March, 1, 2008
Obama, Being Called Muslim Is Not A Smear
The Nation: Candidate Has Not Pointed Out That False "Muslim Smear" Against Him Shouldn't Be Considered A Smear At All
-
Play CBS Video
Video
For The Record: Barack Obama
Barack Obama went from Democratic Party underdog to the forefront of the field. By now he doesn't have to spell out his name, just his record. Dean Reynolds reports.
-
Photo
Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., speaks during a rally Thursday, Feb. 28, 2008, in Ft. Worth, Texas. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)
-
Photo Essay
Barack Obama
A look at the life and meteoric rise of the president-elect.
Hillary Clinton denied leaking the photo of Barack Obama wearing a turban, but her campaign manager says that even if she had, it would be no big deal. "Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely."
Sure she did. And George W. Bush put on a fetching Chamato poncho in Santiago, while Paul Wolfowitz burned up YouTube with his antimalarial African dance routines when he was World Bank prez. The obvious difference is this: when white politicians go ethnic, they just look funny. When a black presidential contender does it, he looks foreign. And when the ethnic apparel in question is vaguely reminiscent of the clothing worn by Iraqi and Afghan fighters (at least to many Fox viewers, who think any headdress other than a baseball cap is a declaration of war on America), the image is downright frightening.
The turban "scandal" is all part of what is being referred to as "the Muslim smear." It includes everything from exaggerated enunciations of Obama's middle name to the online whisper campaign that Obama attended a fundamentalist madrassa in Indonesia (a lie), was sworn in on a Koran (another lie) and if elected would attach RadioShack speakers to the White House to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer (I made that one up).
So far, Obama's campaign has responded with aggressive corrections that tout his Christian faith, attack the attackers and channel a cooperative witness before the House Un-American Activities Committee. "Barack has never been a Muslim or practiced any other faith besides Christianity," states one fact sheet. "I'm not and never have been of the Muslim faith," Obama told a Christian News reporter.
Of course Obama must correct the record, but he doesn't have to stop there. What is disturbing about the campaign's response is that it leaves unchallenged the disgraceful and racist premise behind the entire "Muslim smear": that being Muslim is de facto a source of shame. Obama's supporters often say they are being "Swiftboated," casually accepting the idea that being accused of Muslimhood is tantamount to being accused of treason.
Substitute another faith or ethnicity, and you'd expect a very different response. Consider a report from the archives of this magazine. Thirteen years ago, Daniel Singer, The Nation's late, much-missed Europe correspondent, went to Poland to cover a hotly contested presidential election. He reported that the race had descended into an ugly debate over whether one of the candidates, Aleksander Kwasniewski, was a closet Jew. The press claimed his mother had been buried in a Jewish cemetery (she was still alive), and a popular TV show aired a skit featuring the Christian candidate dressed as a Hasidic Jew. "What perturbed me," Singer wryly observed, "was that Kwasniewski's lawyers threatened to sue for slander rather than press for an indictment under the law condemning racist propaganda."
We should expect no less of the Obama campaign. When asked during the Ohio debate about Louis Farrakhan's support for his candidacy, Obama did not hesitate to call Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments "unacceptable and reprehensible." When the turban photo flap came up in the same debate, he used the occasion to say nothing at all.
Farrakhan's infamous comments about Jews took place twenty-four years ago. The orgy of hate that is "the Muslim smear" is unfolding in real time, and it promises to greatly intensify in a general election. These attacks do not simply "smear Barack's Christian faith," as John Kerry claimed in a campaign mailing. They are an attack on all Muslims, some of whom actually do exercise their rights to cover their heads and send their kids to religious school. Thousands even have the very common name Hussein. All are watching their culture used as a crude bludgeon against Obama, while the candidate who is the symbol of racial harmony fails to defend them. This at a time when US Muslims are bearing the brunt of the Bush Administration's assaults on civil liberties, including dragnet wiretapping, and are facing a documented spike in hate crimes.
Occasionally, though not nearly enough, Obama says that Muslims are "deserving of respect and dignity." What he has never done is what Singer called for in Poland: denounce the attacks themselves as racist propaganda, in this case against Muslims.
The core of Obama's candidacy is that he alone - who lived in Indonesia as a boy and has an African grandmother - can "repair the world" after the Bush wrecking ball. That repair job begins with the 1.4 billion Muslims around the world, many of whom are convinced that the United States has been waging a war against their faith. This perception is based on facts, among them the fact that Muslim civilians are not counted among the dead in Iraq and Afghanistan; that Islam has been desecrated in US-run prisons; that voting for an Islamic party resulted in collective punishment in Gaza. It is also fueled by the rise of a virulent strain of Islamophobia in Europe and North America.
As the most visible target of this rising racism, Obama has the power to be more than its victim. He can use the attacks to begin the very process of global repair that is the most seductive promise of his campaign. The next time he's asked about his alleged Muslimness, Obama can respond not just by clarifying the facts but by turning the tables. He can state clearly that while a liaison with a pharmaceutical lobbyist may be worthy of scandalized exposure, being a Muslim is not. Changing the terms of the debate this way is not only morally just but tactically smart - it's the one response that could defuse these hateful attacks. The best part is this: unlike ending the Iraq War and closing Guantánamo, standing up to Islamophobia doesn't need to wait until after the election. Obama can use his campaign to start now. Let the repairing begin.
Postscript: Ari Melber criticized this column, citing a video the Obama campaign has been circulating featuring a minister of Obama's church who makes it clear that while Obama is not a Muslim, there would be nothing wrong with it if he was. I had the same clip sent to me directly from the Obama campaign and wrote this in response: "What I am suggesting needs to be said can only be said by the man himself, just as he has taken brave stances against racism directed at Latinos under the guise of fighting illegal immigration. Do not underestimate the message that his silence is sending, not just in the U.S. but around the world."
One more thing: now is the time when candidates are most open to pressure. For instance, Hillary Clinton just announced that she will co-sponsor legislation to ban the use of private military companies - exactly one day after my Nation colleague Jeremy Scahill revealed that both Clinton and Obama were poised to let the mercenaries stay in Iraq even if the troops come home. Pushing candidates on the issues during a campaign can have a real impact, so can we please move beyond superfandom? I have also heard from people who think that saying Arabs and Muslims are worthy of exactly the same rights and protections as other minorities is just too high-risk a position for Obama during the campaign. If that's the position, so be it, but don't pretend the campaign is doing something it is not. It is precisely because he has been so strong on other issues of discrimination and racism that his trepidation on this issue leaps out.
By Naomi Klein
Reprinted with permission from The Nation.
| If you like this article, check out www.thenation.com for more investigative reports, timely editorials and incisive columns |




http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-usark245589997feb24,0,2670956.story
She seems to have carried that tactic with her when she actively participated in smear campaigns against the credibility of the victims of her husband%u2019s harassment, even after he was caught lying under oath in a court of law. Making women terrified to report sexual harassment out of fear of being publicly humiliated and having their careers destroyed is a terrible role model for women, as is attacking the character of 12-year-old rape victims.
Tenacity can be a desirable trait in a leader, but ruthlessness, a trait that Hillary conflates with tenacity and cultivates in abundance, is not."
Posted by g english
It is scary that a woman lawyer Hillary would smear a rape victim child to gain recognition. For 35 years, Hillary has done whatever it takes at all cost to secure her personal gain. People just don''t change.
NEXT WE WILL SEE ADS WITH HIM LIKING WHITE WOMEN AND HATING GUNS LIKE WE DID IN TENNESSE!
AMERICA WISE UP OR EAT GRASS!
STAND UP OR SHUT UP!
Posted by Jade_406 at 11:19 AM : Mar 01, 2008"
Because it is a family name handed down over a couple generations. You''d know that if you''d bother to read anything about Obama rather than just parrot FOX talking points. Grow up, read some facts and make a judgment based on reality not lies, you''d sound a lot less stupid.
Posted by huanaco at 09:19 AM : Mar 01, 2008"
Perhaps he will be, but the fact that you are making a decision on who should be the President of the United States based on narrow minded racism is pathetic. But then I guess for Republicans this isn''t too surprising, you made the same decision about Mitt Romney and he was a Christian, just the wrong kind of Christian.
I certainly hope that we can get away from the narrow minded bigotry that runs American politics.
Here is something to consider. Religion does not equate to race. Therefore, citing religion as a determining factor in a persons vote IS NOT RACIST!
If you wish to argue policies and legislative history, fine. But every time you call a person racist when their attacks (with or without logic or substantiation) are not racist you lower your standing as someone who can indeed address the facts.
Posted by tama351 at 12:17 PM : Mar 01, 2008
+ report abuse
It''s sad to hear and read post from people who either know nothing of or are trying to hide the past. I grew up in the south. Lived through the 60''s there and I know as well as anyone alive what is going on here. This isn''t going to effect the votes of any well educated person in the Rest of the nation. It''s not going to even make a ripple in the support for Obama in colleges or places of higher learning. This is as it always has been, is targeted to the fearful and the ignorant. You need only look at how people of the Muslim faith is being dealt with by the Religious Reich (Klan) to understand. The goal is to scare these people into hating ALL Muslims, to scare them into fearing ALL Muslims. Then when the Radical Reich or a Neocon Radio voice tells them that Obama has the middle name that is the SAME as Saddam, the link is made, the fear is created. These people do not care that doing this will most certainly further divide this nation. They can''t defend the record of their Party, it''s horrible. They can''t debate Obama on the issues, they will loose. But this way they at least hang on to the "Solid" South and their base. The Klan is good folks and so are the Neocon''s, good at what they have always been good at. HATE and DIVISION. Let''s leave this trash where it belongs and talk about the issues we all face and how the two canidates intend on dealing with them.
Posted by Jade_406 at 12:12 PM : Mar 01, 2008
+ report abuse
It''s sad to hear and see these kind of post at this point in our history. It''s great to see that the vast majority of American''s do not buy it and when they find out that they are, like the Swift Boat Ad''s, nothing but lies, they will reject them. That''s the reason for the early start to the Champaign, so that there will be time for the simple minded and those who are victims of this fear, to KNOW the truth and see the hate and division for what it is. There''s an AVALANCHE headed toward the Republican Party and it''s going to sweep them from office. Things like this will only add to that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by taddles at 11:59 AM : Mar 01, 2008
+ report abuse
Well when you have taken a Balanced Budget and a Surplus, turned it into the mess we now have. When you spent 6 years and a Trillion Dollars attacking the WRONG Country. When you spent 7 Years trying to capture the person who attacked this nation only to have him NOW strong as he was when he attacked you and in a safe haven in Pakistan, HATE and DIVISION is all you have. It''s going to get much more ugly! There IS no Republican Party anymore outside the south to speak of. These people are so dispicable they turn off the normal Republican''s and they are now backing Obama as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by tama351 at 02:02 PM : Mar 01, 2008
+ report abuse
I like most American''s really do not know what I am. I''m listed as White but I''m no different than most... I''m a Mutt! I''m also a native son of the south! This guy in Tenn is a Klan Member and the man who attacked Obama in Ohio, if not a member of the Klan is as close as anyone I''ve ever heard. This kind of thing makes me sick to my stomach. We have the WORST PRESIDENT in our History sitting in the White House. He got there the same way you people want to put McCain there. Do you honestly think the American People are going to fall for the same thing twice? Especially when they NOW know the LIES that has taken them to a war that never had to be. Now they can see the complete and total failure of the Republican Party? YOU think they are going to vote against this man and the change he will bring because of his MIDDLE NAME, which HE had no control over? LOL You need to walk around a little and talk to people. LOL
I know I wouldn''t. I want my children and grandchildren to have more rights and freedoms not less.
Actually, it is. Not because they used the word "muslim", however.
Actually admitting that you''re part and parcel of any religion should cast serious doubt on your qualifications for any political office. I mean, really, how good can your judgement possibly be if you believe the world was created in 6 days, or that you''ll be rewarded with virgins when you die, or any other ridiculous nonsense with ZERO evidence? As an agnostic (atheism is a bit too far to the other side for my taste) I know that I am in the minority, and that''s ok. Once it was a majority belief that black people should be slaves or that the world was flat.
The simple truth is that we have no evidence whatsoever of what happens after death, and to base any life-altering decisions on any religious belief should be a serious detriment to ANY political campaign. I mean really - if you can seriously buy into these things, what kind of nutso things are you going to do when you enter office? Oh wait, we have GWBush as evidence of that. 8-)
Morality, kindness, compassion and tolerance are not the products of religion. They are the products of human society, for those that choose to follow such social standards. I fully respect and endorse your right to believe and live under whatever belief structure you want. However, when you''re asking to become my president, I need someone grounded in reality. Thank you.
The Nation, by the way, is the oldest weekly in the US. They were also one of the only two US magazines that during World War 2 condemned the Holocaust.
Everybody else just didn''t care for that stuff at the time.
I''ve always said the Nation is one of the most honest magazines I''ve read and I hope people can appreciate that.
Like all swift-boating, truth has nothing to do with it when the target is the ignorant and hate-filled among us.
I know - as a gay man, I watched the demonization of *** in both of Bush''s election campaigns. I stood by while 13 states passed anti-gay marriage amendments that were not designed to affect policy, but to scare the hell out of the evangelical wing of the Republican Party and drive them to the polls.
This is no different. No one, not one politician of any stripe could come out and endorse Gay Marriage in response to the Karl Rove ugliness. Why? Because the smear (also irrational - it will kill traditional marriage - why? will all prospective bridegrooms suddenly decide to become gay? :-).
Though morally correct, it would have been career suicide, because the true evil of Swift-Boating is that the lie becomes very real in the minds of the numerous idiots who buy that garbage.
If Barack Obama had given a nuanced reply, calling the miscreants on their very premise, I promise you that the next morning CNN would carry a headling:
Barack Favors Muslims
You can''t win with a swift-boat attack. That''s how they''re designed. All you can do is deny and change the subject.
What a sad world we live in.
carnalzoo@yahoo.com
Remember all....The world doesn''t hate Americans
( many Americans are nice people).
The world hates republicans.
Republicans are destroying democracy and America.
W. is just the first step over the cliff.......
Look out belooooooowwwwwwwww........
Then it is a good thing you are not running for office as you are not in touch with reality.
Morality, kindness, compassion and tolerance are not products of society. The opposite is true. I will not say all religions teach those things, i am not familiar with all of them. But I will tell you I know few people who are not religious that believe in morality, kindness, compassion and tolerance the way truly religious people do. I am not talking aobut those who are only religious on Sunday, and not even Super Bowl Sunday at that. I am talking about those people who live it 24/7.
Where are his loyalties?
-
by bradshawfami
March 3, 2008 9:15 PM PST
- Last night on 60 Minutes. Barack Obama was asked if he knew where the rumor got started about his religious affiliation being Muslim. He said he really did not know and blamed it on his political adversaries. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed but wouldn''t most people think that with a name like Barack Obama your probably a Muslim. I guess I can only come to the conclusion that the rumor started with his parents when thay named him Barack Obama.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 37 Comments