PDA

View Full Version : Laura Ingraham Show: Obama the Apostate and more Faux News Garbage



AZLouis
06-23-2008, 01:39 PM
On the June 19 edition of The Laura Ingraham Show, guest host Monica Crowley falsely asserted that Malik Obama, Sen. Barack Obama's half brother, "went on the record to The Jerusalem Post, of all places, and said, 'Oh yeah, Obama's got a really solid Muslim background.' " As the broadcast was going to commercial break, Crowley aired a clip of Fox News Washington managing editor Brit Hume from the June 16 edition of Fox News' Special Report, in which he pointed to a statement on Obama's campaign website that Obama "has never been a Muslim, and is a committed Christian." Hume stated: "But Obama's half brother is not so sure. Malik Obama tells The Jerusalem Post that 'if elected his brother will be a good president for the Jewish people, despite his Muslim background.' " But as Media Matters for America noted, Hume's claim that Malik Obama told the Post that Sen. Obama had a "Muslim background" is false. Indeed, as ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper reported, according to The Jerusalem Post, Malik Obama did not speak directly with the Post but, rather, the article was referring to an interview Malik Obama gave to Israel's Army Radio. Moreover, Tapper wrote that "nowhere in [the interview] does Malik expressly say anything about Obama having a Muslim background," adding, "Malik did not say that or come close to saying that."

Earlier on the Ingraham segment, Crowley had asserted that Obama "was born to a Muslim father, which, in Islam, automatically makes him a Muslim." She added: "Now, he left the faith, does that make him an apostate? I don't know. It's unclear. Punishable by death for leaving Islam, OK? He says he became a Christian in his adolescence, and he's a Christian now." Crowley's comments recalled a May 12 New York Times op-ed, in which Edward N. Luttwak asserted, "As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood." Luttwak also labeled Obama's "conversion" to Christianity as "a crime in Muslim eyes," adding, "it is 'irtidad' or 'ridda,' usually translated from the Arabic as 'apostasy.' " New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt refuted Luttwak's assertion in a June 1 column, writing, "I interviewed five Islamic scholars, at five American universities, recommended by a variety of sources as experts in the field. All of them said that Luttwak's interpretation of Islamic law was wrong." Hoyt also noted: "Interestingly, in defense of his own article, Luttwak sent me an analysis of it by a scholar of Muslim law whom he did not identify. That scholar also did not agree with Luttwak that Obama was an apostate or that Muslim law would prohibit punishment for any Muslim who killed an apostate."

Discussing Obama's name later in the broadcast, Crowley said, "I want to point this out, because nobody else has: Barack Hussein Obama -- given name. That was his given name. Throughout his teenage years, he went by the name 'Barry.' He went by the name of 'Barry' until he got to college and found himself, and then he switched back to Barack Hussein Obama." She went on to say, "Now, here is the point: African-Americans in particular in the United States when they convert to Islam, most of the time, they will change their name or at least take a Muslim name. Muhammad Ali, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Malcolm X -- the list goes on and on and on. ... [T]he explicit point of that is to signal to everybody that they are, in fact, now a Muslim -- hence the name. ... They are signaling to the world that they have converted to Islam and they are a Muslim." Crowley then stated that this "[r]aises the question: What is he signaling with that name? What does he want you to know?"

As Media Matters has repeatedly documented, Obama is, in fact, not a Muslim. Obama has said, "I've always been a Christian," and has also repeatedly stated that he has never been a Muslim or ever practiced Islam.

From the June 19 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Laura Ingraham Show:

CROWLEY: The most prominent so-called lie is that Obama is a Muslim, right? And this is the one that they are so up in arms about, "Oh, this is a viral lie. It's vicious. It's horrible. Everybody knows that Barack Obama's a Christian. Well, his own brother-in-law, Malik, in Africa, went on the record to The Jerusalem Post, of all places, and said, "Oh yeah, Obama's got a really solid Muslim background." Barack Obama was born to a Muslim father, which, in Islam, automatically makes him a Muslim. Now, he left the faith, does that make him an apostate? I don't know. It's unclear. Punishable by death for leaving Islam, OK?

He says he became a Christian in his adolescence, and he's a Christian now. OK. But you're not allowed to say that about Obama, all right. Nobody's out there -- nobody's supposed to be out there saying, well, he's a Muslim, 'cause that's just a vicious lie. But the Obama team can go out and do vicious lies on McCain all day long, and nobody says boo. By the way, you're also not allowed to tell the truth about the Obamas either, right?

Not allowed to go out there and tell the truth about Barack and Michelle Obama -- can't raise Reverend [Jeremiah] Wright; can't raise Father [Michael] Phleger; can't raise the domestic terrorists, Bill Ayres and Bernadine Dohrn; can't raise the Syrian immigrant, now convicted con, Tony Rezko, and his relationship with Obama. So you can't lie about Obama and you also can't raise the truth about the Obamas. Oh, we're in a real fix here, aren't we, America? 800-876-4123. I'm Monica Crowley. Back in a flash.

[begin audio clip 1]

HUME: Barack Obama is a practicing Christian, married in a Christian church, whose children were also baptized in that church. His campaign has emphasized his faith in part to dispel what the campaign calls an online smear campaign, which contends, among other things, that Obama was raised a Muslim. There is even a statement on his official campaign website reading, quote, "Obama has never been a Muslim, and is a committed Christian."

But Obama's half brother is not so sure. Malik Obama tells The Jerusalem Post that "if elected his brother will be a good president for the Jewish people, despite his Muslim background." The article was also accompanied by an image of Malik Obama holding a photo of him and Barack Obama both in Muslim dress, reportedly taken when the two first met back in 1985.

[end audio clip 1]

[begin audio clip 2]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE 1: Well, he's got his own beliefs, with the Muslim beliefs, and couple issues that bothers me at heart.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE 2: Hmm-mm. You know this -- that's not true.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE 1: No. I'm just -- this is what I'm being told.

[end audio clip 2]

CROWLEY: Another thing you're not supposed to point out about Barack Obama -- and this is a very serious point that I want to make that nobody else has made. We were talking right before the commercial about the -- what Obama calls the smear that he's a Muslim. And I was pointing out that he was born to a Muslim father, which automatically makes you, under Islam, a Muslim. So, does that make him an apostate or what? I don't -- it's still unclear, although he claims to have switched religions in his adolescence, and there is part of Islam that says that that's OK. If you do that before you are technically an adult, you sort of have a shield to that.

But I want to point this out, because nobody else has: Barack Hussein Obama -- given name. That was his given name. Throughout his teenage years, he went by the name "Barry." He went by the name of "Barry" until he got to college and found himself, and then he switched back to Barack Hussein Obama. Get back to his roots, trying to find his identity -- the whole nine yards, right? So he goes back to Barack Hussein Obama.

Now, here is the point: African-Americans in particular in the United States when they convert to Islam, most of the time, they will change their name or at least take a Muslim name. Muhammad Ali, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Malcolm X -- the list goes on and on and on. And the point of that -- the explicit point of that is to signal to everybody that they are, in fact, now a Muslim -- hence the name. Muhammad Ali. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. They are signaling to the world that they have converted to Islam and they are a Muslim.

So Barry goes happy-go-lucky through his teenage years as Barry Obama, and then he changes his name as an adult back to Barack Hussein Obama. Raises the question: What is he signaling with that name? What does he want you to know? I think this is a completely legitimate question, which, of course, everybody is afraid to ask because everybody is petrified of offending Barack Hussein Obama. 800-876-4123.

—A.J.W.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200806200006

Wild Cobra
06-23-2008, 06:52 PM
And your point?

ChumpDumper
06-23-2008, 07:00 PM
They're stupid.

Wild Cobra
06-23-2008, 08:33 PM
Monica did what any other reported does. Report what someone else said.

Again, your point?

ChumpDumper
06-23-2008, 10:46 PM
She's stupid.

Wild Cobra
06-23-2008, 11:59 PM
She's stupid.
I guess the entire main stream media is stupid too for reporting what others say as fact. Right? The left does it all the time, and you must be salivating at one of the rare times a conservative makes the mistake of quoting a source that slightly changed the truth.

This gets me a little. Monica Crowley is filling in for Ingram. You want to complain about conservatives lying, and you have to pick someone lesser known... Must be hard not having ammunition all the time like this against conservative hosts. Did you know Hume reported the same thing? Did you know the transcript does not rule out this being said? The audio tape available (http://a.media.abcnews.com/podcasts/080618_israelie_army_audio.mp3) only has Obama's responses, and does sound like he's referring to a question asked about Obama being Muslim.

I wonder what her brother-in-law Alan Colmes would think of you, for the way you attack her, by being an Olbermann lemming?

Here is part of another article (http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12918.htm):


Malik says, in response to the interviewer's question: "I don't think that's in any way going to be something to worry about. I myself am not speaking for him. But we are here, we love people in general. People love us. I myself love people who love me. You know, so, everything's mutual. I can't go [sic] in terms of Israel and Kenya and America, and so forth, you know, but based on what else I've heard him say and what I know of him as an individual, I don't think Israel should worry too much, you know, about the connection. Because, I am a Muslim myself, and I don't think that my being a Muslim has got anything to do with my brother being the President of the United States."

The context clearly indicates that "the connection" being asked about had something to do with Barack Obama's relationship to things Muslim -- although without hearing the question, it is uncertain what exactly is the connect. Malik answering "because I am a Muslim myself" might imply that Barack, in his mind, is a Muslim too, but on the other hand Malik asserts that "my being a Muslim" did not have "anything to do" with his half-brother being President [sic]." (Presumably Malik meant that their shared heritage would not impact Barack's actions should he be elected.) The rambling and genial answers do not prove, nor disprove, the depth of the Obamas' connections, past or present, with Islam -- except of course the undenied fact that their common father was a Muslim convert. (By the laws of Islam that makes Barack Obama a Muslim.)

ChumpDumper
06-24-2008, 12:18 AM
You're stupid too.

Ignignokt
06-24-2008, 01:37 AM
You're stupid too.

but you're a moose.

Nbadan
06-28-2008, 01:20 PM
Ode to FAUX News...


L158phvMgUQ

Oh, Gee!!
06-28-2008, 09:41 PM
Laura used to be pretty decent till she started hosting for Bill O'Reilly

Budkin
06-28-2008, 11:29 PM
Who the fuck listens to right wing hate radio anymore?

jochhejaam
06-29-2008, 08:48 AM
Who the fuck listens to conservative radio anymore?

Uhm...everyone?


Talk Radio Audience
Weekly Cume (in millions)

2007
13.5 - Rush Limbaugh Conservative
12.5 - Sean Hannity Conservative
8.0 - Michael Savage Conservative
8.0 - Dr. Laura Schlessinger General Advice
5.0 - Laura Ingraham Conservative
5.3 - Glenn Beck Conservative
4.0 - Neal Boortz Conservative
4.0 - Mark Levin Conservative
4.0 - Dave Ramsey Financial Advice
3.7 - Mike Gallagher Conservative
3.7 - Michael Medved Conservative
3.2 - Jim Bohannon Ind. / Moderate
3.2 - Clark Howard Consumer Advocacy
3.2 - Bill O'Reilly Conservative
3.2 - Doug Stephen Ind. / Moderate
3.2 - Ed Schultz Liberal :lmao/ Progressive

63.9 - Conservative Radio
3.2 - Liberal Radio

xrayzebra
06-29-2008, 09:49 AM
Uhm...everyone?


Talk Radio Audience
Weekly Cume (in millions)

2007
13.5 - Rush Limbaugh Conservative
12.5 - Sean Hannity Conservative
8.0 - Michael Savage Conservative
8.0 - Dr. Laura Schlessinger General Advice
5.0 - Laura Ingraham Conservative
5.3 - Glenn Beck Conservative
4.0 - Neal Boortz Conservative
4.0 - Mark Levin Conservative
4.0 - Dave Ramsey Financial Advice
3.7 - Mike Gallagher Conservative
3.7 - Michael Medved Conservative
3.2 - Jim Bohannon Ind. / Moderate
3.2 - Clark Howard Consumer Advocacy
3.2 - Bill O'Reilly Conservative
3.2 - Doug Stephen Ind. / Moderate
3.2 - Ed Schultz Liberal :lmao/ Progressive

63.9 - Conservative Radio
3.2 - Liberal Radio

No problem, Nancy Pelosi is going to solve that problem 63.9 vs 3.2. She wants the "fairness" doctrine brought back. It is just not fair people like conservative radio better than the "progressive" or should we say "regressive" radio.:downspin:

Wild Cobra
06-29-2008, 12:26 PM
Who the fuck listens to right wing hate radio anymore?
LOL...

Most the "right wing radio" is not "hate radio". Now I will say the likes of Michael Savage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Savage) and Tom Lickis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Leykis) are.

Pssst.... Your ignorance is showing....

Most right wing radio is rather nice to listen to. Most the other hosts do get furious at times, but it is well deserved and understandable when the truth is known.

Want to hear real hate radio? Just listen to Air America (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_America_Radio), or Randi Rhodes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randi_Rhodes) some time.

Now if you really listen to many formats of radio, I think you'll find more liberal Shock Jocks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_jock) than conservbative.

JoeChalupa
06-29-2008, 05:30 PM
Does anyone think Laura is hot? I bet she shags like there is no tomorrow.

spurscenter
07-01-2008, 05:47 AM
Fuck Obama

JoeChalupa
07-01-2008, 09:17 AM
Fuck Obama

Go for it.

Nbadan
07-01-2008, 02:46 PM
Uhm...everyone?


Talk Radio Audience
Weekly Cume (in millions)

2007
13.5 - Rush Limbaugh Conservative
12.5 - Sean Hannity Conservative
8.0 - Michael Savage Conservative
8.0 - Dr. Laura Schlessinger General Advice
5.0 - Laura Ingraham Conservative
5.3 - Glenn Beck Conservative
4.0 - Neal Boortz Conservative
4.0 - Mark Levin Conservative
4.0 - Dave Ramsey Financial Advice
3.7 - Mike Gallagher Conservative
3.7 - Michael Medved Conservative
3.2 - Jim Bohannon Ind. / Moderate
3.2 - Clark Howard Consumer Advocacy
3.2 - Bill O'Reilly Conservative
3.2 - Doug Stephen Ind. / Moderate
3.2 - Ed Schultz Liberal :lmao/ Progressive

63.9 - Conservative Radio
3.2 - Liberal Radio

Jochhejam confuses the corporate M$M's willingness to risk lower ratings over putting out a product that most people really want to listen too...dare I say that if there was a radio show that pitted a real conservative against a true liberal, and it was entertaining...say, like Stephanie Miller versus Glen Beck, it would put all other radio shows to shame.....and don't give me this shit that liberal radio can't be successful in San Antonio, Chris Duel was very successful at KTSA before they shit-canned him because of his pro-liberal views.....

FromWayDowntown
07-01-2008, 07:01 PM
I honestly believe that right wing radio is a major factor in the political divisiveness of the country -- perhaps the single biggest factor. The notion that one must be either liberal or conseravative, but nothing in between, strikes me as both absurd. But I hear more and more people espousing the notion that if you aren't conservative you must be liberal. As someone who regularly listened to Rush Limbaugh for years in the early 90's, I know my first exposure to that notion came through my encounters with Limbaugh-ism. I hear the same thing when I listen to those like Hannity and Beck and I see a more and more pervasive view that commitment to an ideology means, in a very basic sense, opposing things that those who self-identify with the other party will support. That's certainly an oversimplification, but the notion of Two Americas strikes me as a very real socio-political development and the idea that Two Americas is a divisive construct is basically self-evident.

2centsworth
07-01-2008, 09:13 PM
Who the fuck listens to right wing hate radio anymore?

liberals will try to make that case and eventually censor the airwaves. then they will label the bible as hateful and then eventually try to outlaw all literature that is offensive.

liberals will be the founders of the fascist state.

Oh, Gee!!
07-02-2008, 08:24 AM
liberals will try to make that case and eventually censor the airwaves. then they will label the bible as hateful and then eventually try to outlaw all literature that is offensive.

liberals will be the founders of the fascist state.

I think we've found talk radio's target audience

2centsworth
07-03-2008, 02:41 PM
I think we've found talk radio's target audience

I hope I'm wrong, but bills like the fairness doctrine tell me I'm not.

Nbadan
07-04-2008, 01:53 AM
I think we've found talk radio's target audience

:lol


WASHINGTON - The White House said Thursday that dangerous detainees at Guantanamo Bay could end up walking Main Street U.S.A. as a result of last month's Supreme Court ruling about detainees' legal rights. Federal appeals courts, however, have indicated they have no intention of letting that happen.

... "I'm sure that none of us want Khalid Sheikh Mohammed walking around our neighborhoods," White House press secretary Dana Perino said about al-Qaida's former third in command"

The evil AP via Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080704/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_guantanamo_bay)

BOO!

:lmao

ElNono
07-04-2008, 10:22 AM
The evil AP via Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080704/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_guantanamo_bay)

BOO!

:lmao

From that article:
"The judge might say to the United States, 'You don't have enough evidence to hold this person,'" Perino said. "And then what do we do? ... Is he allowed to leave? And if so, is he picked up by immigration? Even if that's the case, they're only allowed to be held for six months."

Wow. Just wow.

ChumpDumper
07-04-2008, 11:40 AM
We have already released prisoners from Gitmo.

Wild Cobra
07-04-2008, 11:45 PM
liberals will try to make that case and eventually censor the airwaves. then they will label the bible as hateful and then eventually try to outlaw all literature that is offensive.

liberals will be the founders of the fascist state.
If they were in complete power without our constitution, that's exactly what we would have. They are facsists at heart.

jochhejaam
07-05-2008, 06:54 AM
I honestly believe that right wing radio is a major factor in the political divisiveness of the country -- perhaps the single biggest factor.
"Divide" implies that there is more than one faction and if the divide is deep then those with opposing views have to be at least equally responsible for the divide. Therefore, I believe that the far "left wing" liberal talking heads are the single biggest reason for the political rancor that is so pervasive in our Country.






The notion that one must be either liberal or conseravative, but nothing in between, strikes me as both absurd. But I hear more and more people espousing the notion that if you aren't conservative you must be liberal.
You are spreading this "either liberal or conservative" labeling across the board, right? Giving equal blame to "both" sides? I certainly hope so, because there are just as many people out there saying that "if you aren't liberal, you're conservative", "if you're conservative, you're racist", "if you don't support affirmative action, you're racist", "if you aren't for excessive taxes on the rich, you hate those in poverty", etc.
<I won't take it any further for now, lest I end up arguing a position you don't hold. I'll wait for clarification>

FromWayDowntown
07-05-2008, 09:52 AM
"Divide" implies that there is more than one faction and if the divide is deep then those with opposing views have to be at least equally responsible for the divide. Therefore, I believe that the far "left wing" liberal talking heads are the single biggest reason for the political rancor that is so pervasive in our Country.

A divide could exist with one side choosing to separate itself from another -- to wit, Confederate States seceding from the Union in the run-up to the Civil War created a divide without the remaining American States having specifically done anything. I'll grant you that the better word for me to use might have been something like exacerbated or amplified -- but you'll not convince me that the divide hasn't been greatly deepened (and, perhaps, become intractable) because guys like Limbaugh and Hannity routinely insist that you're either conservative or liberal, but nothing in between.


You are spreading this "either liberal or conservative" labeling across the board, right? Giving equal blame to "both" sides? I certainly hope so, because there are just as many people out there saying that "if you aren't liberal, you're conservative", "if you're conservative, you're racist", "if you don't support affirmative action, you're racist", "if you aren't for excessive taxes on the rich, you hate those in poverty", etc.
<I won't take it any further for now, lest I end up arguing a position you don't hold. I'll wait for clarification>

I will say that in my experience, I don't hear "liberals" insisting that one is either liberal or conservative. Perhaps I'm living in an entirely different sphere, but I simply don't hear that rhetoric -- at least with the specific labels of liberal and conservative. I'll grant you that I've heard things like "if you don't support affirmative action, you're racist," but I suppose that doesn't strike me as much of a culprit in the Blue State/Red State divide, if only because it's a singular issue and not a pervasive ideological separation. I do see your point on that issue, though.

And, as someone who is neither liberal nor conservative, I certianly wouldn't support that notion that those who aren't one are the other.

xrayzebra
07-05-2008, 09:57 AM
I honestly believe that right wing radio is a major factor in the political divisiveness of the country -- perhaps the single biggest factor. The notion that one must be either liberal or conseravative, but nothing in between, strikes me as both absurd. But I hear more and more people espousing the notion that if you aren't conservative you must be liberal. As someone who regularly listened to Rush Limbaugh for years in the early 90's, I know my first exposure to that notion came through my encounters with Limbaugh-ism. I hear the same thing when I listen to those like Hannity and Beck and I see a more and more pervasive view that commitment to an ideology means, in a very basic sense, opposing things that those who self-identify with the other party will support. That's certainly an oversimplification, but the notion of Two Americas strikes me as a very real socio-political development and the idea that Two Americas is a divisive construct is basically self-evident.

Why because they expose the falsehoods that the dimms and MSM put out.

Rush does nothing to put a message that you can succeed in this country. He explains it is not gloom and doom if you fail, just pick yourself up and carry on and learn from your experience.

The deciveness of which you speak has been going on since time began. It is only now that the some want you to think it was always this way. Horse hockey. Political parties are political parties because of deciveness. They aren't love In's. It is a power game all the way, everyday, anyway it can be achieved. Like it or not! It is no different now than back in the first days of this nation.

ChumpDumper
07-05-2008, 02:33 PM
:lol

Why don't you just link Rush's radio spot that says exactly the same thing?

Dittohead, indeed.

Right wing radio just promotes a different kind of victimhood.

jochhejaam
07-05-2008, 03:04 PM
A divide could exist with one side choosing to separate itself from another -- to wit, Confederate States seceding from the Union in the run-up to the Civil War created a divide without the remaining American States having specifically done anything.
An act of divisiveness, met with ambivalence rather than resistance, isn't very devisive at all. The remaining States had the option of remaining ambivalent, or agreeing to the separation; they chose not to and rose to the occasion. What we end up with, because of their opposition <aka "specifically doing something">, is an impassable divide created by equally impassioned views






I'll grant you that the better word for me to use might have been something like exacerbated or amplified -- but you'll not convince me that the divide hasn't been greatly deepened (and, perhaps, become intractable) because guys like Limbaugh and Hannity routinely insist that you're either conservative or liberal, but nothing in between.
I mentioned recently that I'm not trying to convince you of anything other than that your view isn't one that I share. Although since you went on the offensive regarding the divisiveness of talk radio, without provocation from me, I'll assume it's okay with you that I blame you for the division that exists between us on the matter...?

(After thought) - It's humorous that you put an emphasis on the divisive powers of Shush and Hannity, while another poster (budkin) recently tossed out a thought about how no one even bothers to listen to "conservative" radio.








I will say that in my experience, I don't hear "liberals" insisting that one is either liberal or conservative. Perhaps I'm living in an entirely different sphere, but I simply don't hear that rhetoric -- at least with the specific labels of liberal and conservative.
I regularly hear it at work, and on this very board in the form of posters throwing out the label "neocon", "neoconservative", etc., based on another poster's viewpoint on a single issue. Additionally, liberal radio talk show hosts are presently outnumbered in listeners by a ratio of about 20-1. I believe that it may be reasonable to suggest that the terminology of left-wing liberals, derogatorily labeling dissenters as conservatives would be even more pervasive if they were able to establish an audience for their strain of philosophical rhetoric.







And, as someone who is neither liberal nor conservative, I certianly wouldn't support that notion that those who aren't one are the other.
That's the sensible open-minded view, and I share it.