Heard About Obama’s Extremist Muslim Education?

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Elections, General Politics

Well, CNN debunks it, and they do it the way news organizations should do it…by visiting the school he went to and doing some very basic fact checking.

Do note that many on the right, including some Fox News commentators, blamed Hillary for this smear. And while I can’t prove that she didn’t…I can point to a Snopes article that collects a right-wing email that circulated in 2006 claiming Obama was taught by Wahabbists.

Hmmm…is that the smell of partisan hacks scrambling around? Smells an awful lot like bullsh-


This entry was posted on Monday, January 22nd, 2007 and is filed under Elections, General Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

10 Responses to “Heard About Obama’s Extremist Muslim Education?”

  1. Glen Wishard Says:

    I can point to a Snopes article that collects a right-wing email that circulated in 2006 claiming Obama was taught by Wahabbists.

    Who says it’s “right-wing”? Do you know who sent it? Snopes doesn’t. Neither does urbanlegends.about.com, which has two different versions of this e-mail, both collected within the last two weeks.

    How do you think politicians smear each other, on official campaign stationery?

    Not to say that Clinton’s campaign is responsible for this e-mail campaign, even if they are encouraging anti-Obama rumors as Insight claimed (a claim based on an anonymous source – very MSM). If they were, they might be canny enough not to send it to the leftist blogs that claim to have received it.

    Of course, there are numerous ways to smear people, and one way is to accuse someone of staging a smear themselves. In the 2000 Democratic primary, Bill Bradley accused Gore of having originated the famous “Willie Horton” incident in 1988. Gore denied it. So did Gore smear Dukakis, or did Bradley smear Gore? Or c): Is everybody full of crap?

  2. gerryf Says:

    Who did what to whom is missing the point and falling into the trap of the rumor monger.

    The moral of this story is that whoever was tipped off SHOULD have checked the rumor before spilling it.

    The fact that people are already trying to assess blame to whomever started it is a cover for the idiots who perpetuated it without checking it.

    It ranges from the moronic columnist who gets a “leak” from the president’s staff to the foolish traffic reporter who cannot tell the difference between SPAM and a news story. Just yesterday, on the radio, a local reporter was telling people about an upcoming state police ticket blitz in my state–the source being an anonymous email that has been circulating the internet since at least 2005. But, it was simply reported as fact.

    Good god, I just cannot believe this anymore.

    Our media and the blogosphere and the people who get their news from them are either lazy, gullible or ill-intentioned. The ever-growing number of false reports is a frightening thing. Political insiders aping anonymous sources and unsubstantiated rumors should have everyone concerned. The why and the who has been gone over before so I won’t belabor it, but the unreliable nature of the news is one of the greatest threats facing our democracy.

    Despite all the retroactive reasoning that has gone on since, we are in Iraq right now because bad facts were concocted or never checked. People on the right can backpeddle all they want, anyone who says different is being disingenuous. People on the left can blame Bush all they want, but the cry “Bush lied people died” would never have happened had enough people stood up and said “WAIT A SECOND!”

    Whoever said it first was right: “We Get The Government We Deserve.”

  3. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    Obama recited the Shihada at least until age 7, and was baptised later in his adult life. According to all 4 schools of Sunni Islamic law (not sure about Shi’ias but they are even crazier), he is therefore considered an apostate and subject to the death penalty.

    A more interesting story would be an inquiry into what CAIR (who’s leadership is dominated by Wahabbists) thinks about a Muslim-apostate president? Is it Islamophobia if we use our current laws to prevent Muslims from demanding the assassination or execution of a president?

  4. bob in fl Says:

    Hey, Dhimmi – The article is about spreading of unchecked rumors. And you fall into the trap of doing exactly the same thing. . But then , after reading some of what you have written here before, this is a habit of yours, a very bad habit.

    You also have given yourself the reputation of defending against every rebuttal against you. So defend away. The truth only hurts when it is the truth.

  5. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    I have a reputation? neat.

  6. SD Law Student Says:

    Obvious right wing hit job.

  7. James Says:

    Welcome to RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!

    Smear job or not, it’s stupid campaign politics and it’s nothing new. Assigning blame puts you in no better seat than they are in.

  8. Glen Wishard Says:

    Obvious right wing hit job.

    If the Clintonites are not responsible for this, they are certainly passing up an excellent chance to be ruthless. They could get away with it clean, because it’s so “obvious” that someone else is to blame.

    I’m sure it was obvious to people like you that anti-Catholic smears against John F. Kennedy in the 1960 Democratic primaries must have been the work of the Ku Klux Klan, not good Humphrey liberals.

    This is why you see things like this every time a political campaign gets underway, and why you will see things like this until the end of time.

  9. Sean Aqui Says:

    Wouldn’t one expect a Hillary hit job to be, you know, accurate? Or at least not the sort of thing where, when the truth becomes known, it will simply generate more good press for Obama?

    A right-wing hit job that smears both Obama and Hillary, on the other hand, doesn’t care because a) their target is not Democratic primary voters and b) even if Obama looks good, Hillary doesn’t. Denial is always less convincing than accusation, and it helps reinforce Hillary’s already astronomical negative poll ratings.

  10. Glen Wishard Says:

    Wouldn’t one expect a Hillary hit job to be, you know, accurate?

    The truth is always the best smear, if you can get the real dirt on somebody. But that mostly happens only in the movies.

    I agree that it is doubtful that the Clinton campaign has anything to do with this email – spam is so low-class – but it is possible that a Clinton supporter did author it, believing that it would help Clinton.

    The point of the email is not to convince Democratic primary voters that Obama is a Jihadist Muslim. The point of the email is the convince them that some people think he is. That means that “a negative perception” of Obama exists, even though the email is an easily debunked lie. In politics perception is as good as reality any day – in politics, a person can be seen as having a “credibility problem” not because he tells lies, but because other people are telling lies about him.

    I should point out that political professionals have very little faith in the ability of the public to see through things like this. If somebody is saying it loud enough, they assume that people are believing it.

    It’s certainly to Clinton’s benefit to raise negatives about Obama at this point, when lots of donations and endorsements are still up for grabs. Clinton has many negatives of her own – real or perceived, doesn’t matter – and Obama still looks like an Eagle Scout. Again, they aren’t trying to convince people that Obama is a Muslim, only that he has Muslim baggage that might cause him to lose in the general election.

    Or, it could be a right-wing hit job, as previously said. If this happened a few weeks before the 2008 election, I would say the probability favored that explanation. Coming as it does in the opening blows of the Democratic primary race, I would say the odds favor a Democratic operative.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: