An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Tiller is dead, but what happened?

The Sean Goldman Case: “Heartbreaking and Disgraceful” »

Obama’s ‘Muslim Country’ Remark: Knock Off the Handwringing

Posted by PETE ABEL, Managing Editor in Politics.
Jun 3rd, 2009 | Comments

I am but shouldn’t be surprised by the swift, largely unified right-wing reaction (a sampling) to President Obama’s remark during an interview with a French television station:

“And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world,” Mr. Obama said. “And so there’s got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples.”

Sure, the president might have stretched it a bit: a quick survey of commenting sites suggests the US ranks somewhere among the top 30 or so countries in terms of Muslim population. Not top 5 or top 10. But top 30; maybe top 35.

Then again, maybe he didn’t stretch it: In a world with 190-plus countries, we’d be (at #30) in the top 15% — i.e., we would have a Muslim population larger than 85% of the world’s nation states.

I’m all for calling the President’s bluff, when it’s deserved. I did so yesterday, pointing to a post at Donklephant, wherein Alan Stewart Carl essentially argued that, since Obama let politics (rather than judicial qualifications) dominate his commentary and vote on John Roberts’ nomination to the Supreme Court, he basically has nothing to complain about if certain Republicans let politics (rather than judicial qualifications) dominate their commentary (and eventually their votes) on Sonia Sotomayor.

But in this case — with respect to Obama’s “Muslim country” remark — I think it’s fair to argue that the feigned bluff-calling from the right wing is entirely out of line. In his interview with French TV, the President made what seems to be a sincere effort, flawed or not, to point out to the Muslim world that the U.S. has a large Muslim population and thus a foundation for seeking a better, more productive, more constructive relationship with Muslim populations elsewhere. Seriously: What is the problem with that? Do rightwingers not want to build bridges between the U.S. and Muslim worlds? Would they prefer no effort be made to improve this already strained relationship?

Perhaps we know the answers.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

jwest

While we all embrace the U.S. as a Muslim Country, could we get one TMV author to mention in passing the two soldiers shot by the anti-war Muslim convert.

These were only soldiers, not nearly as important as a partial birth abortionist, but it was mentioned on some cable news shows and even made it in a few newspapers.

Hey, let’s pretend the shooter was a right wing extremist gun nut. That would rate at least a dozen articles.

The diversity here at TMV is remarkable. If we could just find a Native American disabled gay liberal, we would have complete coverage of all opinions.

Pete Abel

Jwest wrote: "... could we get one TMV author to mention in passing the two soldiers shot by the anti-war Muslim convert."

Reference: http://themoderatevoice.com/33994/religion-deat...

jwest

Pete,

I stand corrected.

This issue has been beat to death here at TMV. It’s time we all move on.

HemmD

jwest

Perhaps you'd prefer to have someone on the left point out that the Muslim shooter was merely following what his God wanted him to do? Perhaps a recounting of the deaths of innocent Muslims killed by US soldiers should not be admissible mitigating evidence. You know as well as anybody that Muslim extremists are not capable of civilized behavior, so one must put up with one or two crazies in a highly charged atmosphere of political debate. There's obviously no comparison between extremist Muslims and extremist Christians, so if a few people tangentially related to a conflict get killed, hey freedom isn't free.

jwest - Murder "in the name of God" is the devil's method to damn the human race. If two dead soldiers piss you off, but one dead doctor is only a political talking point to be debated, you play halfway into his hands.

Both acts are horrific and shouldn't be used to further political agendas. It is my most sincere belief that senseless, evil, acts of violence like these can only be resolved when people look for commonalities between each other instead of "issues" to divide them.

jwest

HemmD,

So……you’re against murder. Even religious murder.

Okey Dokey.

I don’t recall anyone, including me, trying to condone or defend or minimize Tiller’s death. My point was the near total absence of discussion of a converted Muslim who has an anti-war jihad going on in Alabama.

Could his anger have been amplified by leftist lies about an “unnecessary war” or talk of torture where none existed? In the quest to use every rhetorical weapon available against Bush/Cheney, could the left’s over-the-top craziness have influenced a young, impressionable, simple minded follower to the point that he thought he was doing “God’s (or Allah’s) work?

There certainly wasn’t any trouble on the left linking a lone nut case killing a partial birth abortionist to everyone on the right. But the thought that perhaps some of the “Bush Lied, People Died” chanting may have sunk into the addled brain of this soldier killer hasn’t occurred to anyone here.

But, it’s no use rehashing this over and over.

Let’s find some new Dick Cheney cartoons.

HemmD

jwest
You really do have a problem with objective comparison. No one on the left has called these soldiers baby-killer. The right extremists did just that. No one on the left has called the murders of these soldiers justifiable. The right extremists did just that. No one on the left has demanded that the rule of law be ignored because they had usurped God's authority. The right has done just that.

It seems to me you see world where "right is good" and "left is bad." From where do you draw that opinion. What is you're justification for painting everything in merely black and white?

If you wish to argue that the left is somehow responsible for these deaths, feel free to show some proof other than your overwhelming certainty. Overwhelming certainty is how we got into this discussion to begin with.

jwest

HemmD,

Objective comparison? It depends on how literal you want to get.

My point was to show the lack of any introspection on the left concerning the killing of these soldiers while the tenuous connections to the right were made on Tiller.

That was in general

More specifically, I was pointing to the TMV community and the (almost) nonexistent mention of the soldier killings in comparison to the endless Tiller articles.

As to the “left bad, right good” attitude, I plead guilty. I actually do view leftists as a negative on humanity. Not wanting to be misunderstood, I am not saying leftists are evil, they are for the most part well meaning, but their minds are not able to process information to realize the effects of their actions. It’s as if the intentions negate any responsibility for the results. Call it criminal naivety.

Some day, hopefully, there will be an “awakening” where leftists finally look around and comprehend the ignorance, poverty, suffering and death they have caused. The world will be a much better place afterwards.

jchem

jwest -- I would agree with you about the scant attention paid to the recruiter shooting, but when you then say:

their minds are not able to process information to realize the effects of their actions

your criticism begins to lose value. Couldn't this same argument be applied by anyone on the left toward those on the right? Neither side holds a monopoly on stupidity. Personally, I feel that both sides often fail to understand what the results of their actions could be.

Some day, hopefully, there will be an “awakening” where leftists finally look around and comprehend the ignorance, poverty, suffering and death they have caused

If you were a small child growing up in either Afghanistan or Iraq during the past few years, would you seriously believe that your situation and your surroundings are due to "leftists"?

casualobserver

HemmD- take a look at the picture of the parade banner that was photographed and currently on display at Redstate.

The banner reads "We support the troops when they shoot the officers".

I will concede this expression of sentiment was not a direct response to the recruiting center shootings, but it does establish that there are leftwing voices as malevolent as those who have been highlighted by TMV authors in connection with the Tiller shooting.

I take jwest's point to be TMV authors go out of their way to highlight the malevolence on the right and go out of their way to never republish anything that would show the same coming from the left.

Relative to a population of hundreds of millions, both are statistically insignificant, yet one is deemed newsworthy at TMV while the other is not.

jwest

Jchem,

Of course, a leftist could use the same argument, but it wouldn’t be true.

The basic difference between the right and the left is that the right envisions an outcome and maps a course to get there, sometimes against the grain of popular opinion or at the expense of immediate “compassion”, while the left ignores the ultimate goal to take the most popular path of least resistance.

My criticism didn’t speak of stupidity, of which there is plenty shared by both sides. I talk of a particular trait of leftists in which they find themselves incapable of recognizing the results of their actions. They want to improve education with all of their hearts, but their actions have resulted in millions of children falling into illiteracy. They want to eliminate poverty but every program they institute encourages and perpetuates it. They embrace junk science and fad prejudices that deny proven advances in food production and preservation, along with pesticides to prevent disease, so that millions die each year of starvation and malaria.

Leftists think of themselves as more “creative” than others. Perhaps this is true. I couldn’t choreograph an interpretive dance explaining the menstrual cycles of unicorns to save my life. But if there is this mental asset, could there just as likely be a mental deficit in the logic function needed to see the causal results of actions?

The reason I lean towards this type of explanation is my belief in the inherent goodness of most people, including leftists. My faith in humanity keeps me from believing that anyone could be so deliberately evil as to implement and maintain leftist programs while comprehending their results.

Rudi

jwest Please show a history of Muslim attacking recruiters or bombing recruiting stations. Where is the US Muslim version of Randall Terry and Operation Rescue? There is some organization from Right wing extremist groups, US radical Muslims have no organization and really doesn't exist like the problems in Europe. Dearborn Michigan is US Beirut, but where is the violence there? Mc Vie had ties to Michigan - the result was OK City.

jwest

Rudi,

I know it’s not your fault that when you read what I write it gets twisted around to mean I support Tiller’s murderer and blame Obama for the two soldiers being shot. That’s just the way your mind works. I understand.

You want to believe Tiller’s killer is just another mainstream conservative following our leader, Randall Terry. That’s just the way your synapses fire. It’s OK.

Brace yourself. I have ties to Michigan too.

HemmD

jwset

"As to the “left bad, right good” attitude, I plead guilty. I actually do view leftists as a negative on humanity. Not wanting to be misunderstood, I am not saying leftists are evil, they are for the most part well meaning, but their minds are not able to process information to realize the effects of their actions. It’s as if the intentions negate any responsibility for the results. Call it criminal naivety."

You need to tighten skull cap, cause you don't know enough to know what you believe.

So the left is bad; you mean like those radicals who wrote such conservative blasphemy as "All men are created equal" At the time, the world was governed by Kings who had divine right to treat subjects any way they saw fit. If the left is bad, then so is that document.

"The basic difference between the right and the left is that the right envisions an outcome and maps a course to get there, sometimes against the grain of popular opinion or at the expense of immediate “compassion”, while the left ignores the ultimate goal to take the most popular path of least resistance."

So these bad leftists ignore the ultimate goal; you mean like creating a constitution with checks and balances that has stood the test of time. Not bad for a bunch of leftists who can't envision a goal.

"Leftists think of themselves as more “creative” than others. Perhaps this is true. I couldn’t choreograph an interpretive dance explaining the menstrual cycles of unicorns to save my life. But if there is this mental asset, could there just as likely be a mental deficit in the logic function needed to see the causal results of actions?"

You're right, those leftists were creative; they even envisioned that people like you could come to believe that redical ideas like equality and rule of law were conservative's own. If you wish to rail against ignorance, physician heal thyself. Learn where all your radical beliefs come from.

kathykattenburg

It is my most sincere belief that senseless, evil, acts of violence like these can only be resolved when people look for commonalities between each other instead of "issues" to divide them.

Beautiful, Hemm.

kathykattenburg

jwest writes:

I don’t recall anyone, including me, trying to condone or defend or minimize Tiller’s death.

Well, jwest, when you make comparisons like this, "These were only soldiers, not nearly as important as a partial birth abortionist," you DO kind of minimize the value and importance of Tiller's life.

jwest

HemmD,

You can’t really be saying the framers of the Constitution were a pack a raving leftists, can you?

The group of people who pledged their lives, property, honor and fortunes to establish a republic based on individual responsibility, no onerous taxes, states rights, equality of opportunity (not outcome) and freedom of speech would recoil at the socialistic near-monarchy the left wishes to foist upon us.

Hemmy, buddy, you’re either having a bad reaction to some mushrooms or your history teacher played a cruel joke on you.

But enough of that. My comment was concerning present-day progressivism and the terrible harm the left’s misguided policies have done to countless people. I know you have to resist this truth with every fiber of your being, because if you admit it, how could you ever live with yourself, knowing you had been party to the suffering of millions.

Hang you head in shame, liberal. You are the problem.

casualobserver

Hemmy, buddy, you’re either having a bad reaction to some mushrooms or your history teacher played a cruel joke on you.

jwest, lol, but stop it already, my coffee is all over my desk now!

jwest

CO,

Thanks.

(tapping his microphone)

I was wondering whether this thing was on.

HemmD

jwest

You really crack yourself up.

5 definitions of conservative taken from that liberal biased web:

# Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.

# The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
# A political philosophy or attitude emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.

# Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.

# disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

So tell me another joke about how the radical founding fathers conserved, preserved, or maintained the status quo of anything by revolting against their sovereign ruler and creating a brand new kind of government dedicated to equality for all men. Their act was one of radical change, not a feature of the right by any definition.

You do seem to know a lot about mushrooms though.

jwest

HemmD,

Come on, you really don’t believe this whole line……do you?

Conservatives are locked in tradition and the past, prefer the dark instead of the light, trying to understand why people want to drive fancy new cars instead of using a horse and cart.

Oh, and the constitution was written by a bevy of flaming liberals, acting out each Article of the Constitution with an interpretive dance, standing up to the British Crown after taking a few polls and talking to focus groups.

No, you’re too smart for that.

Remember my original point. Leftist are good people who have a mental defect. They simply can’t understand what their well-meaning help is doing to destroy people’s lives.

Most are incapable of seeing it. Some refuse to admit it.

Let’s Hope they Change.

HemmD

jwest
way to argue effectively.

ignore objective definitions.

sprinkle in a few ad hominid attacks

stir with generalized anger, and ta da, another right wing wing nut response.

keep going, you prove your lack of intellectual discipline better than I ever could.

HemmD

jwest
"
(tapping his microphone)

I was wondering whether this thing was on."

I believe you may have turned off your mic.
I guess discretion is the better part of valor.

jwest

HemmD,

It’s just that I have a life and sometimes it takes precedent over this blog.

Just stopped back to say there was a long discussion about why the mainstream media didn’t mention the soldier’s killing, but had story after story on the abortionist.

If you want to know what will be on the news tonight, read jwest during the day.

roro80

HemmD -- didn't you know that the REAL TRUE definition of conservative is "the awesomest group of awesome righteous and logical and practical dudes EVAH!"? No? See, your problem is that you think "conservative" comes from the root "conserve". Your trying to be all "logical" about things is just sooo liberal and illogical.

jwest -- your mic is fully on, and the jokes are hi-LAR-ious. Conservative founding fathers -- ha! -- that's just funny.

MorganLvr

Well, I'm not disabled nor gay nor liberal, but I AM part Native American, so maybe I qualify to comment. jwest, you are an idiot. End of comment.

bsully77

"The basic difference between the right and the left is that the right envisions an outcome and maps a course to get there, sometimes against the grain of popular opinion or at the expense of immediate “compassion”, while the left ignores the ultimate goal to take the most popular path of least resistance."
-------------------------------------------------------

Would that be the same right that took us to Iraq and still has us there without a clear plan or withdrawal strategy?
And wouldn't the path of least resistance be to drop bombs and take prisoners rather than solve the root cause of religious extremism in the first place? Damn those whacky liberals for trying to make the world a better place.

jwest

HemmD,

Speaking of ignoring points, how about the main point I made.

Can you see the harm the policies of the left have caused? Are poor, black inner-city kids better off because of liberals or worse off?

HemmD

As opposed to slavery? A conservative position of the 1860s. As opposed to Jim Crow laws? A Republican invention. As opposed to segregation? A southern white conservative position?

Why yes they are. Thanks for asking.

jwest

HemmD,

What is the word for someone who has dyslexia in the subject of history.

It was Republicans who fought slavery. George Wallace, Bull Conner, Robert Byrd all Democrat racists.

Here’s the vote for abolishing the Jim Crow laws:

[edit] By party
The original House version:[9]
• Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
• Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:[9]
• Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
• Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]
• Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
• Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
Looks like 80% of my guys were for ending discrimination.

But let’s not fight about the past. Right now, you believe that the Democrat party is making the lives of inner-city kids better – correct?

And just for fun, do you think conservatives want to return blacks to slavery?

HemmD

In United States history, carpetbaggers was the term southerners gave to northerners who moved to the South during the Reconstruction era, between 1865 and 1877. They formed a coalition with freedmen (freed slaves), and scalawags (southern whites who supported Reconstruction) in the Republican Party. Together they politically controlled former Confederate states for varying periods, 1867–1877.

The term carpetbaggers was used to describe the white northern Republican politicians who came South, arriving with their travel carpetbags. Southerners considered them ready to loot and plunder the defeated South.[1] Although the term is still an insult in common usage, in histories and reference works it is now used without derogatory intent.

Thanks for playing

jwest

HemmD,

You’re a product of the public school system, right?

Honestly, this crazy notion that Republicans have been the ones supporting slavery and stopping civil rights is so wrong it’s funny.

Seek the counsel of your leftist brethren to set you straight. You won’t believe it if I give you the facts.

It’s far better to shed your ignorance on this subject here, in anonymity rather than at some dinner party. Blurting out something about how Republicans supported slavery or how Democrats were fighting for civil rights in the ‘50s would bring the wine shooting through the noses of those around you.

Come on folks, jump in here and help HemmD.

HemmD

I suggest you consider the fact that the discussion was about left and right, conservative and liberal, you remember don't you?

Anyone who reads history beyond your comic book level understands a shift in conservative and liberal thought is not neatly tucked into one party or another. It's true the south during the civil war was "democrat". They believed in states rights, and decentralized form of central government, and slavery. Even you can see that the first two characteristics are your sides hawking points today. You know, states rights to succeed like Texas.

The carpet baggers that descended upon the south to collect power from that broken region were not the Republicans of Lincoln. Likewise, the dixiecrats of George Wallace and Nixon's southern strategy had little to do with any party. They were merely conservatives trying to maintain the status quo of white superiority.

Worry about your own education. I think you got jypped.

Try reading a book without so many pictures next time.

blog comments powered by Disqus