# Obama vs. Fox **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 20, 2009, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497 "2009-10-20T16:57:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 30
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/581 "2009-11-04T00:05:17Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Obama’s drop is only relative to numbers that started as absurdly high to begin with. He’s still solidly over 50%, which is remarkable for a President dealing with a recession, a two front war and a media complex devoted to a full scale, 24/7 demonization campaign. If you put as much effort into looking things up as you do into making things up, you’d be dangerous. Initial poll approval ratings after their election: Kennedy 72% Eisenhower 68% Obama 68% Carter 66% [SOURCE](http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/01/obama-more-political-capital-than.html) How is Obama’s post-election rating “absurdly high”??? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/582 "2009-11-04T00:07:40Z")
[This](http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE52P60220090326) is the UN Resolution to which **intention** is alluding. It’s a non-binding resolution which condemns religious “defamation” (specifically condemning “Christianophobia” and anti-semitism along with Islamophobia) and calls for religious tolerance. It has no force of law, makes nothing a crime, and proposes no infringements on free speech. It’s just a little statement that says, “religious defmation is bad…m’kay.” **Intention’s** characterization is completely fraudulent. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/583 "2009-11-04T00:09:16Z")
> [@intention](#): > > If you put as much effort into looking things up as you do into making things up, you’d be dangerous. Initial poll approval ratings after their election: > > Kennedy 72% > > Eisenhower 68% > > Obama 68% > > Carter 66% > > [SOURCE](http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/01/obama-more-political-capital-than.html) > > How is Obama’s post-election rating “absurdly high”??? How is 70% _not_ absurdly high, especially in the current political era? Getting anything over 50% is wild success. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/584 "2009-11-04T00:14:32Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Ooooh, this is hard. Let’s see. Dio, who wasn’t there, says there was no intimidation, nothing to see here, it’s a “non-story”. > > On the other hand, a number of people who witnessed the incident said it was intimidation. And the video shows a big man with a nightstick in front of the polling place. And some people who were there said they felt intimidated. And the DOJ issued an injunction to stop the intimidation. > > Hmmm … witnesses’ and participants’ statements and video and the DOJ on one side … Dio who cannot be intimidated on the other side … gosh, that’s a tough one, I’ll have to ponder that for a while. The statements of witnesses are meaningless, not only because the complainers are political hacks, but because it’s not the defendants’ fault that some pussies pretended to be scared. I saw the video. It was nothing. Trying to blow this kind of chickenshit up into an important news story is absurd. It was a couple of guys with sticks. It wasn’t worth the DOJ’s time. End of story. Especially since no one was prevented from voting. Incidentally, even if we accept your own most fevered, paranoid interprtation of that incidnt as true, what the fuck does it have to do with Barack Obama? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/585 "2009-11-04T00:24:29Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Obama is definitely the most radical Black President … do you even notice what you write?.. _When you whooosh upon a star Makes no difference who you are!.._ ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/586 "2009-11-04T00:33:36Z")
> [@intention](#): > > As to what he has done that is radical, oh, how about signing on to the UN statement proposing that it be a crime for me to say that Mohammed is a flaming asshole … radical enough for you? For someone who is unsullied by the influence of the voices of right-wing radio, you manage to come up with the same interpretations, almost word for word, all by yourself, as the talking heads spout every day. Even when they are completely false. You’re remarkable that way. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/587 "2009-11-04T01:02:46Z")
Anyone want to watch Fox News tonight to see if they mention how all the exit polls show that by a very large margin, today’s elections were not about Obama at all? ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/588 "2009-11-04T01:36:36Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > [This](http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE52P60220090326) is the UN Resolution to which **intention** is alluding. It’s a non-binding resolution which condemns religious “defamation” (specifically condemning “Christianophobia” and anti-semitism along with Islamophobia) and calls for religious tolerance. It has no force of law, makes nothing a crime, and proposes no infringements on free speech. It’s just a little statement that says, “religious defmation is bad…m’kay.” > > **Intention’s** characterization is completely fraudulent. Reuters, in the cite you provided, doesn’t report that it is benign “defamation is bad m’kay” at all. I had said that a radical action was: > [@](#): > > signing on to the UN statement proposing that it be a crime for me to say that Mohammed is a flaming asshole Reuters said (emphasis mine): > [@](#): > > GENEVA (Reuters) - A United Nations forum on Thursday passed a resolution condemning “defamation of religion” as a human rights violation, despite **wide concerns that it could be used to justify curbs on free speech in Muslim countries**. > > The U.N. Human Rights Council adopted the non-binding text, proposed by Pakistan on behalf of Islamic states, with a vote of 23 states in favor and 11 against, with 13 abstentions. > > **Western governments and a broad alliance of activist groups have voiced dismay about the religious defamation text** , which adds to recent efforts to broaden the concept of human rights to protect communities of believers rather than individuals. > > … > > It called on states to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are protected, to **reinforce laws “to deny impunity” for those exhibiting intolerance of ethnic and religious minorities** , and “to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs.” > > … > > India and Canada also took to the floor of the Geneva-based Council to raise objections to the OIC text. Both said the text looked too narrowly at the discrimination issue. > > “It is individuals who have rights, not religions,” Ottawa’s representative told the body. “Canada believes that to extend (the notion of) defamation beyond its proper scope would **jeopardize the fundamental right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom of expression on religious subjects**.” > > … > > Earlier this week, 180 secular, religious and media groups from around the world urged diplomats to reject the resolution which they said **“may be used in certain countries to silence and intimidate human rights activists, religious dissenters and other independent voices”** and ultimately restrict freedoms. Note the part where it says the resolution seeks to “reinforce laws “to deny impunity” for those exhibiting intolerance of ethnic and religious minorities”. As in, throw blasphemers in jail … So I’m not the only one who thinks that it is a mistake to propose that it be a crime to call the Prophet Mohammed an asshole. The representatives of India and Canada and 180 secular, religious and media groups have raised exactly the same objection that I raise. It jeopardizes freedom of expression on religious subjects. Which to me, is radical. I believe what the Canadian representative said, that it is individuals that have rights, not religions. And I believe what the 180 organizations said, which is that the resolution may be used to silence and intimidate religious dissenters. Anyone who thinks that is not dangerous is not following the world news. And for the people that claim I’m just quoting some right-wing fool, note that a wide range of governments, the media, religious, and secular groups oppose this crap. Are you accusing all of them of being “dittoheads” as well??? Your attempts at guilt by association are a joke. I don’t care who says or doesn’t say what I might say. I look at what I think is right, not who else might have said it. In this case there’s lots of folks who agree with me, but that’s not the point except in your minds, so I bring it up. I follow what I think is right, and ugly as it might seem, sometimes even Rush is right, a blind hog will find an acorn once in a while. This is a horrible resolution, one which tries to enshrine blasphemy laws and attempts to justify criminalization of opinion on religion. Do you people not understand the concept of freedom of speech, or do you just not care? Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I’m a cartoonist who produced a set of [12 cartoons](http://homepage.mac.com/williseschenbach/.Public/Interview_With_The_Prophet.pdf) (PDF, zoom out to read it at proper size) of the Prophet in honor of the 12 Danish cartoonish who are still to this day under death threats for drawing pictures of the Prophet. So I am a bit touchy on this subject, but for good reason, people have been killed for doing what I did. Your bullshit about “religious defamation is bad m’kay” provides justification and support for the maniacs who killed Theo Van Gogh and their ilk. You may find that trivial … I don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/589 "2009-11-04T01:42:53Z")
Nothing you bolded supported your bullshit assertion. People “expressing fears” doesn’t mean jack shit. The resolution made nothing illegal. All it did was make a hollow condemnation of religious defamation. My Mr. Mackey characterization was completely accurate, and your pathetic appeal to pity doesn’t change the fact that you mischaracterized the resolution. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/590 "2009-11-04T03:04:42Z")
> [@intention](#): > > And since MSNBC has totally ignored the story since the beginning, you are right that we will hear about it … but perhaps not from MSNBC. Then again, perhaps it will, since I pointed out that searching for “Black Panthers polling station” on MSNBC’s own search function returned 30 hits. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Obama’s drop is only relative to numbers that started as absurdly high to begin with. He’s still solidly over 50%, which is remarkable for a President dealing with a recession, a two front war and a media complex devoted to a full scale, 24/7 demonization campaign. Oh, come on, dude. That dog won’t hunt. Obama’s approval ratings have dropped massively, regardless of the circumstances. Whether he could have done anything to prevent that is an open question. > [@intention](#): > > As to what he has done that is radical, oh, how about signing on to the UN statement proposing that it be a crime for me to say that Mohammed is a flaming asshole … radical enough for you? There are about thirty United Nations General Assembly votes a day, plus anything from one to a dozen Security Council and any number of committee votes. I highly doubt anybody bothered to brief Obama on the _nonbinding_ resolution before it was voted on, except perhaps to say, “oh, and the ambassador will be voting on a resolution condemning religious intolerance.” ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/591 "2009-11-04T03:25:55Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > … There are about thirty United Nations General Assembly votes a day, plus anything from one to a dozen Security Council and any number of committee votes. I highly doubt anybody bothered to brief Obama on the _nonbinding_ resolution before it was voted on, except perhaps to say, “oh, and the ambassador will be voting on a resolution condemning religious intolerance.” As contentious as this one was, being the subject of intense debate since it was originally introduced in March, if they didn’t brief Obama then he was very poorly served. Nor was this just any resolution. It was introduced by that bastion of human rights, Egypt, and one other country … the US. So if Obama didn’t know about it, shame on him. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/592 "2009-11-04T03:33:09Z")
Well, for what it’s worth, India apparently didn’t object to the resolution very strongly, seeing how it [abstained](http://www.ifex.org/international/2009/03/30/article_19_and_cihrs_condemn_un/) from the vote. I can’t find the actual text of the resolution anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/593 "2009-11-04T03:34:54Z")
I can’t believe I’m seeing Diogenes the Cynic defending blasphemy laws, or at least shrugging this resolution off as nothing to worry about. Aren’t you the guy who hates religion? I’ve seen you go bananas over much smaller matters of religious intrusion into affairs of the state. Or is it only Christians that bother you? I also never thought I’d see the day that Canada would be standing up against the U.S. on an issue of individual rights of expression, and be on the side the angels. Oh, happy day! ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/594 "2009-11-04T03:35:04Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Then again, perhaps it will, since I pointed out that searching for “Black Panthers polling station” on MSNBC’s own search function returned 30 hits. I couldn’t reproduce that result. I tried it, and it gave me 10 results, but all of them were blogger comments … what am I doing wrong? I went to [msnbc.msn.com](http://msnbc.msn.com), typed in the search string “Black Panthers polling station”. I got ten results. None of them were articles about the incident, every one was a blogger’s comment. Here’s one blogger that came up in the search … > [@](#): > > I don’t understand why NBC and the other station are not talking about the situtation that happen in Philly with the Black Panthers at the voting place My question exactly. What am I missing here? ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/595 "2009-11-04T03:36:16Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Well, for what it’s worth, India apparently didn’t object to the resolution very strongly, seeing how it [abstained](http://www.ifex.org/international/2009/03/30/article_19_and_cihrs_condemn_un/) from the vote. > > I can’t find the actual text of the resolution anywhere. That was the vote on a very similar resolution back in March. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/596 "2009-11-04T03:57:37Z")
From a column in USAToday entitled “[Just say no to blasphemy laws](http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/10/column-just-say-no-to-blasphemy-laws-.html)”: > [@](#): > > Blasphemy prosecutions in the West appear to have increased after the riots by Muslims following the publication of cartoons disrespecting prophet Mohammed in Denmark in 2005. Rioters killed Christians, burned churches and called for the execution of the cartoonists. While Western countries publicly defended free speech, some quietly moved to deter those who’d cause further controversies through unpopular speech. > > In Britain, it is a crime to “abuse” or “threaten” a religion under the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006. A 15-year-old boy was charged last year for holding up a sign outside a Scientology building declaring, "Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult. "In France, famed actress Brigitte Bardot was convicted for saying in 2006 that Muslims were ruining France in a letter to then-Interior Minister (and now President) Nicolas Sarkozy. This year, Ireland joined this self-destructive trend with a blasphemy law that calls for the prosecution of anyone who writes or utters views deemed “grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion; and he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.” > > ‘Blasphemy’ incidents > > Consider just a few such Western “blasphemy” cases in the past two years: > > • In Holland, Dutch prosecutors arrested cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot for insulting Christians and Muslims with cartoons, including one that caricatured a Christian fundamentalist and a Muslim fundamentalist as zombies who want to marry and attend gay rallies. > > • In Canada, the Alberta human rights commission punished the Rev. Stephen Boission and the Concerned Christian Coalition for anti-gay speech, not only awarding damages but also censuring future speech that the commission deems inappropriate. > > • In Italy, comedian Sabina Guzzanti was put under criminal investigation for joking at a rally that “in 20 years, the pope will be where he ought to be — in hell, tormented by great big poofter (gay) devils, and very active ones.” > > • In London, an aide to British Foreign Secretary David Miliband was arrested for “inciting religious hatred” at his gym by shouting obscenities about Jews while watching news reports of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza.Also, Dutch politician Geert Wilders was barred from entering Britain as a “threat to public policy, public security or public health” because he made a movie describing the Quran as a “fascist” book and Islam as a violent religion. > > • In Poland, Catholic magazine Gosc Niedzielny was fined $11,000 for inciting "contempt, hostility and malice"by comparing the abortion of a woman to the medical experiments at Auschwitz. > > The “blasphemy” cases include the prosecution of writers for calling Mohammed a “pedophile” because of his marriage to 6-year-old Aisha (which was consummated when she was 9). A far-right legislator in Austria, a publisher in India and a city councilman in Finland have been prosecuted for repeating this view of the historical record. The UN Resolution is a clear intrusion on free speech, and should never have been sponsored by the US. It provides cover for Islamic governments to jail people for criticizing their religion, and encourages western governments to follow Ireland’s lead and criminalize blasphemy. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/597 "2009-11-04T03:58:01Z")
> [@intention](#): > > I couldn’t reproduce that result. I tried it, and it gave me 10 results, but all of them were blogger comments … what am I doing wrong? I went to [msnbc.msn.com](http://msnbc.msn.com), typed in the search string “Black Panthers polling station”. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/?id=11881780&q=black%20panthers%20polling%20station&p=1&st=1&sm=user](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/?id=11881780&q=black%20panthers%20polling%20station&p=1&st=1&sm=user) It’s not just you, because I did it just now and got _one_ hit, then did it again and got 35. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/598 "2009-11-04T04:01:07Z")
> [@intention](#): > > The UN Resolution is a clear intrusion on free speech, and should never have been sponsored by the US. It provides cover for Islamic governments to jail people for criticizing their religion, and encourages western governments to follow Ireland’s lead and criminalize blasphemy. It doesn’t provide anything. Nobody reads UN resolutions unless they’re desperately hunting for excuses to do silly things. In any case, Ireland is firmly under the thumb of the Catholic Church. Most of the other western democracies are not, and you’ll notice that all those examples refer to speech directed at minority religions. Incidentally, the UK Racial and Religious Hatred Act was passed in order to give the government an excuse to deport people like [Omar Bakri](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Bakri_Muhammad), which I’m perfectly alright with. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/599 "2009-11-04T04:12:10Z")
One has to blame the mainstream tedia for failing to advise us of the earth-shattering significance of this resolution. I am, like so many of you, stunned. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/600 "2009-11-04T04:14:55Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I can’t believe I’m seeing Diogenes the Cynic defending blasphemy laws There aren’t any “blasphemy laws.” This resolution doesn’t make any laws at all. > [@](#): > > ,or at least shrugging this resolution off as nothing to worry about. What is there to worry about? what part of “religious intolerance is bad, mkay” do you disagree with? > [@](#): > > Aren’t you the guy who hates religion? No. You must be confusing me with somebody else. > [@](#): > > I’ve seen you go bananas over much smaller matters of religious intrusion into affairs of the state. How is this resolution an intrusion into anything? It’s a non-binding resolution that makes no law and abridges no expression. have you even read it? Do you have any dea what you’re talking about? > [@](#): > > Or is it only Christians that bother you? Christians don’t bother me, **Sam**. I’m married to one. I send my kids to a Catholic school. I’m not a bit bothered by any religion. Intrusions of the _state_ into religion bother me, but not religion itself. > [@](#): > > I also never thought I’d see the day that Canada would be standing up against the U.S. on an issue of individual rights of expression, and be on the side the angels. Oh, happy day! What individual right of expression is being abridged by this resolution? Be specific. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497.md?page=31)