A Foolish Attack on Barack Obama

Once again, a member of the political Right has taken a false shot at President Obama.

From The Hill: “Former Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), a conservative radio host, said Thursday that President Obama “hates Israel” because he “has always been” a Muslim at heart.”

Walsh tweeted, “It makes the GOP uneasy when I say he’s a Muslim. It makes my radio stations uneasy when I say it.”

Walsh may just be throwing out red meat to the people who regularly listen to him. After all, his livelihood requires him to satisfy a large-enough radio audience.

Still, the Obama-is-a-Muslim canard isn’t helping anyone. All that it does is show just how theologically illiterate that some Americans are.

Since illiterate people are aided by photos, here are two that they should think about:

In the above photos, Obama is doing something that a Muslim wouldn’t be caught dead doing. He is wearing a yarmulke and participating in a custom that is specific to Judaism.

This is the same Obama who, in the Spring of 2008, attended the Passover Seder of his Jewish campaign staff. This is the same Obama who initiated the celebration of the Passover Seder in the White House’s old family dining room.

Obama’s 2009 Passover Seder included what is remembered as the Macaroon Security Standoff.

Along with doing Jewish things that no Muslim would be caught dead doing, President Obama has failed to do the things that every Muslim is required to do.

This is where the theological illiteracy comes into play. The people accusing Obama of being a Muslim haven’t demonstrated that Obama has conformed to any of the Five Pillars of Islam. Such accusers act as if they know nothing about the Five Pillars. Perhaps they don’t.

Here is what the Pillars are:

Shahadah: sincerely reciting the Muslim profession of faith.
Salat: performing ritual prayers in the proper way five times each day.
Zakat: paying an alms (or charity) tax to benefit the poor and the needy.
Sawm: fasting during the month of Ramadan.
Hajj: pilgrimage to Mecca.

All of the alleged “proof” that Obama is a Muslim isn’t proof at all. Instead, it is a poor substitute for the required proof that has yet to be presented.

By the way, that now-famous photo of Obama wearing traditional Somali garb is just that – a photo of him wearing the traditional garb of the ethnic group that Obama was visiting at the time.

If Obama is a Muslim because he wore Somali garb while visiting a Somali village, then George W. Bush is Vietnamese.


The above photo shows Bush wearing Vietnamese garb while he was in Vietnam for a political conference.

Behold "The Great Unravelling."
No Evidence Of Russia-Wikileaks Connection
  • FrenchKiss

    Apparently this author has never heard of taqqiya. Google it.

  • magic1114

    Of course Muslims NEVER lie! And the sun rises in the west… Look up the word Taqqiya.

  • pennywit

    If the question is “Is Obama a Muslim?” the real answer is “What difference does it make?”

    • Brett Buck

      I agree. What he does is what matters, not what he is. What he has done has been largely reprehensible, no matter what his background might be.

      I can see how people might come to the conclusion he is a Muslim. He has sided with radical Islam at every opportunity, consistent with his previous statements on the topic. That’s what matters, I don’t care what is in his heart and putative soul.

      • Brucehenry

        YEAH!! Sided with radical Islam at every opportunity!

        Like when al-Awlaki and Bin Laden were taken out! Like the drone strikes killing both terrorists and innocents in Yemen and Afghanistan! Like not allowing over 200 anti-Israel UN resolutions to pass!

        Wait…what?

        • Wild_Willie

          I am very perplexed and ashamed that the US government would allow this to happen to Israel. Muslim or not, I believe Obama has a problem with Israel’s leadership since he helped the PM’s opponent in the last election and the PM confronted Obama at a WH visit. The spoiled child which is Obama spitefully did this. He should grow up. He did not one thing for peace. Yet the libtards such as you Brucy encourage him. ww

          • Brucehenry

            So were you perplexed and ashamed during the Reagan administration when 21 resolutions critical of Israel passed the UN Security Council? Some of which we voted FOR?

            I read that Reagan personally disliked Menachem Begin, too. I think he, like Obama, was man enough and smart enough to disregard personal dislike and do what he saw as in the interest of the US.

          • jim_m

            Fact of the matter is that 1981 and 2016 are two different eras. Like most leftists you think that nothing has changed and nothing should change that history is bunk and you only bring up this issue because you think it makes some point.

            It does not.

            It does, however, demonstrate that you are a small minded fool, looking to draw a false equivalency between events 36 years ago and today. It isn’t there. There is no doubt that obama’s actions are driven by personal politics.

            Even foreign leaders are noting that he is wrong in his motivation and behavior. Theresa May said that Kerry and obama were wrong. Putin mocked him. In May’s case I would say that our allies are rejecting our leadership but obama has no allies and has made a concerted effort to transfer that to the United States. However, as in all things, he has failed to do that. Our allies and enemies see that obama’s weakness is his and his alone.

            We have to ensure the republic stands for another 19 days.

          • Brucehenry

            Actually it is only your opinion that “there is no doubt that Obama’s actions are driven by personal politics” and that Reagan’s weren’t. An opinion driven by your visceral and unthinking hatred of Obama, based simply on the fact, I suspect, that he is bl…..I mean liberal.

            I myself do not think that Reagan’s decision to condemn the Osirak bombing was driven by anti-Semitism (although, if I were able to interrogate the ghost of Reagan, it would have some ‘splainin’ to do regarding the Waffen-SS cemetery thingie) but instead by a sincere desire to advance and protect American interests. There WAS outrage at the time, mostly from the left and mostly from American Jews, that Reagan did not take into account Israel’s deep fear that a hostile Iraq might become a nuclear power.

            So, even though these two events occurred 36 years apart, there is indeed equivalency here. You may dismiss it and that’s OK. Repeating and exaggerating already-exaggerated rightwing nonsense is your thing, we all get that.

            By the way dismissing something that happened 36 years ago as irrelevant is rich coming from a guy who routinely pretends that the positions and goals of the Democratic party of 150 years ago are unchanged today.

            Thanks for your weak defense of an untenable position, Jim. “It was a long time ago” is pretty good, considering what you had to work with.

          • jim_m

            Actually, you just made a wonderful case for my assertion that it was politically necessary. Thanks. Too bad you are too dimwitted to realize what you just did.

          • Brucehenry

            I did huh? Imagine that.

            Dumbass. I DO think Reagan’s action was politically necessary, as I have repeatedly said on this thread, or at least that he saw it as such.

            There were voices crying “betrayal” and “anti-Semitism” in 1981, too. Those voices were wrong, just as your voice, opportunistically hopping on a wingnut bandwagon, is wrong today about this latest resolution.

          • jim_m

            Tell us Bruce, how many of those resolutions called the Western Wall occupied territory and called for the removal of access for all Israelis to their most holy of sites? That is the effect of obama’s UN resolution.

          • Brucehenry

            Any of the resolutions passed during previous administrations that reference the Fourth Geneva Convention — and there were several — had that effect, genius.

        • Brett Buck

          So your premise is that the cause of liberty has been advanced in the Middle East during the last 8 years? Please, elucidate. Or rather, don’t.

          • Brucehenry

            No I don’t have a “premise” or at least not that one. I was just highlighting how dumb a boilerplate nonsense statement like that sounds.

          • Brett Buck

            Boilerplate? From where? I generally don’t read conservative websites aside from this one, I am going from what I see in a general sampling of news. I see the Iraq democracy pissed away, I see ISIS making advances everywhere. I see radical islam promising to invade western countries, then clearly and successfully doing it, I see the US either encouraging radical Islamist revolutions throughout the middle east or acting in such a bumbling manner to have the same effect. We were damn close to going to war with the Russians on the side of islamist radicals including ISIS just a few months ago. That’s what I base it on, and it has been going on since the idiots patrol arrived in 2008.

          • Technically, January of 2009. But yes, you have been paying attention and that is an accurate recounting of the B. Hussein 0bama “legacy.”

          • Brucehenry

            My mistake then, I’ve seen it on many conservative sites and heard it on FOX so many times I just figured that’s where you got it.

          • Brett Buck

            I have watched Fox news for a grand total of about 30 seconds in the last 10 years.

          • It is inconceivable to progtards who move in lockstep with the LSM that their enemies are not similarly beholden to preferred sources for all their information and opinions…

          • Brett Buck

            Agreed. Projection is near the top of the list of stereotypical (and irritating) leftist psychological issues.

            Funny thing is, I actually *do* watch MSNBC on rare occasions, just to watch the meltdowns. Every once in a while, they are forced to the realization that instead of their carefully-crafted affectations of being the smartest people in the room, they are in fact punching the tickets on the short bus. Rachel Maddow, in particular, is *just barely sentient enough to get it* on rare occasions, and it’s wonderful.

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah I can’t watch MSNBC myself. The bias is so obvious that even though it’s largely bias that I already hold it makes me squirm that anyone presents it as straight “news.”

          • No one was corresponding with you.

    • DeplorableDonna

      makes a big difference to Israel.

  • jim_m

    No. obama is suspected of having significant muslim affinities because he grew up in a majority muslim nation (Indonesia) attended a madrassa and received islamic education for the formative years of his personality, and adopted policies that favored muslims in sometimes idiotic ways (NASA’s primary purpose was to perform muslim outreach) and not infrequently against the national interests of the United States (funding so-called rebels in Syria when the arms and money was going straight to ISIS and Al Qaeda). And let’s not forget to mention that he was on the side of the muslim brotherhood, the organization that tried to turn Egypt into an islamic fascist state and that perpetrated the assassination of Anwar Sadat.

    Does that make him a muslim? The first couple of answers (plus that his father was muslim) would cause many muslims to say “Yes it does.” Do the rest of the issues make him muslim? No, but they sure as hell show whose side he has been on from the start.

  • Retired military
    • Brucehenry

      I think you misunderstand what this graphic says, RM. If 223 resolutions DID NOT pass in the last 10 years, that means either the US vetoed them, worked against their passage, or found it unnecessary to do either. Given that the UN is largely anti-Zionist, I doubt there were many if any in the third category.

      In fact, in the eight years of Obama’s presidency, this resolution is the ONLY resolution critical of Israel to pass the UN Security Council. By contrast, there were six in the Bush 43 administration, nine in the Bush 41 period, and TWENTYONE in Reagan’s two terms.

      https://theintercept.com/2016/12/30/barack-obama-wasnt-nearly-as-tough-on-israel-as-republican-presidents/

      https://sethfrantzman.com/2016/12/24/abstaining-from-history-heres-all-the-un-resolutions-on-israel-the-us-abstained-on/

      • Retired military

        Bruce
        I honestly didnt take the time to do any research before posting that.
        That being said I have paid enough attention to the news the past 20 years or so to know that the UN is IMO vehemently anti Israel. Nor do I believe Obama to be a friend of Israel. If I had my way we would pull out of the UN and defund it entirely. We could start another diplomatic organization of countries that are friendly towards the US and work to effect world change that way. THe UN has not been a friend to the US and has done things such as listing us among the top human rights abusers in the world with countries like Libya sitting on the committee. IMO we can do a lot more good for our allies and for people wanting change with the money invested than lining dictator’s pockets like we are now.

        • Brucehenry

          Well all of that is a different argument than you seemed to be making by posting this graphic. I suggest that those upvoting this image misunderstood it as well.

          Hope you had a nice holiday, RM.

          • Retired military

            I was just going to edit above and wish you a happy new year.
            Holidays were okay. Kinda lonely but my sons and I are making it through things.

  • Sky__Captain

    OK, I might buy the “0bama is not a Muslim because..” line.
    However, he actions since 2008 prove he is most definitely anti-American.
    His most recent actions show his antisemitism and his immaturity.

  • Sky__Captain

    What about the picture of Barry deeply bowing to the Saudi King? Does that action not signify his subservience?

    • Brucehenry
      • Vagabond661

        Was he bowing or recieving a medallion?

      • jim_m

        Bruce posts a picture that is an outright lie. He knows it is a lie but he is such a dishonest asshat that he cannot help himself even though he knows it will make him look like a complete and utterly dishonest fool.

        • Sometimes looks are not deceiving…

        • Brucehenry

          I also posted a pic of Bush bowing to the Pope and the leader of Communist China. Do not those actions “signify his subservience”? LOL.

        • Brucehenry

          Says the dude who swore up and down for years that “Kerry’s botched joke” was evidence of his anti-veteran stance.

          • jim_m

            I have not done that, you must have me confused with someone else. But now that you bring up I agree with the sentiment. Kerry is anti-veteran and Anti-American. His Congressional testimony has been shown to be a pack of politically motivated lies and his entire accounting of his service has been shown to be so as well.

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah maybe it was somebody else. Wingnuts often all sound alike.

          • jim_m

            Note how Bruce delivers an insult when he is incapable of refuting or otherwise addressing the substance of the comment.

          • Brucehenry

            Says the guy who routinely opens his replies to me, Paul, or David with “Idiot.”

  • jim_m

    So david, your argument seems to be that the image of obama wearing muslim garb is not accurate but the images of obama wearing a kippa somehow IS. Are you really that stupid?

    When has obama said of Judaism anything like:

    “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer” – About the closest you can get to that about another religion s obama saying “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.”

    “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” – He would never defend Jews in the same way. He would rather dance on their graves, or stoke the ovens.

    “Islam has always been part of America” – Has he ever said the same of Judaism?

    “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities” – Can you see that dirtbag racist saying that people should study in Israel? Never!

    “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” – He would never say the same of Israel or Judaism.

    No. As a matter of public record obama has made a point of running down Christianity and Judaism at every opportunity.

  • Par4Course

    Obama may not be a Muslim but he is a poser – you can’t believe anything he says or does. He sat in Reverend Wright’s church for 20 years but says he never heard the anti-American rhetoric the minister was spewing. If B. Hussein Obama didn’t hate Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu, his Administration would not have coordinated the effort to pass the anti-Israeli UN resolution and then abstained from vetoing it.

    • Brucehenry

      So when Reagan coordinated the effort to pass the resolution condemning Israel for the bombing of Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 — a step Israel felt it had to take to defend its very existence — and then not only failed to veto it but actively worked for its passage and voted for it, did that mean Ronald Reagan hated Israel and Begin?

      https://peacenow.org/entry.php?id=17676#.WGkOxvkrLIX

      EDIT: By the way, subsequent to that resolution, Reagan embargoed further sales of F-16s to Israel and then allowed TWENTY more resolutions critical of Israel to pass before he left office — some which the US voted in favor of, some of which we abstained from.

      What an anti-Semite, amirite? Amirite?

      • jim_m

        No you are not right. You are an anti-Semite pretending to cloak yourself in righteousness.

        • Brucehenry

          The “amirites” are facetious, genius.

          I don’t think Reagan was acting as an anti-Semite when he criticized Israel for blowing up the Osirak reactor, voted FOR a resolution condemning the action and demanding that Israel’s nuclear program be placed under an international inspection regime, and embargoing sales of F-16s to our ally. I think he was acting in what he saw as the best interests of the United States. I think he was doing the same when he allowed twenty further UN resolutions to pass during his time in office, abstaining from some and voting FOR others.

          But YOU have not explained — because you can not — why Obama’s abstention on this ONE resolution was “betrayal” and “anti-Semitic” when Reagan’s actions were not. Neither has anyone else here, despite my repeated requests over two days and two threads.

          I’ll wait, with bated breath.

          • jim_m

            The resolution condemning the Osirak bombing was a political necessity and was predicated on a specific act and was an action taken contemporaneously with that act.

            obama’s actions were out of petty, personal spite and taken for no legitimate reason and were taken solely because he is leaving office and wanted to throw a fit like a 6 year old.

            You applaud obama’s churlish actions because you 1)hate America and American foreign policy, 2) are an anti-Semite just like obama.

          • Brucehenry

            Oh I see a “political necessity” versus “personal petty spite.”

            Well, an answer of sorts, without any evidence of course just your opinion.

            Were all the other twenty resolutions allowed to pass while Reagan was president allowed to pass out of “political necessity” too? And tell me how Obama kept his personal petty spite in check long enough to veto or block passage of over 200 anti-Israel resolutions, if you would please.

          • Brucehenry

            While you’re at it tell me if you agree with the resolution regarding Osirak that Reagan’s UN ambassador voted for. Israel, with good reason, regarded the destruction of that reactor as an existential necessity. Do you think they should have left it alone?

            Did not Reagan have the courage to stand up for Israel on such a matter? Why did Reagan betray Israel on such an important matter?

            BTW this latest resolution was also “predicated on a specific act” — the continuation of the expanded “settlements” policy.

  • Vagabond661

    To put it in “fact check” lingo, Obama is mostly Muslim. He is more Muslim than Christian. He is more socialist than capitalist. He is more Anti-American than American. He is more disruptive than calming.

    • jim_m

      Indeed. 0bama knows no god other than himself. He worships at the mirror. But subsidiary to that he has far more affinity to islamic radicals than anyone else. He has more affinity to communists than anyone else. He has more affinity to America’s enemies than anyone else.

  • TheyTukRJobz

    I always consider it to be a foolish action to pretend one is God or the Shadow and claim to know what is in the hearts of other men.

    Is Obama a “muslim at heart”? Since Jesus didn’t grant me a franchise to know such things, I simply pass and say it is a moot point – let’s look at his words and actions instead and judge those as words and actions.

    He seems to be naïve and ignorant, or at least self-deluded, about how radicalized Islam can get, and how easily Muslims can be pushed into radicalized mode. Despite the Islamic world of Middle East and North Africa having become violent and war-torn under his watch (but never, ever his fault! LOL) he still seems incapable of seeing Islam for the threat to Western Civilization that it truly is. This bespeaks more a personal character defect and mental block than being a “muslim at heart” IMO.

    He’s been a disaster because of his defects and intellectual laziness where he seems to prefer thinking in left-wing stereotypes and myths than addressing and analyzing reality. And we – the US and the world – are poorer for his having been elected president.

    But let’s leave the silly chattering about what’s in his heart where it belongs – at the children’s table.

    • What would he have done differently if he was not Mohamedean practicing taqqiya?

      See also Matthew 7:16.

      • TheyTukRJobz

        I don’t believe in wasting time trying to prove a negative, or to prove something that neither you nor I will ever know.

        Why not just acknowledge his incompetence, his actions which harm our allies like Israel while helping our enemies, his knee-jerk leftist doctrinaire approach to everything, etc – in short all his character defects without trying to do a Tarot reading of what’s in his heart?

        • What would he have done differently if he was not Mohamedean practicing taqqiya?

  • Brucehenry

    I just love these guys who want us to believe they “know the truth about Islam” because some wingnut website told them what “taqqiya” is.

    • jim_m

      And you think that islam is as pure as the driven snow because they hate America at least as much as you do. Tell us Bruce, when did you become a holocaust denier?

      • Brucehenry

        Gee I thought you had fled the thread when AGAIN challenged to explain why Reagan’s actions weren’t anti-Semitism but Obama’s are.

        • jim_m

          Nope. I have a life and friends.

          • Brucehenry

            But no answer to that question.

          • jim_m

            Wrong again. I answered it.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes I see that now and have replied to your “answer” such as it is.

      • Stop feeding the troll.

      • Brucehenry

        Hey watch out when you make a claim like that without evidence some moderator might come along and tell you it’s a lie and that you are a liar and despicable or maybe senile.

        No, just kidding, ain’t gonna happen.

        • jim_m

          What lie? I asked you a question that you have now twice avoided answering.

          • Brucehenry

            Which is what? My senility must be kicking in again I missed it.

        • Scalia

          You’re lying AGAIN. You just can’t stop, can you? You stated that we said something that we never said, and when asked about it, you continued to lie about it. The only possible explanation is that you’re either senile or you’re an arrant liar. The facts prove the latter. You ARE a despicable scumbag. What a joke you are.

          Don’t get sore because you’ve been caught in another lie. The solution isn’t to attack the person who exposed you. The solution is to repent and resolve (New Year’s and all) to be truthful.

          If you continue closing your eyes to your own problems, that’s your call, but don’t carry your bitterness about being exposed here. We all know that you’re a liar, so there’s no need venting your frustration about it on our boards.

          • Brucehenry

            Gee and I thought you might show up here to ask Jim, “Ok, I’ll bite. Who denied the holocaust?”

            And then to worry the point like a pit bull when Jim explained that “it is implied.” Or whatever explanation he has for making such an outrageous claim. Of course I don’t hold it against Jim — that’s the kind of thing he does.

            Just kidding, I didn’t really think that.

            Here’s a resolution I’ll try to keep,. though. I’ll refrain from making smartass remarks about “certain moderators” if you’ll leave me the hell alone. I didn’t address you last night and don’t want to continue to explain to a literal-minded blockhead that some things are implied and some things are hyperbole and some other things are lies.

          • Scalia

            You’re lying about the hyperbole because you’re trying to save face.

            Are you really that stupid? I routinely leave you alone. I actually stepped in to give you an opportunity to be truthful, and you typically flubbed it big time. You were asked who said that the UN action was unprecedented. You then tried to pin that on Walter, but his quotation of the Washington Post was after you had made your charge. Instead of manning up, you dishonesty tried to call it hyperbole. It was nothing of the sort.

            NO MORE POSTS ALONG THIS LINE.

          • jim_m

            Here’s the point: You said that the vote in the Security counsel last week was no different that the votes cast by the Reagan admin 36 years ago after the Osirak bombing. I pointed out that the vote taken after Osirak was one of political necessity and of different character than the rather personal vendetta vote from last week. You at first denied that there was anything different and then later admitted that you thought the Reagan vote was one that the administration felt was politically unavoidable.

            You are a lying troll. You know that to be true, but you don’t want to publicly admit it.

          • Brucehenry

            No Jim, actually HERE’S the point. Reagan ordered his UN ambassador to cast his vote condemning the Osirak bombing because, as you say, it was a political necessity, and also because, in his judgment, it was in the best interest, long term, of the United States. It was also, he felt, in the long term best interests of both Israel and the Palestinians. There was jumping up and down about anti-Semitism and betrayal at the time, but those making those charges were, in Reagan’s judgment and in my opinion, wrong and unhelpful.

            In this case, Obama made the same judgment. You may huff and puff all you wish about how this was out of personal pique and adolescent yada yada and what Reagan did wasn’t, but you have no facts to back you up, only personal opinion fueled by your undying, unreasoning hatred of Obama.

            There WAS nothing different about the two votes, 1981 and 2016, and I never “admitted’ that there was. In both cases, the president of the United States made a judgment about what was in the interests of peace and acted accordingly. Your opinion that Obama sucks and Reagan rules is irrelevant.

            The ONLY difference is that in the 8 years of the Reagan administration, there was an embargo on military sales to Israel for a time and there were twenty OTHER UN resolutions critical of Israel that the president either voted FOR or abstained from, and in the 8 years of Obama, NO embargo and only this one abstention. Oh, and no visit to a Nazi cemetery.

            I was goading you when I repeatedly asked you to explain why one action was a “betrayal” and one wasn’t. I knew that all you had was opinion. Reagan was no anti-Semite, and neither is Obama.

          • jim_m

            Blah blah blah.

            You lied about what you thought.

            THAT is now the real point of the discussion. You refuse to debate honestly. There is no point in engaging you constructively. You have made that obvious,

          • Brucehenry

            Says the guy who has pretended to have some kind of gotcha throughout these last two threads.

            Whatever, Jim. You DIDN’T EVEN KNOW there had ever been a case where the US did not veto a UN Security Council resolution critical of Israel until I told you. No, you didn’t.

            No, you didn’t. You never know what you are talking about when it comes to what actually happened in history. Stick to healthcare policy, you’re pretty knowledgeable on that, or seem to be.

          • Go infest some other blog.

          • Scalia, you know this is typical of him.

            Why are you feeding the troll?

          • Scalia

            I let two snide remarks from him slide by, but I’m not going to let it continue, especially since he’s trying to revise what occurred.

            He said plenty on the other thread, and nothing he posted was deleted. I’m just serving him notice that he’d better move on to other topics.

  • Paul Hooson

    This administration has been characterized by a false sense of paternalism towards Israel, falsely believing that only it understands the best interests of the tiny nation. Neither the Palestinian Authority and certainly not, Hamas, have any dedication to peace, and with Iranian support, Hezbollah rockets have only improved, where threats from Syrian soil seem to dictate that Israel enhance it’s border security measures. Further, the Iran Nuclear Deal only delayed Iran’s development of nuclear weapons by 10 years, and did not prevent them, leaving the problem for future leaders of the U.S. and Israel to worry about later. Sweeping a problem under a rug for 10 years does not resolve a problem. Further, hundreds of millions in Iranian assets have been unfrozen and have only funded terrorism and other problems. This same regime took our embassy staff hostage as well as “nationalized” many millions in American assets and should actually pay the United States significant damages and reparations.

  • fustian24

    It turns out that I am less than one percent African and the rest is all northern European. Of that, the largest identifiable part is probably Irish. I even spent about 3 days there once.

    And I know very little about Irish politics or really much else about the island.

    But here’s the thing. If they suddenly got into some conflict with somebody else, there is a part of me that identifies with them as my people.

    I’m pretty sure Obama feels that way about Islam.

    And let’s not forget that Obama studied at a madrasa as a child. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find that he said the shahada, and technically, he IS a muslim.

  • LiberalNightmare

    0bama, like the Clinton$, will say/do/be whatever it takes to hold power. If it polled well, 0bama would claim to be a pastafarian.