Oh, hai everyone! Did you know President Obama is a SECRET! Muslim? Yesh! The Righties in their tightie whities have been telling us all about this SECRET for years.
Wait.
If everyone knows Obummer/Obongo is a SECRET Muslim, how is it a SECRET?
Wait again!
If everyone knew this SECRET Muslim was a Muslim (living in OUR WHITE HOUSE, by golly!), why did the American people vote for him TWICE! OMG! It MUST be because the American people are STUPID! That explains EVERYTHING!!!!!
Can you believe it?! Now, let's look at the amazing evidence these super sleuths have dug up from the bowels of the intertubz so that every red, white, and blue American will know the real honest-to-apple-pie truth about the usurping, Kenyan, Marxist, Commie, America (AND FRENCH!)-hater. And boy-o do they have the goods on this SECRET Muslim.
Let's start with this unbelievably Muslim-loving quote by Barry Soetoro HUSSEIN Obama:
 |
Are you kidding me!? He said that? OMERGERD! That proves it! Wow! How could we red, white, and blue Americans have been so blind. I mean look! the proof is right in front of us!
Wait. What? That's not the whole quote? That's only part of what the Righties in the tightie whities spread around the intertubz to make it look like PBO is a Muslim?
Noooooooooooo! What kind of scummy liars would do such a thing?! What's the REAL quote?
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied."
Oops! That doesn't say what the Tightie Whitie Righties want you, you gullible little stack of pancakes, to believe, does it.
What? There's more?
Show me:
That's awful! I mean, doesn't that make your eyes bleed when you read it! And just look at the turban Hussein Obama is wearing. Doesn't that prove he's a Muslim, even though, y'know, it's the style of a turban more likely to be found on a Sikh's head rather than on a Muslim's. But I digress. The important thing to know is that Hussein Obama said "I will stand with the Muslims...!"
Wait! That's not the whole quote either? Whaaa?
Misleading e-mail: From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
Actual quote from "The Audacity of Hope" [pg. 261]:
"Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
Obama did not say he would side with "the Muslims," which could easily be read as meaning he would side with the world’s Muslim population even if it meant working outside the best interests of the United States.
He said he would side with "them," referring back to his mention of immigrant communities and specifically to "Arab and Pakistani Americans." Furthermore, he was speaking of an "ugly direction" like the mass internment of Japanese Americans.
So what are we supposed to think here, guys? Did the SECRET Muslim, Barack Hussein Obama, really say the future doesn't belong to those who slander the prophet and that he'd stand with the Muzzies?
Well, actually, no!
But...but...the emails and images going around the intertubz all say he DID!
Does that mean that the people who copy and paste these images into their blogs are a bunch of ugly, hateful, malignant, character-assassinating mountbanks, willing to spread lies in order to slander the blah in the White House?
Well, maybe they're not all ugly. Some may even have all of their teeth.
34 comments:
It is no secret that far right politicians like Sam Brownback and Ron Santorum, as well as in
Britain and Italy, are members of the uber-conservative Opus Dei.
-Whose secrets date to pre WWII
fascism. Let the accusers clean
their own house.
Well, of course. They lie. They blatantly, knowingly, premeditatedly lie. We've seen them do it in comment threads right on this blog, any number of times. The only reason they even bother to take real quotes and distort them is that, as CS Lewis said, if you mix a little truth into a lie, you make the lie far stronger. Remember "you didn't build that"? The people who started the meme that Obama meant business owners hadn't "built" their businesses had obviously heard the entire quote and they knew what Obama had actually said. They intentionally lied. It's the same here.
Not for nothing, but we all know Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech. Maybe some would still wail and flail, but they'd haven't a leg to stand on even amongst their own.
If he'd name the enemy already, a lot of these nuts would turn their attentions back to other trivial pursuits.
That he doesn't want to is on him. Whatever his reasons, 1) It doesn't seem to be helping, and 2) It doesn't convey strength or confidence. And it most certainly makes for great conspiracy fodder.
Gonna get even more insane.
"Joni Ernst To Deliver GOP Response To 2015 State Of The Union Address"
Already breaking in Michele Bachmann's replacement.
Get ready buckaroos it's going to be a wild two years.
"Joni Ernst To Deliver GOP Response To 2015 State Of The Union Address"
Senator Pig Castrator?
You're kidding. We wondered if they could get any crazier than they already were.
I guess we know now.
Josh: "Not for nothing, but we all know Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech,"
End to what ramblings? That the nuts on the right think he's a Muslim? Why should he have to say anything more about his Christian religion? No other president has had his religion questioned. Why do you suppose that is?
Infidel753: "Well, of course. They lie. They blatantly, knowingly, premeditatedly lie."
It's the habit of weaselly liars to take half a quote and try to twist someone's words to make it look like he or she is saying the opposite of what is meant.
The Soviet propagandists would have envied their treachery.
BBIdaho - Brownback is NOT in Opus Dei because he's a Dominionist meaning Pentecostal. He's not Catholic at all. He anointed another Dominionist, Rick Perry, thereby conferring God's "chosen" status for the 2012 election. Among Dominionists there is great hostility toward Catholicism, even Opus Dei, so at best Brownback and company are uneasy allies of those who are ultra-Right Catholics.
And he dares to come to Liberal blogs to play nice.........In my eyes he's nothing but a Self-Righteous Obnoxious Hypocritical Son Of A Birch!
How many ways can we call this guy an Obnoxious Hypocritical Son Of A Birch?
Anon,
"In 2002, an Opus Dei priest, the Rev. C. John McCloskey III, former director of the Catholic Information Center, converted U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) from evangelical Protestantism to Catholicism. Brownback's conversion was shepherded by U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), a conservative Catholic and Opus Dei booster" Source -whatever his convoluted
theology, according to friends in Kansas, he is rapidly turning the
Jayhawker state into Mississippi.
From the link BB-Idaho provided on Opus Dei:
"Long the scourge of progressive Catholics, Opus Dei, with an estimated 80,000 members worldwide, has enjoyed a close relationship with the church's conservative hierarchy, serving, as one writer put it in the mid 1980s, as a "holy mafia" to promote far-right views on "culture war" issues."
"Holy Mafia?" The connotations associated with that are chilling.
I hope Papa Francisco has more than a few body guards around him. I'm sure the "Holy Mafia" would love to see his Pontificate be a very short one.
Tough Tony Scalia is Opus Dei.
Well, conspiracy nutters are always unfortunately going to exist. Just about three weeks ago, right after Christmas, one of my progressive friends floated the idea of trying again with a petition to charge George W. Bush with plotting the attacks of 911. Multiple explosions caused the collapse, according to him and many others, despite everything else to the contrary. So there is no way Obama's going to escape the full weight of conspiracy. The more popular one is, the more of this type of nonsense they have to put up with.
But I tend to notice a spike in the "He's a secret Muslim" claims, and it usually happens directly after radical Islamic extremists blow something up or kill someone, and when our President speaks he calls them any and everything but radical Islamic extremists.
The administration goes out of its way not to use such language. For what reasons? I haven't the slightest. But to someone already unstable and looking for it, that's a key piece of evidence for them to believe he's a Muslim.
But is there something wrong with being a Muslim, though?
I remember not that long ago one of those 'net trolls was calling me gay, over and over and over, and he seemed to be really upset that I wasn't upset. "But you're gay, c$*ksucker!" he said almost puzzled as to why my response was just "lol." It's hard to insult me with something that isn't insulting.
Josh-from Oshkosh-by-Gosh: “Not for nothing, but we all know Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech.”
If a partisan hack says something defamatory, inflammatory, or stupid, the onus of responsibility falls upon the author, not the recipient. And there are two choices. You can either …
1- Refute the drivel or
2- Ignore the drivel
If you are very busy with urgent matters, the better part of valor is to ignore the drivel and not waste valuable time. So why should Obama - or anyone - feel obligated to respond to slush-on-demand. The most unworthy crapola does not always deserve an answer – not Birtherism, nor Flat Eartherism, nor any Manchurian candidate claim awash in squash.
Off topic: There is a position available for an Amoeba-in Residence to serve as spokesperson for the Tea Party. What could be simpler? A single cellular organism with no organ systems – no heart, no liver, no brain – to represent the voice of no government, no taxes, and no rules or social conventions. A formless creature that can shape in a moment – with talking points to match. Contact (O)CT(O)PUS for details.
when our President speaks he calls them any and everything but radical Islamic extremists. The administration goes out of its way not to use such language. For what reasons?
It's perfectly simple. He's trying to avoid antagonizing other Muslims who are allies or potential allies against the extremists. This was particularly obvious back in September when Obama said that ISIS is not truly Islamic, even though he undoubtedly knows better. It's often necessary to use dishonest diplomatic language because there are practical benefits to be had by doing so. I posted about this here. It's a normal part of international relations and always has been.
Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech.
Nonsense. We're dealing with deliberate lies here, not lack of information or evidence. With this as with the other lies conservatives have promulgated about Obama, they already know that what they are saying is a lie, and they spread them anyway. No amount of facts and evidence will make the lying stop.
Did I say the onus was on Obama?
Of course I didn't.
If you quoted what I actually said rather than what your paranoid mind links random words together to mean, you wouldn't have material.
Josh: “Not for nothing, but we all know Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech.”
There is no other way to take the above statement as anything BUT putting the onus on President Obama to "put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech."
Those are YOUR words explaining that the President can stop people believing he's a Muslim by giving a speech.
Also, what Infidel753 said:
Josh: "Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech."
Infidel753: "Nonsense. We're dealing with deliberate lies here, not lack of information or evidence. With this as with the other lies conservatives have promulgated about Obama, they already know that what they are saying is a lie, and they spread them anyway. No amount of facts and evidence will make the lying stop."
So a fella paints a still life with apples and oranges and declares” “Everyone should paint like me!”
Why not paint scrapple with snapple? How about bananas? Or Anas Americana from Havana in shades of red, white and blue! What to include or exclude on any canvas is in the eye of the beholder. So let’s look at your props, Josh-by-Gosh:
“I was simply pointing out that there's another religion out there, that which shan't be named, where a person literally has to take lives before being thought in the extreme. Everything less is considered a moderate stance.”
Are we using a double standard here? Do we really hold Christians to a higher standard than Muslims? Is the ‘taking of lives’ the only litmus test of “radical” Islam? What’s on your canvas? These are on mine ...
Forbidding young girls from getting an education [an example of Taliban extremism]; throwing acid in the faces of young schoolgirls [Taliban extremism]; the shooting of Malala Yousafzai [Taliban extremism]; burqas, hijabs, niqabs, blasphemy laws, arranged marriages, childhood marriages, vani, genital mutilation, gender discrimination ...
Are these enough props for your canvas? Speaking of double standards, there are Muslims who can make similar claims. Anti-Semitism and holocaust denial are banned in France and other European countries but not anti-Islamic rhetoric. In case you haven’t noticed: Islamophobia has become quite fashionable these days.
You see, here is my point: Anyone can decide what props to paint, and where to place the Archimedes point of any argument. This is the mother of all false equivalences, and the most common cheat sheet used in dishonest debate.
Josh-by-Gosh: “ … when our President speaks he calls them any and everything but radical Islamic extremists … The administration goes out of its way not to use such language. For what reasons? I haven't the slightest.”
Here’s why. There are 1.7 billion Muslims on this planet, and a similar number of Christians. Are you itching to start a paradigm war, a clash of civilizations? Humanoids are a destructive and doomed species; cephalopods shall inherit the Earth. So go right ahead! Be my guest!
Also sprach der Krakken.
It's quote-mining.
It's being used to suggest I'm saying it's Obama's fault the idiots are pushing their conspiracy, when that is not the intent of that statement. It is simply pointing out that Obama has the power available to make them shut up, if he wanted.
He can do what he wants; but the fact remains it is within his power to shut a lot of them up. It's a simple observation.
"But I tend to notice a spike in the "He's a secret Muslim" claims, and it usually happens directly after radical Islamic extremists blow something up or kill someone, and when our President speaks he calls them any and everything but radical Islamic extremists."
I also say that the lunatics are going to believe whatever, and there's no way to escape it entirely. But presenting that quote as if I'm saying Obama is at actual fault for what people say about him is the height of intellectual dishonesty.
Do you people despise me that much? Honestly.
I know my first time back here I was called a racist multiple times, and now some dude is so obsessed with me that he's given me a cutsie little nickname, speaks about me randomly in posts I'm not a part of, and loves painting me as some villain. And the quote-mining is always a nice touch. But why? Did I insult any of y'all? Did I insult Obama or something? Did I pee on one of your patriarchy pamphlets or use a banned word or commit the atrocity of a microaggression something? I'm at a loss.
Josh, please. You are misunderstanding and misreading what people wrote in response to your claim that "Obama could put an end to the ramblings of lunatics with a single speech."
No one here has faulted you. What we've answered is that no amount of speechifying by Obama will stop the Cringe Fringe from claiming Obama is a Muslim. Period.
BTW, Mr. Obama HAS STATED quite clearly that he is a Christian. It is the maniacs and hysterics on the Right who refuse to take him at his word. How many times must Mr. Obama repeat his assertion that he is a Christian?
Here is a link to his statement on his Christianity:
President Obama: ‘I am a Christian By Choice…The Precepts of Jesus Spoke to Me’
Mr. Obama has made it abundantly clear that he is a Christian--more than once.
The whackos--wherever they are on the political spectrum--need to STFU on this subject, because the more they harangue on it, the more they are seen to be lunatics.
Josh, its not in his power to change un changeable minds. He tried this with his birth certificate and we saw how well that worked.
Not one GOP leader has stood with Pres Obama on that count and said unequivocally that his birth certificate is accurate, that he was born in the US, and that he is a natural born American citizen. Not one that I know of.
Many have said they take him at his word yes, but that us the weasel way... Why not just stand with him?
Fear of backlash? Probably. Lack of spine? Most likely.
There is nothing Obama can do to change the minds of people determined to hold these types of views.
But here's the difference between now and W's times...
Back then Dems stood with Bush and said the extremists on the left were wrong and out of line.
We're still waiting for the GOP to do that fir Obama.
Josh,
You should write this on a blackboard one hundred times:
"Bullshit does not deserve the dignity or legitimacy of a presidential response."
Meanwhile, the rest of us will eat your lunch while you complete the assignment ...
How many times did Dubya have to say he was a Christian? Or born in the USA?
What made it different for Obama?
Anyone?
Dave, I'm not so sure.
While there are some whackos out there who continue to insist Obama is a Kenyan-born man who is thus disqualified from the office of President, that entire crew took a hell of a hit when Obama's BC details were widely released and when much of media began explaining the details.
It went from one of the top criticisms to a strict fringe criticism.
As I said, he's never going to escape the full weight of it, but many of the loons will go back to other of their trivial pursuits.
There was a time when you only had to open your ears to hear it; now, I'd argue, you have to go to the fringes to find it. I think it would be the same in this situation. Obama has it within his power. That's not to say it's his responsibility; rather, he holds the key.
Octopus, you're weak. That I'm so under your skin that you bring me up in unrelated discussions of which I'm not a part is enough for me. I haunt your dreams, evidently, all because my opinion varies from yours.
I've never cursed at you. I've never had a bad or mean word to say in your direction. But because your ilk are allergic to true diversity, e.g. diversity in thought, you've had a hare up your ass since first ever you read one of my posts. I'm flattered, so long as you're not thinking about me while you rub one out. That'd just be creepy.
And this "we" and "us" stuff is just sad. I realize I'm treated like a piece of shit around here, but you take it above and beyond. Do you need backup now?
"What made it different for Obama?"
A stab in the dark, and some further fodder for Octonoob to take out of context: The same reason George Bush wasn't accused of raping women or having Alzheimer's or being involved in real estate fraud.
The fire builds from the fuel provided. I know a lot of people love to say the "first black president" and use that as the reason. But Obama's a "first" in other regards as well. Bush didn't have the international upbringing Obama did, did he? Instead, he dealt with different accusations as President; e.g. wartime coward, 911 plotter, Cheney's puppet, etc.
To me, it seems the answer is easier than many are willing to admit. That is to say, it's the people themselves whose lives and career trajectories dictate ultimately which nutter conspiracies will take root. It'd be kind of hard to start one saying Bush was born in Kenya or that Clinton's BC was false. These questions don't loom over their heads; and that's how most of these things start: With a question.
What happened in Roswell? From that question, look at the results some many decades later. What happened to the Twin Towers? What is Area 51? On and on.
We love conspiracies as a species, don't we? On my TV schedule tonight, between Grimm and Gold Rush, I'm going to watch Ancient Aliens to fill the hour. I know it's just some conspiracy nutters preaching their BS as fact, acting as if the entire world is purposefully hiding their truth. But we're of a curious mind, many of us, in many things regarding other people and events. It's entertaining when that wild-haired guy insists aliens are responsible for every carving, drawing, king and civilization. And it's no secret why so many believe it. Do people who believe it have something against Jesus or archeologists or Egyptians? Or is it likelier that we just sometimes believe some off-the-wall stuff? Nothing personal; it's just what's there. And in the event it is personal, it's just what's there.
Josh: "Bush didn't have the international upbringing Obama did, did he?"
Josh, where do you get your information?
Your claim that Obama had an "international upbringing" is odd.
Mr. Obama spent exactly 4 years in Indonesia, from 6 to 10 years old. How much of your life do you remember when you were those ages? How much happened during those years that you can say shaped you as the adult you are now?
"But Obama's a "first" in other regards as well."
In what other regards, besides being the first bi-racial president?
He's a Christian, he's a once-married family man and father of two daughters, he's a former state and U.S. senator, he's a graduate of prestigious universities.
Well, if you want to quibble with my choice of wording, I won't argue.
If you'd rather say a few years abroad rather than international upbringing, I'm fine with that. But my point still stands. Is that something that can be said about, say, Bush or Clinton, or is that something specific to Obama?
Don't forget that this was simply an attempt to answer someone else's question thoroughly and honestly. (Since no one else had stabbed at it.)
Seriously. I cringe to think what would happen to me if you folks ruled the world. lol Burned, stoned, drawn and quartered, perhaps the rack -- I don't know. It just wouldn't be pretty! I'm the one accused of liking to argue, but damn if it don't seem reversed from my seat.
So, you can have it. "International upbringing" wasn't something I was hinging my point on; it was just my choice of wording. If you feel that's just me unfairly attacking the President with some uninformed spin, so be it.
As for me personally, a lot happened that I remember and that shaped me in those years. Right as I was starting school, I remember a lot -- most of which is pretty bad stuff, not visions of big dinners or good holidays or green yards in the cul de sac. I wouldn't say these are formative years for everyone, but they're not throw-aways either.
Again, while it's me who's accused of wanting to argue, everything I say certainly loves being thrown back up as quibble fodder.
What did I do now, Shaw?
What about "first" is so bad? It's like I'm being disrespectful or insulting Obama or something. I've never seen the like.
I know I'm not liked around here, but holy shit.
He's the first president I'm aware of to have such an up-- oh, sorry, a few years growing up in a completely separate culture, under a separate religion.
He's the first president I'm aware of to have such a family dynamic growing up.
He's the first president I'm aware of to essentially become a super star via social media -- a celebrity on the world stage.
He's the first president I'm aware of to take office in a modern age without ample political experience behind him.
Every president is unique, was the only point I was driving at in my response to explain that presidents and their conspiracies are unique to the president in question, not just random things plucked from the air.
Any other short sentence anyone wants to pluck out before I get back to work? lol I got 'til about 4 EST. Make it snappy!
I'm thinking that the point Josh
is making goes all the way back
to Julius Caesar. "Men willingly believe what they wish". What they
wish to be true becomes a fact in
their minds. As Josh points out,
the puerile conspiracy theories
abound in partisan media and even
TV documentaries; as for those
about 2Bush, having read his
Nat'l Guard activity, high connections and absences from
his reserve commitments, I was a sucker for the Dan Rather expose.
I wished it to be true. Basically,
if I understand Josh's points,
if people believe in Sasquatch and flying saucers, they will believe the various fictions about Obama no matter what facts are presented to them.
I see that Josh-Awash-in-Oshkosh did not complete his detention assignment:
"Bullshit does not deserve the dignity or legitimacy of a presidential response."
And like all obnoxious and obstreperous children, he has turned himself into the focus of attention - the signature trait of a troll (just as I had forewarned). What a bore!
"I know I'm not liked around here, but holy shit."
You appear to have a chip on your shoulder, Josh. This is my blog, I have not made you unwelcome. I have pushed back against some of your assertions, and that's all. Don't take on the cloak of a victim, you're not.
BB-Idaho: "if people believe in Sasquatch and flying saucers, they will believe the various fictions about Obama no matter what facts are presented to them."
I think most of here have acknowledged the point, nor did we need Josh-by-Gosh to repeat the point over and over ad nauseam as if our various and sundry comments were never written ... or read.
Either the squash is tone-deaf, has a retention problem, or is an ATTENTION HOG. Methinks the latter.
Post a Comment