As the Clinton campaign has suffered one defeat after another, the advice of Hillary’s chief strategist, Mark Penn, has been consistent: go negative. So yesterday, according to Drudge, a Clinton staffer leaked a photo of Obama in a turban to the press. The photo was taken in Kenya, and seemed obviously designed to raise fears that Obama was a “Manchurian candidate” a sleeper muslim trying to sneakily infiltrate his way into the White House:
 |
|
Will voters find this turban disturbin? |
With a week to go until the Texas and Ohio primaries, stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo over the weekend of a “dressed” Barack Obama. [Link]
Clinton’s campaign did not deny its staffers distributed the photo, and Obama’s top advisers were quick to blast what it called an underhanded campaign tactic. [Link]
OMG – he’s wearing a turban! He’s a mooo-salim! Oooooga Booooga! Oooooga Booooga!
The campaign’s desperation comes as it finds itself strapped for cash, having tapped out its major donors. The irony is that HRC might have a few more paisas in her pocket if she had not suddenly decided her long time Sikh friends had the cooties and were too uncool to be seen with any more:
Mrs. Clinton also scuttled a fund-raising breakfast at a nearby fairgrounds where Sikh leaders had hoped to raise $1 million for her presidential campaign. [Link]
<
p>
Given that she’s spent only $11 million this month on ads, that extra $1 mil would have come in handy, even if only for her donut tab.
 |
|
How about this one? |
However, instead of spewing irate invective, I’d rather spoil her game. The best way to deal with “scary” images is to normalize them. Below the fold are a series of photos of politicians either wearing turbans or next to somebody who is wearing a turban. Let me know if you’ve got more!
[UPDATED – ptr_vivek pointed us at a great photo of Bill looking quite dashing in a Rajasthani turban. Thanks!]
The only other turban wearing politician I could find was the mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa. I want to give him huge props for wearing a turban given that he did so to promote civil rights, and did so without any money being donated to his campaign (the photo op was for a donation to a soup kitchen). The other three are Hillary (clearly), Bill Richardson and President Bush. Not so scary now are we?
 |
 |
 |
 |
I don’t think you know what the word “and” means.
HMF:
I’m going to bow out of this argument with you b/c once again, presented with evidence that you’re completely wrong, you persist with tedious and pedantic arguments that just seem either dishonest or weird. i provided you with the very quote where he denounced Farrakhan and his ant-semitic comments (“I have been very clear in my denunciations of him and his past statements”) and you somehow construe that since the context of him denouncing Farrakhan was his anti-semitic comments, the very context that i myself referred to in #71, means he didn’t denounce Farrakhan. WTF?
I could go on and parse you’re clintonian argument that he didn’t reject Farrakhan’s support, but i suspect it’s a big waste of time.
However, if anyone else thinks ther’s any credence to HMF’s argument, please speak up and I’ll elaborate. short of that, you can have the last word HMF. I’m out.
I don’t think you know what the word “and” means.
I dont think you know what the word context means.
that he didn’t reject Farrakhan’s support, but i suspect it’s a big waste of time.
Because it’s the actual truth. once again, for the reading impaired:
MR. RUSSERT: Do you reject his support?
SEN. OBAMA: Well, Tim, you know, I can’t say to somebody that he can’t say that he thinks I’m a good guy
Does this amount to an unequivocal “NO”? Of course it doesn’t, again, it presupposes the ability to read.
means he didn’t denounce Farrakhan. WTF?
WTF indeed. He denounced him insofar as he made those comments. It’s clear Obama wasn’t making an absolute, all-around rejection of him as a perennial racist and evil human being, as most so often do. Your comment in #71;
“denouncing and rejecting the vile anti-Semite and racist as Clinton attempted to corner him”
if you left it at “anti-Semite” I’d say your comment was contextualized in the same way Obama’s was. However you added “racist”, my guess in reference to his statements on white America. Your overextension of what Obama had said is what I pointed out.
I’m going to bow out of this argument with you b/c once again
Because of your inability to address the point. You haven’t proved anything wrong, infact I’ve given you more snippets from the debate to show you how it wasn’t the all-inclusive denunciation you made it out to be, now if you’re retracting from that position, say so, rather than, “your arguments are weird and pedantic”
Obama has denounced Farrakhan and his statements. But, Obama cannot prevent Farrakhan from supporting him. That is what I understood.
Agreed, the dictionary does not define denounce as “absolute, all-around rejection of him as a perennial racist and evil human being”. But, what if Russert had asked Obama if he thought Farrakhan was evil and racist. My guess is Obama would have said yes.
But, what if Russert had asked Obama if he thought Farrakhan was evil and racist. My guess is Obama would have said yes
That’s your guess. And it’s a wonderful guess that can make it to the hall of fame of guesses.
However, based on what was asked of them that day, at that time, by Tim Russert, you cannot conclude that Obama denounces Farrakhan (outside of the anti-Jewish statements that Russert had alluded to), nor can you say he unequivocally rejects any verbal praise, because he answered that as well.
Obama has denounced Farrakhan and his statements.
He denounced him in so far as he doesn’t agree with and doesn’t wish to be associated with those particular statements. For example, Farrakhan has also said,
“And I hope that five years and 10 years from now, I’ll be a better man, a more mature man, a wiser man, a more humble man and a more spirited man to serve the good of my people and the good of humanity. “
Now, if Obama was denouncing him completely, he should as well disagree with this statement, and every other statement he makes, correct? but my guess is, he’d agree with or at the very least, not denounce this statement.
Agreed, the dictionary does not define denounce as “absolute, all-around rejection of him as a perennial racist and evil human being
Actually, it’s pretty close:
” to pronounce especially publicly to be blameworthy or evil“
I’m pleased to see John McCain Repudiates ‘Hussein Obama’ remarks,by a conservative radio talk show host. Just maybe we have turned a corner -politicians realize that citizens want more. link
Obama answered /phrased the Farrakhan charge from Hillary just right, by spelling out the silly semantic word games this came down to;
Salon
My sister is married to a man who attended the Million Man march. It doesn’t follow that she, her husband, or anyone else who hasn’t offered a total ban on all things Farrakhan is anti semitic. I’ve visited Trinity (Obama’s Church in Chicago)- it’s too theologically liberal for my taste. That’s a very separate issue from it being “separatist/racist” as Richard Cohen in the WaPo attempts to make it out to be.
it’s too theologically liberal for my taste.
How so? just curious.
I’m pleased to see John McCain Repudiates ‘Hussein Obama’ remarks,by a conservative radio talk show host.
And this dumb fool tried to defend his repeated usage of ‘Hussein’ by shrugging his shoulders and saying, “That’s the name his mother and father gave him”
56 · Manju said
😉 manju you’re my favorite young, uh, republican – not that there’s anything wrong with that.
The Wapo writer was drawing attention to Obama’s church giving some sort of honor/ award to Mr. Farakhan, and by imputation, asking Obama to call Farakhan the “blank blank” that he Mr.Cohen beleives him to be.
#104 But, what if Russert had asked Obama if he thought Farrakhan was evil and racist. My guess is Obama would have said yes.
I think he would have said no, in so many words.
I dont throw the full expansion out willy nilly.
😉 back at ‘cha
I was being deliberately over the top to compensate for my “PC-ness in #’s 68 & 27–sorry, though–it does look a bit crazed (!) without that context.
Rob,
Thanks, that is what I thought, knowing your commenting history it looked out of character.
Rob:” “Well, you can’t say that Spanish-culture affiliated people are entirely without grounds for holding a bit of concern about (certain strands of) Islam now, can you?? (Think El Cid then or Madrid bombings now!)”
Oh, please! Like the rest of the Islamic world isn’t concerned about the conservative strain? As for “Spanish-culture affiliated”- the Catholics did way more harm to the New World than any Arab ever did. Just read Fr. Junipero Serra’s theories on creating a labor force. Think of it this way: that kind of brown did not exist before 1492. In addition, under the Andalusian kingdoms, at one point, “Spain” possessed one of the most enlightened social constructs available in Europe and most of the known world.
Anyway, for a boy to officially join the umma, he has to be circumcized (usually around 4-6 years of age) and make a conscious declaration of faith (between 8-12)- at least in North Africa.
The other thing I have a problem with in regards to the brouhaha over the photo is that local dress does not always exclisively signal religion. Sometime local dress is just local dress and custom occaisionally requires a turban or whatever. Oh well.
And then there’s this.
Sure, but the Spanish weren’t crazed or “Islamophobic” to view the Moors as invaders, right? I mean, they did invade. Yes, I know they were there for a long time and had impressive cultural accomplishments in Spain, but the modern Spanish national identity was forged on the anvil of resistance to the Moors . . . . And while the Spanish were definitely very brutal in the New World, the fact is that Latinos are “Spanish-culture affiliated”–how can you even argue against that–e.g., they speak Spanish!! So all I’m saying is that Spanish culture has some lingering problems with Islam that are historically-based. That seems pretty factual to me.
115 · rob said
So immigrants from Latin America in 21st century USA should feel Islamophobic because of the Moorish invasion of Spain in the 8th century?
No, I’m not saying that at all! Just let’s not be too quick to trot out the “Islamophobia” card when discussing culturally Spanish people’s views on Islam–there is a ‘there’ there.
Sure, but the Spanish weren’t crazed or “Islamophobic” to view the Moors as invaders, right?
Oh no, I’m sorry, the correct answer is Moops.
But, upon reflection, and to more directly answer your rhetorical question, which is framed to make saying “yes” look stupid–“yes, a bit”–it’s not as if the Muslim world is impressive in terms of its tolerance–just look at the cartoons in Egyptian newspapers–so, if you want to call a lingering suspicion “phobic,” go ahead, it cares me nothing.
No, I’m not saying that at all! Just let’s not be too quick to trot out the “Islamophobia” card when discussing culturally Spanish people’s views on Islam–there is a ‘there’ there.
Wait a minute, you’re saying that Spanish people would a historic reason to feel theatened by Muslims (that’s disconnected to the American/European version of Islamophobia), and this is because they were invaded and culturally appropriated,
but isn’t that what happened to the majority of the Latino population themselves? wouldn’t they likewise feel threatened by Spanish culture, including any attempt to “pass on” this fear of muslim invasion and cultural appropriation?
Why would the Mexicans, South Americans, etc… be so open to investing themselves into the culture of their invaders, while the Spanish harbor all kinds of fears and antipathies towards their invaders?
See, e.g.,this–I’m genuinely puzzled as to why Latinos are to be condemned for (allegedly–I’m actually not sure what the reality is) not getting on board some sort of fashionable academic construction in which Muslims are always victims and never victimizers.
I don’t know (although part of the answer is obviously that Mexicans aren’t some sort of non-Spanish block–that’s why you have more racial tension, I think, in Latin American countries like Bolivia where the Spanish-indigenous divide is more obvious–i.e., fewer mestizos (not that it doesn’t exist in Mexico, but it’s less pronounced than in Bolivia)–that’s actually a very interesting and complicated question, not that dissimilar from the issue of our (desi) use of English on this very blog–but, at the end of the day, it is factually incorrect to think that Latin Americans don’t share a lot of cultural assumptions with the Spanish (not on every issue, mind you, but on a lot of them).
Obama gave a little shout out to Kal Penn in his US magazine interview. This is what he said when asked if he was starstuck.
Oh and he refused to answer their silly Boxers or briefs question with humor.
it is factually incorrect to think that Latin Americans don’t share a lot of cultural assumptions with the Spanish (not on every issue, mind you, but on a lot of them).
Rob,
Let me please ask you few simple questions:
a) Have you been to Spain, and Latin American countries? b) How much have you interacted with Spaniards, and Latin Americans?
My PhD advisor, close friends were/ are Spaniards, I have worked in Spain, I have interacted with lot of Latin Americans in South here………..trust me, apart from, language, religious mores, and affinity for similar music, and culture, there is no transference of deeper traits, as you have been implying all along on this thread. Spain, and Latin America are two very distinct entities, they have grown on their own distinct paths. They (Latin Americans) have affinity for Spain, but no “genetic” passing of phobias, etc.
Spaniards left South America long time ago.
Kush, You’re a good guy, so we’ll just to agree to disagree, with me certainly conceding that I’m no expert. But, the (mainly Cubans and Venezuelans) that I know very well are totally into Spanish (as in European Spanish) culture. I’m sure that it varies a lot.
The Spanish ‘antipathy’ toward ‘the Moors’ is more a ‘religious’ thing than an invader-invaded thing (I think). The Moors ruled mainland (peninsular) Spain from roughly 711 AD on, for about five centuries. And they were in Granada for another three centuries. So it would be hard for ordinary folk to see them as ‘invaders’ for that long. But for European Kings, and crusaders influenced by Catholic doctrine, they were seen as ‘religious Others’, and perhaps also as ‘racial Others’. For no other reason than that, the Moors were ‘driven out’ of Spain, and the Spanish were converted to Catholicism, many forcibly.
So if there is a antipathy toward Muslims (‘Islamophobia’) among Hispanics in the US – it would be more from an indoctrinated religious Otherization than any (manufactured) memory of ‘having been invaded’. (When? Like thirteen hundred years ago?)
hmmm, i had this spanish/latin american discussion with an ex spanish gf a few times. she was from vigo, near Portugal, itself a somewhat different culture from madrid, etc. but her mom was originally from venezuela and so there was a large cultural difference, she thought, between herself and her cousins.
basically her cousins where venezuelan bombshells, i’m sure you know the type, and she didn’t think this to be very Spanish. they, however, had great affinity for Spain, not really seeing the difference.
we never discussed Muslims except once her parents had some exchange students from Somalia come and stay.
I think you are at risk of treating Latinos too much like your average white American (who is very “modern” and not too caught up with historical/cultural linkages). I think (with some significant evidence, though I immediately concede far from conclusive evidence) that their identification with Spanish history/culture is quite deep. As I said to Kush, though, this is almost certain to vary a lot.
And Rob, while you are making sweeping statements about how Latin Americans should hold onto centuries-old grouses inherited from their own invaders, could you also advice us how Latin-American Muslims are supposed to feel on the subject ?
(emphasis added)
Maya, You are making the “is implies ought” fallacy here. I’m not saying Latinos should do anything. I’m just trying to describe at a finer grain of detail what’s going on, rather than just slapping the “Islamophobic” label on Latinos. As far as Latin American Muslims go, Argentinian President Menem was of course of Arabic background (though a convert to Catholicism–hello, Bobby Jindal!! 😉 The chickens are starting to come home to roost in Argentina, though, in terms of gov’t collaboration with the Hezbollah attacks on the Jewish community center in Buenos Aries.
Well, I haven’t seen this angle covered as much through this conversation, but this whole event made me think about my status in everyday Americana. To clarify, I am a Sikh woman in a turban. I have seen Sikhs and Muslims, including myself, do rather well in corporate, university and not-for-profit settings, etc. Lately, things have been going so well for me, that I’ve almost led myself to believe that there is no ceiling. That despite prejudice, because I’m qualified and work-hard, all opportunities are open to me. And after all, my boyfriend’s family is Anglo and they’ve embraced me at the dinner table. Why won’t others?
After looking at the amount of shock, disgust, denial and statements from the left..the LEFT after this photo, I’m pretty friggin disturbed. Is anyone else? Of course I’m aware of the scrutiny that Muslims and Sikhs faced after 9-11, but to many of us, it seemed very contained to ‘those’ folk. This makes me feel differently, deep in my gut. Is anyone else feeling the same way? Obviously, I’ll keep up the fight; this won’t stop me. But I ask you, my community, if you’ve trembled in the same way…and not out of weakness, but out of acknowledgement.
Sona, I doubt you’d be well received if you ran for office any time soon.
132 · Ennis said
or, maybe she’ll be received like this.
rob, with all due respect (because I do NOT think you are unintelligent), both your description and your rationale re: people born in Latin America, Spaniards, U.S.-born Latinos and Islamophobia makes no sense.
Camille, No offense at all taken–please say more. I’ve probably said too much, so just let me summarize with one sentence–I think that (1) modern Spanish national identity/culture keys off of (in a crucial sense) the defeat/expulsion of the Moors, and (2) many Latinos share a lot of cultural affinities with Spain (including this one re: the Moors). I’m not saying that they logically should, just that a lot in fact do.
modern Spanish national identity/culture keys off of (in a crucial sense) the defeat/expulsion of the Moors,
Modern Spanish national identity keys off the following (in descending) order:
1) Spanish Civil War 2) General Franco, and later return to democracy, and the role of Spanish Royal family in bringing democracy 3) Relationship with Basque, and France 4) Spanish conquest, the age of exploration and discovery, colonialism related to Spain as being once a super power.
… … … 10) Moors
Their civil war trumps everything by orders of magnitude.
I have spent couple of weeks in Granada in 1996 – that place show cases Moorish influence (example Alambra, and all the architecture there) in the most sophisticated way, and Andalucia is teaming with Moroccans (legal, and illegal immigrants), and mixed races.
I forgot
5) Spanish inquisition
It’s alright. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.
Kush, sure–but–how do the Spaniards feel about that? Now I will throw back the question you asked me–do you know many “real” Spaniards? I’m saying they’re awfully “phobic” about it (way more than Americans)! And by mentioning this fact, I’m not condoning it. But it’s a true fact in the world. Europe is dying, but the average man on the (Spanish) street is pretty pissed about it.
I’ve never met a Chicano voter who spent much time defining their identity via the the Moorish-Christian conflict of the 1400s.
Also, where does The Macarena fit in?
Nor have I, but Chicano is but a sub-section of Latino–go to Miami, or to an upscale business or restaurant in Mexico City or Lima, and you’ll be surprised at how “lit” they are on the subject if you get them talking about it.
Another case of Clinton xenophobia:
Hillary Clinton claims Obama needs Moor scrutiny
Have some more pillows, Manju.
definitely below La chucaracha
do you know many “real” Spaniards?
Yes, I do. In 90s, I interacted, worked, partied with them – dozens of them. In 1995, I was on a drill ship that had Spanish drillers, with from other nationalities too.
Yes, they do have phobia for Moroccan immigrants – no more, no less than anyone else around the world has for the “others“. In fact, lot less, tension than Germany, France, and UK has for others. That was one of the reasons Madrid train bombing was relatively easy, and they have found so many terror cells in Spain recently. It was more easy there than other places in Europe. Yes, Spain is also a deeply Catholic nation, and played a crucial role in Crusades.
This said, walk on the streets of Granada – you will see Moroccans all over.
What struck me was the % of mixed races in Southern Spain, more than any other place in Europe.
Ennis, you touched this topic off in #47–I’m trying to explain why Latinos might have a cultural suspicion of Islam–what is your position, that it’s wholly irrational?
I think your efforts to ground it in Spanish experience is off-base.
Well, could I just point out that, in the last several threads, I seem to get offered pillows first question all the time.
I’m not sold on the concept that Spanish/North-African is “mixed race,” (as opposed to mixed religion, or mixed ethnicity), but OK–I see what you’re saying. I also think the Geert Wilders/Pim Fortuyn sort of “liberal” anti-Muslim politics has serious legs going forward in Europe. But that’s just me. I’m happy to be in the US!