I, for one, believe Daniel Pipes when he says he's not a child molester. It does seem to me that widespread belief that he's a child molester might hamper his career, but he says he's no child molester so I'll believe him when he says he doesn't molest children.
« Quitting Time | Main | Wire and Reality »
Belief
31 Dec 2007 12:19 pm
Comments (43)
He says he's not a child molester now, and I believe him
"He says he's not a child molester now, and I believe him"
I bet he's stopped beating his wife too. Good for him.
Nevertheless, I confess I do find something troubling about his stance.
I'm sorry, but I never believe Daniel Pipes.
I, too, believe him, but one wonders how other kiddie fiddlers will may react to him. This may prove problematic.
Personally, I think his denials have been just a little too vehement, or not nearly vehement enough. Whichever.
His child molesting ways are, in any case, bad news for the Democrats.
While I believe Daniel Pipes' claim that he is not a child molester, will other child molester's believe it? Rumors that he was once a child rapist, but has now turned his back on the hobby, will anger that subset of his readers
I am sure the upcoming coverage in the National Enquirer will help to clarify the issue.
well done sir.
So, Matt, you consider being a Muslim the moral equivalent of child molesting? Or you just think that spreading vicious rumors about people you dislike is appropriate behavior?
Fuzzy - the point went thataway...
So, Matt, you consider being a Muslim the moral equivalent of child molesting?
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Daniel "Crack" Pipes considered child molesting morally superior to being Muslim.
Pete, perhaps you can explain it to me. It seems to me that whatever you think of Pipes, it is clear that some people have suggested good reasons to believe that Obama is a Muslim, or at least for Muslims to think so. And it is not clear to me that thinking this is necessarily a smear.
OTOH, the child molesting comment, however humorously intended, is exactly the kind of thing that *does* start rumors on the web.
Fuzzy, that whooshing sound you heard was Matt's point blasting by your pointy head.
After all Cesar was an honourable man...
OT, but: did you intend "But Brutus says he was ambitious. And Brutus is an honorable man?" If so, 'twas a grievous misquote, and grievously hath I corrected it.
Unless you intended some reference to Cesar Chavez or Cesar Romero.
Dunno about child molesting, but he sure is a nasty piece of work.
Fuzzy, that whooshing sound you heard was Matt's point blasting by your pointy head.Then please explain it to me. I am having trouble finding an honest point, here. I don't mind people helping me to understand, but just saying that I have missed the point without explaining it makes me suspect that there is no real point beyond shared mockery.
Fuzzy,
I would say shared mockery is appropriate in this case. If you didn't get the point I'm not sure explaining it to you is going to do the job. I for one prefer to just laugh at your ignorance (even though it is probably feigned).
it is clear that some people have suggested good reasons to believe that Obama is a Muslim
It is equally clear that some people have suggested good reasons to believe that Elvis has been the night manager of a Piggly Wiggly just outside of Tupelo, Mississippi since his "death" in 1977. And that's not a smear either!
In truth, the post just hit one of my buttons. I really hate the degree of personal attacks being hurled around in the political arguments. They tend to replace actual dialog, and I have this idea that somebody with a real argument doesn't need to do them.
Oh, enough, Daniel "Fuzzy Face" Pipes, give it a rest already.
Though I'm not an expert on the classification of trolls, it seems to me that fuzzy's comments may fall into that catergory (concern? Fauxtard?).
Fuzzy, pipes' smear falls into the catergory of calling someone gay or an atheist or an effete intellectual or whatever. Are these things bad? Most enlightened people would say no. Are they considered bad or distasteful in certain circles? Of course. Does Rush or Sean or any of the rest of the noise machine consider these labels smears and disrespectful when applied to their targets? Of course. Should the target take offense? I'm not sure, but the namecaller definitely wishes to offend.
Pipes is a wicked and odious Zionist zealot Jew. He has called for the "transfer" (i.e. genocide) of 3,000,000 Palestinians. He has called for the "transfer" (i.e. genocide) of all Christians in Bethlehem. He advocates nuking Iran, Syria, Libya, and Saudi Arabia. Child molesting is the least of his sins.
Then this must be the point I am missing. What exactly this this "smear"? Suggesting that Obama might be a Muslim? That he isn't one? That people have suggested he might be, but he denies it?
Is there some cultural thing on this blog that takes mention of religion as insulting? I feel like there is an in-joke going on and I am not getting it because I missed the previous meeting.
So could somebody please tell me exactly what Pipes' offense is?
The offense - both his and yours - is called "concern trolling". You can find the definition on the web.
So, the issue is that Pipes, as a conservative, has no business commenting on Obama's chances in the primary?
And I find it interesting that commentators cannot distinguish between trolling and trying to understand things. Asking questions about things I don't understand is about the best way I know to learn. Why is that offensive?
What exactly this this "smear"? Suggesting that Obama might be a Muslim? That he isn't one? That people have suggested he might be, but he denies it?
To a certain portion of the population, it is a smear. Most of those would never vote for Obama anyway, but the premise of the strategy is that there are some for whom the possibility is a subtle, perhaps unconscious deciding factor. It's called "concern trolling" to continually bring it up in indirect ways like Pipe's article.
Now, the fact is that Obama isn't now, and has never been a Muslim, which adds a second problem: to the extent that the "Obama was a [secret] Muslim" meme gets established, it adds a secondary effect of "I don't care if he's a Muslim, but why is he lying about it?" The whole tactic plays into a bigoted fear of Muslims and adds, not a frontal attack, but an odious whiff of scandal to Obama for a significant percent of voters.
The third part is the telephone effect of the smear, which is that a lot of people will continually hear "Obama" and "Muslim" put together, and not paying attention, may actually think that he's Muslim. This will either decide some voters against him or play back into the second effect when they learn of his denials.
Matt's post is an evocative illustration of the position it puts someone in to have to deny falsehoods, and demonstrates the cynicism of Pipes' "concerns". It's all just a way of keeping the "Obama was a Muslim" meme in play.
The fuzzy face is merely the exteriorization of the fuzzy brain. I believe there was a Talking Heads song about this many years ago.
It's offensive because it's wormy and disingenuous. What- you can't understand that insinuating that Obama's a stealth Muslim is designed to scare and upset the average voter? What- you don't understand that post 9/11...being a Muslim automatically makes you a target of law enforcement, subject to being tossed off airplanes, a whole host of frightening indignities? who the fuck do you think you're kidding?
Thank you for the explanation, Justin.
If you want to see the effect in action, Fuzzy, go read the comments on Pipe's original piece:
Now I am wondering like some of you, is Obama one of those who is pretending to be ONE of us until the time comes. Is he denying his Muslim background as Mohammad had taught his followers to do in order to take advantage of the us the "unbelievers"?
A Presidential candidate hiding his Idendity is pre-betraying the Nation.
Can he be trusted ?
Should our votes be influenced by potential Islamic perception of Obama apostasy?
Manchurian Candidate
It's all just a way of keeping the "Obama was a Muslim" meme in play.
Plus, the ""If I were a Muslim I would let you know," Barack Obama has said, and I believe him." carries the implication that there is some decent recent to believe otherwise, that he is Muslim. As though Pipes had to seriously weigh the possibility, only to be swayed by Obama's words.
It's garbage, of course. There is no actual reason to think that Obama is a "secret Muslim." But that doesn't stop Pipes from kicking the can further down the road.
And honestly, do you really think painting Obama as a Muslim is just idle curiosity and discussion over his (not chosen) religion, as if we were discussing whether he was Methodist?
Thank you for the explanation, Justin.
Posted by Fuzzy Face | December 31, 2007 3:14 PM
Has anyone heard rumors about "Fuzzy Face" being only disingenuously dimwitted? I mean, based on the above I'm now giving him benefit of doubt: I believe that really is dim enough to require the explanation.
Has anyone heard rumors about "Fuzzy Face" being only disingenuously dimwitted? I mean, based on the above I'm now giving him benefit of doubt: I believe that really is dim enough to require the explanation.
So I'm going to offer a very forgiving possibility here: Republican smear tactics work because to those unfamiliar with the rules, they are very effective. And they are difficult to tease out. If you read this blog everyday, of course, they are all plain as day. But you don't have to be an idiot to misunderstand what Pipes is doing. If all you've heard is that Obama might be muslim and you see Pipes kind of repeat it, it all makes sense. After all, you're the true victim of the Republican misinformation campaign (the voter). Many of these cases are like Al, that is, pretty much trolls. But I'll bet every day someone new reads this blog...
Pipes is a neocon Jew who has said a lot of odious things about Palestinians and others, but he is challenging Lefty Jew and Democrat assumptions that Obama's biography - is skin color and Muslim background - will Redeem America in the eyes of 3rd Worlders who see us led by not an Evil White Christian Oppressor, but a noble non-white who intuitively feels for what Muslims want from his Muslim roots and (according to Obama) life-changing time as a boy in a Muslim country who lived with Muslims and observed much of their lifestyle and faith.
Pipes says this is bogus because Muslims care about US policy, not politicians biography or skin color (hence why we didn't miss the waves of Muslim adulation for black Condi Rice, Powell, Ralph Bunche, and the plethora of Muslim and non-white US ambassadors - because there were no waves of redemption or adulation.).
And Pipes properly raises the matter of whether Obama will be seen as born Muslim and make an apostate through little fault of his own, but the "fuck and walk away from family obligations and his son's religious upbringing" neglegence of Obama's bigamist black African father "moving on" when he was 3.
At best, Obama will be thought of as a victim who came to deny and reject the faith of his father because he lacked exposure and reaffirmation of Islam after age 10 as his mother moved on...
Pipes - For them, that he was born to a line of Muslim males makes him born a Muslim. Further, all children born with an Arabic name based on the H-S-N trilateral root (Hussein, Hassan, and others) can be assumed to be Muslim, so they will understand Obama's full name, Barack Hussein Obama, to proclaim him a born Muslim.
At worse, Muslims will think this born Muslim rejected his Faith with his late joining of Christianity as an adult and deserve the "you can check in to Islam but you can never leave" penalty. Having his blood shed.
Either way, his Jewish Left and Left Democrat backers are wrong about his biography and lineage giving him more acceptance than an "evil white American." Odds are, he gets less acceptance if elected...which is unlikely considering his complete lack of executive experience, never serving in the military, never working a full-time job in the non-NGO, non-Government private sector like 95% of other Americans did and do..
I smell a rat. Pipes is not typical reading material for most democrats -- so its pretty curious to me how it came to be that Ben Smith beats everyone to this Pipes article. I don't for a minute think that Ben is a closet Pipes enthusiast and probably doesn't have a subscription to FrontPageMagazine. This is fairly fringe stuff --and likely to remain obscure until after the caucus. It needed some extra "help" to get out there. So... WHY NOW? FROM WHOM?
Less that four days before the first voting in the primary season and a couple of hours after Ben spends the day travelling through Iowa with Bill this story shows up on his blog. Seems to me that Ben's post (not the original article) was meant for democratic eyes. Most dems would dismiss Pipes' argument and recognize him for the crackpot he is -- BUT perhaps they might start worrying about "electibility" and what the right-wing smear machine would do to Obama if he were the nominee. Consider this in context with the "I'm fully vetted, no surprises here" line that is extolled by Hillary Clinton. Of course this is all just speculation...
Sometimes you just gotta laugh your ass off at Ford.
His Ku Klux Klan membership card is just hanging out for all to see with stuff like this.
Donna's conspiracy theory is interesting, though. Hillary borrows a Republican asshole to shaft Obama? The only problem with that notion I see is that most Dems who know anything about either Obama or Pipes would ignore Pipes and anything he says about Obama - as everyone has here. So it seems to me a pretty lame try by the Hillary campaign, if that's what it was.
Hack -- I don't put anything past the Clintons anymore. This current episode just reeks of their "just saying what others are saying" technique. In this case the slur is not necessarily believed by dems, but that's not the point -- its meant to instill fear in them about Obama's electibility.
Donna, you could be right. I'm just saying it doesn't seem like a strong attempt, just because of the relative obscurity of posting a Pipes rant on one blog.
And if this guy Ben is a big Hillary shill, then probably only Hillary supporters will read it - unless it really gets picked up and spread around the blogosphere.
Oops - Matt just did that.
Maybe you're right.
I don't know if Ben favors Hillary -- but others seem to think so. To me it just seems he is eager to gets hits and links to his blog so he goes with sensational stories -- nothing like a little controversy to get people to pay attention -- and Ben is good at that. The commenters on Ben's blog are now mostly Obama supporters although it certainly did not start out that way. Anyway -- this is all thankfully overshadowed by very good news for Obama tonight. According to the DMR poll he has widened his lead. Happy New Year!
I see now that this Pipes smear has been picked up all over the place, including over at TPM.
Looks like it wasn't such a lame move after all, if that's what it was, although I'm still not seeing any reports of an actual impact on Obama.
As an Arab and a Muslim I love the fact that people like Pipes don't get how good an Obama Presidency will be for them. The guy will be trying so hard to prove how patriotic he is, and trying so hard to prove that he is a friend of Israel and not the Muslim world , that he will most likey be the most pro-Zionist prez. in decades.
Comments closed January 14, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
After all Cesar was an honourable man...
Posted by Rob | December 31, 2007 12:24 PM