More than once in his short tenure as president, Barack Obama has been accused of insensitivity and arrogance toward the citizens (read voters) of the nation he was elected to lead. Pundits and politicians, as well as ordinary citizens have commented on his aloofness and his seeming condescension for many Americans, in particular for those who disagree with his governance, such as the Tea Party partisans, and of course, Republicans.
On Friday, August 13th Obama hosted an iftar, a ceremonial dinner in celebration of the breaking of the daily Ramadan fast, to which the White House invited a number of prominent American and foreign dignitaries, most of whom are Muslims. In his speech that evening, Obama justifiably stressed the positive contributions of Muslim-Americans throughout our history and paid tribute to what he called the “patchwork heritage” of the American people as being a principal strength of our country.
At one point in the speech, however, referring to the controversial so-called Ground Zero mosque, Obama intoned,
Recently, attention has been focused on the construction of mosques in certain communities — particularly New York. Now, we must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of Lower Manhattan. The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country. And the pain and the experience of suffering by those who lost loved ones is just unimaginable. So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. And Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.
But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are. The writ of the Founders must endure.
Understandably enough, these words were perceived by Obama's opponents (and not a few supporters) as controversially supporting the planned construction of the mosque in relatively close proximity to Ground Zero. The furor over his remarks was instantaneous and considerable, prompting Obama to fumble about in an insulting attempt to ameliorate the import of his ill-considered remarks on Friday night. On Saturday, in an interview with CNN's Ed Henry, Obama disingenuously allowed as how he
was not commenting on and will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right that people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country's about and I think it's very important that as difficult as some of these issues are, we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about.
In these two declarations we have an interesting case study of Obama's contempt for the American people. It is nothing short of arrogance that, from one day to the next he can make such a transparent, inept and ham-handed attempt to deny what is still fresh in the minds of everyone and expect us to believe him. It is also insulting.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Alan Kurtz
Okay, I'll bite. What does Lynne Truss's book Eats, Shoots & Leaves have to do with this article?
2 - Clavos
Nothing. I just like it.
3 - Irene Athena
"But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right ^as everyone else in this country ^ to practice their religion."
Better? Net even slightly? :+)
4 - jeannie danna
What does this man have say or do in order to please you?
Can you imagine the tug of war that ensues after every word he utters, and dare let him speak off the cuff!
Of course, when Bush went his own way he was a decider.
I just don't see what he did that was so insulting.
Nite, Clavos...I'll look in the morning for a response. :)Obama Mama
5 - Dr Dreadful
I just don't see what he did that was so insulting.
For me it was that he backpedalled.
Just a few days ago somebody on one of these threads - I can't remember if it was you, Jeannie, or Handy - was applauding the President for taking a principled stand over this. The cynic in me perked up then, looked around at all the blood vessels that were bursting noisily everywhere, and wondered how long before he retracted. And sure enough...
I wish that, just every once in a while, a politician - and I'm not talking about Obama only - would stick to their damn guns over a controversial opinion and not try to hide up their own arses as soon as they realise a few folks didn't like what they said.
I admire this president for his ability to compromise - but he's got to realise that sometimes you can't please everyone, nor is it honorable to try.
6 - Clavos
For me it was that he backpedalled.
Bad enough, but worse, he tried to pretend he hadn't.
7 - Cannonshop
#5 It's a function of Leadership to know WHEN to compromise, and over WHAT.
Job: "Executive"-means you're supposed to be able to prioritize and make decisions. Chief Executives also set policy on how to execute directives from the board of directors, which isn't far different from what a President is supposed to do in relation to congress-make decisions, refuse some directives (Veto), set priorities, and establish policy for the branch of government tasked with doing things.
I guess I'd be more disappointed at Obama's backpedaling if it weren't already something I expected based on his resume, and performance thus far in office. He's a good little Apparatchik for the Party, but without Daley telling him what he thinks every morning, he's going to blunder like this-as he has in the past-and have to make an insincere retraction (as he has in the past.)
You thought you had a warrior, what you got was a drone.
8 - jeannie danna
Clavos,
I see that in this feature, links are not necessary to prove every point...
{a href......?)
:O ?
9 - Clavos
That the top percentiles of taxpayers pay the bulk of taxes is well known, Jeannie.
Here
10 - jeannie danna
[The average income for a tax return in this top 0.1 percent is $7.4 million, while the average amount of income tax paid is $1.6 million, indicating an average effective individual income tax rate of 21.5 percent. This very top income group actually has a lower average effective tax rate than the rest of the top 1 percent of returns because these extremely high-income returns are more likely to have income from capital gains and dividends, which are typically taxed at lower rates.] Thank you
11 - Clavos
How many returns are in the top 0.1%, Jeannie? It says it in the article. Only 141,000 returns is the number, and as you point out, these people still paid 21.5%, considerably above all but the rest of the top 1% of taxpayers (which paid a rate of 22.5%), according to the chart (From the IRS) at the bottom of that article.
Here's another source, which indicates that, in 2008, not only did the top 10% of taxpayers pay 73% of all taxes paid, but also that the bottom 47% of taxpayers will pay no income taxc at all for 2009.
In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.
Also:
The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.
And:
The number of households that don't pay federal income taxes increased substantially in 2008, when the poor economy reduced incomes and Congress cut taxes in an attempt to help recovery.
In 2007, about 38 percent of households paid no federal income tax, a figure that jumped to 49 percent in 2008, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center.
The constant bashing of top earners as not paying their fair share of taxes is a favorite shibboleth of liberals, but it is simply not true in regard to the top class of wage earners as a whole.
12 - jeannie danna
Clavos,
Are you aware that the corporations are given huge tax breaks in a lame attempt to help the economy?
The number of households that don't pay federal income taxes increased substantially in 2008, when the poor economy reduced incomes and Congress cut taxes in an attempt to help recovery.
and my comment was quoted from your link.
shibboleth ?
If anything I'm telling the truth here!
Pay taxes! The poor do, and the worker does before they even cut the PAYCHECKS!
Yes, the government needs money to function...move to Cuba if you think your government here is so horrible.
: O and don't bitch about my punctuation, this is the comment section...
13 - jeannie danna
WTF is wrong with speaking out and against this, wealth hording?
[Obama has pushed tax cuts for low- and middle-income families and tax increases for the wealthy, arguing that wealthier taxpayers fared well in the past decade, so it's time to pay up. The nation's wealthiest taxpayers did get big tax breaks under Bush, with the top marginal tax rate reduced from 39.6 percent to 35 percent, and the second-highest rate reduced from 36 percent to 33 percent.] source
Where is that Reaganomics now? It's time for the GOP to prove this theory once and for all.
When are you all going to trickle down on the rest of us with this invisible benevolent love and caring for those less fortunate?
We are not all charter members of, The Lucky Sperm Club.
14 - Clavos
Pay taxes! The poor do...
Do you not know how to read, Jeannie??? The poor DON'T pay taxes -- on the contrary, the government PAYS THEM!!
See above:
...the bottom 47% of taxpayers will pay no income tax at all for 2009...In 2007, about 38 percent of households paid no federal income tax, a figure that jumped to 49 percent in 2008, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center.
If you want to present the image of semi-literacy, that's your problem.
15 - roger nowosielski
Isn't it partly because the poor have become poorer yet?
What other interpretation are you going to assign to this statistic?
16 - jeannie danna
Yes, thank you Roger...that is exactly what I got from this statistic. Of course they are giving the individual even the poor tax breaks.
Now, if Reaganomics had been such a great idea for this country, then we all would have the luxury of being able to pay taxes!
Don't go having a fit on me.
17 - Clavos
Once again:
It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.
And:
The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $66,532) earned 68.7 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.6 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $410,096) earned approximately 22.8 percent of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid more in federal individual income taxes than the bottom 95 percent of tax returns.
And the Bush administration cut taxes for the poor as well as for the wealthy:
The nation's wealthiest taxpayers did get big tax breaks under Bush, with the top marginal tax rate reduced from 39.6 percent to 35 percent, and the second-highest rate reduced from 36 percent to 33 percent.
But income tax rates were lowered at every income level. The changes made it relatively easy for families of four making $50,000 to eliminate their income tax liability.
All quotes are from the sources previously cited.
18 - jeannie danna
"America, STFU and pay your taxes!"
19 - jeannie danna
: ) I'll be back, Clavos...
I have to go to the store. I will buy products and pay taxes attached to them. Ironically, the companies I am buying these products will pay very little tax.
sweet!
20 - Doug Hunter
Clavos, you're arguing with people whose ideology is rooted in class envy and hatred, who need to believe that every success is the result of 'luck' or government, and wealth can only be stolen from someone else, not created. The wealth that America created is trickling down, alot of it just ends up in India or China or Mexico to people who want it more than we do. If only it weren't under the guise of capitalism these wealth redistributors would absolutely love it (or maybe as I've long suspected people only support redistibution if they believe they'll be the distributee rather than the distributor). Now suddenly, they're the ones becoming all nationalistic and supporting our hoarding of global resources.... now that's the spirit!!!
21 - roger nowosielski
Clavos keeps on repeating the same old point like a broken record, but refuses to connect the dots: the poor did get poorer over the period in question, yet that little "factoid" is lost on him.
How convenient to be dealing with the superficial when one's ideology prevents one from saying the obvious.
22 - jeannie danna
And tell us, Doug Hunter...what did you and your family create? more like stole, pillaged and plundered if you are (forgive me Doc and Chris),ENGLISH.
23 - Baronius
Clavos, for the life of me I can't follow this thread. Where did comment #9 come from?
Also, a formal event at the White House is called an affair, not an "iftar". Come on, you're usually better at spelling.
24 - jeannie danna
Live near the Gulf? I bet if you did, Doug then you were screaming with the rest of the people, "Where is Obama! Where is my government help!"
25 - jeannie danna
You can only follow this thread if you enter the twilight zone, where we all close our eyes and say that we don't see anything wrong...