real, perceived or lied about)....because it would not work to just single out whoever is in ones cross hairs today....if however prosecution must be entertained then how about prosecuting all the liars and wrong doers in Washington? Not a bad idea but there would be NOBODY not up for prosecution for something, hence none get prosecuted....the situation is partisan insensitive as they are all involved or none are not excluded.

Some example they set for morals and doing what is right...they are perfect examples of what not to do. As mere mortals we the people could not get away with it.....

It comes with being a politician.

BTK

OMG Just last week they were talking about Truman being a criminal for bombing Japan. Where would it end? There is a way for prosecuting someone by using his past. For instance: The drunk driving incident which killed a young woman when Ted Kennedy drove his car off a bridge. Most experts believe that one incident kept him from winning the Presidency. To be fair, I'm sure there are plenty of examples of politicians from the other party being tried in the media, also.

Good or bad...I think it would be logistically impossible to prosecute wrong doings from the past in our courts.

You are correct of course BTK, but Chelsea and others (she is not alone) react to crticism of President Obama (or actually anything within their party) with the Bush rhetoric and I would really love to see it without the all the sound bites, etc....this is the answer to most criticism of Obama....blame it on or blame Bush !

You notice, except for VK (this is my opinion)...NOBODY defends Obama with any facts or discussion....they simply refer to Bush !

I actually can see the frustration and the calling everything in political to be negative if you dont have any facts to discuss or do not have the interest to develop facts, and you just want to follow blindly. It would be frustrating to read anti congress and anti Obama each and every day.

Just to be a bit self serving.....most of what I have posted on here is anti Obama and has been since the primary before he was the candidate. Back in the days when those who are upset with the criticism were calling him an "empty suit" but now swoon at his feet.

I am not a Bush apologist, but cannot prove that to anyone on here just simply based on timing of my coming to this board.

But.....
 

Bucco, sweetie. You're the one that brought up the past. The past starts less than a second ago and goes a long way back baby! You just seem to want to go back as far as the campaign. :shrug:

Anyway, I just know you missed me and had to give you a shout out! :laugh:

As always I have no clue what the meaning of your post is ~!!

I brought up the past relative to the training and background of President Obama, a subject I posted on here many many times about as far back as when you called him that "empty suit".

Now that you have swooned for him, I have stayed the course because I think his background if absolutely relative (and he is doing what I told you would happen during the campaign).

You want to discuss Bush...fine with me, but discuss it..dont give out the sound bites you hear from the party. TALK about it....I am agreeing with your idea of an open investigation with all the facts on the table.

Bucco, do you really think her reply deserves a response? Consider the source. Some people would never believe what they know to be true if it was placed in front of them on a silver platter. Sometimes your better off to ignore people who have nothing valid to say.

have noticed jake tapper before....
 

he was the only reporter to ask any really journalistic questions at the last news conference...i think there may be at least one fair reporter in the mainstream media....how refreshing!

Logically, it will end with the incitement of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, ET AL for treason. Didn't you figure?

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

The purpose of this thread was not in anyway to say anything negative about Islam, nor anyone's religion but simply the hypocrisy shown on the issue of Islam where as in the primary and campaign it was something NOT to be mentioned at all, it is now a topic of discussion.

I add this note because during the primary and the campaign there was a poster or two (I am sorry I do not recall their names, but it was not me) who would refer to our President using his middle name. There were also a few radio commentators who mentioned it on the air.

The posters were really ridiculed on here...they were taken to task BIG TIME. The radio hosts were ridiculed on cable shows and criticized loud and clear.

Today, I heard the President use his middle name...so now I suppose it is ok !

This note is not meant to say anything negative about Islam nor any person's religion, but simply to address the hypocrisy !

Whaaat??
 

Yeah, I think it's OK for a person to use all of his given names...or not use them, as he/she sees fit.

We are really testing a new level of political criticism with discussion of people's given names, I think. I had nothing to say about the names my parents gave me, nor does anyone else that I ever heard of, including Barack Hussein Obama.