For once I'm glad the president was being dishonest!

Speaking to the Turkish Parliament, President Barack Obama made the following claim:

"...if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world."
As Don Surber demonstrates, the claim is wrong:
With an estimated 5 million to 8 million Muslims, obviously he does not mean by percentage; Muslims are less than 3% of the U.S. population.

By sheer number, the United States is far behind Indonesia (213 million), Pakistan (156 million), Bangladesh (127 million) and so on. At least 23 nations have more Muslims.

The USA in fact has less than 1% of the world's Muslim population of an estimated 1 billion people.

So why would a president make such an outrageous lie?

Because no one will fact check him.

How true. Fact checking does not go hand in hand with bowing.

If we assume for the sake of argument that the United States did have the 24th largest Muslim population in the world, it simply is not honest to call it "one of the largest."

But even if the statement were true, it would be insensitive to the spirit of this country's tradition of separation of church and state. Imagine the outcry if President Bush had said this:

"...if you actually took the number of Christian Americans, we'd be one of the largest Christian countries in the world."
"...if you actually took the number of Jewish Americans, we'd be one of the largest Jewish countries in the world."
(Actually, the United States ranks second in "largest Jewish populations by country," but I've never heard any American politicians call it "one of the largest Jewish countries in the world.")

Over a year before the election, John McCain got in trouble for saying America was a Christian nation, and had to distance himself from his remarks.

What matters isn't the numbers of Christians, Jews, or Muslims who live in the United States. What matters is that no religion should ever have so much as a hint at government favoritism.

I guess I should be glad that the president's use of the phrase "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world" was dishonest.

posted by Eric on 06.03.09 at 02:30 PM


It's called rhetoric. The President was trying to remind the world that there were lots of Muslims in America, who liked living here and didn't want to blow up any Americans (or die in the next terrorist attack by Muslims). You got a problem with that? Given all the nonsense the Islamists are saying about America, this really doesn't register on the outrageousness scale.

And given the many possible meanings one can ascribe to Obama's words, it may not even be a lie. Maybe he meant "America is one of the biggest nations with Muslims in it." Which certainly bears saying.

Raging Bee   ·  June 3, 2009 2:45 PM

I agree! Whenever I see those gaffes I'm reminded of when Bush rubbed Merkel's shoulders, or when Bush tried to open a locked door and made a crazy smirk, or when Bush started drunkenly dancing in Africa, or when Bush slapped the butt of an American volleyball player at the Olympics, or when Bush was hauled out of the stands at the Olympics because he was so drunk he couldn't stand on his own power.

President Obama is a mere piker when it comes to gaffes. Maybe he can get Bush to give him instruction on better gaffes.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 4:23 PM

Don't forget that video of Bush Jr. HOLDING HANDS with the Saudi king. How lame was that?

Raging Bee   ·  June 3, 2009 4:31 PM

I don't think Bush holding hands with the Saudi despots was any more lame than when he sidestepped a question and cut off questioning from journalists by saying "Now watch this drive" on a golf course.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 5:05 PM

Actually, maybe the time he addressed the "haves and have-mores" as his base during a speech in front of said have-mores might've been worse.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 5:07 PM

Or maybe it was the time Bush started joking about not finding WMD's after his lies about Iraq having them had killed tens of thousands of humans.

Yep, that's the one.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 5:09 PM

Oh--I'd say Mr. GALT, since you have quite some time on your hands and might just see this, that bowing to an Arabian king trumps all the other gaffes plus some.

And while "on the numbers" raging bee might be correct, it would seem that our situation is somewhat different than some enclaves in Europe by now, where it can be found--not uncommon--that much of one's city council is Islamic.

That is not the case in Lilburn Ga, or Spartanburg SC, and other hamlets.


There's demographics, and then there are the results of those same or similar numbers across the board, which in America for her part are not yet changin the culture into something else.

As far as the nonsense part, that's all too true, but then America is like Orwell's Room 101--too uptight, too hetero, too gay, too wealthy, too militaristic, or perhaps too passive, too much liberalism, or is that too much conservatism and liberTARIANism?

Whatever your bugbear du jour, we got it, baby.

Now as far as what Eric said:

I guess I should be glad that the president's use of the phrase "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world" was dishonest.

Thank Allah for small favors...

Wakefield Tolbert   ·  June 3, 2009 6:06 PM


The only people who think "bowing" to the Saudi king is worse, especially after Bush was seen kissing him and holding hands with him, are the pants-wetting right wing who are scared to death of imaginary Muslims. They seem to be less scared when their Republicanus Maximus Bush has his tongue shoved down the Saudi's throat.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 6:31 PM

If only the Republicanus Maxiumus Bush had been as scared of Muslims as his acolytes are right now, 911 would not have happened. He would have read that report back in August 2001 about OBL being determined to strike.

Instead he told the person who gave him the report, "OK, now you've CYA", then left on a month-long vacation to drink...oops, I mean cut brush.

Too bad Joe Six-Pack Republican didn't put his pants-pissing fear of brown people and Muslims into his Holy Leader Bush.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 6:37 PM

First of all, lipstick besmirched piggy,

Speaking of all things "Galt", I had some smattering of respect for that stillborn philosophy of Rand's even if I agreed with her only part of the time, but now for some reason you muddy the waters further.

This in turn begs other questions. Perhaps Eric thinks you're just a knee-slappin' hoot with all that talk of pissing the pants about brown people (when in fact, to my knowledge the only issue with that is that in point of fact the Sons of Allah do make quite a few gory snuff films and seem handy at hiding under skirts and flying aircraft somewhat low) but it seems he's allowing some Vaudeville shtick to sneak in the back door hear and I think he's asking for more serious commentary.

SECOND, your other verbal darts do not ring quite true, as they are devoid of vast swaths of context.

THIRD, along the lines of the second, bowing is NOT quite on par with holding hands, which, while it truly looks goofy, has been known to occur (just so you know this) on the football field and other venues as a show of respect among males more masculine than the metrosexual crowd now pushing their way into national politics. Slightly turned the other way it is almost on par with the handshake, which I would have preferred to see, but still..

Talking of pissing the panties and the panty waists, eh?

You're way off the mark, chief. For that you might look to your Dear Leaders in PC Cloud Cuckooland.

Wakefield The Devil   ·  June 3, 2009 7:24 PM

PS--Be they just warriors for Allah, whence you consider indifferent, or fear and loathing, or just the Imam nice guy act down at the local mosque protesting about bars and gays and slatternly Western chicks, the fact is quite real that Muslims are...well........REAL.

Make of that what you please.

Wakefield Tolbert   ·  June 3, 2009 7:27 PM

He would have read that report back in August 2001 about OBL being determined to strike.

That's old hat. And he knew that before the report. You need to peel your eyeballs from the glimmer of the Truthout911 freaks.

This has all been answered before. Shall it be done again?

The report was not specific in any degree more than the ones that came out before.

I've seen the quotes, piggy.

Piggy Peeler   ·  June 3, 2009 7:30 PM


I notice how you studiously ignored the kisses and saliva that Maximus Republicanus Bush planted upon the lips of the Saudis.

Of course, you COULD address it in your own wonderful style by simply asserting that "bowing" is worse than that, just like you asserted that "bowing" is worse than holding hands.

You keep working on that! I bet you can assert with a straight face that having sex and sharing needles with somebody isn't as bad as "bowing" to them.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 7:40 PM

Piggy Peeler:

Wow, more assertions. Are you related to that Wakefield character?

Actually that report was far more specific and severe than previous reports. The discovery of the ignored Aug 6 report, in fact, caused Condoliar Rice to state publicly that "no one could have imagined" flying planes into the WTC, even though that scenario was the subject of wargames as far back as the 70's.

You should leave the bald assertions and lies to your Maximus Republicanus idols. They are much better at it than you.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 7:45 PM

OK, I get it. No matter what Obama does (or doesn't do) it cannot possibly be as bad as what Bush did or didn't do.

I get that I can't criticize any action of Obama's because Bush did something worse. This seems to be especially true if I actually criticized Bush at the time.

I get that because I'm not a liberal Democrat who spent 8 years hating Bush that I now have no moral authority to criticize any action Obama takes or doesn't take.

Really, I get it. So will you, LipstickBedeckedPigs, just STFU now?

Donna B.   ·  June 3, 2009 9:10 PM


I don't think you get it. When right-wing poutrage over something Obama does is as loud and shrill as it has been over this, we must examine the HI. The HI, or hypocrisy index, is the ratio between the silence that right-wingers had over egregious misbehavior by Maximus Republicanus Bush versus the whining they do over lesser things done by Obama.

And thank you for your courteous suggestion to STFU. I know you guys hate to hear criticism of Maximus Republicanus Bush. He did such a good job destroying the American economy.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 3, 2009 10:10 PM

OK, I get it. No matter what Obama does (or doesn't do) it cannot possibly be as bad as what Bush did or didn't do.

Well, Obama hasn't invaded a country we didn't have to invade, under pretenses that have ALL been proven false; nor has he got over four thousand Americans killed for no benefit to our country; nor has he deregulated the banking sector to the point where a crash like last year's was inevitable. So yeah, there's plenty Bush has done that's worse than Obama's actions; and that will probably be the case for quite some time. Do you get it now?

Raging Bee   ·  June 3, 2009 10:47 PM

I'd like to congratulate LBP on a masterful job of trolling. You have managed to shift attention away from the subject at hand with great skill. Kudos.

Evil Otto   ·  June 4, 2009 7:35 AM

Evil Otto:

Thanks for the ad hominem attack. Interesting how your comment has nothing to do with the subject at hand, but mine did.

Kind of the Bizarro-World type comment I've come to expect.


LipstickBedeckedPigs   ·  June 4, 2009 9:55 AM

Thanks for the ad hominem attack.

And thanks for this one:

Richard Lindzen is an oil industry hack who openly gets funding from oil companies.

Eric Scheie   ·  June 4, 2009 10:19 AM

Geez. I can't even not criticize Obama without getting griped at! What's the world coming to?

Donna B.   ·  June 4, 2009 1:15 PM

As I said, Donna, life was easier under Bush.

Eric Scheie   ·  June 4, 2009 1:52 PM

Thanks for the ad hominem attack.

I was being honest. Your only goal here is to poke the hornet's nest... you do not desire debate or discussion, only to abuse those who disagree with you politically, and to shift attention away from discussion of Eric's post. Trust me, if I make an ad hominem attack against you, you will know it. As will your decedents to the next seven generations.

Evil Otto   ·  June 4, 2009 2:47 PM

Post a comment

April 2011
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30


Search the Site


Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link


Recent Entries


Site Credits