A reminder of the facts: Not all Muslims are terrorists, not even close, but 99% of all terrorists are Muslims and that’s what is important. Nuff said.
Want a detailed list of the constributions radicalized Muslims have made in the USA? Click here. And when you’re done over there try this link. How about a real current list just for grins? Click here.
You’ve been punked.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/muslimmonth.asp
I think you should now name the person who gave you this false information so that you won’t be alone in your public shame.
You need a better bullshit detector. As soon as I read the title I knew it was a lie or a hoax. Any non-gullible person would know that. I then Googled the term “Muslim Appreciation Month” to make sure, and the very first result was snopes.com. The story originated on a satirical news site.
Why didn’t you do this before posting the story, Jack? Why do you CONSTANTLY post absurd claims without verifying their accuracy? There is no excuse for that kind of sloppiness in the Information Age. It took me five seconds to determine this story wasn’t true. Ignorance is a choice.
Oh wow Jack, I knew it was bad, but had no idea it was this bad. The lists on the links goes on and on forever. The one for just this year alone is shocking.
Out of curiosity, do you know if there is a Christian Appreciation Month? Or how about even a Jewish Appreciation Month? If there is I sure haven’t heard of them. I was just thinking of the great inventions and scientific/medical improvements that have been created by members of these two groups that have benefit mankind. Wonder if members of the Muslim faith have made an equal contribution or if their primary focus is to force everyone to convert to their faith or suffer the consequences.
Since apparently you guys don’t know how to do this:
Let Me Google That for You!
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=muslim+appreciation+month
The origin of the story, as Chris noted, appears to be National Report, a satirical news site.
After joining in the obligatory insults one blogger points out that conservatives who post this as a news story should not spend much time or energy worrying about the error:
And let’s face it, it’s not as if journalists, politicians and glo-warm alarmists bloggers have not been caught fabricating (some profiting handsomely) while duping vast swaths of the population through acts of so-called legitimate journalism!
Chris, for his part, is caught in a predictable adolescent, PC, harrumph that includes his signature authoritarianism:
And let us not leave out expressions of self-congratulatory superiority:
Are we not all just as impressed as he**?
Googling for a fight, eh Chris?
Tina, you keep using that word “authoritarian.” I do not think that word means what you think that word means.
This is at least the third time in the last two weeks you have posted or cited an article that was a complete fabrication. Last week it was the Weekly Standard misquoting Warren Buffet, pretending that a pro-Obamacare statement he made three years ago was an anti-Obamacare statement he made that week. You at least corrected that one, but not the article you cited in the comments that falsely stated that the ACA mandated doctors to ask patients about their sex lives.
Then a few days ago you cited an article which misrepresented a survey, falsely claiming that it proved a “majority of scientists” disputed global warming, even though it only polled a small group of industry scientists in Alberta, Canada, and the majority of that group did agree that at least some global warming was occurring. You did this even though we had previously discussed another erroneous report of the same survey that made the same misrepresentation, and I showed you then exactly how it was wrong. I’ve asked you to acknowledge that error repeatedly, and you’ve repeatedly refused. That was not “authoritarian of me;” I even said please.
If I’m acting “superior” to you, it’s because, quite frankly, that’s the response you deserve. You are operating so far below basic standards of common sense and decency, why should anyone give you the benefit of the doubt at this point?
You are choosing to conform to every negative stereotype of conservatives there is. How many times have I said that you guys will believe anything you’re told, as long as it’s anti-Obama, without bothering to do any research? How many times have I encouraged you to take a few seconds and verify your facts before you post ignorant nonsense that is only going to embarrass you?
You want to be treated with more respect? Earn it. Stop proving me right.
Tina: “Googling for a fight, eh Chris?”
What “fight?” You guys were fooled, once again, because of your own laziness, prejudice and ignorance. There’s nothing to fight here, nothing to debate. You could take this as a teachable moment, a reason to do some self-reflection: “What does it say about me that I was so willing to believe this, without any evidence whatsoever at all?” But that would require a degree of humility you have never shown.
Chris will you quite picking on Tina PLEASE? I posted the article based on a false news report. If there is any blame it is me. I operate on the trust but verify principle and this so-called news story seemed legit, but I did NOT read every word and fact check every claim because I have a life outside Post Scripts. I did a cursory check, found it covered on several sites and I called it at that point as something of interest and worthy of printing. My call-nobody else. My responsibility nobody else! The story was a setup, a fraud, a spoof, by sicko degenerate who lacks ethics and abuses the internet. I would punch him in the face if I found him, but short of that I’m moving past it to better things.
In short: Nothing to see here, just a minor mishap…no need for gawking, move along.
PS It’s nice that you found the story in error and brought it to our attention, it’s not nice that you continue to harass and harangue everybody here over it. That part does not serve you well. -Jack
Tina: “After joining in the obligatory insults one blogger points out that conservatives who post this as a news story should not spend much time or energy worrying about the error:
… PressTV picks up stories from “the Onion” and then promptly runs them as real news all the time.”
Wait. So the argument of that blogger is that conservatives should not be embarrassed by this error because…the *state-run propaganda network of Iran* makes the same mistake all the time?
Please, keep digging. This is getting funny!
Your reaction is a scream!
Chris: “You at least corrected that one, but not the article you cited in the comments that falsely stated that the ACA mandated doctors to ask patients about their sex lives.”
How do you explain the fact that doctors and clinics believe they have been mandated (regulated) to ask these questions?
I know this is true because I have been asked…and I have to say by embarrassed nurses that were obviously schooled to do so and who obviously feel stupid and uncomfortable doing this extra intrusive paperwork that has nothing to do with the procedures they administer.
I have also posted that in addition to the original Obamacare legislation which is, I believe, over 2 thousand pages long, there are thousands of pages of added regulations…with an open ended ability to add even more.
(scroll down at the link to see the photo)
According to Sen. McConnell’s office the pictured stack of regulations is 7’3″ tall, “nine inches taller” than Kobe Bryant.
Have you read these regulations?
Comments on this story and the hoax story have been comingled; the following is about the hoax story.
The Examiner weighs-in on the “hoax” with the following observations regarding the quotes attributed to Obama and Khaled Matei in the “pseudo” declaration:
Tina: “How do you explain the fact that doctors and clinics believe they have been mandated (regulated) to ask these questions?”
The article in question quoted ONE doctor, a cardiologist, who said he couldn’t think of a single time he would have to ask such questions. Because as we all know, one’s sex life has absolutely nothing to do with heart health.
Either the doctor cited by Betsy McCaughey is terrible at his job, or one of them is lying.
“I know this is true because I have been asked…”
So have I, five years ago, before Obamacare was even a thing. Again, such questions are standard practice for physicals and other routine vists, are recommended by the CDC, and have been for years. I simply can’t believe you’ve never, in all your time on earth, been asked these questions by a doctor before.
“The liberal goofballs who perpetrated the fraud for the purpose of representing Christians and conservatives as “gullible” are the only fools in this situation.”
Tina, it’s a *satire site.* And not even a very funny one. I don’t even see any indication of whether the writers are conservative or liberal; their stories mock both Democrats and Republicans, and because of the poor quality of the attempts at satire it’s hard to tell who their real targets are. So your assertion that this was a “fraud” perpetrated by “liberal goofballs” is literally something you’re just making up to make yourself feel better.
The Examiner:
“Meanwhile the president has notoriously run roughshod over the Christian Bible presenting it as an ancient collection of dark and self-contradictory platitudes, as seen in this video clip.”
In that clip Obama is making an argument against using scripture to “guide our public policy.” It’s nearly identical to a speech made by President Bartlett on “The West Wing,” so Obama may be guilty of plagiarism here, but he is not “denigrating Christianity.” Nor is he elevating Islam above Christianity; Obama has praised Christianity and cited scripture positively on numerous occasions, such as this one:
Often questioned about his faith, President Barack Obama Tuesday spoke at length during a Easter week White House prayer breakfast about Jesus Christ and the calming role faith and the Bible play in life.
“I wanted to host this breakfast for a simple reason -– because as busy as we are, as many tasks as pile up, during this season, we are reminded that there’s something about the resurrection — something about the resurrection of our savior, Jesus Christ, that puts everything else in perspective,” he said.
“We all live in the hustle and bustle of our work. …
“But then comes Holy Week. The triumph of Palm Sunday. The humility of Jesus washing the disciples’ feet. His slow march up that hill, and the pain and the scorn and the shame of the cross.
“And we’re reminded that in that moment, he took on the sins of the world — past, present and future — and he extended to us that unfathomable gift of grace and salvation through his death and resurrection.
“In the words of the book Isaiah: “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.”
“This magnificent grace, this expansive grace, this “Amazing Grace” calls me to reflect. And it calls me to pray. It calls me to ask God for forgiveness for the times that I’ve not shown grace to others, those times that I’ve fallen short. It calls me to praise God for the gift of our son — his Son and our Savior.”
http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washington/2011/04/obama-praises-our-savior-jesus-talks-of-resurrection.html#storylink=cpy
The birther wing of the party likes to ignore speeches like this in order to paint Obama as some kind of foreign, scary “Other,” and it’s ridiculous. The man has been exposed to many religions throughout his life. He sees beauty in and has taken lessons from each them. He identifies as a Christian now but that’s not good enough for closed-minded fundamentalists. He’s not the “right” type of Christian for them. The fact that he has been exposed to other religions and philosophies is a reason to view him with fear and suspicion rather than admiration.
The fact is that this story did NOT sound at all realistic to many people, who did their due diligence and discovered it wasn’t true. It’s pretty weasly to say “well, it COULD have been true!” at this point, when so many immediately knew it had to be a hoax. Those people were behaving rationally upon hearing an irrational story; you, and everyone else who fell for this, were not. It would be ridiculous for Obama to proclaim a month of national recognition for any religious group. I knew that, many other rational people knew that, and you didn’t. If you want to choose not to learn anything from the experience, be my guest.
Chris you have a valid point about the Presidents statements that include passages from the Bible, I have heard/read them myself.
You assume that the people who have objected are Christian, “closed-minded fundamentalist Christian, or (crazy) birthers and you have no reason to have drawn this assumption. Those that were fooled have been described mostly as conservative or right wing. Could be your own mean-spirited prejudice, judgementalism, and crap attitude are driving much of your criticism…you of the self-proclaimed party of tolerance.
Chris you are another phony lefty who likes to pretend he’s more kindhearted than others. You’re not. You are just as capable of the things you accuse others of on a regular basis. We all see it. Give it up; you fool absolutely no one.
Had it been a faux story about Ted Cruz, leftist blogs would have done the same thing. We’re all human, or had you forgotten having taken up residence on that lofty, high, look-down-your-nose perch?
Barack Obama has earned much of the criticism he receives and as a public figure and participating criticizer, he should expect it, as should you.
The criticism is not any different or more outrageous and nutty than anything you and your leftist pals have/had to say during the eight years of the GWB presidency. Obama continues to criticize Bush covertly if not overtly and blame him for anything bad in the terror war and the economy After five years that’s pathetic in a man that holds such power.
Get over yourself, cookie…you ain’t all that.
Tina: “Had it been a faux story about Ted Cruz, leftist blogs would have done the same thing”
Don’t know about Ted Cruz, but that site has posted similar fake stories about right-wing politicians, including one that said Jan Brewer wanted to pass a law putting gays to death.* I don’t know if any liberal blogs fell for it; if they did, I would think they should be just as embarrassed! I will admit that the tendency to believe the absolute worst about our opponents is not unique to conservatives, but I do think the nature of the right-wing blogosphere, which relies a lot on chain e-mails and copy-pasted info, encourages it a bit more. Still, anyone who falls for stories like this, no matter what political persuasion, should be ashamed and should take a hard look at themselves. This kind of gullibility and personal hatred, whether it’s for Obama or Ted Cruz, is doing serious damage to our national discourse.
Thanks for acknowledging my point about Obama quoting the Bible. I can see why you think my description of those who believe Obama is promoting Islam over Christianity is perhaps prejudiced, but I think it is based on a pattern I have observed.
*Again, that site really sucks at satire, because it’s totally unclear who the target is supposed to be. Is it Jan Brewer? Is it liberals who oppose Jan Brewer? Same for the Obama story; is he the target or are conservatives the target? I have no idea, so the joke isn’t funny. With sites like the Onion, you always know who the joke is being played on, and the stories are funny because they have a grain of truth. This is just “Let’s say something ridiculous about a politician,” which is not inherently funny.
About the “Obamacare will ask you about your sex life” thing:
“”Arrgghhh — now I have heard it all!” said Molly Cooke, president of the American College of Physicians.
Cooke, an internist, told PolitiFact that when she was in medical school in the 1970s, she was taught to ask:
• Are you sexually active (with other people)?
• If yes, are your partners men, women or both?
• If no, is that out of choice, because you don’t currently have an appealing partner, because you have no privacy, or some other reason?
• Are you happy with your sex life, however it is?
“My classmates and I were taught to ask all patients all four questions,” she said. “I am not saying that we always did it, but these questions are as old as the hills.”
The rationale is that patients’ answers may reveal important information about their health, safety and well-being, she said.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/sep/19/betsy-mccaughey/betsy-mccaughey-says-obamacare-will-question-your-/
Chris: “Arrgghhh…etc.”
Argrghhhh right back atcha!
Being instructed in college to ask these questions of patients and then left to decide for oneself when it is relevant to a patients care is not the same thing as being regulated to ask and place the information in a national database.
I have never been asked these questions, even by gynecologists prior to the passage of Obamacare. It may be that at places like college clinics and Planned Parenthood the experience has been quite different, as well it might, but even then it has not been collected for entry into a database as ORDERED by the U.S. government.
The difference is huge for the fully awake.
“Not all Muslims are terrorists, not even close, but 99% of all terrorists are Muslims and that’s what is important.”
What horsepucky. Easily 1 percent of Christians are also terrorists. And we can pat ourselves on the back for the reduction. In times gone by, fully 30 percent of Christians were terrorists.
Progress!
Tina: “Being instructed in college to ask these questions of patients and then left to decide for oneself when it is relevant to a patients care is not the same thing as being regulated to ask”
Again: There is nothing in Obamacare regulating that doctors ask such questions. Betsy McCaughey made it up, because she likes to make things up about healthcare. She provided no evidence for the existence of such a regulation, because such a regulation does not exist.
If you believe otherwise, please show me where in the law or any subsequent modifications this regulation can be found.
“I have never been asked these questions, even by gynecologists prior to the passage of Obamacare.”
That is still bizarre to me, and makes me wonder how responsible your doctors have been, but I will have to take your word for it.
“but even then it has not been collected for entry into a database as ORDERED by the U.S. government.”
As Politifact also points out, this just isn’t accurate, for a bunch of reasons:
1) The government has not “ordered” doctors to do this. They do get incentives for entering information into an electronic database. This database is protected by the same federal privacy laws as paper records, and has been recommended by medical experts as being more efficient.
2) There are required questions for entry into the database in order to get incentives, but questions about sexual history are not among them.
3) This has nothing to do with Obamacare, as the incentives program was created by the stimulus program.
4) The database itself started under George W. Bush.
Progress? By what measure?
Thanks for sharing Chris.
Re Chris: “This database is protected by the same federal privacy laws as paper records, and has been recommended by medical experts as being more efficient.”
I am so relieved. Yet another protected government database.
Thoughtful operators be advised, most of the time we catch those…we’re human but we do our best…as do you 🙂 Thanks for the heads up.
If the government writes an “incentive” into a bill is it a bribe or an order? Does it matter?
Our government treats schools in this country with the same kind of carrot and stick rules. Butts in the seats is the “incentive” held out to get the cash to cover that seat on any given day. The school, however has to pay teachers, energy and phone bills, and the administrators every day. What a stupid approach to funding our schools.
It’s equally stupid to bribe medical people as a means of controlling costs.
Tina: “If the government writes an “incentive” into a bill is it a bribe or an order?”
Neither, it’s an incentive.
“Does it matter?”
It matters to me. Why do some people feel the need to show the least amount of charity possible to anything done or said by a political opponent? Characterizing this as a “bribe” or “order” is inaccurate, and is done for the sole purpose of making someone look worse than they really are. Why should that be necessary, if Obama and his healthcare law are so bad? You shouldn’t have to resort to inaccuracies and exaggerations if the merits are on your side.
There might be some valid security concerns about the database, but this isn’t a partisan issue. Medical records will all be digitized eventually; you’d have to be a complete Luddite to think otherwise. This was a goal of Bush and would be happening now even if Romney had won the presidency. If you’re concerned about security or privacy, advocate better privacy protections. But you really don’t need another area that liberals can point to and say conservatives are trying to stand in the way of inevitable progress.
Jack, I’m not “picking on” anybody. This is not an isolated incident, this is a trend that has become common on conservative blogs. And it frustrates me that you refuse to learn anything from this.
You say:
“My responsibility nobody else!”
But then you say:
“The story was a setup, a fraud, a spoof, by sicko degenerate who lacks ethics and abuses the internet. I would punch him in the face if I found him, but short of that I’m moving past it to better things.”
You’re not really taking full responsibility here, you’re still blaming the satirical site the story originated from. You baselessly call the writer a “sicko degenerate” and you are mad enough to punch him, but satirists have no ethical duty to the gullible. And yes, if you had scanned the site, you could have been able to tell it was satire. The story was a spoof, but it was not a setup. The only crime of the site runners is that they aren’t very funny.
Again, the story was NOT realistic, and it shouldn’t have sounded legit to you. The only reason it did is because you are immersed in a media environment which tells you that Obama shows preferential treatment to Islam and denigrates Christians. That is simply not true. Obama frequently quotes the Bible favorably, your preferred sites just never mention those times.
You fell for this because it fit your inaccurate preconceived biases. There is a clear right thing to do here: examine those biases and realize they are steering you in the wrong direction. That doesn’t mean becoming a Democrat or liking Obama. It means that you need to consider that maybe, just maybe, your opposition to this president is getting a little extreme, to the point where it’s making you believe irrational things.
Chris: “It means that you need to consider that maybe, just maybe, your opposition to this president is getting a little extreme, to the point where it’s making you believe irrational things.”
And the psychic energy they waste! I mean, it’s not like he’s up for a third term.
On the other hand, this Congressional fight over the ACA in the House is bigger than they know, probably. If, for the next three years, Obama can keep the ACA on track, and if, at the end of those three years tangible improvement in the economy is noted, the Repugs may not see the White House again for quite some time.
So, natually, Boehner & Co. are ready to sink the country to prevent that. Classy.