The following seems to be typical for what I call the mainstream conservative view of Obama and Islam - this is blog post from NC Media Watch and responses by the blog's readers - Amazing...

June 02, 2009

Holy Crap Bat Man, US one of the largest Muslim nations?

Russ Steele

Powerline has an interesting post: ROBERT GIBBS, CALL YOUR OFFICE

June 2, 2009 Posted by Paul at 10:14 PM
In an interview on the French television station Canal Plus, President Obama apparently observed that the United States could be considered as "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." In what possible sense can any rational person consider the United States to be a Muslim country?

My questions is what was the time frame he was talking about? When are we to become one of the largest Muslim nations in the world?  Tomorrow? Next month? Next year? Four years from now? Eight years from now?  Is this Obama's mission, to turn the US into one of the largest Muslim nations in the world?

I wonder who will open the first burka shop in Nevada City? Or, will it be Grass Valley?

Original story in New York Times which adds:

The president said the United States and other parts of the Western world "have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam."

"And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world," Mr. Obama said. "And so there's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples."

What part of beheading infidels is it we do not understand? Really?

The following are the only two comments so far:

In the interview Obama is reported to say that "... the United States and other parts of the Western world have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam." I am astounded. The Islamists have educated us very effectively on their religion and strategic aims, and they aim to continue this curriculum. And now our President wants us to increase the intensity of our Islamic studies. Is anyone asking that Muslims educate themselves on what America has and continues to deliver to the people of this planet? And all this after genuflecting to the Saudi king!

Posted by: George Rebane | June 02, 2009 at 10:16 PM

So have I got this right, during the election he distanced himself from the Muslim faith, and now he IS a Muslim?
Doesn't anybody notice these things?
I think we are getting further and further into "say what you need to say when you need to say it", then do what you want. Honesty just isn't important anymore it seems.

Posted by: JeffinGV | June 03, 2009 at 06:50 AM

http://multimedia.wbz.com/m/audio/21392350/democratic-radio-adddress-11-08-08.htm

Obama quickly and rightly corrected his indelicate seance reference to the elderly and ailing Nancy Reagan - See the following as reported in the Washington Post. I think it is important that he immediately recognized his mistake and moved quickly to correct it - humor at the expense of a former First Lady wasn't very presidential. 

Obama Calls Nancy Reagan

By Shailagh Murray
CHICAGO -- President-elect Barack Obama made one notable slip during his first post-election news conference: his crack about the ailing Nancy Reagan's reported consultations with an astrologer. He quickly sought to remedy it.

"In terms of speaking to former presidents, I've spoken to all of them that are living," Obama had said in answer to a question. "Obviously, President Clinton -- I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any seances."

"President-elect Barack Obama called Nancy Reagan today to apologize for the careless and off-handed remark he made during today's press conference," transition spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter announced. "The President-elect expressed his admiration and affection for Mrs. Reagan that so many Americans share and they had a warm conversation."

Not sure if others have already posted this but in an interview (shown here at Liberal Values: http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=5748) with Fox's  Shepard Smith, Nadar defends his earlier in the day reference to Obama as an Uncle Tom for corporate America. In this amazing - essentially audio exchange, Shepard to his credit (with an on camera stare that bespeaks incredulity) allows Nadar the opportunity to retract his racist remark - but Nadar refuses and charges ahead in his anti-Corporate America stump speech.  There are a host of outrage comments collected at Liberal Values - most feel that this is the death knell of Nadar's long - but essentially ever waning persona.   

Bush may well be the lamest of all ducks ever - his approval rating does not really exist - there is almost no one who approves of him now - the McCain campaign fled from him and actually campaigned against him.  We face an unprecedented array of domestic and international issues that demand prompt and competent attention - other than letting Obama get up to speed on security issues, I see no down side to Bush resigning now and letting Barack assume the presidential mantle - why not?

Cue Bobby and Pam Ewing - time for the shower scene from Dallas and to wake up from the "bad dream" of the last 8 years - just pretend like the last two terms never happened!

For what its worth, I saw the following at various sites - including:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7692725

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/10/31/simulation_shows_obama_will_win.html

Simulation Shows Obama Will Win

Brian Adams, a mathematics and computer science professor at Franklin & Marshall College, reports that there's a 99.98% chance that Sen. Barack Obama will win the presidential election on Tuesday.

Adams has developed a simulation model that involves running 50 million simulated state-by-state races, using the late-October poll results for each state. He ran his simulation 50 million times to allow him to calculate all the different combinations of electoral votes that might result, even long shots. While the number of possible outcomes is very large, the result is always the same. Obama receives 270 or more electoral votes 99.98% of the time. Using intervals of electoral vote results, there is a 95 percent chance that the outcome will have Obama winning between 303 and 381 electoral votes.

Wouldn't it be nice!

My original post was as follows:

"Politico is reporting that a Quebec comedy duo notorious for prank calls to celebrities and heads of state has reached Sarah Palin, convincing the Republican vice-presidential nominee she was speaking with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

In the interview, which lasts about six minutes, Palin and the pranksters discuss politics, pundits, and the dangers of hunting with current vice-president Dick Cheney.

The Masked Avengers, who have a regular show on Montreal radio station CKOI, intend to air the full interview on the eve of the U.S. elections."

Here is the audio link:

http://www.tindeck.com/audio/filestore/w/wwdo-SarahPalin.mp3

Alaskans are asking whether Ted Stevens is convicted or not?  Here is the Alaska Daily News article covering the issue:

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/574952.html

Politico is reporting that a Quebec comedy duo notorious for prank calls to celebrities and heads of state has reached Sarah Palin, convincing the Republican vice-presidential nominee she was speaking with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

In the interview, which lasts about six minutes, Palin and the pranksters discuss politics, pundits, and the dangers of hunting with current vice-president Dick Cheney.

The Masked Avengers, who have a regular show on Montreal radio station CKOI, intend to air the full interview on the eve of the U.S. elections.

Todays Muhlenberg College tracking poll for Pennsylvania shows Obama ahead overall 52% to 44% for McCain - but I thought the following cross tabulations taken directly from the report are interesting and informative - notice that Obama leads in every catogory except for one (who registered Repulicans plan to vote for - and in some strange twist of fate, the Repulicans plan to vote for McCain - Go figure!) and is tied in one (those who identify themselves as "white"). Obama even leads among men (albeit only 49 to 48%).  Obama leads, on the other hand, among independent voters with 52% supporting Barack and 45% supporting McCain.

I find it interesting that 100% of the democrats are accounted for with 84% supporting Obama and 16% supporting McCain.  But only 96% of Republicans are accounted for with 80% supporting McCain and 16% supporting Obama - the poll also finds that 4% of voters are still undecided  - so are these 4% of undecided the missing 4% of Repulicans who were not listed as supporting either candidate?  Probably not - the poll says that 1% plan to vote for a 3rd candidate or are not voting for either McCain or Obama. But there are many little interesting things to think about in these polls. 


MUHLENBERG COLLEGE /MORNING CALL

2008 Presidential Tracking Poll

RELEASE #36 - November 1, 2008
FIELDING PERIOD - October 27-31, 2008
SAMPLE -604 Likely Voters in Pennsylvania

SELECTED CROSSTABULATIONS

For October 27-31



                                        Obama                       McCain

OVERALL                          52%                            44%
DEMOCRAT                      84%                            16%
REPUBLICAN                   16%                             80%
INDEPENDENT                 52%                            45%
MALE                                 49%                            48%
FEMALE                            55%                            42%
CATHOLIC                         49%                            47%
PROTESTANT                   51%                            46%
WHITE                               48%                            48%
NON-WHITE                      90%                              8%
NO COLLEGE DEGREE   48%                            46%
COLLEGE DEGREE         55%                            42%
UNDER 60K                      52%                            45%
OVER 60K                         55%                            43%
SENIOR CITIZENS           50%                            47%

You can find a link to the PDF for this poll inside the following:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/pa_obama_53_mccain_40_muhlenbe_1.php

If anyone is still having a hard time convincing their Republican friends to vote for Obama - try this link to a list of prominent Republicans who are supporting Obama - this comes from The Republicans for Obama site - sorry if everyone is already aware of the site.

From the Washington Post: 

Poll Gives Obama 8-Point Va. Lead

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/26/AR2008102602504.html?hpid=topnews

According to the NYT, the US in using Predator missiles to strike at Al Qaeda / Taliban inside Pakistan - but has not launched a ground attack in pursuit of Al Qaede into Pakistan since September 3rd, following sharp protests from the Pakistan govenrment.  Apparently, "... Pakistani officials have made clear in public statements that they regard the Predator attacks as a less objectionable violation of Pakistani sovereignty."

But the NYT also notes "[a]t the same time, however, officials said that relying on airstrikes alone, the United States would be unable to weaken Al Qaeda's grip in the tribal areas permanently. Within the government, advocates of the ground raids have argued that only by sending Special Operations forces into Pakistan can the United States successfully capture suspected operatives and interrogate them for information about top Qaeda leaders."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/27/washington/27intel.html?pagewanted=1&hp

The question is whether under an Obama administration land strikes by US operatives would resume, and if so, under what conditions / scenarios? For instance, would they occur with or without a hand tipping advance warning to Pakistan?