Glad to see another Hurlburt edition.

I'm not sure if "Muslim World" is a patronizing form of address, but in Western political discourse -- particularly neo-con US discourse -- it often comes across as code for "Arabs and other troublemakers (i.e., Iran, the Taliban and even Pakistan if we're feeling really cowboyish.)" I do think it's patronizing to treat Muslims as if Palestine were only important to them, as a religious and/or Arab nationalism issue. Israel's treatment of Palestinians is problematic for all people who care about human rights. But it's also nuts for Muslims in Africa or Indonesia to act as if Zionism were the major issue in their lives (and plight) Having said that, Obama is speaking in Egypt, not Jakarta or Nairobi. This is the heart of the Arab world, and the players are first and foremost Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese, Saudi, Iraqi, Jordanian, Palestinian and Israeli Arabs. The wounds of war are very fresh throughout most of the region.

Delightful to see Heather back on BloggingHeads! It seems like a long time. This was a good discussion, and I understand the focus on the speech, but I was very disappointed not to hear Heather's take on the issues where Obama has been disappointing liberals -- State Secrets, "rendition", open-ended, preventive detention for some detainees, the continuation of the military commissions, etc. I'd love to hear what she has to say about the Jack Goldsmith piece, where he suggested that formal improvements in our policy toward detainees will lead to worse outcomes for suspected terrorists than (some version of) the Bush policies. Suspects will either be killed outright in drone attacks or sent to places where nobody makes the torturers put plywood on the walls that heads are slammed into. Obama, Goldsmith argues, is under tremendous pressure to prevent the next 9/11, so he like any other politician in his shoes WILL bend the rules. Perhaps our focus on upholding the rule of law will salve our consciences at the expense of worse outcomes for the terrorism suspects themselves and less intelligence for us. I don't buy this -- or anyway, I don't want to believe it

Quoting Wonderment: I'm not sure if "Muslim World" is a patronizing form of address, but in Western political discourse -- particularly neo-con US discourse -- it often comes across as code for "Arabs and other troublemakers (i.e., Iran, the Taliban and even Pakistan if we're feeling really cowboyish.)"

I think your comment about neo-con use of the phrase "Muslim World" is libel. Neo-cons don't think Muslims or the Muslim world are a problem, they think Muslim extremists and Muslim autocrats are the problem. Saddam Hussein was a problem, Osama bin Laden is a problem, the mullahs in Iran are a problem, and the Taliban are a problem. True neo-cons only ever had a problem with Saddam Hussein and the despotism in the Muslim world, never an issue with Muslims or Arabs. They care about Muslims just as much as you do Wonderment, maybe even more so since they've gotten Saddam Hussein removed from power and a non-authoritarian central government setup in Iraq. The Taliban are no longer in control of Afghanistan as well, another neo-con accomplishment and a manifestation of their love for Muslims.

Quoting Lyle: They care about Muslims just as much as you do Wonderment

Let's settle this. Who has killed more Muslims? Wonderment? Or neo-cons? Of course, if you're going to be slippery and use a phrase such as "true neo-cons," in order to define the viewpoint out of existence...well...actually, I'm willing to bet that Wonderment has killed fewer Muslims than even "true neo-cons" have (even if "true neo-cons" don't really exist).

Quoting kidneystones: ...I don't know how many Muslims Mr. Obama actually knows, but the Muslims I know would probably get-up and leave midway through this extraordinarily insulting attempt to portray America a 'Muslim' nation...

Doesn't ks live in Japan? And, "insulting attempt" - to whom, exactly?

Quoting kidneystones: Has to be seen and heard to be believed. I don't know how many Muslims Mr. Obama actually knows, but the Muslims I know would probably get-up and leave midway through this extraordinarily insulting attempt to portray America a 'Muslim' nation. Or else call him on it to his face. Yes, America is one of the largest Muslim nations in the world. I mean it's so obvious, NBA, NFL, Thanksgiving, the Koran.

Here is the transcript of the interview. Please indicate where Obama said anything about the NBA, NFL, Thanksgiving, or the Koran. Or where he said "America [is] a 'Muslim' nation." He did say something like the latter, in this context:

What I want to do is to create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Now, the flip side is I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively

Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, and al Qaeda have killed more though... haha (not to mention the variety of despots governing predominantly Muslim countries).

I think Brendan is right here. Although Obama's statement is not true if taken literally, I think most people understand the point he's making is to try to say there are many Muslims in America and creating a division between "Muslim countries" and "America" is somewhat false. I personally find this kinda talk somewhat patronizing because I think it overstates the number of Muslims in America and the influence they have on American society but to be honest most American Muslims eat this kinda stuff up are happy if they are not going to be influential and powerful, to be told or have it pretended that they are numerous and influential. I don't know at what point a community reaches the tipping point between just feeling happy to be given symbolic recognition and actually demanding real power and influence.

Delightful to see Heather back on BloggingHeads! It seems like a long time. This was a good discussion, and I understand the focus on the speech, but I was very disappointed not to hear Heather's take on the issues where Obama has been disappointing liberals -- State Secrets, "rendition", open-ended, preventive detention for some detainees, the continuation of the military commissions, etc.

Agreed. An even broader subject for these two speechwriters to tackle would be the gap between Obama rhetoric and action. For example, -- at least where I live -- the biggest issue of disappointment so far from the Administration is the rhetoric gap between what Obama has said about gays and lesbians and the fulfillment of his promises. He has maintained his anti-gay-marriage position, even as "prominent" [sic] Republicans change their minds and even as the District of Columbia and several states have taken crucial steps to legalize same-sex marriage. The "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy has not been suspended. On the contrary, gay men and women are under continued persecution from the US Armed Forces. Gay couples applying for spousal immigration rights are denied and spousal deportation continues to be government policy. Gay and lesbian rights are

Quoting bjkeefe: Here is the transcript of the interview. Please indicate where Obama said anything about the NBA, NFL, Thanksgiving, or the Koran. Or where he said "America [is] a 'Muslim' nation."

bj, You make exactly the same kind of hyperbolic arguments from time to time. Clearly he wasn't be serious about the "quotes".

Quoting Lyle: bj,

You make exactly the same kind of hyperbolic arguments from time to time. Clearly he wasn't be serious about the "quotes".

I would be interested in your pointing to an example where you think I misrepresented what someone said in a way that parallels what kidleystones did. As to whether the supposed unseriousness of kidleystones's misrepresentation was clear or not, I understand wingnuts have their own codespeak, so maybe it was obvious to you. To the rest of us, not so much.

You do realize the Don't Ask Don't Tell is the law of the land as passed by congress and signed by President Clinton. While president Obama has felt free to disregard the law concerning bankruptcy he can't so brazenly do so with the law controlling DADT as he has no way Aas he has no way to disguise the illegality.

bj, You put words in Republican mouths all the time. Who are you kidding?

You do realize the Don't Ask Don't Tell is the law of the land as passed by congress and signed by President Clinton.

Yes, but he claims to be a "fierce warrior" for gay rights. If he made this a priority of his agenda in Congress it would be voted on immediately and repealed by the Dem. majority. Also, as Commander in Chief he has lots of authority to intervene on behalf of people currently getting kicked out of the military. There's plenty he can do that he hasn't.

How can President Obama be a "fierce warrior" for gay rights and also be totally against gays ever marrying one another? If Barack Obama is a "fierce warrior" for gay rights, is Dick Cheney a "really fierce warrior" for gay rights?

Quoting Lyle: bj,

You put words in Republican mouths all the time. Who are you kidding?

You think if you just keep repeating your assertions without offering any examples it boosts your credibility?

bj, i'm too lazy to do it, but you should be more honest with yourself and us (really just yourself though).

I would agree with most of what you say but this is not the only issue upon which he has changed his mind now that he actually has to make policy instead of make hay on the issues.

Quoting Lyle: bj,

i'm too lazy to do it, but you should be more honest with yourself and us (really just yourself though).

I'm not the one making accusations I can't back up, Lial.

Quoting Lyle: Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, and al Qaeda have killed more though... haha (not to mention the variety of despots governing predominantly Muslim countries).

Does this mean they care about Muslims the most?!?--I mean, if we're using 'care' in the True Neo-Con sense.

Quoting Lyle: is Dick Cheney a "really fierce warrior" for gay rights?

just stop at "Really fierce warrior" . . . ::shudder::

Quoting Ray: Does this mean they care about Muslims the most?!?--I mean, if we're using 'care' in the True Neo-Con sense.

No, no it dosn't. I said that they care as much about Muslims as Wonderment does. There is not most to it, they just care.

If you like cocktail parties at embassies, you'll like this. This was awful. Nothing against Heather, I've praised her many times. But this was more boring than watching paint dry, and Christian Brose is a wonderful reminder of the moronic administration that has finally left the stage. The part about the bum rap that the Bushies got because they appeared to support a Palestinian election and then not to abide by the result, that was hilarious. Thank you for digging deeper into that reality, Mr. Brose. Bring back Eli, if this is the alternative. Lowest possible rating.

Christian Brose is a wonderful reminder of the moronic administration that has finally left the stage.

You couldn't be more wrong, the morons were those who take BO seriously on his continuing apology circuit, treating his audience as kindergarten-level gullible with his dishonest historical revision: "We can stand up for human rights, stand up for democracy. But I think it's a mistake for us to somehow suggest that we're not going to deal with countries around the world in the absence of their meeting all our criteria for democracy."
Mr Brose actually and correctly calls him out on this: Shunning non-democracies, and other things that never happened ".........we'll never have a serious approach to the complex issue of balancing interests and values in our foreign policy, as well as the trade-offs between them, if we continue to traffic in baseless caricatures like this. If these are the assumptions that will inform Obama's Cairo speech, to say nothing of his foreign policy, then this will be quite disappointing."

Quoting kidneystones: What, he said was China is the largest Muslim nation in the world by population and that Russia is the largest nation in the world by land mass.

Russia, China, and the US are the largest Muslim nations in the world.

Everybody knows that.

Check the transcript.

The President does not mention either Russia or China in the transcript I linked to above (repeated here). If you are talking about some other transcript, please provide a link.

Get a life...and a brain.

I hate to assign too much import to what comes out of politician's mouths, and this may be more so when the politician in question is head of state. In that case the verbiage might have little more meaning then the percieved need to utter soothing sounds. Still, that first quoted paragraph seems, well, really bad: What I want to do is to create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The US needs to explain to the Muslim world how we think about terrorism? Because we think they are too thick to figure out we are against it? Do they need to be enlightened about a view that a "Western" life is worth ten or a hundred of their lives? Or that we are prone to irrational responses if provoked? I'm probably missing

cragger said (usual quoting mechanism avoided to preserve italics):

I hate to assign too much import to what comes out of politician's mouths, and this may be more so when the politician in question is head of state. In that case the verbiage might have little more meaning then the percieved need to utter soothing sounds. Still, that first quoted paragraph seems, well, really bad:

What I want to do is to create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

The US needs to explain to the Muslim world how we think about terrorism? Because we think they are too thick to figure out we are against it? Do they need to be enlightened about a view that a "Western" life is worth ten or a hundred of their lives? Or that we are

Quoting kidneystones: While the US press is largely ready (as always) to cut the administration, the French press is having a field day with: "si l’on compte le nombre d’Américains musulmans on voit que les Etats-Unis sont l’un des plus grands pays musulmans de la planète"

Every major French news outlet press is all over Obama on the eve of his big speech for claiming America is one of the biggest muslim nations on the planet.

Le Monde headlines the claim. What an idiot.

Quick! Check the transcript!

Sorry, kid, but one of the regrets of my life is that my high school French has not stuck very well, due to lack of use in the years since. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by supplying "evidence" that few on this board can read, but then, I've never understood anything about you. [Added] I can puzzle out the headline to see that it matches what it says (in English) in the transcript I have linked to before, and I've already said what I have to say as far as Obama saying the US is "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." Perhaps you would

Quoting kidneystones: [...]

Here, kid. Let me add to your dark fantasies. This is a picture (via Al Giordano) of the President of the United States and how everyone will be required to dress in his presence from now on.

Quoting kidneystones: Neat, huh?

Pass the lube.

Well at least he isn't bowing to the Saudi potentate this time around.

Quoting piscivorous: Well at least he isn't bowing to the Saudi potentate this time around.

Yep. He's moved on to someone else in this regard.

Quoting piscivorous: Well at least he isn't bowing to the Saudi potentate this time around.

ZOMG!!! MORE BOWING!!!1! Hat tip to Betty Cracker, who pointed out the "several excitable wingnuts," and concludes:

Can this shit get any dumber? (Of course it can!)

Works like a charm.

I believe he could do more. The talents that many of these individuals have is needed in other parts of the government. He could immediately hire them into one of the departments as they would generally have the security clearances to do similar type work out side one of the Armed Forces. They would get a pay raise, more bennies and most would get to come home to their own bed at night. I know there would be some haranguing, from the right, about interfering in the civil service hiring process but he could blow that off through his powers as CINC and national security in a time of war. If nothing else it would force a showdown in the House and Senate.

Cheney loves gays more than President Obama.