Now I feel bad for lambasting Kathleen Parker for hinting at a tenuous relationship between Obama and Osama because of the rhyming last names.
(This reminds me: is it now a good time to resurrect the old Internet sensation the Llama Song?)
I was alerted to an article by Frank Gaffney, “America’s first Muslim president?” Turns out Ms. Parker’s criticism is quite reasonable compared to Mr. Gaffney’s read of Obama’s Cairo speech.
Is he for real? It’s got to be a parody. Simply too good to be true. But it is. I. Don’t. Know. What. To. Say.
Read it for yourself.
Wow.
Highlights of “arguments” made by Gaffney:
With Mr. Obama’s unbelievably ballyhooed address in Cairo Thursday to what he calls “the Muslim world” (hereafter known as “the Speech”), there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself. Consider the following indicators:
• Mr. Obama referred four times in his speech to “the Holy Koran.” Non-Muslims — even pandering ones — generally don’t use that Islamic formulation.
• Mr. Obama established his firsthand knowledge of Islam (albeit without mentioning his reported upbringing in the faith) with the statement, “I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed.” Again, “revealed” is a depiction Muslims use to reflect their conviction that the Koran is the word of God, as dictated to Muhammad.
• Then the president made a statement no believing Christian — certainly not one versed, as he professes to be, in the ways of Islam — would ever make. In the context of what he euphemistically called the “situation between Israelis, Palestinians and Arabs,” Mr. Obama said he looked forward to the day “. . . when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.”
Now, the term “peace be upon them” is invoked by Muslims as a way of blessing deceased holy men. According to Islam, that is what all three were – dead prophets. Of course, for Christians, Jesus is the living and immortal Son of God.
In the final analysis, it may be beside the point whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim. In the Speech and elsewhere, he has aligned himself with adherents to what authoritative Islam calls Shariah — notably, the dangerous global movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood — to a degree that makes Mr. Clinton’s fabled affinity for blacks pale by comparison.
Gaffney would have made a huge contribution if he were part of the McCarthy Red Scare investigation team. Just sayin’
{ 0 comments }
“No, Newt, You’re the Racist” Thank goodness someone more elequont wrote this rebuttal…
May 29, 2009
in imho is just a polite way to say I know you don't give a hoot what I think but I'm going to say it anyway,this i believe
to the charge by some Republicans against the Supreme Court Nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, as being a racist against the white people, and specifically, white male people.
I first saw this charge when I was waiting to board the plane. (You know the CNN scrolling texts on the bottom that drive everybody crazy but, I have to admit it, was pretty useful when there was NO sound on!) I could NOT believe my eyes. But I was not surprised either.
In my head I was formulating all these rebuttals, clever comebacks, theories, arguments against charges of any type of Reverse Racism. The best I could come up with was: It is like the Royal Families complain about being prejudiced against because people are jealous of the privileges they enjoy.
Seriously? Give me a break!
Thank goodness for Vanity Fair. Here is again another article that I LOVE so much that I want to print it out and eat it whole. I really should be working since I am buried by projects that are all due YESTERDAY. But I need to get this off my chest before I explode into a pile of, YES, non-white, mess…
No, Newt, You’re the Racist by Michael Hogan (May 27, 2009)
Mr. Hogan, I assume who is white and male (NOT that there is anything wrong with that…), managed to deliver a rebuttal against this utter nonsense in an even-handed, non-didactic, non-preachy way.
Digression: I also appreciate much the fact his article does not invoke White Guilt either, for nothing is more annoying to me than condescension and patronization born out of White Guilt. No, thank you very much, we have managed along quite well. We do not need to be rescued by a knight in shiny armor. Give me outright Racism any day ( Disclaimer: obviously, I understand VIOLENCE committed on the basis of racism is no joke. Here I am referring to TALKS. DISCOURSES.) When it is veiled in White Guilt, I am at a loss as to how to react to it.
Anyway, the best quote from the article is as follows, although I do hope you read the entire thing if you have stayed with my rant so far…
Nicely done. Thank you.
If you happen to be white (in appearances) and you cannot see the implied privileges that come with your skin color, here is a great article/exercise that may resonate with you:
“White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” by Peggy McIntosh in 1990. Yes, it is decades old. But hey, some things never change… or at least, not much.
p.s. Once again, the comments steal the show and become the proof for the importance of writing the article being commented on in the first place.
Michael Hogan, poor guy, he’s being pummeled and maligned in the comment section. It is rather scary and disturbing what was said in those comments. I wish I hadn’t read them because now I am officially pissed. And scared at the same time. And disturbed. And dispirited.
Tagged as: ability to be oblivious, comments are the best part, damn liberals, i am a fan, inconceivable, posts in which i talk about race, say what, seriously?, things i want to say out loud
{ 1 comment }