Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Media Repeats Stream of Lies About Obama

By Ari Berman, The Nation. Posted March 13, 2008.


He's been defended by AIPAC on his Israel views, made it clear that he's Christian, yet the media keeps swallowing right-wing lies.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

In Special Coverage

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Jim Hightower, Raising Hell
Jonathan Rowe

Democracy and Elections:
Are Feds Trying to Aid Republican Candidate's Election?
Tim Kalich

DrugReporter:
A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom
Lux

Election 2008:
The Real Elitist: Video of McCain's Collection of Mansions Reveal He's Not Your Average Joe
Steven Greenhouse

Environment:
Republicans Have Handed Democrats a Winning Election Issue
David Morris

ForeignPolicy:
Blocking a Gazan's Path to an Education
Fidaa Abed

Health and Wellness:
The Misshapen Mind: How the Brain's Haphazard Evolution Left Us with Self-Destructive Instincts
Sasha Abramsky

Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman

Immigration:
Medical Neglect in Immigrant Prisons Reveals America at Its Worst
Kyle Hussein de Beausset

Media and Technology:
What's Going on with the Media's Ballooning Coverage of Celebrity Babies?
Meredith Blake

Movie Mix:
Protest over Use of the Word 'Retard' in Stiller's 'Tropic Thunder' Misses the Target
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Obama Should Pick Hillary
Lanny Davis

Rights and Liberties:
Stop the Execution: Jeff Wood Faces Death Tomorrow for a Murder He Didn't Commit
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
Catching the Wrong John: When Are the Media Going to Talk about John McCain's Infidelity?
Drew Westen

War on Iraq:
How Many More Iraqis Can You Throw Behind Bars Without Trial?
Fatih Abdulsalam

Water:
What If Your Tap Water Is Not Safe To Drink?
Elizabeth Royte

More stories by Ari Berman

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

He's a Muslim. He was sworn into office on the Koran. He doesn't say the Pledge of Allegiance. His pastor is an anti-Semite. He's a tool of Louis Farrakhan. He's anti-Israel. His advisers are anti-Israel. He's friends with terrorists. The terrorists want him to win. He's the Antichrist.

By now you've probably seen at least some of these e-mails and articles about Barack Obama bouncing around the Internet. They distort Obama's religious faith, question his support for Israel, warp the identity and positions of his campaign advisers and defame his friends and allies from Chicago. The purpose of the smear is to paint him as an Arab-loving, Israel-hating, terrorist-coddling, radical black nationalist. That picture couldn't be further from the truth, but you'd be surprised how many people have fallen for it. The American Jewish community, one of the most important pillars of the Democratic Party and US politics, has been specifically targeted [see Eric Alterman's column in the March 24 issue, "(Some) Jews Against Obama"]. What started as a largely overlooked fringe attack has been thrust into the mainstream -- used as GOP talking points, pushed by the Clinton campaign, echoed by the likes of Meet the Press host Tim Russert. Falsehoods are repeated as fact, and bits of evidence become "elaborate constructions of malicious fantasy," as the Jewish Week, America's largest Jewish newspaper, editorialized.

What floods into one's inbox these days bears little or no relation to Obama's record. "Some of my earliest and most ardent supporters came from the Jewish community in Chicago," he has said. Obama ran for the Senate promising to help reconstitute the black-Jewish civil rights coalition. His first foreign policy speech of the campaign was before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), where he pledged "clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel." He has occasionally angered pro-Israel hawks by urging direct negotiations with Iran and Syria, but Obama's foreign policy record is well within the Democratic Party mainstream. He's committed to a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, supported Israel's incursion into Lebanon in 2006 and has criticized Hamas. During his campaign for the presidency, Obama has been defended by AIPAC, the neoconservative New York Sun and The New Republic's Marty Peretz, a noted Israel hawk. And yet no defense of Israel by Obama -- or of Obama by the pro-Israel establishment -- seems to be enough. "When one charge is disproved, another is leveled," says Rabbi Jack Moline, who leads a synagogue in Alexandria, Virginia.

It's nearly impossible to decipher where the smears originated [for a comprehensive account of how such campaigns are generated and spread in the age of the Internet and e-mail, see Christopher Hayes, "The New Right-Wing Smear Machine," November 12, 2007]. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency traced one e-mail back 200 people before it stopped with a filmmaker in Tel Aviv who didn't receive a return address. "No one knows if it's the Clintons, a rogue agent or a Rove agent," says Congressman Steve Cohen, a Jewish Obama backer who represents a largely black district in Memphis. Likely it's a combination of the three.

We may not know who started the smears, but we do know who's amplifying them. The "Obama is a Muslim" rumor began in the fringe conservative blogosphere. "Barack Hussein Obama: Once a Muslim, Always a Muslim," blogger Debbie Schlussel wrote on December 18, 2006. Schlussel had a history of inflammatory rhetoric and baseless accusations. She said journalist Jill Carroll, who was kidnapped by Iraqi insurgents in 2006, "hates America" and "hates Israel"; labeled George Soros a "fake Holocaust survivor"; and speculated that Pakistani terrorists were somehow to blame for last year's shootings at Virginia Tech. Yet her post on Obama gained traction; one month later, the Washington Times's Insight magazine alleged that Obama had attended "a so-called Madrassa" and was a secret Muslim.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: barack obama, hillary clinton

Ari Berman is a contributing writer for The Nation, covering national politics and the 2008 election, and an Investigative Journalism Fellow at The Nation Institute. Research support for this article was provided by The Nation Institute's Puffin Foundation Investigative Fund. Click here to read it at The Nation's site.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
They were going to do this on any Democratic nominee. Israel lacks a middle class as it is.
Posted by: maxpayne on Mar 13, 2008 3:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Israel and America are going to have to come to grips with the cold hard truth that there is no such thing as winning a war on terrorism. Wars cause terrorism in the first place.

As for Obama, let's see if he and his party will fight these same old culture war charges out by fighting for progressive populism. The Corporate Media is a friend of Al Quaida, America's creation. If the Democrats haven't learned their lessons from 1988, 2000, and 2004, they might as well lose and perish in the process. America needs a firm progressive movement, not another set of dysfunctional me-toos.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't like Obama, because I consider him a demagogue
Posted by: joeunix on Mar 13, 2008 3:54 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But an "anti-Semite" and a "Muslim"?

That's slander. It's that simple.

But then, consider the source. Right-wing nuts are anything but above slander. Just ask Al Gore or John Kerry.

If I were Mr. Obama, I would fight such charges tooth-and-nail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I don't like Obama either Posted by: jeffersonian
» RE: Uh-uh Posted by: Longdream
» So many smears Check this out. Posted by: Verjenie
If Obama and his supporters think that being a muslim is a liability
Posted by: PakiBoy on Mar 13, 2008 4:03 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
then I'm all for wingnuts to swiftboat his campaign.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks, Blink Posted by: joeunix
» I appreciate your honesty Posted by: Blink
» RE: Wow! Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Wow! Posted by: joeunix
With Friends like these...
Posted by: al.hamilton on Mar 13, 2008 4:35 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems that most of the Obama=muslim rhetoric has been coming from Hillary and her surrogates.
Mccain and the right wing conspirators have been relatively benign in this aspect. I'm sure it will change if Obama secures the nominations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» PLEASE STOP LYING Posted by: Verjenie
» RE: NOBODY'S LYING. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: OOOOH! Posted by: Longdream
.
Posted by: ShoShenQ on Mar 13, 2008 5:38 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it wouldnt surprise me that Hillary is behind this mudslinging.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: . Posted by: data23
Flash cards and hand puppets
Posted by: fbc21ca on Mar 13, 2008 5:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is probably the #1 thing he has to fight.

Conventional wisdom to the contrary, he is getting NO help from the mainstream media.

By the way, did you see the Reuters story that says the majority of Americans *don't read* political blogs? I don't know if it's true, but it squares with my instinct -- that the progressive online world operates in an echo chamber.

This battle will be won on television and in the pages of the National Enquirer (who just ran another Obama smear article).

I think it can be won, but perhaps only at the protozoan level. Maybe Obama should employ a series of flash cards or a hand puppet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Uh uh Posted by: Longdream
» Blogs Posted by: kokiss
» RE: Blogs Posted by: SkeeterVT1
Oh, yeah -- Obama's a Christian
Posted by: Blink on Mar 13, 2008 6:32 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We know that by listening to excerpts of taped sermons by his "spiritual leader" and "pastor."

Unadulterated bile and hate from a lunatic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» hmmm, sounds like you are the one.. Posted by: voicefromafar
A lesson in how to make the ugly even uglier.
Posted by: Sojourner on Mar 13, 2008 7:24 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fill a 5000 word article with facts about horrendous slander from right wing nuts but scatter in some accusations, only a dozen words maybe, that his legitimate opponent approves of such slander. I might as well watch Fox News as read AlterNet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Obama supports Israel then he is just as worthless as others.
Posted by: fonn on Mar 13, 2008 9:41 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course you cannot win an american election if you tell the truth about israel, that it was criminally created at an enormous cost to the palestinian people. The question is: is Obama faking it or is he really for israel? If he is faking it, then he has my respect. If not, then he can take a hike. Can you believe it, that america is the only country in the world which considers the interests of another country as more important than its own interests!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since when does Alternet think Christianity is a good thing?
Posted by: Blink on Mar 14, 2008 2:40 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think I've ever read one Alternet article in defense of Christianity. In fact, it's quite the contrary, as Alternet regularly publishes articles excoriating Christianity and mocking Christians (at least, white Christians). Alternet also publishes articles in defense of Islam. So why is it now a good thing that Obama is a Christian?

Besides, is he really a Christian? No Christian I know would have belonged for 20 years to the kind of church Obama belonged to and listened to the kind of pure, unadulterated hate that spewed from its so-called "pastor."

Obama is living a dual life -- one where he presents himself as a secular messiah over whom grown women swoon (what morons), and another that he keeps hidden and that the dry-stream media refuses to press him on. We get glimpses into that hidden life by the comments his wife makes when her guard is down and by listening to the words of his "spiritual" advisor, the crazed black racist who performed his wedding ceremony and baptised his children.

This man does not represent the "audacity of hope" (which is an illogical phrase anyway) or an optimistic future. He represents the audacity of hate, a throw-back to a time that pre-dates the civil rights era.

This man is a charlatan, an empty suit who can't stand criticism or scrutiny and who has zero qualifications for being the President of the U.S.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hatchet Job Posted by: herbal
» Racist to call him Black Posted by: kokiss
» Love the ad hominems Posted by: Blink
» RE: Glad to oblige. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Hatchet Job Posted by: SekhmetsatRa
» RE: Hatchet Job Posted by: Ellie F.
» Are you sure... Posted by: Bbear41
» RE: Blink and you miss it Posted by: gazooks
» Gazooks has it nailed. Posted by: Fencerider
» RE: OH, ME! Posted by: Longdream
Obama needs to challenge Israel policy
Posted by: herbal on Mar 14, 2008 2:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why can we not hope that Obama is not taken under the cloak of AIPAC Israel lobby as have Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman. Is it so difficult to see that Israel's Likud right wing has been placed in a position of dominance in Israel by US perpetual war foreign policy? Who takes the time to investigate the positions of the repressed Israeli peace movement? Search Google before endorsing the ISRAELI EQUIVALENT OF THE BUSH ADMIN. So, in this way the US has been able to exploit the Israeli citizens and undermine their real security over many years. Our country, USA does this to keep its military in a position to steal the oil of weak Moslem countries. It is folly to think it is possible to be anti-war and pro-Likud Israel. And do not shrink if you are called anti-semitic; after all, Arabs are Semites also. Obviously, the US can unilaterally guarantee Israel's borders and ensure its security much more effectively by military means than pre-emptively attacking Iraq. We can simply enforce the original UN sanctioned borders and enforce international law that forbids taking and keeping land gained by warfare. Create two states. We whup whoever crosses the line; that simple.

Choose not to believe it? Please read:

www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804

This is Vanity Fair's April issue expose they call Gaza Bombshell. It is but the latest example of how the US undermines the peace process in the Israel and MidEast.

I am a Jew for peace. Begin your change if heart by going here:

www. google.com/search?hl=en&q=jews+for+peace&btnG=Google+Search

Also, see Tikkun and Rabbi Michael Lerner

Obama=shalom meschugena nein.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama's Church mainline Protestant
Posted by: herbal on Mar 14, 2008 3:25 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is easy for anyone to google up Obama's church website and look for yourself:
http://www.tucc.org/home.htm

This is not a Falwell/Dobson cult. This is the United Church of Christ, the national mainline church that has been outspokenly against the Iraq war. I subscribe to their on line newsletters and they are great and sincere people. I can't see that Obama's pastor is any more racist than Dr. M. Luther King was. Call a spade a spade. Its most interesting to see crackers call someone else on racism.

Many of these comments are misinformed Rash Limberger attack pieces. For shame for shame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What I find most horrifying
Posted by: paula.c on Mar 14, 2008 5:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is the same old Anti-Semitism that has been around for thousands of years. And to top it off is the racial insensitivity of ANY Jew to this wonderful man. Where are your brains? Get out and fight for Barack Obama's presidential campaign, and be generous!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary and McCain team up against Obama?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Mar 14, 2008 5:22 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary, as many have noted, stooped to a new low in Democratic politics by claiming that McCain would be a better president than Obama. She also rolled out a nice racist campaign full of smear tactics at the last minute.

So, the media smears are probably a result of efforts by both the Hillary and McCain campaigns, both of whom are set for defeat as things stand today.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Slander?
Posted by: douglashoyt on Mar 14, 2008 5:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The attacks don't work as intended, unless the target audience have a prejudice toward the the victim of the slander.

In other words, bigots believe slander.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Slander? Posted by: Longdream
These Attacks Have Been Routine for Hillary
Posted by: johnp on Mar 14, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The attacks you're talking about here, have been routine agaisnt Hillary. In fact, they are taken for granted, they're actually required of anyone writing on the left and are part and parcel of mainstream media. It's as impossible to find a kind, charitable, even a fairminded word, anywhere in mainstream media on behalf of Hillary, every remark, every commentary, every story, every discussion, about Hillary is negative and ugly, as it is to find a good thing to say about her in Alternet, or Huffington, or OpEdNews, etc. Every remark is an attack. What's going on here? I consider myself decisively on the Left, and am a strong Hillary supporter. This stuff being said about Obama is nothing by comparison. Or, more precisely, it's just getting started for him, after 10 months of nothing but attacks on Hillary. In fact, even with regard to these relatively mild attacks on Obama, Hillary is being blamed for them. This unanimity of opposition to Hillary is evidence of a something very ugly in our media, right and left. It is a mob mentality, as if no one dares say anything nice about her, but there is also an unmistakable anti-feminism operating here. The contrast revealed in the general public's feelings about Hillary is absolutely striking. Everywhere she goes, the crowds are vast, intensely admiring and respectful. Media has chosen its candidate to demean, and like a mob of adolescents, has gone on the attack. I can't believe its happening, but the ugly reality is, that it is happening.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Unfortunately TRUE Posted by: Verjenie
» RE: It's backlash. Posted by: Longdream
We need no diagrams
Posted by: Kuressaare on Mar 14, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any and all of the mudlsinging and falsities, half-truths (hardly even those) are so obvioulsy in line withthe undercurrent in Mrs. Clinton's ordinary rhetoric, who can doubt the origins? Oh surely a ten thousand-strong group of campaign workers putting it together, but we know where it's coming from. With additives from the republicans. It's been this way from the start. Only yesterday at last I saw him himself (Sen. Obama, about time too) point out that he has been "experienced" in an elected office for 12 years, his opponent in the dem. party only for 8, and I don't think hers were in the dem. party, results wise. Damn I wish she'd throw it in. The Brits at BBC tried to figure how she could win, and really , she can't. They just can't accept that, but they are very backwards, with words like wog and n----- still in common use, and of course the longer one about someone (Pushkin for example) having been brushed with the tar brush. How elegant. Sir Peter Ustinov too. Well, the figures aren't there, and meanwhile the Clintons get nastier day by day. I did not, I must say, think the Clinton years were notable for grace and high purpose. I am afraid though I don't give a dam (tinker's dam) about the oval office and what games are played there, I remember not grace under fire but the lurid reports of penis size drawings given to congress and the press. How illuminiating. How enlightening. And Politics to be played to the same high standard? Not in my back yard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can we move beyond Religious Labeling to select our next President
Posted by: kiwijohn on Mar 14, 2008 5:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The concept of Christianity, or for that matter any other legacy religion, means many things to many people both inside and outside their respective worldly constituencies. The label of Christian, Muslim or Jew or whatever says little about the true nature of an individual.

I am coming across more and more people (GenX and Y as well as those of even Woodstock vintage) with profound, genuine, thoughtful, commitment to positive, forward looking humanity. Few of these people are closely associated with any 'Religion' as such, particularly not those with a fundamentalist focus.

Many people in our current world have not yet entered into the space of even starting to work through substantive metaphysical concepts. That's not intended as a put-down, just a physical world observation of a reality I share with many of my friends (btw, I personally get there only sporadically, as much as I try to); many people are bound by hand-me-down, unfortunately largely thoughtless herd behavior that compromises their ability to grow as individual human beings.

Using a formal Religion as a defining label to ascribe moral, political or even personal positive or negative attributes to individuals is reasonably counter-productive, speak useless.

If we are to lift the quality of debate over the selection of the next US President the discussion should probably start to steer clear of Religion... and Race, but that's another subject altogether.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

media infiltration spawned by "Young Republicans"
Posted by: GPFrank on Mar 14, 2008 6:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those such as Blink is the real Charlatans; All he does is repeat
allegations without any proof. He is one of a breed spawned by the "Young Republicans" who initiated defamation and trash talking as the justified means 20 years ago.

At the time I heard them talk of developing people to infiltrate the media (newspapers)supposedly to imitate what the Communists were doing. Perhaps stimulated then by the publication of "God and Man at Yale" that was simply an honest criticism, not intended as defamation.

At the very least senior editors have a responsibility to keep track of their correspondents and monitor what is being circulated on the Internet as facts but is simply talking trash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Be negative be happy
Posted by: solrev on Mar 14, 2008 6:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Negative attacks on ones opponent will always be a good strategy as far as the eye can see. The media as entertainment will pick up negative attacks. Your opponent will then have to spend some time on defense and this takes away message time. Negative attacks will solidify one’s base. The only con is that, in actual vote count they do very little. The great majority of people vote for someone rather than against someone. A step in the right direction would be to get rid of all those goofy American idol primary debates. A good issue debate, while Kucinich was around, would have been national health insurance vs. national health care. It appears like actual issue debates are in no candidate’s best interest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SAME 'OLE SHIT,DIFFERANT DAY!
Posted by: donl51 on Mar 14, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What does anyone expect? this is America,and our news media is a joke for the most part,the papers in the supermkt. checkout are it! LIES LIES LIES !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"the media keeps swallowing right-wing lies..." Ya' wanna know why???
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Mar 14, 2008 6:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Becaaaaaase, the "right wing media" is OWNED by large corporations who tell the media how high to jump, which direction to go AND Any propaganda that will help propetuate their agenda...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barack Hussein Obama is good for this country
Posted by: puredusthere on Mar 14, 2008 7:01 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War is terrorism and terrorism is war simple as that.
What is so bad about being a Muslim. When a person is a Muslim he also believes in Jesus the Messiah and his second coming. A Muslim believes in all Prophets from Adam to Jesus and Muhammad the last of all Prophets without leaving anyone out. In the Koran Jesus was mentioned 154 times but is considered the Son of Miriam - Mary the Virgin.
The racists have a broblem with Obama's skin color and use religion as a scare tactic to confuse the voters but they are bound to fail. This country is in great need for change or may wind up like old Germany did with a Hitler style Dictatorship and go broke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: FWEEEEEEEET! Posted by: Longdream
A dark day for American history!
Posted by: Doggycuny on Mar 14, 2008 7:25 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a Texan I speak for everyone from the south. We are disgusted at the prospect of having a black president. And if that wasn't bas enough, he's a Muslim.

What a dark day for American that would be; having a black, Muslim president.

We didn't fight the civil war for nothing! We didn't kick the north's ass for nothing! This is a disgrace! Abe Lincoln would be turning in his grave, knowing the fighting he did for us against the north was for nothing! Knowing that the uppity blacks he tried to control are now running loose and on the rampage in our great land. We need to get back the control we lost over these animals.

The day we have a black president will be the day the south rises up again and takes back God's land from these barbarian criminals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A dark day for American history! Posted by: radiomorning
Hate to break it to you but
Posted by: Alyx on Mar 14, 2008 7:32 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He may not be anti-semitic, but Farrakhan is, and he's not only supported him, but given him an humanitarian award.

http://www.tv7-4.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=108191

His church is cause for some very serious concerns. Check out the "Black values" pdf from their website, you'll see plenty of racist values.

http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

And here he blames America for 9/11 and tells his congregation to not sing God Bless America, but God Damn America. When Ward Churchill did something similar to this the whole country demanded he be fired.

If they're going to get into politics, than they can give up their non-profit status and pay taxes like everyone else.

But even more interesting, Obama's campaign staff work to separate him from Wright's extremism, than Obama turns around and defends Wright's racist comments. Newsflash, racism is color blind, anyone can catch it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: FWEEEEEEEEET!!! Posted by: Longdream
» RE: FWEEEEEEEEET!!! Posted by: YogiBear
Tip of the Iceberg
Posted by: Southern Gal on Mar 14, 2008 7:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's happening in the media now is the tip of the iceberg. The Republican, Neo Con, right wing, religious wingnut vultures are just getting started. They are deadly serious about staying in power and will do anything to keep it. I hope that the Obama camp is prepared.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tip of the Iceberg Posted by: pkbw
what the hell did you expect?
Posted by: jeffersonian on Mar 14, 2008 8:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just because Obama plays nice the Republican slime machine will play nice too? And the right-wing 527s? Obama supporters are naive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: