Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
“It disgusts me that this racist drivel goes unchecked”
***********************************************************
I would be more encouraged for our future if it WAS “racist” drivel; At least you would have a functioning being who hopefully, and mercifully, could be turned around over time. The situation is even worse than one of racism; its one of stupidity. If you eliminate the pejorative variation of the word, its about as good a word as we’ve got to define those folks, and it’s a word that’s at least recognizable to a large majority of our population.
I mean, if the word, “stupid,” was understood, and used, in a calm, unemotional manner to accurately highlight the cognitive state of these people, it would demonstrate the dreadful reality that what we have is a real lot of stupid people; a much worse situation than a lot of racists. They WANT to be “racists,” they try really hard, but their diminished capacity renders them incapable of figuring out how. That’s a primary reason why they appear agitated most of the time; they’re just really frustrated.
The real problem for the rest of us is, their condition, “stupidity,” isn’t confined just to their struggles with racism. It stays with them all the time and affects everything they must do in trying to function in our society.
So, bottom line, I could deal with a bunch of racists; you just tell’em they’re assholes, and “fuck-off.” But what do you do with a whole bunch of stupid people? You can’t say to them, “you’re stupid.” What good would that do? They just look at you and say, “wuh?” And I don’t know if its just me, but their numbers seem to have been growing exponentially over the last bunch of years.
“Leave Britney alone!!!!” may end up being the high point in American culture, based on the speed and direction these mutations seem to be taking.
“Houston,” we’ve got a problem.
Barrack's gonna have his hands full.
I'd totally concurred with your ideas about the tabloid-ish headline given the column--or at least the hundreds of previous headlines open to that interpretation...
This one changed my mind the instant I saw it! The whole point of the article is 'influencing the collective consciousness'; what better way to do that than publishing your pro-active article with a title that will more readily place it in a search-engine?
Seriously, name one...
He may have been a Muslim, but now denounces all of them all. Isn't this a form of bigotry? He converted to a radical black church in Chicago which is not exactly preaching about unity.
This is a blog not the news, although the two are easy to confuse.
As for the question of one commenter, is being a member of Rev. Wright's constroversial racist church better than being a main stream Muslim? I think being a main stream muslim is actually more sincere. They are Americans, a very few are terrorist...a very few. Obama's Dad, step-dad and syblings are Muslim, why is he denouncing them when not saying he was wrong to listen to the rhetoric for 20 plus years at a anti-semitic and racist church? I think the man does protest to much.
He even gets all pissy when someone quotes his books or uses his middle name. If he were truly a uniter he would embrace everyone, not just a few.
You are so right. But this tactic is nothing new. It used to be the "stupids" labeled those they didn't like as commies and reds. Now Islam is the flavor-of-the-month for the idiots. Facts have become irrelevant. But then again John McCain is probably a Manchurian Candidate. Prove that he's not. :)
People believe he is a Muslim because his father was a Muslim. His grandmother was a Muslim, as told by her to the NY Times, but now she is a Christian. Most people will think the father's religion will have an effect or that the son was raised that way. No where in the story is that important fact even mentioned. Why are people afraid to bring that up? It is his lack of mentioning the father's religion and your lack too that people will draw their own conclusion on the matter.
Let's face reality. All of the silly stuff about Barack Obama is simply another way to say, "Ain't gonna vote for no black man." America has its share of bigots who do not find it in their best interest to admit it. Bigots, for the most part, are dishonest cowards who try to hid their bigotry behind many of the untruths floating the internet.
I find it distasteful that being called a "Muslim" is considered a smear. Like being called gay. What if he was Muslim? Shouldn't be an issue. He would not be legally barred from being President. Legally, we don't make candidates sign articles of Xtian faith to hold office here. I observe that people's attitudes lag far behind the law, and suspect plenty of people don't even know that a Muslim (or a Jew) is as legally viable for President as any Xtian.
Perhaps you should have considered an even BIGGER, BOLDER headline - just to ensure that the rumor is substantiated in everyone's mind. And on the front page, to boot. SHAME ON YOU! Do you not realize you are now part of the problem? Do you truly wonder why people are still hanging on to this un-truth?
Did you even consider using the headline 'Barack Obama is NOT a Muslim'?
There are Wahhabi Muslims (the most powerful in Saudi Arabia) who regard the Sufi and Shia Muslims as apostates. Saddam Hussein was a Sunni Muslim and Iraq is now riven by a power-struggle between the Shia and the Sunni. With American soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, it might be expected that the American public would inform itself about the variations in the Muslim religion. Those who state that Barack Obama is a Muslim should be more specific in their accusation since there seem to be as many denominations in the Muslim faith as there are in Christianity, the type of a-la-carte Christianity practised in most of the western world.
The title of this piece is "Barack Obama is a Muslim and other stories". I don't see any "other stories" but the usual old claptrap. Pakistan's l65 million people -Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluch, Pashtun - have never fully united as one nation, despite being 97% Muslim. The whole question is far more complex than this trite article would allow and only reinforces the idea that America knows very little about the rest of the world.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
