18-24% of Americans Wrongly believe Obama is Muslim

Madanthonywayne:

Mad, this has a little something do to with the right wing machine deliberately undermining the legitimacy of the president by nurturing those ideas.

I agree with this.
--

Why does it matter to Americans, anyway? So what if Obama was Muslim? Or atheist? Or Hari Krishna?
 
I tend to come across polls like these a lot (a quarter of Americans do not know that America broke away from Great Britain, for example).

In this particular case, I think the reason for the confusion is that Obama does not communicate anything about his religion. The only religious stories I remember are Fox News stories complaining about his skipping church. I am fine with that though, since his religion should be irrelevant. It has nothing to do with his job, he's not supposed to be Pastor-in-Chief.

It's not necessarily that people don't know who he is, it's that what they know of him are the policies he supports, not which denomination he belongs to.
 
Mr. Murdoch is getting his money's worth out of Fox News.

The discovery that man can be scientifically manipulated, and that governments can turn large masses this way or that as they choose, is one of the causes of our misfortunes. There is as much difference between a collection of mentally free citizens and a community molded by modern methods of propaganda as there is between a heap of raw materials and a battleship.
- Bertrand Russell, An Outline Of Intellectual Rubbish
 
Madanthonywayne:
Why does it matter to Americans, anyway? So what if Obama was Muslim? Or atheist? Or Hari Krishna?
Religion is, and always has been, very important to Americans. Remember, we were founded by religious fanatics.

I seriously doubt a Muslim, an atheist, or a Hari Krishna could be elected in the US. JFK was the first Catholic ever elected. Even Mitt Romney, a Mormon, had problems in his bid for the Republican nomination because of his faith.

Worse yet, the Time magazine poll cited in the OP shows that nearly one third of the US believes Muslims should be banned from serving as president altogether.

So, sad to say, religion still does matter in US politics.
 
Conservative bigots need psychiatric help

Deputy White House Communications Director Jen Psaki responded today to the Pew Poll figures:

"President Obama is a committed Christian, and his faith is an important part of his daily life," Deputy White House Communications Director Jen Psaki told CNN. "He prays every day, he seeks a small circle of Christian pastors to give him spiritual advice and counseling, he even receives a daily devotional that he uses each morning. The President's Christian faith is a part of who he is, but not a part of what the public or the media is focused on everyday."

(Lothian)

Additionally, Psaki explained that Obama's Christian faith "guides him through the challenges – a recovering economy, bringing troops home from Iraq, putting healthcare and financial reform implementation in place", but also explained that he doesn't wear his religion on his sleeve.

Should he really have to?

Madanthonywayne said:

Religion is, and always has been, very important to Americans. Remember, we were founded by religious fanatics.

I seriously doubt a Muslim, an atheist, or a Hari Krishna could be elected in the US. JFK was the first Catholic ever elected. Even Mitt Romney, a Mormon, had problems in his bid for the Republican nomination because of his faith.

Worse yet, the Time magazine poll cited in the OP shows that nearly one third of the US believes Muslims should be banned from serving as president altogether.

So, sad to say, religion still does matter in US politics.

Sad to say, indeed. Some would even go so far as to say disgusting, repugnant, and worthy of ridicule.

Indeed, the conservatives who drive this insane bigotry need to be reckoned with. But what, in the end, is appropriate in civil society? Personally, I think they're a useless pile of shite that ought to be disregarded on any occasion that they open their mouths. We have a lot more pressing issues to face as a nation, yet there are how fucking many who don't want us to do so, because they still want to bitch and moan because they lost the last presidential election?

Grotesque. Sickening. Insane. These people need serious psychiatric help; they're simply not competent.
____________________

Notes:

Lothian, Dan. "White House strikes back at 'Muslim' tag". CNN Political Ticker. August 19, 2010. PoliticalTicker.Blogs.CNN.com. August 19, 2010. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/19/white-house-strikes-back-at-muslim-tag/
 
Indeed, the conservatives who drive this insane bigotry need to be reckoned with. But what, in the end, is appropriate in civil society? Personally, I think they're a useless pile of shite that ought to be disregarded on any occasion that they open their mouths. We have a lot more pressing issues to face as a nation, yet there are how fucking many who don't want us to do so, because they still want to bitch and moan because they lost the last presidential election?

Grotesque. Sickening. Insane. These people need serious psychiatric help; they're simply not competent.
An interesting, albeit predictable take. Here's a more objective analysis:
"Trust and distrust - that explains almost all of it," says Nicholas DiFonzo, professor of psychology at the Rochester Institute of Technology and an expert on rumor and gossip research. "We are in such a highly polarized political environment. Our country is sorting itself into more closely knit, opposing factions each year" - factions, DiFonzo suggests, that in turn become "echo chambers" for factoids that aren't fact at all.
And this highly polarized environment is made worse by the internet which allows wackos to find like minded people to confirm their beliefs:
"The Internet has made it worse," says Lori Robertson, managing editor of the website FactCheck.org, a nonpartisan project run under the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. "Any of these rumors are more rampant, and there's more stuff about them - blogs writing about conspiracy theories. People are exposed to it more."
It is true that certain extremist commentators like Michael Savage have added to the problem, but even some straight news stories may have left the public confused:
when President Obama traveled to Cairo for a long-awaited speech to the Muslim world, the White House was saying, and the press was reporting, the same thing Kerrey had to apologize for. “President Obama is now embracing his Muslim roots,” ABC News’ “Nightline” announced. “President Obama’s speech … was laced with references to the Quran and his Muslim roots,” said USA Today. “Obama touched on his own Muslim roots,” reported the Associated Press.

Many people do not pay close attention to news reports. It’s entirely possible some of them blurred the distinction between “Muslim roots” and “Muslim,”

 
The cesspit of hatred

Madanthonywayne said:

An interesting, albeit predictable take. Here's a more objective analysis ....

All well and fine.

But if we didn't have a bunch of racist Birther lunatics running around screaming at the top of their lungs and filing frivolous lawsuits ...

If we didn't have a bunch of half-witted Tea Partiers carrying signs like, "Obama my forefathers were Christian yours were from Kenya that explains a lot about you!" ...

If we didn't have a bunch of racists like Rand Paul on Republican tickets ...

If we didn't have almost twelve percent of the GOP House caucus supporting the Birthers ...

If we didn't have a bunch of insincere people like you pushing the argument ...

... Americans wouldn't have to worry about the distinction between "Muslim roots" and "Muslim".

You know, those people who aren't racist, but use, support, and defend racist rhetoric anyway? Yeah, they're part of the problem.

Welcome to America: Y'all have the right to try to drag the rest of us down into your cesspit of hatred.
 
You know, the whole "my Muslim faith" gaffe sure plays a big part in this.

Ironic that Howard Dean's presidential run was scuttled by The Scream, a harmless little show of emotion, and yet President Obama can still get elected after such a huge faux pas.
 
All well and fine.

But if we didn't have a bunch of racist Birther lunatics running around screaming at the top of their lungs and filing frivolous lawsuits ...

If we didn't have a bunch of half-witted Tea Partiers carrying signs like, "Obama my forefathers were Christian yours were from Kenya that explains a lot about you!" ...

If we didn't have a bunch of racists like Rand Paul on Republican tickets ...

If we didn't have almost twelve percent of the GOP House caucus supporting the Birthers ...

If we didn't have a bunch of insincere people like you pushing the argument ...

... Americans wouldn't have to worry about the distinction between "Muslim roots" and "Muslim".

You know, those people who aren't racist, but use, support, and defend racist rhetoric anyway? Yeah, they're part of the problem.

Welcome to America: Y'all have the right to try to drag the rest of us down into your cesspit of hatred.

The only hatred I see here is from you.

You haven't missed a single play from the liberal playbook of slander.

The funny thing, (as Obama falls in the polls, and continues to expose Himself), is the desperation of the sycophants like you in their defence of their Liberal Messiah Obama.

This isn't the only time that Obama has said My Muslim Faith, or His deep Muslim Roots, it take some research but time and again there are stories and videos of Obama saying one thing here, to America, and claiming another in speeches and meetings, to and with the Ruling Faithfull of Islam.

http://www.weeklyblitz.net/940/muslim-obama-controversy



[1] March 2009, Obama declares the "war on terror" is over despite a dramatic increase in jihad war ops.

[2] March 2009, he floats the idea that he will talk to violent, genocidal Hamas.

[3] March 2009, he demands, recruits and insists that more Muslim Americans work in the Obama administration.

[4] April 2009, Obama tells Europe to admit Islamic Turkey into EU, much to the consternation of the Europeans.

[5] April 2009, Obama demands non-Muslims respect Islam in a speech in Turkey.

[6] April 2009, Obama in a speech from Turkey: "We are not a Christian nation."

[7] April 2009, Dalia Mogahed, the first hijab-clad senior adviser to Obama on Muslim affairs says in an interview with terrorist- and jihad-supporting Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi's website, "Many have claimed that terrorists have 'hijacked Islam'. I disagree. I think Islam is safe and thriving in the lives of Muslims around the world. What the terrorists have been allowed to take over are Muslim grievances."

[8] In April 2009, Obama lays groundwork for a partnership with Hamas.

[9] May 2009, Obama promises to offer his "personal commitment" to Muslims.

[10] May 2009, Obama calls America "one of the largest Muslim countries on the planet."

[11] June 2009, Obama invites the Muslim Brotherhood, violent global jihadist group whose sole objective is a universal caliphate, to his speech to the Ummah [Muslim community] in Cairo.

[12] June 2009, Obama makes a stunning speech to the Muslim world from Al Azhar University in Cairo. It defies explanation.

[13] July 2009, Obama creates a new office at the State department, Outreach to the Worldwide Muslim community, reporting directly to Hillary Clinton.

[14] October 2009, Obama offers millions in Muslim technology fund.

[15] May 2010, Obama's Counterterrorism Advisor calls Jihad "Legitimate Tenet of Islam".


Adul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, where the US President told him that He was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the step son of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.
 
Last edited:
Religion is, and always has been, very important to Americans. Remember, we were founded by religious fanatics.
The country was founded by British nobility and prospecting merchants.

I seriously doubt a Muslim, an atheist, or a Hari Krishna could be elected in the US.
Atheists have higher chances than most simply as a result of there being more of them.

It would be more astute to simply point out that minorities do not tend to do as well in politics. Even though atheists are less widely liked than Muslims, it's better the "frienemy" you know than the friendly stranger who might stab you in the back.

In fact, it is likely that Barack Obama's ethnicity works against him. In situations in which white populists believe that they have the upper hand, they will admit to you plainly what really bothers them about Obama. To quote one memorable woman of the "redneck" persuasion, "What really bugs me is that we have a nigger in the White House."

If you think that racism is a think of the cold and distant past in the US, as far as public policy, you are naive or simply a scoundrel. In the US, something called "community-centered schooling" is becoming popular. It sounds nice, doesn't it? In some cases, it is simply a renaissance of Jim Crow. Some cities have applied the concept in a manner that is consciously intended to do the opposite...that is, to bring in students from various economic backgrounds. However, this is not always the case.

And, speaking from second-hand experience, my mother, who is a teacher for the public school system, was forced to leave one of her jobs. The AG program was being used to the same effect: rich white parents were paying off quack psychiatrists to diagnose their children as "gifted," so they could sit in the AG classes with the belief that they were somehow special. They were only special in the sense that their parents were corrupt, and they are probably destined to exhibit the same pattern of behavior as adults. When my mother attempted to make noise about the issue, she was met with scorn, and she eventually handed in her resignation and picked up a job in another county. Even though this is not strictly speaking racism, it is still economic segregation. It is an effort by the affluent to create a social structure in which they are considered to be inherently "better." Feudalism is the first step back to savagery.

Of course, this doesn't mean that the people who are likely to be affected by this are evil. Although it is a sad problem and a serious problem, we need to understand what the problem is. Firstly, black people are correctly perceived as being more likely to be from a lower-class background, and our society still places a great emphasis on affluence. Secondly, many people still see a black person as something strange and foreign, simply due to lack of interaction with black people. Thirdly, and most sadly, images in the media can paint the black person as a potentially threatening figure. Finally, many black people in the US do practice Islam or at least, if they are Christian or atheistical, have an intellectual fascination with it.

However, Barack Obama's apparent ethnicity was an advantage to him during the election of 2008. Because the country was weary of the ancien regime, they wanted something that looked new and fresh. They were looking for an "outsider." Barack Obama essentially rode into town on a pale horse, and he was appointed Sherriff and asked to come and dispense "his own kind of justice."

2012 is to be a different fight altogether. If Barack Obama wants to stay in office in 2012, he needs to play the insider. He needs to style himself, starting right now, as the graybeard. The "strange man on the pale horse" routine only works once.

And he has plenty of grounds on which to do so. He could portray the GOP candidates as dangerous gamblers. He could claim they want to use the American people as guinea pigs. However, the only way he will be able to make this work would be to follow a less experimental type of policy than he has during his first two years as the President of the United States. He needs to examine the successes and failures of not only his predecessors but also those of other national leaders. You can love it. You can hate it. Either way, your choices are either this or Nancy Pelosi.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Adul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, where the US President told him that He was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the step son of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.

Would be good if we could find a credible source for this...Newsweek, US News, Time, etc.
 
The country was founded by British nobility and prospecting merchants.
You are incorrect. I notice you quickly edited your post to remove the "royalty" comment. Royalty and nobility founded the colonies; the country was founded by God-fearing business men.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Royalty and nobility founded the colonies; the country was founded by God-fearing business men.
The Constitution of Carolina was authored by one of my ancestors, who was a member of the nobility. In fact, he was also one of the men who helped end tyranny in Britain.

Furthermore, many of your "god-fearing businessmen" were also British nobility.

The religious nuts wanted to run a fucking commune.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The country was founded by British nobility and prospecting merchants.
The Pilgrims came to America to be free to practice their brand of religion which was considered extreme and subject to persecution in England.
Atheists have higher chances than most simply as a result of there being more of them.
Sure. That's why we've had, how many atheist presidents? Zero.
In fact, it is likely that Barack Obama's ethnicity works against him. In situations in which white populists believe that they have the upper hand, they will admit to you plainly what really bothers them about Obama. To quote one memorable woman of the "redneck" persuasion, "What really bugs me is that we have a nigger in the White House."
I have never heard anyone refer to the president in that way. People don't like Obama because of his policies and because the economy is in the tank.
However, Barack Obama's apparent ethnicity was an advantage to him during the election of 2008. Because the country was weary of the ancien regime, they wanted something that looked new and fresh. They were looking for an "outsider." Barack Obama essentially rode into town on a pale horse, and he was appointed Sherriff and asked to come and dispense "his own kind of justice."
I pretty much agree with this.
2012 is to be a different fight altogether.
Indeed. In 2008 Obama ran as the anti-Bush on a nebulous platform of "hope and change". In 2012 he'll have to run on his actual record.
 
I think the problem here, is that Americans are waking up to the godawful truth, finally.

They've figured it out: Obama is unable, unlike his predecessor, to shoot flames out of his ass. Oh, the profanity!

Maybe after a good one-on-one with the new Aussie battler, a decent "light-em-up" session in the Oval Office--whatsisname Stevo, or Terry or something, you know, got elected recently for farting in public (with the best Aussie aplomb I've seen for awhile).

For the shocked and horrified: taking the piss, when it comes to politicos, is a finely wrought Antipodean pastime. We don't take politicians all that seriously--have you noticed?
 
Last edited:
They've figured it out: Obama is unable, unlike his predecessor, to shoot flames out of his ass. Oh, the profanity!
That is actually an intelligent point.

Maybe after a good one-on-one with the new Aussie battler, a decent "light-em-up" session in the Oval Office--whatsisname Stevo, or Terry or something, you know, got elected recently for farting in public (with the best Aussie aplomb I've seen for awhile).

For the shocked and horrified: taking the piss, when it comes to politicos, is a finely wrought Antipodean pastime. We don't take politicians all that seriously--have you noticed?
I approve.

God save the Queen.
 
The Pilgrims came to America to be free to practice their brand of religion which was considered extreme and subject to persecution in England.

Not to endorse Alien Cockroach's comments, but it is curious that the Pilgrims and the Puritans get all the press when it comes to the founding. First, the Puritans were were more likely to persecute other religions than anyone in England. They left England for Holland...and then left Holland because there were too many sinners there. When they came here they periodically passed laws banning many ungodly practices, like:

  • skipping church
  • falling asleep in church
  • being a Quaker (which was punishable by death for a while)
  • cursing your parents (punishable by death, though unlike the Quaker ban, not actually enforced)
  • celebrating Christmas (for at least 22 years).

The Quakers were also here to be free from persecution (though had to avoid New England for that), but weren't considered terribly extreme.

The rest of the country...New York and New Jersey (both originally Dutch), Delaware (Swedish, then Dutch, before the Quakers were took it over) and Virginia and the Carolinas, those were mostly settled by people interested in commerce, not those fleeing religious persecution. Georgia was somewhat of a mix. Some of the early settlers were there as an alternative to debtor's prison, some were religiously persecuted, some were there for commercial reasons.

Religious persecution in Europe was a reason for some people to move, but it strikes me as a somewhat less important reason than the national mythology sometimes makes it out to be. There's no shame in moving because you want to pursue commercial interests.
 
Back
Top