Loading ...24% of Republicans say Obama may be the Anti-Christ
flockwoodFifty-seven percent of Republicans say President Barack Obama is a Muslim, according to Harris Interactive.
And 24 percent say he may be the Anti-Christ…
Which reminds me of how Mitch McConnell jokingly described the Democratic presidential primary back in February 2008:
The nomination fight between Clinton and Obama featured a “New York senator who was born in Illinois and an Illinois senator who was apparently born in a manger,” McConnell said.
March 25th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I had never heard McConnell say anything half so witty; good one! I saw the same poll, and was amazed at the results. I knew Republicans were crazy, but I had no idea how delusional they were. As one account summarized it: “According to the poll 67 per cent of Republicans thought President Obama was a socialist, 57 per cent thought that he was secretly a Muslim, 42 per cent believed he was “racist,” and 61 per cent thought that he wants to abolish gun ownership.”
And, “It also found that 51 per cent of Republicans thought that he wants to turn over the US to a single world government, and 22 per cent believed “he wants the terrorists to win.”" The poll apparently didn’t ask them about whether they believed the earth is flat; no doubt many of them do.
No wonder they’re the party of no; they have no grip on reality!
March 26th, 2010 at 7:11 am
This is amusing and all, but can you really take it seriously? This Harris Poll was “conducted online,” which makes it even more skewed than regular old polls. The Harris Web site only lists its results, not the questions used to get those results, which makes it really hard to know how the wording of the questions impacted the answers people gave. It’s also worth noting some Democrats held similar feelings about President Bush when he was in office. What this and similar polls tell us is that when you tap into the fringe in either political party you’ll get a high percentage of results that tell you that those folks are on the fringe. That’s not news.
March 26th, 2010 at 9:34 am
My question is, what is wrong with the other 76%?
March 26th, 2010 at 10:50 am
Stephen, as much as I despised Bush II, and as many bad things as I said about him, everything I said was grounded in fact; I don’t recall anyone making up bad things about Bush to say. Of course, there were enough real bad things about him to fill the airwaves without making things up.
I realize that conservatives will never admit that their rhetoric has a racist tone to it, but you’ve only got to contrast what the right wingnuts are saying about Obama to what they said about Clinton, for example. And that’s without mentioning the racist slurs hurled by that little group of teabaggers at John Lewis and other black Congressmen. There’s also an anti-feminist side to it, as shown by the vicious attacks on Hilary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi. If you’re a white male, you’re largely immune from attacks by the conservatives, but everyone else is fair game.
March 26th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
Caleb, don’t be silly. Whites are the least racially conscious group in America, and the most afraid not to offend other races.
On the other hand, Black racism is openly expressed all the time, with multitudinous organizations existing soley to advance Black interests.
High percentages of Blacks voted for B.O. specifically for racist reasons. Ask Hillary Clinton about that. Where is your condemnation of their racism?
So White skin makes you immune to conservative attacks? Ask Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul about that.
March 26th, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Justin,
The mere fact that you divide degrees of racism along racial lines is in and of itself racist. If you want to pretend that whites are somehow superior in the manner they treat others, that’s your agenda, but don’t act like it’s an established fact. The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks hate groups. Of the twenty-four hate groups identified in Arkansas, one, the Nation of Islam, is non-white. The other twenty-three are white, Christian, and very, very conservative.
March 26th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
My question, “Are they all former used car salesmen?”
The Republicans need to be careful, the backlash they are creating is really going to hurt them at election time. John McCain may be the first to go!
March 26th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
And Blanche Lincoln will be second. Oh, wait, she’s a Democrat. Why is that so hard to remember?
March 27th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Justin, you say: “Whites are the least racially conscious group in America, and the most afraid not to offend other races.”
That may be true on Park Avenue in New York, but in Lexington, Kentucky, and I suspect Little Rock, Arkansas, it ain’t necessarily so. You saw what Cheese wrote about white hate groups, and that’s true nationwide. I don’t know the statistics offhand, but the last time I read the SPLC hate group list, almost all were white, all were conservative, and most had as part of their aura some sort of association with either the Old South in the US, or the Third Reich.
March 27th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
“Democrats held similar feelings about President Bush when he was in office…”
Yeah, I take strong exception to that statement too. A lot of patriotic Americans criticized GWBush for his policies, but that’s a whole lot different from maligning his very identity. What are these “feelings” about former President Bush that are comparable to calling him the Anti-Christ? Was he widely regarded to belong to a different religion than the one he professes? Was his citizenship challenged depite clear evidence to the contrary?
We should pay close attention to how the Obama haters slap on labels and then slink away without substantiating their attacks. Anyone rash enough to call the President a Socialist or Communist ought to explain why (and they should be able to explain what those terms mean).
March 28th, 2010 at 8:16 am
I thought this was America, land of the free. If I choose to believe in “socialism” and “communism,” shouldn’t I be able to do so? There’s no law against it. We say we’re a free country, but as soon as you step outside the bounds of conformity, people treat you with disdain. We have a very narrow and ego-centric definition of freedom in this country.
March 28th, 2010 at 10:00 am
Of course you can be a socialist or communist in this great country. Sen. Sanders of Vermont calls himself a Socialist and the citizens of his state elect him to Congress year after year. And you can be Muslim, Jewish, and even atheist. And you can root for the Cowboys or some other team. That’s not the issue.
The problem is when folks lie about the identity or beliefs of others. President Obama has been called a Muslim and a Socialist. He is not, and it is wrong– very wrong– when people say that he is. Those who have a regard for truth also have an interest in fighting deceit.
March 28th, 2010 at 11:30 am
Yet who really wants to know the truth, Jose? The majority of people don’t care about figuring out the truth. They only want confirmation that they already know it. This is why they put so much emphasis on faith and belief instead of curiosity and doubt. It’s why “truth” can be purchased at Barnes & Noble for $14.95 plus tax. Look at our friend, Julian. He’s convinced himself that a man who died over a thousand years ago is any minute now going to come back alive, punish us non-believers for our non-belief, and open the doors to paradise for him and others who think like him. The possibility that they don’t already know everything doesn’t even cross their minds. Are they lying about President Obama’s identity? Lying requires knowing what you’re saying is false. They believe what they’re saying is true. The real problem is their arrogant ignorance and the culture of escapism that encourages it.
March 28th, 2010 at 7:40 pm
What concerns me is the lack of respect for the office. The man was put in the by a group of people who aren’t beholding to any corporate endeavor and that scares politicians. Its the first time in a very long time that “for the people and by the people” have made a statement like this. He has opened the door to a new America that will once again belong to the people. If you guys thinks this healthcare is socialism what is social security, medicare, medicaid. What is the IRS. To think that a country like couldn’t implement and run a national healthcare plan is absolutely absurd. The real question would be, “What if we had a President that ignored the problem for another 4 years?”.
March 29th, 2010 at 11:15 am
The SLPC’s list of hate groups says more about their own agenda that anything else. Pedastaling them as the neutral authority is naive.
The double standard remains: why are you only concerned with White racists?
March 29th, 2010 at 11:37 am
“Pedastaling?” I suppose we’ve reached that level of equality which allows every word to become a verb if it works really hard, but that’s a new one on me.
I have been a member of the SPLC for years, and for my money it’s the only organization out there that does anything to fight right wing hate groups. You didn’t ask me, Justin, but the reason that I’m more concerned about white racists than the other colors are (i) I’m white, and therefore they offend me; (ii) there are a lot more white groups than those of any other color, and (iii) the white racist groups appear to be the ones who commit racially motivated violence.
The next time I see a white person lynched or tortured by black racists, I’ll be against them, but to date I haven’t seen much out of them.
March 29th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Justin,
I’m not only concerned about white racists. I’m concerned about any group of people with a serious superiority complex. Many of those people happen to be white. My question to you: why are you only concerned about non-white racists?
Think what you will about the SPLC, but your quickness to stereotype them as a biased organization says more about your own agenda than it does theirs. I don’t care for unsubstantiated slander. Unless you have some facts to back up those opinions, I’d shy away from making racial conspiracy claims. That whole “innocent until proven guilty” thing works as good in the real world as it does in the courts.
March 30th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
Justin says:
“The SLPC’s list of hate groups says more about their own agenda that anything else.”
The SPLC list included the Hutaree militia. Several Hutaree members were arrested over the weekend and charged with planning acts of domestic terrorism. Justin is right, and we should be thankful for groups like the SPLC.
March 31st, 2010 at 12:15 pm
cheese, I’m concerned with ALL racists. Unlike anti-White racists who are totally silent about minority racism.
Caleb, if you really think Whites are not targetted for racial hate crimes, you really haven’t looked very hard. But, of course, only “racists” would even highlight such crimes, right?
The SLPC has a clear agenda demonizing all White racial consciousness. Why don’t they also demonize all non-White racial consciousness?
I call that RACISM!
March 31st, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Justin, I don’t know where you’re coming from on this. The SPLC, while certainly focusing on white organizations, also include others on their list. Why do you think they have an agenda beyond fighting hate in general? I’ve read virtually every word they’ve written in the last ten years, and I don’t see anything remotely suggesting that they have an agenda.
For example, Justin, what non-white hate groups exist, but don’t appear on the SPLC’s list? What racially motivated crimes against whites have been ignored by the SPLC? You say the SPLC demonizes “white racial consciousness,” but from what I can tell, most of the people at SPLC are white themselves. Please explain yourself. This is an organization to which I’ve donated thousands of dollars over the years, and if there’s something wrong with it, I want to know.
April 2nd, 2010 at 11:46 am
Caleb, what I am saying is that many of the groups that SLPC lists as “hate” groups are just promoters of White racial consciousness, or attempting to be White community activists. Many are simply pro-White, not anti- anything or promoting hate, not even “supremacist”. White racial consciousness, which is perfectly acceptible and encouraged in other groups, is made taboo by this constant negative branding.
I am suggesting that if they applied the same standards, a great deal of mainstream pro-minority sentiment should also be labeled as “hate”.
April 2nd, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Well, Justin, I’m still waiting for specifics. Is there a specific group, or number of groups, that you think have been wrongly targeted by the SPLC? If so, what are their names?
Also, I asked you what non-white hate groups you know of that were left off the SPLC’s list, and you didn’t give any. Do you know of any?
April 4th, 2010 at 9:40 am
The title of this story is suggestive to a hate group.