The John Gibson version of tbis slander (as indeed it is) went further to claim that Hillary Clinton was behind it. A two-fer, from their point of view. Expect more.

indeed -- imagine how ugly it'll get if it's a Clinton-Obama ticket...

Yes, but as a sitting senator, cna't he actually DO anything about it? Demand a retraction, maybe?

These malicious, irresponsible charges

Uh oh, I can hear the wingnut chorus now: Oh, so you mean it's malicious to say someone's Muslim or was raised Muslim?

OT: Greg, when are you going to get a link on TPM for this place? I always have to remember how to get to it.

The Insight story itself claimed Hillary's people were behind it. Obama's and Hillary's staff both called the piece a hit job at both of them. It's no surprise John Gibson would repeat the lies and the Hillary "link."

we'll have a link up soon...meantime, the Horse's Mouth homepage is at:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth

I hope he sues the bastards.

I hope Hillary does the same.

Way to go, Obama! The key as you rightly say, Greg, is to name the names of the irresponsible accusers. Make it about them, not about their target. Destroy their credibility.

Fox News, Just a Bunch of Gossips.

"We Repeat, Then Deride"

Did Obama develop a spine after seeing Webb's response last night? Either way, I am glad he is fighting back. May that be a lesson to all Democratic candidates.

So why aren't these guys getting the same treatment as Dan Rather?

Can you say "Swift Boat"? This was the first attempt at swift-boating Obaba, and with any luck the rapid and firm response will demonstrate that this tactic just doesn't work any more. I'm hoping that soon it'll catch on that the old republican playbook is exhausted.

Doocy and his little friends on that morning show are the worst--the blonde who called Ted Kennedy and enemy on the homefront. Even in the world of al-Foxeera, Gibson, O'Reilly and Hannity are 'commentators', I think these nitwits are supposed to journalists.'

Now, Senator, direct a little of that fire at the administration and it's supporters.

Rush Limbaugh today, Wednesday, said Insight is reporting that the information used by Fox on Obama came from a Clinton operative.

Is an email memo enough? I'd get all excited if he got 1 minutes on TV to call Fox a bunch of LIARS.

His response is great except for the part labeling the false story "charges." He was "charged with going to school at a Muslim school and learning Wahhabism?" That makes it seem like going to a Muslim school and learning to practice a form of the Muslim faith is somehow illegal, immoral or both. These were false claims, not charges. Wahhabism is the dominant strain of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia, btw -- hardly a fringe nation.

"which cites unnamed sources close to a political campaign"

Doesn't this give credence to part of the smear that the Clinton campaign gave it to them. If I remember Gibson and Limbaugh etal, didn't they imply that this came from the Clinton campaign directly and not really highlight the real sources-Insight and the Wash Times.

So the Obama release highlights the real sources- the two right wing media outlets where the thing could could have been made up wholecloth. Indeed as many sources, if I am right, including you, point out there is no evidence whatsoever that the Clinton campign were part of this. Indeed given how easily rebuttable it was - it was a public school- it could be asked why would they be stupid enough to be any part of it.?

And so I ask why is this phrase in the Obama rebuttal....Innuendo also unsupported by the facts.

Obama's response is great, but I think he and all Dems should take the naming of names one step further when episodes like this occur.

Name Rev. Sun Myung Moon as the owner of the Washington Times and include a pithy description of him and his followers, like Fox and the GOP do with, say, MoveOn and George Soros, to mention but one among many on a long list.

Name Rupert Murdoch's News Corpororation as the owner of Fox News and include pithy descriptions of him and Roger Ailes as well.

Shouldn't be hard to do either of those things, and the power of it can be amazing. I can't tell you how often I hear people dismiss MoveOn as sponsored by some rich atheist socialist.

We should hold Rev. Moon's views and actions and Rupert Murdoch's views and actions to the same scrutiny.

Shades of Don Segretti faking a letter on Edmund Muskie's letterhead in 1972 falsely alleging that Scoop Jackson, a fellow Democratic presidential primary candidate, had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old. Some things never change.

BTW in 2000, Segretti served as co-chair of John McCain's campaign in Orange County, California.

"Even in the world of al-Foxeera, Gibson, O'Reilly and Hannity are 'commentators', I think these nitwits are supposed to journalists.'"

Nah... They are not journalists or commentators, they are just "common 'taters" for the couch potatoes. Faux Nooz is to journalism what pro wrestling is to sports.

At last! Proof that spinal recovery is possible! Props to Sen. Obama for responding so vehemently to the Right Wing Noise Machine!!!

I love the fact that Obama is hitting back, but I'm troubled by the implication that calling someone a Muslim is an accusation. (Try telling that to Keith Ellison.)

I'm sure that the statements were *meant* to be accusations. I wish Obama had made the point that (a) the story is false, and (b) even if it were true, it shouldn't matter.

I know for a fact that Sen. Obama has sent his daughters to JCC Summer Camp. Looking for weak points in its physical security, I must now assume.

</foxnewsmode>

This guy is the right choice at the right time. He is smart, direct, fresh, and will be difficult to pin down to controversial past (like Mrs. Clinton). He's the real deal. Hopefully the Dem establishment won't take him out to preserve Hillary's front running status. We all know where that got us the last time. I'm just waiting for the new From/Reed memo. Penn and Carville have already put forth the first salvos of bullshit.

"To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago. Furthermore, the Indonesian school Obama attended in Jakarta is a public school that is not and never has been a Madrassa."

Methinks they protest too much. Anything wrong in being a Muslim? Go Hillary!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch

Bad as that episode smelled, a worse fragrance has wafted from the Murdoch enterprise in China, where he won broadcasting privileges from the corrupt Communist regime. For a reported advance of $1 million, News Corp. published the stunningly awful hagiography of party boss Deng Xiaoping, authored by daughter Deng Rong. Meanwhile, Mr. Murdoch tried to suppress a critical book on China by the renowned British diplomat Christopher Patten.

http://www.observer.com/20060417/20060417_Joe_Conason_opinions_conason.asp

"Friends and colleagues were all floored in 1998 when [Murdoch] suddenly dispatched Anna, his second wife of 31 years, with breathtaking speed, fired her from the News Corp. board and married a 32-year-old go-getter, Wendi Deng."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091402628.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

Roger Ailes is well known to many of us as a former GOP political hitman, but few people in the general public are aware of this fact.

http://www.outfoxed.org/

One false note in the response: to state that these lies are "malicious" instead of repugnant. To clarify, it's insulting to suggest that a Muslim education is in any way a stain on any candidate's character. I think Keith Ellison did a good job of slapping that one down. So yes, these were lies. But even if they were true, so what?

Glad to see the Senator stand up to those lying bastards. I and several of my frinds have solved the Fox Lies. We have blocked the channel from our TV's it does not come into our home. I think the attack mode on these LB's is the best method.

"To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago."

He might want to mention the church he attends is actually Trinity United Church of Christ
http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

This is their creed:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

This may create a new problem

i agree that obama is right to fight back. but it concerns me that he refers to allegations of being raised as a muslim as 'malicious'. obama is treading a fine line here, and in my opinion has slipped over a little.

I like the fact that Obama went back agressively against the false allegations. I watched the "Fox & Friends" clip and it wasn't just the false allegations themselves, it was the way the hosts spoke when they presented these lies. "That man right there"? What are you, Doocy, a tough guy? He then followed that reminding folks that Obama's middle name is "Hoooo-sein". Yes, he stretched it out for impact.

However, like others, I'm concerned that this response from Obama makes it seem as though there is something wrong with being a Muslim or going to a madrassa. Yes, there are plenty of madrassas out there that teach radical Wahhabism. But if I'm not mistaken, there are also madrassas that are simply religious schools - ie, no radicalism.

In addition, it's not like Islamic terrorism brought us Madrassas. I just finished reading Robert Byron's, "Road to Oxiana", written in 1933. While visiting Herat, Afghanistan, Byron visited the ruins of a madrassa built in the 15th century by Gohar Shad, one of the most powerful and influential female Islamic political figures in history. I don't think the young men who went to that particular madrassa were being taught to hate the Great Satan because, well, the United States didn't even exist.

But who knows? The way things are these days in this country these days, it may unfortunately be reality that even a hint of a Muslim past could doom one's political career. I'm sure the people who created these lies were of that mindset. And regardless of CNN's reporting on the lies and Obama's denunciation of FoxNews, there are going to be plenty of people who will still believe that Obama is some kind of Muslim Manchurian Candidate, hell bent on destroying the US. But then those people would never vote for Obama anyway.

Some of you guys really need to stop overthinking the issue. He wasn't simply accused of being a Muslim. He was accused of concealing his alleged Muslim faith, and maybe being an adherent of a radical strain of Islam "that hates us." You can't put aside the innuendo and act like all they did was misstate his religion; the nasty innuendos are the entire point.

I don't see why he doesn't sue them for libel. He probably wouldn't win since he is a public figure, but it would generate a TON of publicity.

Perhaps it's time for the Dems to go after big media conglomerations like FOX. It is in America's best interest to break them up and rescind their privileges if, no when, they are polluting the public discourse with lies and misrepresntations.

Enough already!

The Dems should flex their power.

kp

I'm glad Obama went after Fox aggressively. That's exactly what needs to happen. However, I continue to be underwhelmed by Obama and I'm at a loss to explain his meteoric rise to national prominence. He's smart. He's articulate, but untested. He says the right things, but there are lots of others out there who are every bit as smart and articulate. Could white guilt play a part in his ascendance?

Off topic, I got up early (west coaster) the day after the November election to watch Fox and Friends. It was such a pleasure to watch them swallow hard and paste sickly grins on their faces after all the crowing, innuendo and general disinformation they regularly spew. It was definitely worth getting up at 4 am for.

To those who fear Clinton and Obama candidacies because of the attacks they seem open to, I would remind them that many of us thought Kerry, with his combat history, would be the most electable candidate. Then, we got the swiftboaters. Success in the present political/media environment has much less to do with a candidate's actual history and much more to do with his or her ability to counter slander and misinformation, sad as that fact is.

Frankly, I don't feel the response is strong enough. It only brands the charges as lies. Of course they are lies! Obama, either personally or through his campaign, should brand the individuals who uttered them as irresponsible liars utterly lacking in professional or personal ethics. He should demand their termination, and/or personal public apology. He should demand that the organizations involved demonstrate new policies and procedures to prevent such slanders and libels from occuring again.

I don't want EVER to see any more pusillanimous responses to Swift Boat-type slander from another Democratic candidate. It's both knees on their necks, or we'll lose again!

Whereas I agree with you Greg that this sort of stand-up attitude is a greatly needed attribute in all walks of life (and especially rewarding to see displayed against the winger nuts) I predict this will do Obama more harm than good, simply for the reasons people are talking about here. He overstepped his response and seemingly agreed that to be considered Muslim is akin to being considered a criminal or terrorist. That will most likely be picked up on by the very same folks who wrote the article and, even though they were implying that exact idea, they can know use it against Obama ironically. The pro-Muslim (or non-anti-Muslim) types are exactly the ones that Obama doesn't want to alienate, but this sort of language will do just that. And in a hurry.

Good God,

The weak-kneed, clucking liberalism is here in full force I see.

Oh, is he ashamed to be called a Muslim [faints]?

You, of course, are falling right into the talking points the Republicans are ginning up against Obama (they have a different set for HRC), ensuring that this utter crap will be part of the campaign long past the shelf date.

He's basically being called a radical Wahhabist plant because he attended a madrassas and you guys are trying to define what madrassas are. Are you that impressed by your own worldliness to NOT understand what 'madrassas' mean to the rest of the country?

Who gives a fig if there are plenty of decent Islamic schools that don't teach hate. Do you, for a minute, think that's what they mean when they say it? Do you not have even the barest sense that THIS is GOP framing, something that has essentially nothing to do with reality?

You'd think, at long last, people would celebrate the fact that a Democrat decided to fight back instantly against slander (which is exactly what it is), instead of being defined by it. But no. The above-it-all crowd would rather read and hear what the GOP has plated up for their consumption and complain that Obama should be happy he's been called an Islamicist because, after all, there's nothing wrong with that!

Pathetic.

I agree that Obama's language made it sound like he was defending the fact that he was a Christian, kind of like "how dare you call me a Muslim! And my father wasn't a Muslim, either! He was an atheist!"

There's nothing wrong with demanding that the reporters get their facts straight and report the truth and to rightly call them on trying to stir something up, but I think he made a George Allenesque booboo here. It would have been more effective if he'd simply stated "Actually I am and have always been a Christian and the school I attended in Jakarta was a public school, not a private madrass or an Islamic school."

C.

I saw CNN's debunking. The whole thing is ridiculous, even responding to something about when he was 6 years old is ridiculous.

I did see Hillary Clinton's staffer on Hardball the other night and he would not answer the question whether Hillary Clinton is employing anyone on her staff to do opposition research on the other Democratic candidates. This Obama stuff was already out and there he was not making an effort to say it didn't come from Clinton.

Republicans have no stake in bringing down Obama this quickly that I can see.

"Faux Nooz is to journalism what pro wrestling is to sports."

Pro wrestling (WWE) doesn't claim to be "real". They call themselves "entertainment" and drive that point home in the media all the time.

Gotta love, "We repeat, then deride"!

This is exactly what Democrats need to do. Clinton started it, then Barney Frank was outstanding (the clip with Neil Cavato was removed from the Fox site within hours)... and this one was, indeed, an attempt at a two-fer.
This is EXACTLY what Democrats need to do. And cnn.

For anyone who believe that Obama was being critical of Muslims, you are REALLY missing the point. This was meant to hint that Barack Obama is a terrorist (similar to the new Muslim Rep) and that big bad cold unelectable HRC is out to get him.
If you are an offended Muslim for what Barack said, you are also falling right into the trap of Fox. Please! Put your thinking cap on (with lemon :-).

I agree that Obama's language made it sound like he was defending the fact that he was a Christian, kind of like "how dare you call me a Muslim! And my father wasn't a Muslim, either! He was an atheist!"

Yes, because we all know how well atheism is received in the public arena, it's a perfect dodge.

Seriously. It's preposterous to read that he's somehow hurting himself to the vast array of pro-Muslim voters because he says his dad's an atheist and he didn't attend a radical muslim school growing up (which, HINT, was the "malicious and irresponsible charge" -- which it was).

Next thing you know he'll have to address the fact that his middle name is Hussein. Oh, wait....

Now I know why Somerby seems so nuts sometimes. Reading the mewling responses here to Obama's attempt to nip a stupid narrative in the bud makes me crazy too.

The inferred slur is clear -- and it didn't come from the Obama campaign's rebuttal.

I can't wait to watch you guys start talking about how HRC shouldn't distance herself from being called a ball-busting lesbian because, you know, there's nothing wrong with being a lesbian.

I really feel that unnamed sources are fine when the story is fact. Once the story is clearly debunked then Insight should retract, apologize and name the source. Insight also has the option of challenging the CNN story and standing by their earlier report though I can't see on what basis they could do that. CBS retracted their Bush TANG report for lack of sufficient evidence and named their source so Insight would not be breaking any new ground.

THANK YOU MR. OBAMA--GIVE IT TO THEM, THEY ARE COWARDS AND THEY WILL RUN.

waiting for your detailed communication. . .

I think its great so many liberals are so supportive of a "committed Christian" of the Church of Christ, as he stated so clearly he is.

That makes him a "born-again Christian", just like President Bush.

I would like to know what he means by committed Christian. Does that mean he is a follower of Jesus Christ? If so, would Jesus approve of late term abortion, in his mind? If not, which all know Jesus would not support it, why does this self claimed "committed Christian" support something His Lord does not. Could Jesus actually be his Lord, if he disregards what His Lord would do?

IMU, and others who wonder the same thing: It's a losing proposition for a public figure to sue for libel, not just because they'd lose the case, but because libel is one of the few situations where the plaintiff, rather than the defendant, is effectively on trial. Someone in entertainment can occasionally "win" because, hey, there's no such thing as bad publicity, but for politicians, there IS such a thing as bad publicity, and a libel trial would be it.

Look thin-skinned, give your attackers a forum and a reason to pull out all stops, lose because the law's against you, which your attackers then play as proving they were telling the truth--no politician with working brain, left or right, will sue anyone for libel, ever, unless the charge is so egregious and painful they'd rather end their careers than deal with it any other way.

I'm not (at this point) a supporter of either Obama nor Hillary C. for the Democratic nomination for President, but for those commenters who are offended that Obama might have inadvertently belittled Muslims in his presentation of the TRUTH, I say: If you think that implying that one is, or was at some point in time, a Muslim would not adversely affect his/her candidacy for President, then you are super-foolish and devoid of reality.

I have no animosity toward AMERICAN Muslims (the few I know, personally) nor the religion itself, per se, but political calculations are important if one is vying for National Elective Office.

SeeDee

Technically, Obama would sue Fox for "False Light Slander". He would have to prove reckless disregard for the truth and malice, both of which are in plentiful supply at Fox News.

If you think Jack is a biblical scholar or even a knowledgeable student of Jesus' teachings (to say nothing of the UCC), well, you don't know Jack (nice of you to speak for Him though. In the old country, that'd get you stoned for blasphemy).

Put those Fox Noisemakers in their place. Call those that lie, liars! Call those that repeat stories without checking facts, gossips! 'Liars and Gossips' - The new name for Fox and Friends.

I disagree with the author. Mr. Obama made a similar reaction with Maureen Dowd after she wrote about his ear size. While this doesn't detract from the disingenuous nature of Fox's reporting, Barak must understand that this is big boy politics. If he is going to react to everything written about him in such a reactionary manner, then I think this reveals a disturbing aspect of his character.

A quick clarification in response to the anonymous comment above: The United Church of Christ (ucc.org), otherwise known as the Congregational Church, is quite different from the Church of Christ (church-of-christ.org). Sen. Obama's church belongs to the former.

So when the left (wing) calls Bush a Nazi should he be suing also???

Oh but thats the truth right??? forgot what website i was on...

Mistakingly calling someone a Muslim is bad but calling someone Hitler and a Nazi is OK?

Let Campaign 2008 begin...

For all you Olbermann cool aid drinkers... get a life. You can't even entertain the slightest possibility that Clinton operatives planted the story. When are you guys going to see her without the halo around her head? The gloves are coming off because of her ambition to be President.

The Clinton's wrote the book on political attacks and you morons can't see it for what it is... no wonder you idiots lose elections.

If he is going to react to everything written about him in such a reactionary manner, then I think this reveals a disturbing aspect of his character.

Shorter that: "Let trivia and slander rule."

If either Gore or Kerry, both whom gentlemenly followed your advice to the letter, had been 'reactionary' in their responses to slander, this country would have been in a much better place.

But then they would have had to live with your oh-so-stern disapproval, so they can always feel good about that.

Jack--Obama's Christianity isn't anything like Bush's Churchianity:

It's not the "Church of Christ", it's the "United Church of Christ." Big differnce. The UCC is on the liberal end of mainstream Christianity. From their homepage (www.ucc.org):

"The United Church of Christ seeks to be Multiracial Multicultural, Open and Affirming, and Accessible to All - A Church where everyone is welcome!"

Their slogan "God is still speaking" is at the heart of an advertising campaign, including an ad rejected by ABC, CBS, and NBC (at least). It shows bouncers at a church door only letting in straight-looking white folks, and then the voiceover "Jesus didn't turn people away. Neither do we."

The "Church of Christ" is also comprised of essentially autonomous congregations who share some particular practices (no instrumental music in church, male-only elders, etc.). They do believe that the Bible is the final authority, but have wide latitude in determining just what that means. There are certainly liberals in the Church of Christ, but it's quite a different animal from the UCC.

As to the 12 statements from Obama's home congregation, it seems that the Christianists would have a hard time refuting any as somehow anti-Christian or even anti-American. Oh, they do say "black" the way the Christianist code doesn't have to say "white" because it's assumed. Can we get beyond that, please?

Senator Obama is a public figure and generally must show either malicious conduct or a reckless disregard for the truth. Here, that should be pretty easy to do and the Senator could do the World a favor by removing the "Reverend" Moon from the news business. Or maybe he could just introduce a Bill.

I'm with ohiomeister and longtom. Liberals should read conservative blogs. In the comments on this blog, over a quarter are parsing nouns and verbs and asking for compassion. For crying out loud! On a conservative sight, the chorus would all be in harmony and digging for the throat. Have you people never seen a bar fight? Let's sound the drums, all of us, all the time. It takes ten million repetitions to plant something in the American consiousness. Repteat after me, on every blog, "Liars at Fox!!!" Liars. Liars. Liars. Liars. Come on!

So when the left (wing) calls Bush a Nazi should he be suing also???

Name a single corporate media outlet who have said that. One. If you can, you might have a point. Otherwise, I can only assume you failed your SAT.

You can't even entertain the slightest possibility that Clinton operatives planted the story. When are you guys going to see her without the halo around her head? The gloves are coming off because of her ambition to be President.

Shorter rightwing apologist: Clinton told us a whopper and we swallowed it whole, without question or research.

This is your excuse? It's Hillary Clinton that the right-wing media slavishly believed, so it's not our fault? That makes Insight and Fox News look so much more credible.

yep. thats the ticket Frenchy... stink up the place with a chorus of rants... and your ilk want to run the country? tsk tsk... hopefully that never happens

.. no wonder you idiots lose elections.

That's some seriously brilliant commentary too, Mark. Sorry I missed that. I guess I should ask Speaker Pelosi or Majority Leader Reid how the Democrats might be able to win a few elections for a change.

Jack

If Jesus decided to represent Illinois in the Senate, then I am sure that he, above all other Senators, would live up to his pledge to faithfully reflect the will of his constituents, and vote accordingly. It's in the Bible. Look it up.

This is all fine and dandy, but Barack Hussein Obama's views, on religion and race, don't stand up to scrutiny.

For starters, he is black only in appearance. He was raised by a white hippy chick who apparently couldn't keep from marrying dirt-bags that left her. He's like that light-skinned guy from Get on the Bus. He's one of these "white black guys" that white people like because he acts white in every respect, but he looks black so they can congratulate themselves on their commitment to diversity. So he alternately acts white or black depending on what's convenient to him, but he really doesn't know what he is and he's a bastard illegitimate child to top it all off.

This guy constantly denies his white heritage. He's the Tragic Mullato of yore, torn between two worlds, incapable of fitting into either, and always insulting one or the other of his identities.

Whites basically don't like "real" black people and "real" black culture, i.e., the urban dysfunctional culture of the inner city. They like blacks who act white, and that's it, describing these others as "ghetto." You see this even among very distinguished and liberal-minded whites.

Let's face it, this pseudo-black guy is a fraud from top to bottom, and whether he went to a madrassa or not is kind of irrelevant. Where's his mom? Where are the campaign photos of him and his white hippy mom? What a joke this guy is. He should be doing something useful like putting black criminals in jail as a prosecutor with that silver tongue of his and not muck up our national politics so that we end up with Al Sharpton as the Chief Justice before long.

Like Anderson Cooper was quoted as saying (I'm paraphrasing) Fox News talks about the news rather than reports it.

What they did was irresponisble and bad journalism if you can even call it that. It's so obvious it's part of the Republican propaganda machine. Washington Times-->Fox News-->NY Post. The latter two being part of Rupert Murdoch.

I think Obama is taking issue with the assertion that he was educated at a *fanatical* Muslim school. Unfortunately, his response can be interpreted as taking offense to being called Muslim. His need to point out that he's Christian is too bad. There's no religious test to hold office.

Fox shouldn't be allowed to call themselves fair and balanced. It's false representation. They should be honest and say "news with a conservative bias."

and another thing... where's your outcry for equality when a white congressman wants to be a part of the black caucus primarily because his constituents would benefit from his membership? Thats what I really hate about liberals... hypocrites... the very definition of the word.

Posted by: Steve
Date: January 24, 2007 02:19 PM

I agree. Obama has spoken in positive terms of Islam and other religions before, and will certainly do so again, although I wouldn't be surprised if the Fox News crew hypocritically tries to take the tact of, "what's wrong with being a Muslim?" The Muslim part of the story from Insight is inaccurate. What makes it libel/slander are the insinuations that Obama was hiding this fiction, that furthermore it was not an ordinary school but a Madrassa, and that Obama was indoctrinated into a radical strain of Islam shared by our "enemies" and so on. The icing on the cake is the rightwing attributing their own perfidy to Hillary Clinton's campaign!

I read over at Media Matters that Insight has since retorted to this affair by claiming CNN and the WaPo do not rise to their standards, and write that "If [Obama] was raised in a secular household (as he claims), why does he have -- or retain -- Muslim names, Barack and Hussein?" Wow. No bigotry there. Insight is attempting the Scooter Libby defense - muddy the waters and hope the readers can't tell the difference.

As Eric Boehlert discussed with Al Franken earlier today, rightwing hack Glenn Beck also repeated all of this, including the Hillary slur. While Howard Kurtz covered this shameful episode well in WaPo, he and CNN did not name CNN's Beck as one of the perpetrators. As a further sign of the apocalypse, Boehlert reported that Beck may get a slot on one of the morning shows - I believe Good Morning, America!

Good for Obama for smacking these scoundrels down. The only way to make people stop dirty tricks is wide exposure to pay make them pay for such behavior. These are political hacks, not journalists. I'm hoping Obama gets some TV time for this (or uses some of his ample TV time for it!).

Contrary to the thrust of Obama's characterization and your piece, wasn't the news value of this story the fact that Insight mentioned as its source someone from inside the Clinton camp? Not that Obama is a fanatical Muslim, but the intercine warfare exists between the Democrat front-runners.

In fact, hasn't CNN and the rest of the mainstream media spun and hyped the Obama = Osama non-story to be "the story" in order to discredit Fox? And thereby given Clinton a free pass? An MSM two-for?

these chumps can't see it for what it is... they're to chick*hit to blame Madame Clinton, geesh.

THis is great - check out this "award-winning" journalists credentials. She'll be on Fox and Friends soon, I'm sure. I didn't know that Canada spawned sleazy right-wing "journalists" as well.....

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover012207.htm

There's no religious test to hold office.

True in theory, tone deaf political suicide in reality. Please, pietro, it's reality Obama is dealing with, not the reality you'd like to see.

Mark, you write like an annoying drunk at the end of the bar. I'm surprised you haven't started slurring. Tell me again about the Democrats not winning elections. I loved that one.

If the Congressional Black Caucus represented a majority of legistlators, you might have a semblance of a point. But it's not. It's the reason there isn't a Congressional White Caucus (it's redundant).

The CBC is about maximizing the power of African-Americans serving in Congress, it's not necessarily about the constituents they represent. Much like, say, the Blue Dog Caucus, which is a collection of conservative Democrats. They probably have liberals in their districts who helped them get elected, but they'd probably reject Barney Frank for membership.

I think we would all be well served if the next US president had some background in, and understanding of, the Muslim world.

ohiomeister is dead on about this.

Roger Ailes, Rupert Murdoch, John Gibson, that Dooce person, Rev. Moon-- all of their reputations should be at a level commensurate with their level of honesty and integrity.

Moon once referred to America as "Satan's Harvest" and vowed to convert the US into a Korean styled theocracy.

Hear Hear! My hat is off to Mr. Obama and I do sincerely hope that with his aggressive policy of unmasking irresponsible reporting that we may have a real campaign based on the actual issues. I am tired of all the mud slinging.

"Madrassa" is the arabic word for "school". It does not specifically denote an Islamic religious school, so not only did Obama go to a madrassa—we all did.

In a similar fashion, the word "taliban" is the plural of "taliba", or "student." It has no special connotation to it. It just so happens that a group of jackasses who took over Afghanistan were known as "the Students" because of their pretensions to studying Islam.

So, if the smear meisters were really on their toes, they'd note that not only did Obama attend a madrassa, he was a member of the taliban, too.

Foxofascism is a very dangerous ideology and its fanatical adherents cannot peacefully coexist with civilized modern societies. They hate our freedom and they despise our way of life.

The Faux Republican Network couldn't even wait until after junior delivered the SOTU speech to start the swiftboat crap.

But I'm not surprised.

Anonymity is granted in exchange for truthful information, however maliciously intended. If you agree to provide anonymity to your source in exchange for information, and your source deliberately passes you bullshit, you are freed from the obligation to protect that source.

It's time for Insight to put up or shut up. If they can name the source in the Hillary camp, they're morally obliged to do so. If they can't, then they're morally obliged to expose the source, whoever it is -- and fire him/her if it's their own reporter.

To all who think it was wrong to tag the charges, "Malicious." What on Earth are you thinking? The INTENTION was to draw a link between Obama and radical Islam--- to question his Americanness. Yes, they were malicious. I think it's quite a stretch to view this as some vague indictment of Muslims.

He was "charged with going to school at a Muslim school and learning Wahhabism?"

You need to do a little investigating of Wahhabism, and then you'll understand.

I am not a muslim. We should NEVER have a muslim president!!!

Steve Doocy is an ugly and disgusting human being.

The term malicious is not directed toward the accusation itself, but the way it was used. It became malicious because Fox used it as an attack.

Wow, the trolls have come out and are slinging mud around the floor amongst all the fearful parsers on the left.

Obama was 100% right to slam the "malicious, irresponsible charges" made by Insight and Fox. The charge was not that he may, at some point in his life, have been a Muslim. The charge was that he is a crypto-Muslim, and a radical one at that. If you can't see that's what they accused him of, you are wholly blind and deaf to the speech used by the right wingers, and it does you no credit, nor protects you from harm.

As for the right wing trolls, their comments range from the merely stupid ("no wonder you guys don't win elections") to the openly racist (which I won't dignify by repeating) to the tin-foil hat variety (those wicked Clintons are at it again!).

Of course HRC has someone on staff doing opposition research, as does every other single presidential contender. Were they behind this? Very doubtful. The crypto-Muslim slander on Obama has been circulating for months now among the fever swamps of the right. It's hard to see conservatives forgoing the opportunity to slam Obama with racist nonsense while blaming it on HRC - that's a twofer. One commenter even advanced the ludicrous notion that the Repubs have nothing to gain from sliming Obama so early in the game; aside from the "twofer", they are clearly terrified of his nomination to be sinking so low as to call him a crypto-Muslim so early in the game.

I believe they should be; Obama's response is a sign he won't repeat Kerry's error in failing to respond to the swift boat freaks. And surveying the field of Republican contenders, I can't see one who is a good bet against Edward, HRC, *or* Obama. It's going to get slimier yet, so come out strong, Obama!

But if he's Church of Christ, can he be a REAL Christian?

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

What's malicious about the charges is the negative connotations given to the madrassah schools. They are supposed to be "terrorist" training camps, and whatnot. What's also malicious is the tone of the piece, and the responses to the CNN piece. The responses make it sound like he is hiding his "heritage" and past. blah, blah, blah.

The problem with liberalism is that by defining our country solely as a set of procedures and denuding it of its European and Christian culture, they wouldn't have anything to say if this were a Wahhabi Madrassa. Just another way of looking at the world, and we shouldn't discrimiante against strange third-worlders whether they're sticking bones through their noses or putting women in veils. Recall the ritual denunciation of France when they banned the veil because, unlike America, the know as a nation they must also have a common language, common customs, and common prepolitical values and commitments. In other words, democratic disagreement shoudl be boudned by a coherent culture and sense of shared identity and destiny.

Liberalism, with its multiculti, open-borders obsession, among other things, cannot accept this notion of nation. We're the "creedal nation." Appearance, ethnicity, language, religion, etc. are all supposed to be irrelevant.

This is why liberals are always attacking Christianity even as they defend the religious freedom of the unassimilable Muslims among us. (They are only assimilable to the extent they reject their totalitarian religion which has an inseparable political program.) Because of the modern liberal belief in the moral and substantive equality of all peoples and cultures, the worse any minority or non-Western group really is, the worse the West must be made to appear. Why? Because if the are not made to look equally bad, then the major premise will be in doubt. Since Islam is inherently illiberal and dangerous to free, western societies, it throws a monkey wrench into liberal thinking. They then imagine Islam as the morally equal Other whom we must tolerate and embrace. Therefore, in a massive act of denial, liberals displace the danger Islam poses to the West onto the West itself, especially onto American conservative Christians. Instead of the threat being the historically and actually existing Islamic agenda to establish an Islamic world theocracy, the threat becomes a non-existent American Christian agenda to establish an American or even a world Christian theocracy, a threat that must be met by radically weakening Christianity or even eliminating it altogether. Thus, having discovered that a non-Western religion is waging war on the West, the left responds by waging war against the West’s own religion. This is the fruit of the liberalism that thinks we must, at one and the same time, not look into a candidate's religion while promoting militant ahteism at home.

What a joke. A joke only made worse by the liberalism of the open-borders-Ramadan-celebrating- pseudo-conservative in the White House

"Liars at Fox!!!" Liars. Liars. Liars. Liars.

I'm with you.

Liars are Fox.

The Obama campaign e-mail didn't repeat the 'commentary' that usually accompanied the reports - things such as questioning where his loyalties 'really' lie. Combined with the (I'm sure accidental) mis-spellings of the captions as 'Osama' - I'm certain FOX really is trying to paint Barak as closet terrorist sympathizer.

When I read the e-mail, I hear the outrage against the tactic, and the clear, concise statement of personal belief. I do not, as some here appear to, read into it that there is anything wrong with being Muslim.

I think any attempt to further clarify with 'there's nothing wrong with being Muslim' may well have come off too Kerryesque - geez, that guy could get off on so many tangents it was difficult for many to follow.

I, personally, thought his reaction was appropriate.

So Fox is to blame, rather than the media outlet which reported the alleged falsehood? Interesting...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Rather the one who actually reported the lies about Bush?

I do agree that Fox should have checked its facts better, if it was already known, or capable of being known, that the report from the other media outlet was false. I also detest Doocy (sp?), who is at most a fair weatherman and should under no circumstances be confused with a news reporter, unlike Rather, who was "rather" easy to confuse with a news reporter, since that was his job.

Roach,

You asked, "Where's his mom?"

Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, died of ovarian cancer in 1995 at the age of 52.

Incidentally, if you are interested in learning about the actual man, and not the fictional one you have constructed, you should read his first book.

Roach,

Yawn. How many of us wacky liberals have stopped you from walking through their church doors? How many of us moonbats have demanded your preachers and Sunday School teachers teach evolution alongside the "theory" of creationism in your pulpits? How many of us have prevented Christians from getting married?

If your version of God is all powerful, all knowing and all encompassing, then why are you so damned insecure?

A lot of people don't seem to understand the meaning of the word MALICE.

Love to see the trolls trying to spin another lie from the lie already spun.

You are spiders -- not men.

Get the facts not Obama spin! I challenge anyone here to deny the storyline of the FoxNews report was that Clinton was playing dirty politics. The Obama=Osama non-story was pursued by CNN as if it were the focus of the Fox News report, simply in order to hurt Fox and ignore Clinton trechary.

Early report and video here at liberal Media Matters.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200701200003

Roach-
i see your a student of the Great Books and a U of C grad...is this how they taught you to reason..by stating Obama is a psuedo-black guy because he doesnt conform to your skewed-archetype of what blacks are supposed to act and speak? I guess we can blame liberalism for that too. Perhaps if Obama addressed his audience wearing gold teeth (aka..a grid) and corn rolls in his hair, he'd meet your approval.

its no wonder most black people are leery of conservatives, though, admitttedly, the liberals are no better.

Fox is a joke.

Good for Obama.

My guess Gibson and Doocy will act like they are the victims in all of this.

And for all the nitwits comparing this to Dan Rather, when and where did Dubya report for his National Guard service?

Please. Your desperation is pathetic and weak.

"The problem with liberalism is that by defining our country solely as a set of procedures and denuding it of its European and Christian culture,"

A false pronouncement. Have you not heard of immigration?

"The United States is IN NO WAY a Christian Nation." -- George Washington. Etc.

"they wouldn't have anything to say if this were a Wahhabi Madrassa."

More to the point, Dick Cheney's pals the Saudi princes WHO FUND THE MADRASSAS cannot be attacked because Bush and the rightwing gives them cover.

"Recall the ritual denunciation of France when they banned the veil because, unlike America, the know as a nation they must also have a common language, common customs, and common prepolitical values and commitments."

Nonsense. Banning veils is a useless form of social control, as bad as requiring them.

"In other words, democratic disagreement shoudl be boudned by a coherent culture and sense of shared identity and destiny."

No, this is a nation where NO MAN IS ABOVE THE LAW. Since Bush is a liar, a traitor, and a criminal, it is clear that democratic disagreement should be bounded by a coherent standard of JUSTICE -- and NOT by spurious, bigoted, social control.

I'm not sure that I agree with everyone about Obama going after Fox here. Yes some response was necessary and I think his response was perfectly written. I just don't think that he should get caught up in a firestorm with Fox because his whole shtick is "new politics" and trying to leave all of this negative stuff behind. He does need the support of the Democratic party to back him up, but he needs to stay out of the ridiculous ways of Fox.

John
http://www.monomachines.com

Obama's response is great, but I think he and all Dems should take the naming of names one step further when episodes like this occur.

Name Rev. Sun Myung Moon as the owner of the Washington Times and include a pithy description of him and his followers, like Fox and the GOP do with, say, MoveOn and George Soros, to mention but one among many on a long list.

Name Rupert Murdoch's News Corpororation as the owner of Fox News and include pithy descriptions of him and Roger Ailes as well.

Shouldn't be hard to do either of those things, and the power of it can be amazing. I can't tell you how often I hear people dismiss MoveOn as sponsored by some rich atheist socialist.

We should hold Rev. Moon's views and actions and Rupert Murdoch's views and actions to the same scrutiny.

Posted by: ohiomeister

DITTO! Ohiomeister...this deserves an ENCORE!!!

A few days ago I received a message about Barak Obama. It was one of those FW: FW: FW: things. I have a short fuse about these - the ones that spread fear and hate. Following is the message I wrote and sent to everyone in my address book. It is followed by the message I received. I think it's all self-explanatory.

MY RESPONSE:
Friends:

I received a forwarded message today which pushes one of my hot buttons. I responded directly to that e-friend and took the bold step of hitting ‘Reply All’ to send my message to everyone she had sent this erroneous one to. So now – rather than just grimacing when I see these – I’m putting my keyboard where my mouth is and sending this to everyone in my address book.

I believe – no make that STRONGLY believe – that the practice of forwarding messages that are in error and/or that are blatant hate-filled, fear-mongering attempts to pit one group of people against another absolutely must be stopped. My personal opinion is that most, if not all, of this type of item is produced for no other reason than to create a climate of fear and hate.

My suggestion to everyone is to take one of two actions. One: “hit delete” rather than forward anything that might feed into this madness. There are often buzz words or clues you can easily pick out – spelling, grammar, too far out to believe, ‘facts’ that just don’t compute, etc. If an item does seem real to you and you feel you really should send it on, then please take time to research for yourself before you do.

Two: Send it on but check it out FIRST. Send a note with it – here, I checked this out; it’s wrong and I want you to know that it’s wrong in case you get it from someone else. (There’s more than one myth-buster site on the ‘net. www.snopes.com is one that seems the most up to date and the easiest to use.)

A couple of things to think about:

We’ve all seen the message that goes something like “Thanks to the internet now I know that drinking Coke will make me high if I mix it with baking soda and that if I put my finger in the phone coin slot I will get aids, herpes, and the common cold. Etc.” And we know that it’s a joke based on these crazy things that come around.

We all know that we should delete anything that looks like it might be a phishing expedition (if you don’t know what that is – find out quick!!!).

Just tonight on the news Keith Olbermann talked about a guy (the worser person in the world for today) who sent money (Public money at that!! But that’s another story!) in response to one of these e-letters that you may have received yourself. “Hi, I’m (fill in name) from (fill in country). If you send me $10,000 (or another huge amount) I can invest it in (fill in project) and your return will be $100,000 (or another huger amount).” I doubt most people with any sense believe this great opportunity is true.

But – at the same time – many of the same people who wouldn’t believe any of these things will believe anything that is negative or repulsive about Republicans (if you’re a Democrat – or vice versa), gays, blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, Jews, Christians, you-name-it. Messages that ridicule and belittle circulate the globe. E-mail boxes are filled with messages intended to create a climate of fear and hate. (If these same messages were sent by snail-mail they could be a Federal offense under Federal statutes.)

One more piece of food for thought. Keep in mind that an enemy will go to any length to instill fear and undermine the security of the people they want to destroy. I’m not naïve enough to think there aren’t people out there who want to see the United States go under in a big way. In my mind, it’s perfectly reasonable to think that our enemies are the ones originating these messages. Make us fear and hate one another. Destroy our security and peace of mind. Pit us against one another. Soon, all they’ll have to do is pick up the pieces.

Remember the two things we learned as children: 1) We can be our own worst enemies. 2) If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.

Now before I get off my soap box – please, consider doing one or the other: hit delete or verify yourself (and only send on messages that you DO verify to be TRUE – even take the extra step of dating the item “verified TRUE on xx/xx/xxxx”). This is one very small effort to put a stop to this hate/fear mongering but it’s an easy way that each and every one of us can participate in the war on terror.

If you feel inclined to spread this idea please send this on to everyone in your address book.

Now:

I DID check Snopes and it shows this particular item is False (January 19, 2007). Please, all of you, take time to read what Snopes says about this:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp (if you go directly to Snopes.com you won’t have to read the message below because it is pretty much repeated there.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS IS WHAT I RECEIVED
Subject: True, according to Snopes..A Muslim trained terrorist now a Senator!

Subject: FYI - OBAMA

Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama Sr. (black muslim) of Nyangoma-Kogelo, Siaya District, Kenya, and Ann Dunham of Wichita, Kansas. (white atheist ).

When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced and his father returned to Kenya. His mother married Lolo Soetoro -- a Muslim -- moving to Jakarta with Obama when he was six years old.

Within six months he had learned to speak the Indonesian language Obama spent "two years in a Muslim school, then two more in a Catholic school" in Jakarta.

Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim while admitting that he was once a Muslim, mitigating that damning information by saying that, for two years, he also attended a Catholic school.

Obama's spinmeisters are now attempting to make it appear that Obama's introduction to Islam came from his father and that influence was temporary at best.

In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya immediately following the divorce and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.

Dunham married another Muslim, Lolo Soetoro who educated his stepson as a good Muslim by enrolling him in one of Jakarta's Wahabbi schools. Wahabbism is the radical teaching that created the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad on the industrialized world.

Since it is politically expedient to be a Christian when you are seeking political office in the United States, Obama joined the United Church of Christ to help purge any notion that he is still a Muslim.

Check for yourself: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

PS We sure don't want him in the presidency!

No, John, you miss the point when you ignore the content of this slur, which is an attempt to inject religion and the War on Terror into the campaign. That must be countered, and early, and harshly, all the way down the line.

And, yeah, if the Clinton camp spread the malicious rumor, that's not surprising. She has about as much commitment to her religion as Israel will allow.

If Obama and Hillary could not get the justice served to those who smeared them, they are not worthy of president. One of the reason that put this great nation in such a mess today is that this kind of bullshits from Fox News continues to go unpunished. The viewers of Fox News must have thought that it could be true, if no one ever lost their jobs for those so-called lies.

ohio, why do you post the same thing twice in one thread?

That Scopes screed does not need repeating -- Obama has clarified the point, and CNN visited the Indonesian school, which turned out to NOT be a Madrassa.

So naturally to be 'helpful,' the FOX trolls just keep on spreading the lie.

Basic behavior of the Concern Troll (=) B Best.

Oh, whoops, glissade, your 'encore' is just clutter.

Obama is taking the high road. Educating people on Moon -- when rightwing members of the 109th Congress crowned him in the Senate office building and the media didn't think it worth extended coverage -- is a hopeless task.

Umm, I know enough about politics to realize that issuing a strongly-worded press release is not the same thing as "taking of Fox news". Only nerdy bloggers read press releases. This challenge, if there is to be one, must be mounted in public and in a way that people will notice.

Otherwise, I'm taking on Bush by complaining vigorously to my cat, or in a strongly-worded blog entry.

Go for their money. That's the only way to stop jerks. The statement appear to be hate based and witout foundation. Don't let any of this pass. Take it on and keep fighting. I hope Obama and Clinton can team up and pers and vice. That is one hell of a team. I don't care who's number one.

Excuse me, but I already know of several people who think that Obama is a Muslim; one has even confused him with Keith Ellison, even though Obama has been a sitting Senator from Illinois, while Ellison was just elected as a Representative from Minnesota! (You know, all Black people....)

Anyways, I point this out to say that we should never underestimate the ignorance of our fellow citizens. Yes, it sounds harsh, but it's true. Part of the media strategy has been to subtly brand Obama a Muslim; he appeals to younger voters, and I would imagine young women, so by linking him repeatedly (as people like Jeff Greenfield and the Fox News crazies have done) to the most extreme Muslim elements, like Osama bin Laden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and now to Wahhabist madrassas, the goal is to plant the idea that he is a crypto-extremist, a potential Manchurian candidate who, in addition to being Black, will do the Islamicists' bidding if he's elected.

You might think this is all crazy, but seriously, just start asking people outside the metropoles whether Obama's a Muslim or not. You'd be surprised at the responses. I think Fox and Co. know exactly what they're doing, and they're going to keep doing it to him, Hillary, Edwards, and any other Democrat who seems to outpoll their chosen favorites of McCain, Giuliani, and whoever else the Republicans decide to foist on us. We cannot fall prey to parsing and quibbling, and have to counter this nonsense at every turn, as Obama has rightly done.

These malicious, irresponsible charges...

OOOOh, unfortunate choice of words.

What if it the story had been all wrong, but said that Obama attended a Baptist Bible College. Would they still be malicious charges? Think about it, Barack.

awesome. being labeled a Muslim is a 'malicious charge'. how cool is that?

Stop being so foolish, people. It's not that he was labeled a "Muslim," it's that he was being branded a potential EXTREMIST for having gone to a madrassa in Indonesia! Are you so blind you don't grasp the visceral hatred many Americans have against Muslims--all Muslims--but especially anyone who's even thought to be linkable to "9/11" and "Al Qaeda" and "Osama bin Laden" etc? Why do you think George W. Bush has been able to ram his proto-fascist warmongering through Congress and until last year get away with anything he and Cheney and the neocons pleased? They're trying to paint Obama with the same brush, which is why he HAS TO DEFEND HIMSELF. The self-absorption of some on here is just astonishing.

GO FOX NEWS! I LOVE IT! Thats why they're the #1 cable NEWs network. Thats right... real, honest to god news. They have the 'nads to take on the liberal media CCCN, MessNBC... thank god we have an alternative to the lying putrid dribble of those other so-called news organizations. I couldn't be happier to see you morons complain, bitch and moan. Of course as liberal thinkers, I would expect your full endorsement of FOXNEWs as an open, expression of free speech, regardless of content, because, as we all know, you "higher" thinkers are champions for all forms of expression... right???!! Oh... the silence is deafening. peace out. no need to reply.

Bill Miller:

Osama Obama is an empty suit. Nothing more than the flavor of the month pushed by the leftstream media.

Nail the b**t****! It was glaringly obvious that this is the tack that John Kerry should have taken with the Swift Boat Vets. But I guess he is too inarticulate to have ever been able to do that...

American politics would benefit from picking up some debating and rhetorical skills from the Brits. Glad Obama is taking a step in that direction. Gotta have the eye of the tiger in this game, dude...

I love how Obama played cutely into their hands by calling the accusation of being a Muslim a "malicious" charge, and running from it like from the plague.

Hey gets my vote!

http://mbcpoetry.wordpress.com

Of course the Washington Times got the information from hilary Clinton's campaign office.

Way to go, Barack! Hit these conservative Republican lies while they are hot. Fox News should be ashamed, but then Fox is too concerned about promoting the conservative agenda to bother checking the facts.

Now if only I could emmigrate to the US to become a citizen; I'd vote for Obama based on his speech at the Dem. convention alone, but this... this is beautiful. I'd go door to door as a volunteer to help him. Let's just hope he gets elected and pushes legislation to force news broadcasters to do fact checking, and fine them severely if they don't.

That's it.

TEAM OBAMA!

Of course as liberal thinkers, I would expect your full endorsement of FOXNEWs as an open, expression of free speech, regardless of content,because, as we all know, you "higher" thinkers are champions for all forms of expression... right???!! Oh... the silence is deafening. peace out. no need to reply.

Mr anonymous (real classy there not posting your name): news organizations don't get to LIE and FALSElY smear. That you would equate acceptance of such behavior with "tolerance" and "free expression" tells us, along with your weak grammar and spelling, all we need to know about you.

Sue them for slander? I mean an honest mistake is understandable and deserves a public retraction but there is obviously someone or group of people spreading false info about this man. Whatever happened to verifying your story newspeople?

In reading the comments on this forum, it is amazing to me how many people wish to argue for and about things that are not at issue. Whether or not Barack Obama should or should not be trusted as a presidential candidate is not the point. There are a variety of valid views one can take on this. I support Obama, but I think it is reasonable for Americans to ask questions about his background given the time he spent being educated overseas.

What is not reasonable, or acceptable, is for a major news organization to report easily verifiable falsities as fact. Someone mentioned Dan Rather. Precisely -- Dan Rather did a very bad thing and he both apologized and was relieved of his duties because of it.

I would be interested to hear someone defend Fox's actions here. Why is it ok to disseminate false news when it is easy to determine the truth or falsity of that news? This is not a snide rhetorical question, it is serious. I am disappointed in Fox and I feel I can trust them less than I did before. Am I wrong? Why?

Drew

Obama is freaking awesome!

expect me to vote for him!

with all due respect David... I don't see one miss spelled word in the anonymous post you refer to... punctuation maybe,... but really... who cares. It's a flippin' forum, not a spelling bee.

Secondly, and most importantly, if the news doesn't fit your version of the truth, you seem to be willing to censor opposing views regardless of consequence.

It seems to be the same old tired argument of the left. "They" lied, so we must take them on or shut them up. The left is all for freedom of speech as long as it passes they're "truth" test.

Comment from a Libertarian: The biggest gift you insanely delusional liberals can give the Republican party is the GIFT of running Obama and / or Hillary... FACE REALITY: There are entire GENERATIONS of MEN in America who do not TRUST WOMEN, let alone "a" woman enough to vote one into the presidency. (Don't shoot the messenger here, just telling it like it is.) There is also an ENTIRE sub-culture of "unspoken, unexpressed" racism in America... call it KKK members, skinheads, bigots, rednecks, good ole' southern gentlemen, or just plain old "mid-westeners" or "folks in the heartland" who will NOT ONLY never vote for a "black" man, but who will be MOTIVATED to go out and actively VOTE AGAINST HIM. You will have millions of people who have either never voted or haven't voted for years going to the polls to vote AGAINST those two.

So yeah... go ahead and place all your eggs in the Hillary / Obama basket... just remember, ya can't put Humpty-Dumpty back together again... If you lose this one because you succumbed to altruism and ideology instead of cold hard reality and ran THOSE two instead of someone ELECTABLE, like Joe Lieberman or Evan Bayh... we're stuck with another Republican President for at least 4 years.

IF your party is SO damn smart, then SHOW it... neither Hillary NOR Obama can actually WIN... wake up and smell the coffee.

And as far as whether or not Obama attended a madrassa... the facts will bear themselves out in the end. HOWEVER, just because some other blogger OR CNN "cleared" his name means NOTHING. Bloggers and CNN have proven themselves in the past to be no friends of the TRUTH, and simply cannot be trusted to give us the FACTS. Fox news, like it or not, at least ATTEMPTS to show both sides of an issue, even if many of those attempts are transparent. The 3 major media networks and CNN have been RABIDLY LIBERAL for DECADES now and they don't EVEN attempt "fairness." They report EVERYTHING through the "we utterly DESPISE Bush and Republicans" glasses. After decades of being spoon-fed liberal pablum by the big 3 networks and CNN I find it refreshing to watch Fox... and ask yourself this... if Fox is such a force of evil in our modern society then WHY do they have the HIGHEST RATINGS? At one point their ratings were higher than several other networks COMBINED. Someone is watching them. I bet it's all the folks I mentioned above... you know... the ones who will vote against Hillary and Obama. Think about it. The last election, the one the Democrats "won" in... was ONLY won because a whole lot of Republicans, Libertarians and Independent DID NOT VOTE at all - AS A PROTEST VOTE against Bush's current (at that time) handling of the Iraq war... you won't have that luxury in the coming presidential election... it will be an election where VOTES WILL be cast VERY CAREFULLY and NOT just to send a message. Deal with the reality, liberals... or your recent win be your last for a long while..

can't he ask for a retraction?

DarkReaper, do you not understand that this is a statement from Obama himself, not CNN. He is the one refuting the claims in this memo, and he would know better than anyone else.

I would also like to note that your statement about, "good ole' southern gentlemen, or just plain old 'mid-westeners' or 'folks in the heartland'," is an incredibly racist statement to make in the first place. I have lived in the south my entire life, and I would like to think myself as a "southern gentleman" at least in terms of morals. I believe that women deserve the utmost repect, and beleive that honor is something that you should hold sacred. In no way am I racist, bigoted, or biased in my political choices, other than to those issues with which I disagree. For you to assume that myself and many of my friends who think the same way are inherently racist because of our region shows your complete failure to understand that this nation is not black and white (or "Red" and "Blue") anymore. Coming from a libertarian I would expect more.

You Clinton apologists need to get a life. This is so out of their playbook. Obama better get used to more swiftboating from his own party.

Well, its blatently clear that our Fox Friends knew this was crap, and it actually shows exactly how much the network lacks credibility.

I highly doubt that HRC or her staff was responsible, BUT... if they were...

Kudos to them. It shows that once she gets the nomination, she will stop at nothing to tear those back stabbing, slander spewing, Republican liars down to where they really belong.

It's about time a "politician" used the fact that Americans are sick of "politics," not to mention actually acting upon the realization.

I'm one of those people Jim Webb is referring to when says the majority of the US military doesn't support Bush. I leave it at that.

What's really frightening, there are enough mindless bovine in America that justifies the existence of the fascist feeding trough that is Fox News.

Wasn't the source for this tied to the Clinton Campaign? The washington times and fox news only report what they were given and if you look into this further, he did attend a muslim school in indonesia. The question then has to be "Was it a Madrassa?" I think you guys need to realize who's against who here. Don't forget the Clinton's and their campaign teams aren't in the business of promoting Osama...I mean Obama.

I would never vote for him, he seems he is always mad about somehting.

If it's true that the story originated with "a source" in HRC's campaign, then let them name that source. NAME the source. If a source is spreading lies, you DON'T owe them confidentiality, goddamit, so effing NAME them. If you don't have the courage to name them, then you're just as culpable for spreading the slander as they are--you don't get a pass. And in any case you sure as SHIT don't get a pass for acting as a conduit for their lies without fact-checking them first. You're still culpable, kiddos. You made them YOUR lies when you put your name on the story without checking if what you'd been told was correct. They can't weasel out of this by wiping their grimy noses on their sleeves, pointing to HRC and saying "She made us do it!"

Cowards for lying, cowards for blaming someone else for their lies.

It feels Very refreshing to hear that Fox "News" is getting payback at least once for it's narrow-minded attitude, and hopelessly shoddy reporting.

The indignation is comical. Where was the concern for the unsubstantiated libels of Bush and Cheney?

Obama is going to have to grow a thicker skin if he's going to play in the big leagues. Should he actually be elected president, he should expect to be hated by a third to half of the country before his 3rd year in office.

Real men don't whine.

And John_Az obligingly proves the point. "The washington times and fox news only report what they were given." Yes. Exactly. That's all they do. Stenographers of lies. That makes 'em their lies. And yours too, slimeball, with that "Osama-obama" crap. Bring an argument, fine. But that kind of crap is for people with no integrity, no shame, and no honor. A Republican, in short.

"Obama is going to have to grow a thicker skin if he's going to play in the big leagues. Should he actually be elected president, he should expect to be hated by a third to half of the country before his 3rd year in office.

"Real men don't whine."

They do however fight back. If they don't they get swiftboated. The ONLY answer is to respond hard, not to pretend you're above it all. Dear god, have you been sleeping for the past 12 years?

Judging from the responses on this blog, most of the people here are just "true believers." Not much to learn from them other than that most of the respondents are just not even trying to seek truth. The tenor here just reeks of self-indulgent, hot-headed, self-mesmerizing, vacuous confusion. Please at least try to do better at reason and RESEARCH (quoting CNN is just not enough).

It seems to be the same old tired argument of the left. "They" lied, so we must take them on or shut them up. The left is all for freedom of speech as long as it passes they're "truth" test.

Posted by: Jess
Date: January 24, 2007 10:01 PM

I just wanted to repost this to note the time, date and author of what could possibly be the stupidest comment ever posted in the history of the Internet.

{my inner Somerby: Why is it stupid?}

Oh, all right, the author, with a fatally dim understanding of the First Amendment, the role of the news media and notions of "truth" and "lies" conflates various issues and turns them into toxic gas.

1) Some people think Obama should sue for libel. In this very narrow argument, one which would never, ever move beyond conjecture (and has long been around as such), it could be considered a First Amendment issue but only and tangentially because Obama is a member of the government and they should make no law to infringe of the freedom of speech and this could possibly have some conceiveable relevance.

That said, even public figures can sue for libel, although the burden to prove malice is such a difficult barrier to overcome, it's almost never worth it. However, Jess, the First Amendment is NOT a protection for libel, something legit news organizations have long known.

2) In this case, there is no 'version' of truth. It's either true or false -- Did Obama attend a radical madrassas when he was 6 years old? It has been debunked by Obama and CNN (regardless of the source of the rumor, it was incumbent upon The Moonie Rag and Murdoch's Propaganda Mill to determine the factuality of the claim, something they didn't do.) and not supported by Insight or Fox, both of whom blame the whole thing on the Clinton campaign. This is a verifiable fact, which most people on Earth would reckognize as The Truth.

3) Another fallacy you engage is the one where rebutting a false claim is stifling free speech, not an actual act of it. For example, my opinion is that you are an idiot for writing what you wrote, and I'm writing a very long winded rebuttal because of it. However, at no point do I say, you CAN'T write it. You are entirely free to, without government interference. But if you are free to write such tripe, you also shoulder the responsiblity for it. Something, in this case, Insight and Fox are now shirking.

To sum up, the truth is the most effective weapon against libel and the most effective use of freedom of speech is to combat dimwitted statements like yours.

Stan

If you have seen the CNN report, there would be no doubt that the claim promoted by Fox is absolutely bogus. The CNN team sent a reproter to Indonesia and interviewed people at the school; it showed students studying Christianity; it showed them engaged in secular activities such as dancing that no madressa would teach.

In contrast, the Fox news stories relied on an article by Insight, which didn't provide one verifiable fact. It claimed it got the story from an inside source, but it did not name the source. When I am given two different versions of a story, and one is very factual, and the other is just an allegation, I go with the factual one.

That there are still posters defending Fox news and pretending like the accusations against Obama could be true is really amazing.

Mark and Roach are just angry their party doesn't have any decent candidates. They've all gone chasing the hard-right base in a bid to out hawk each other. McCain is unrecognizable and has doomed his legacy by trying to embrace unembraceable people (the Falwell-Dobson circus), Romney has changed so many of his positions in the last 15 years he truly is multiple choice, and then you have Sam I-can't-run-to-a-pew-fast-enough Brownback with all his "-ness" words and gratuitous restating of points to make his speeches sound remotely interesting. But hey, at least you've got Hagel, who's finally realized the ship he signed onto is sinking pretty bad. He sounds like all those Democrats you wake up in a cold sweat over. Even "Kerry's a girlie man" Schwarzeneggar is walking past you.

Guys, get used to a Democratic Party in power again, because for all their flaws, they outshine and outperform the Rs with ease, and have for the decades leading up to the Contract with America, which the Rs breached in due time because $$$ always comes before real people. You guys have broken every single one of your party's promises and traditions. Who knew you were so effective at sucking so badly? You started in 94 and collapsed 12 years later. Nice run amateurs. Thanks for screwing up America with the worst president in American history and your endless fawning over his big tough talk. So much for like-father-like-son leadership and character and all the other meaningless BS you guys throw around like you own.

Every time I've voted for an R I've gotten screwed. I'm done.

I just wanted to repost this to note the time, date and author of what could possibly be the stupidest comment ever posted in the history of the Internet.

Well, I tend to agree, though the competition is fierce on this thread alone and I'd hate to leave out John_Az's "The washington times and fox news only report what they were given." Thus spake the happy bovine, understanding that "journalism" and mindless stenography are synonyms and liking it that way.

And to reiterate, since repetition is apparently the only way to have an outside chance at penetrating the thick concrete integument that protects the brains of those who will not grasp the point: the question whether HRC's pals promulgated this lie doesn't get the numbskulls at Faux and the Washington Crimes off the hook. They put their names on it and those names are still there. And if they or someone else wants to name whatever source at HRC's campaign told them the lie, and make that claim stick, fine, I'll gladly add that at present unnamed and so far as I know utterly mythological staffer to the list of liars. That STILL doesn't get the Faux blatherers et al off the list. They lied. It may not have been their lie to begin with, but it's their lie now.

So basically Obama is mad and wants Fox news to check it sources... Hmmm sounds to me like next time CNN lies, NY times lies and Daily snooze err news lies, the republican should be allowed to get mad at the papers and mass media. Just goes to show you Liberals whine when they are attacked but when Bush is made fun of being called a moron it ok but when a democrat is under the light it is not.

>>So basically Obama is mad and wants Fox news to check it sources... Hmmm sounds to me like next time CNN lies, NY times lies and Daily snooze err news lies, the republican should be allowed to get mad at the papers and mass media.

Uh, yes. That's the way it works. If any major publication published the crap that Fox published, I would fully expect Republicans to get outraged and to demand an apology, That would be fair.

Obama: 1

Fox: 0

Way to go!

>>the question whether HRC's pals promulgated this lie doesn't get the numbskulls at Faux and the Washington Crimes off the hook.

I agree with your reasoning, but it is incumbent on Insight magazine to reveal the source, which does not deserve protection since the story is utterly bogus. I highly doubt that the story really originated with Hillary Clinton. The smear is so crude, contains such racist overtones, and so easy to prove false that I doubt it would have come from her staff.

I'm sorry, I know I a not regular contributor to this forum, but this last comment about how Republicans "should be allowed to get mad wat the papers and the mass media" is very confusing to me.

How are Republicans not "allowed" to get mad? Is there a law I don't know about? Is Fox News not "mad" at someone much of the time? Again, when Dan Rather slandered the President, people got mad and he paid consequences.

When you seek permission to get mad, my sense is that what you are really seeking is license to get mad without having to answer to anyone for your anger, or something like that. Republicans should get as mad as they want, what they shouldn't expect is sympathy.

And, to point made by someone earlier, Obama shouldn't expect sympathy, either. Dealing with lies, smears and bullcrap is part of being President. He's a big boy, he should handle it or get out of the race. Correcting the error is, in my opinion, a good way to handle it.

My concern is with Fox News. I don't watch Fox often enough to know whether they usually get their facts right but just slipped up on this case or whether going with uncorroborated rumor is normal procedure. If it is the former, obviously someone should be fired, since running this story was clearly a huge mistake. If no one is fired, then I assume this means this is "normal" reporting for them.

I'd like to hear a defense of Fox without invoking the "CNN is just as bad" argument. This is waste of time. I am a liberal, I loathe CNN. I think they are a bunch of airheads. But my impression is that conservatives think Fox News is good and high quality. Is it? If it isn't, why do you watch it? If you think it is not high quality and you don't watch it, why defend it?

I agree with your reasoning, but it is incumbent on Insight magazine to reveal the source

Well certainly--just too goddamned p.o.'d to spell out all the players.

I don't have an opinion whether HRC's campaign is capable of this one or not--I don't care and it's immaterial. If the asshats on the other side want to somehow invoke that as a distraction, fine, let 'em put a name on it. Otherwise it's just hot