[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: The worst insult of all (click to view)
Date: August 24, 2010
A rather disturbing, and much-talked about poll released last week suggested around 18% of Americans believe President Obama is a Muslim, an ignorant statistic that has actually risen since his inauguration.

To the extent anyone has been willing to defend the poll results, some pundits have suggested that "Muslim," in the sense it is being applied to the President, is really just an all-purpose slur for something that is perceived to be "unAmerican" and "of dubious loyalty." When people consider Obama a Muslim, in other words, they are less attempting to categorize his faith, and more trying to express a sense of distrust towards his beliefs and background.

Bad news for American Muslims, in other words. One of the ironic outcomes of this whole "scandal" is that the more Obama seeks to distance himself from the Muslim label, the more he unconsciously implies that there is, in fact, something fundamentally wrong with being Muslim. It's really a terrible dilemma for a progressive-minded guy like him to be in. Protest, and you provide cover to bigotry; don't protest enough, and raise bigot suspicion.

Probably not the sort of dilemma he expected to become associated with his presidency.

Comment on Facebook.

[Psudo]

Your Obama looks so cute when he's angry.

It's a shameful false dilemma Obama's been placed into. He might have better luck if he argued that it was an insult to Muslims for the name of their religion to be used as a slur and not defend himself at all. Then he'd be standing up for the little guy, and the accusers would look bad. That'd be following Alexander the Great's example from when he defended himself against accusations of homosexuality. That was one of the better rhetorical tactics of history's master tactician.

In modern politics, though, I can't see a politician letting any accusation, no matter how ridiculous, stand without a denial. It's a cultural weakness of the modern world.

[Teikiatsu]

Psudo wrote:

He might have better luck if he argued that it was an insult to Muslims for the name of their religion to be used as a slur and not defend himself at all. Then he'd be standing up for the little guy, and the accusers would look bad.

I could still see that being twisted around.

He should have just stayed out of the NYGZ mosque debate in the first place. By doing so he 1) made it a national issue and 2) just added more fuel to the 'secret muslim' fire.

I don't think Obama is a Muslim, but at the same time I don't think he's a 'real/devout Christian' either, in my mind he just pays lip service to the faith in order to maintain a facade of religious sensitivity. If I understand his biography correctly he was an Atheist/Agnostic up until he entered Chicago politics and joined Pastor Wright's church to gain some 'religious cred' with the people who would be voting for him.

As for Islam, he was partially raised in Indonesia and traveled to Pakistan in his college years. While I do not consider him a Muslim, I do consider him sympathetic to muslims. That's fine, he has probably seen a side of moderate Islam that most Americans have not, but for all his so-called communication skills he has not translated that experience well to his constituency.

[GreenTiger]

He should have said that the GZ Mosque is a local issue and left it at that.

[sidd2600]

I don't think Obama's distancing himself from the American Muslim population; he's removing himself from the exact same Tea Party driven Islamic smear campaign that started nine years ago and continues today. What defense would John Boehner give if you equated the Ku Klux Klan with all protestant Christianity?

Is religious freedom sacrosanct? Or is it a political issue? I think Obama hurt himself politically but a populist/centrist taking a hard line value stand in the U.S. is well, well worth that cost and plenty refreshing. It's politically unpopular, but by my constitutional interpretation and from a moral standing it's just the right thing to do.

[andyt]

Obama is sort of in a "have you stopped beating your wife" situation.

[Teikiatsu]

sidd2600 wrote:

I think Obama hurt himself politically but a populist/centrist taking a hard line value stand in the U.S. is well, well worth that cost and plenty refreshing.

When did Obama take a hard line? He said the Muslims had every right to build their mosque/community center/prayer room then two days later said he would not comment on the wisdom of their actions. As always, he's trying to have it both ways and looking wishy washy no matter what.

I won't deny they have the right to build the mosque, but I will also say that building the mosque at that site is not the right thing to do. 70%+ of the US agrees with me on both counts.

Move it back a few blocks, no problems. Hell there's even a Mexican Embassy in San Antonio, meaning sovereign mexican soil 'near' the Alamo, but it's 5 or 6 blocks distant and plenty far away.

[BartSimpson]

Nicely put, thank you.

[commanderkai]

To be honest, I'd prefer Obama being a moderate Muslim than a follower of Rev. Wright. I find the Black Theology bullshit more insulting than a regular Muslim. *Shrugs*

[Voyager]

Obama's difficulty is he's been trying to have it both ways. Because his father was Muslim, by Islamic doctrine, he is a Muslim, period, full stop.

The only way for him to cease being a Muslim is for him to renounce Islam. Doesn't matter that he never assented to it. One would presume, since he goes to a Christian church, and claims to be Christian that he has, defacto renounced it, but that doesn't cut it according to Islam.

Thing is, when he goes over to Islamic countries, and goes on about how his father was Muslim, and he lived in an Islamic country, they see him as claiming to be Muslim himself. After all, his father was Muslim, which, to them, made him Muslim by birth, and he clearly did not say that he wasn't, so to them, he clearly is one.

Basically, he is either lying to us, knowingly misleading the Islamic populations, or so ignorant of Islam that he has no idea what he is saying to them. Frankly, none of them reflect well on the guy.

[JJ]

andyt wrote:

Obama is sort of in a "have you stopped beating your wife" situation.

Originally, I was trying to work that line into this cartoon somehow.

[Trenacker]

Since when is popularity the litmus test for moral quality? At one time, the majority of people in the United States wanted segregation. Indeed, at one time, the majority wanted human slavery.

Why should Obama think and behave in ways that flatter your particular views of Islam, Voyager? Who's to say that you have a correct or valid understanding of that religion? When Obama goes overseas and shares his background, he is purposely making people aware that he has been exposed to other cultures, and therefore may be more tolerant than is usually expected of an American leader.

[Xenterex]

Quote:

Since when is popularity the litmus test for moral quality? At one time, the majority of people in the United States wanted segregation. Indeed, at one time, the majority wanted human slavery.

I like the question you pose, but that statement is worded as to make those terrible choices for examples.

If the "majority" of the people in the Confederate, (and later United,) States of America wanted slavery, then there wouldn't have been need for the 3/5's compromise in the original ratification of the constitution, or rather, the details of such an article, especially in conjunction with the clause to end the active accrual of new slaves in the slave trade. Yes, various populous of the modern world (and not just the States/colonies of America) at the time was at least tolerant of slavery, (or even indentured servitude) that is certainly not a majority "wanting it".

And similar clarification could be given on segregation as well, but I have digressed. I did want to clarify on the use of those examples as either the sentiments behind makes such statements could unintentionally distract from the real point of a post.

[Kjorteo]

The dilemma Obama finds himself in with the subject of this cartoon is really the same type of problem with the mosque debate. Even if you take the fake compromise "I'm all for freedom of religion but it's just insensitive to have it right there" stance (no you're not and that statement is ridiculous even if you were, but let's play along with that train of thought for a second anyway just for fun.) The only reason it would be any more insensitive to have a mosque there than a church, cathedral, temple, synagogue, or whatever else is if you think Islam itself did 9/11. Since it's more an Islamic cultural center than a mosque anyway, I hope some of the protesters actually go there when it's finished and maybe learn a thing or two.