David Swindle over at News Real Blog posted this video of Andrew "Klavan on the culture". I might not have published it myself, but I came across an individual on a discussion forum who was either not too bright or not too honest. After reading the last post I* put up with a question mark in the headline (That's that little squiggly thingy at the end of the sentence!), he concluded:
"I stumbled on a blog that is fanning the flames of this Muslim rumor"Stumbled could be apropos! He was referring to my post on the Pew poll about Obama's religion:
Is it "fanning the flames" to merely repeat the question? The reason I might question this person's aptitude or honesty, is that while he obviously took exception to what was said in the article, he linked to the site rather than specifically to the post in question. If you care to, you can decide for yourself whether or not I was "fanning the flames" of this rumor by reporting the existence of the poll and exploring why people might believe what they do. Though I will admit the line about the dog was meant to be tongue in cheek, I concluded the article by saying:
Obama's faith or lack thereof, is his own business. There's nothing wrong with being a Muslim, if he is one. The only problem would be if he had lied about it or mislead anyone about it for political expediency.
I think more people have a problem with his character and his economics than worry about his religion.
Cletus: You talked about "their idiotic conclusion that because Obama has a Muslim name, he must be one". Only, I didn't mention anything about his name other than to call him by it. Is this not customary on your planet as well? And I never said he was a Muslim, I don't know. Which part of "I think more people have a problem with his character and his economics than worry about his religion" didn't you understand?
So, Clete, in honor of your straw man argument, this post's for you!
*A couple of other writers on the blog have used the little squiggly, er, question mark in their headlines since!