Posted on 08/17/2010 7:02:40 AM PDT by detritus
Last Friday, at the start of Ramadan, President Obama presided over the White House's annual iftar dinner and made some rather bland remarks about religious freedom. The context, of course, was the controversy over the proposed mosque in Lower Manhattan, which is not, as Obama insisted, about freedom of religion but about religious tolerance. And then, having once again gotten high praise for so very little, he went to bed a panicked man and reached, trembling, some hours later, for a political morning-after pill to take back some of what he had said. Whew, for a moment there he was pregnant with principle.
No more. "I was not commenting, and I will not comment, on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," Obama said in revising and extending and eviscerating his remarks of the previous night. He had merely been commenting on freedom of religion. Turns out he's for it.
The president muddled his message. Does he not grasp that questioning the "wisdom" of the mosque's placement is predicated on thinking that 9/11 was a Muslim crime? Does he not understand that the issue here is religious prejudice, not zoning? The answer, of course, is that he does. But unlike Henry Clay, he would rather be president than right....
The inclination to go from the particular to the general -- to blame a people for the acts of a few -- is what has always fueled pogroms and race riots. History shows that it is a natural tendency and it will literally run riot if not controlled. It is the solemn obligation of elected leaders to restrain such an urge -- to be moral as well as political leaders. Obama almost pulled that off, but he flinched.
Yes, he couldn't.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Ouch.
Apparently, TIME’s did not get the memo.....send them one, kkthx.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2571660/posts
There is only one word to describe 0bama: EVIL
Looks like Soebarkah has found a way to please no one.
I don’t think he muddled his message at all. While at a Ramadan dinner, he basicaly said to America, “Screw you. My friends found a way to further grind their heel into your face, and I will support them doing so.”
First straighten out one thing. Is this a religious war?
Islam is a religion of peace [as maintained by Bush and Obama] vs a religious war ordained by the Bible? No Muslim building near the WTC vs Gen. Petraeus getting Muslims to join with US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We have to get our act together. If we are at war, declare it, and win it. Troops are dying while NYC burns.
He was unusually explicit.
"But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances."
What a complete tool.
If Obama would have just come out and said; “It’s not the Government’s role in deciding if a Church, Mosque, or Temple can be built on private land, I’ll leave that up to the good people of New York and their elected officials who have complete control and responsibility over local zoning ordinances”
– I could have respected that. It may have been somewhat of an easy way to avoid controversy, but at least it would have avoided the “did you here what he said” commentary the next day. I think Bush, Clinton, maybe even Reagan would have made a response similar.
But Obama, and his pie-hole he has no control over, just blurts things out, and it comes back to bite him every time.
That was his initial, correct, statement. He wimped out on it (imagine my surprise) in the face of political heat.
How can you blame him for muddling? He’s got the entire Koran on his mind, not to mention all the Suras, etc.
How about this to refute Obama et al:
quote the Internal Security Act again
Sec. 4. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to combine, conspire, or agree, with any other person to perform any act which would substantially contribute to the establishment within the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship
Since Islam represents a totalitarian dictatorship, any organization or individual seeking to establish Islamic Law or Sharia within the United States, can be held liable and charged over its violation. This would apply to both Muslims and non-Muslims.
And the Koran or Quran itself represents a volume whose contents implicitly call for the violent overthrow of the United States.
Consider Chapter 9 of the Koran, which governs the interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims. Particularly Sura 9:29
[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
There are numerous other verses in the Koran which similarly call for Muslims to subjugate non-Muslims and take power. This parallels the charge against the Communist party and places Muslims who believe in the Koran on the same level as Communists who believed in the overthrow of the United States.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2009/05/can-we-ban-islam-legal-guidelines-for.html
They are trying to pull a lewinski here. Its not about sex, it was about the degenerate lying under oath and obstructing justice.
In this case its not about religion, some people think hoboma is a muslim. He is not, he likes his alcohol and he is a closet homosexual.these do not go over well with the terrorists. Which is why it wqas down played in the media about the hijackers going to stripclubs and drinking. Therefore hoboma is not a true muslim and leans closer to what the terrorists were.
Islam is getting it own affirmative action program.
Dear Mr. Cohen,
Yes, we understand your work to circle the wagons around your boy. After all, he was only taking the “high ground”...speaking on the behalf of his dearly beloved US Constitution!!! You know, the one he puts clones on the Supreme Court to prostitute, ignore and disgrace. Save it, Richard. The cat is already out of the bag.
You will neved, ever hear Obama or any liberal stand up for the religious freedom of Christians. Ever. What they will say is that the test for the exercise of religious freedom of Christians is whether someone “might be offended”. They haven’t the slightest idea of what freedom is and they simply don’t care; their hatred colors everything they think, say or do.
Your post is right-on. He does not have to take a stand on some of these things. But he does, and he messes it up, and inflames ALL sides to the issues (which is quite entertaining if not outright damaging to his party and administration).
0zer0’s “I was for the victory mosque before I was against it” moment.
Obama’s message on Friday wasn’t “bland.” It was “anyone who opposes building the mosque at that site is a bigot.”
You mean like being against a porn book store located next to a public school? It's not zoning, its "bigotry" ? And 9-11 had nothing to do with Islam fanatics ?
Of course, Cohen, you elitist numbskull.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.