Slashdot Mirror


Poll Finds 23 Percent of Texans Think Obama is Muslim

A University of Texas poll has found that 23 percent of Texans are convinced that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is a Muslim. Only 45 percent of the people polled correctly identified Obama as a Protestant Christian. Nationwide, the number of people who believe in the "Secret Muslim Conspiracy" is about the same as those who believe that the moon landing was faked (5-10 percent), which makes the high numbers in Texas unusual.

30 of 562 comments (clear)

  1. How could 63% of people be wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That doesn't make sense.

    -- Proud Texan

    1. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      yur bein eliteist with that arthmitic.

    2. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by onix · · Score: 5, Funny

      Texas doesn't make sense.

    3. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by joggle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Boy, that's easy. Let me count the ways:

      Most people agreed with Greenspan that derivatives shouldn't be regulated. Greenspan himself no longer has that view (and he's a staunch libertarian).

      Most people (in America) thought there were WMDs in Iraq before the invasion.

      Most people opposed the $700 billion bailout. I've yet to find a serious economist or capitalist who believes that no action was a valid alternative--we were a hair away from a complete financial halt in the credit/security market which would have quickly halted our entire economy. But, of course, most people haven't taken basic economic courses (much less advanced ones).

      And so on. This is why we don't live in a pure Democracy but elect our peers to lead the rest of us for a number of years--the majority isn't always right.

    4. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by LingNoi · · Score: 4, Funny

      So... you're saying that Obama is a muslim?

    5. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What about the entire Austrian school, which holds that government meddling is what caused the crisis and more meddling can only make things worse?

      That answer does not address the question. The question asked for a specific "serious economist or capitalist", not a generic "school."

      Is there a specific person representing this "Austrian school" who is quoted in a reliable source as saying that no action was a valid alternative?

      That means, quoted recently, specificly addressing this crisis; not quotes showing they said years ago "well, in the future when the mortgage default crisis is going to cause a liquidity crisis in the world, our theoretical analysis is going to recommend that no action should be taken."

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    6. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's the same percentage in the state that view the Flintstones as a documentary - and know that the world is flat, 'cos things don't fall off of it.

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    7. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by Flavio · · Score: 4, Informative

      Quoting the austrian school in serious economic discussions is like quoting creationists or flat-earthers. It's pseudo-science to a degree that real economists are embarrassed by them.

      Liar. Hayek is one of the best known economists in world history, who won the Nobel Prize for showing how government intervention is responsible for the business cycle. He was a member of the austrian school, and his advisor was Ludwig von Mises, a highly influential austrian school economist. A quick Wikipedia search will reveal many other noteworthy economists aligned with the austrian school.

      You're probably just another dumbass who thinks the free market got us into this mess, when in fact all we've seen in the last 100 years is an interventionist economic policy based on central banking.

    8. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by Flavio · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Give me a break. Why is it that any time someone disagrees with someone they call the other person a liar? There is a difference between being wrong and lying you know.

      Because his association of austrian economics and flat-earthers was an obvious attempt to deceive. His comment never had an argument based on logic, science or history which could only pass as "wrong", because it wasn't the product of an honest mistake. It was a demonstrably false attempt to ridicule which deserved to be called upon.

      I'm not going to tip toe around this matter just for the sake of being politically correct.

    9. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Austrain school of thought which Ron Paul subscribes to studies mathmatical curves of supply and demand and how they should mathmatically balance (when the market is perfect). The problem is market perfection is like a limit in Calculus. You aim for it but its never there. You only get closer and closer to it (for those who do not know what limits are).

      For a perfect market you need to have perfectly rational human beings who are well informed %100 of the time. Also in a perfect market there are no monopolies, no barriers of entry, no perfect substitutes, and eveything is always balanced out where if one person ruins the market another balances to offset any correction so everyone is happy in this perfect capitalist utopia.

      Here is reality:
      - Economists do not take human/consumer behavior courses. Humans like to shop at the same place which is why chains are so popular and they may not always be the most informed or care if one place has what they need for cheaper. I go to Walmart and thats it .. etc.
      - Investors are not rational. That says it all ... and look what they have done?
      - No laws against bad loans and no laws about disclosure of ARMS. Most of the time they are in page 21 of the contract in lawyer speak in very small print and the bank does not mention its an arm. Only WOW 500k for only $1600 a month!!
      - Yes its true taxes due change consumer behavior but what are you going to do? Have a volunteer pay system for the military, damns, bridges, hospitals, etc on all public goods?
      - People try to get ahead sometimes does not balance but rather tilts the economy so either ther corporations, home owners, or banks try to rig the system for maximum profits which destabilized the market rather than balanced it.
      - I do not like what Microsoft and Walmart are doing. I am sure we can just compete agaisnt them and take them down tomorrow right? ... uh no. Monopolies are market failures and are not caused by the government. Barriers of entry are the problem by proprietary software or those who have insane power on suppliers

      So sorry but regulation can be good ... GRASP! . Ronald Reagan may have made it unpopular in the west but the only people who support this system are corporations and investors looking to make a quick buck. Its not socialism or communism to have regulations. People are not rational and do things that harm others and themselves. Normally I like to think if someone is dumb enough to shoot themselves in the foot that is their problem. However, we are all suffering indirectly from what a few irrational people did and that is not fair.

    10. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by tuxgeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Obama did refuse to put his hand ofer his heart
      and he did refuse to wear flag lapels when everyone else was doing it

      I really don't know why everybody is making such an issue over this shit.

      Putting your hand over your heart during the PoA isn't a requirement in any manual I've seen. Most of us have just been programmed to do this from when we were young, but if you think about it, it's just a superficial gesture. Some do it, & some don't. Get over it!

      As for the lapel pin, that is a republican thing. They thought it up. It also means absolutely nothing. It is almost sacrilege the way they make such an issue over it too. Considering how badly they have fucked the country up over the past 12 years.
      I don't wear a lapel pin. I'm sure you don't either. Can we let it all go now and just keep moving forward?

      --
      "Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself." Mark Twain
    11. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by otopico · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps it is time we stop being robots and realize that wearing of a flag or posing in a certain way during a song or some bullshit feel good 'pledge' is nothing more than a motion. If a person not putting their hand over some internal organ makes you wonder about that person's patriotism or 'respect' for traditions, it seems it says more about you than them. Questioning a person's decisions because of that makes you look like a simpleton. But at least you aren't alone. I guess intentional ignorance truly is bliss.

      Questioning anyone's patriotism and deciding it isn't as genuine or as true as yours is one of the foundations of fascism.

      Sorry, but too many people have died to let ignorant people take us down that road.

    12. Re:How could 63% of people be wrong? by IICV · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not sure if the law is enforceable or if it even has penalties but it is there and Obama claims he is a constitutional lawyer so he should know about it.

      Why don't you pay attention to what it says?

      (A) all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart;

      It's a recommendation on how you should behave, not a requirement. Just like in an RFC, the difference between "must", and "should" is important.

  2. Well, as they say... by joggle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Texas is a whole 'nother country.

    They have great ice cream (Blue Bell), great water parks (Schlitterbahn), nice lakes and neat caverns. But they also have a lot of insular communities in the country (I grew up in one...not fun if you disagree with the pack/herd).

  3. I guess I'm not suprised by iamthelinuxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The tide is turning. I've been a Texan all my life. Conservative talk radio dominates the AM dial and like they say...garbage in...garbage out. I'm constantly amazed how blindly my neighbors follow the party line. Lies and innuendo are accepted as fact. I hate to admit it, but the Christian Conservative movement has turned the whole fight into an us-against-them battle and it's impossible to make rational arguments when it's gotten to that level. There are those of us here that see the absurdity and will be voting for Obama. I don't agree with everything he stands for. Illegal immigration is a huge issue here. We don't really understand why politicians don't stand up for the American worker. Our jobs are being de-valued by workers who come here and will accept a non-living wage for most Americans. Our federal government hands out money hand over fist for welfare, health benefit and education to people that have no legal right to be here. Other than that, I agree with Obama's plans completely. The myth that the market will take care of itself has finally been debunked and hopefully we will get some sane regulation put back in place. I hope we can bring our troops back home and balance the budget. I hope we can do something about health care. I hope we can do something about our reliance on foreign oil. I hope we can help the unfortunate here at home that have slipped through the cracks due to our own selfishness. I believe that Obama is our best hope for a better future...and as a native Texan...he has my vote.

    1. Re:I guess I'm not suprised by geekoid · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Um, illegal immigarants sdo not take jobs away from Americans, in fact they do jobs Americans wont.
      The old ways were the best. The came into the country, they did seasonal work no one else would, and take cash back toMexico where it improved there live and allowed communities to grow to a point where they culd start making things better, which means less immigrants.
      Then Reagan fucked that up pandering to ignorant fears. So now it's a one way trip.

      Two years ago there were whole fields rotting becasue there where no immigrants, and no locals would pick cabbage.
      The farmer was offering 10 - 12 and hour PLUS benefits. Acres just rotted.

      Now you could argue that they shuodl pay for, except farming respond to other fixed factors.

      I wonder what people would do when all there produce started costing 5 times + in price?

      Have you ever picked? I have, for 3 hours and walked away. It's a damn tough job, and anyone who could would find other work for the price.

      Immigrants I have lived near have all been hard working people, doing crap jobs and instilling strong work ethic into their kids so their kids don't have to pick.

      Really, there needs to be a quick to get seasonal Visa for farm workers.

      "Our federal government hands out money hand over fist for welfare, health benefit and education to people that have no legal right to be here."

      No, not really to that degree. Also, people who work here pay taxes on their income. They will never get SS, but they pay into it.

      Besides, since they can't reasonably go back after season anymore, they stay. This wouldn't be an issue if they could go back.

      Add to that the fact that the cost of securing the border would be more then the money immigrants might be getting in services.

      It's not like they come here and take bankers job, or tech jobs.

      Don't even get me started on what it would take to send them all back.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:I guess I'm not suprised by segedunum · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I feel for you. Man, those Christian fundamentalists have really screwed up conservative values. I'm a Christian myself, and I think we can all agree that some spiritual grounding and much of the stuff in the Bible are good things.

      The problem I have with the Christian Conservatives is they display little in the way of Christian understanding and compassion, and the way they literally interpret the Bible and think they are good Christians scares the shit out of me. Dare I say it, they sound just as bad, if not worse, than the Islamic fundamentalists they rail against.

    3. Re:I guess I'm not suprised by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In a market economy, that's a clear example of not paying sufficiently.

      So how much are you prepared to pay for your cabbage? Farmers aren't going to let themselves make a loss on it...

    4. Re:I guess I'm not suprised by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dare I say it, they sound just as bad, if not worse, than the Islamic fundamentalists they rail against.

      It's fundementalism / extremism that is the brain fart, it doesn't really matter what religion or ideology they've latched on to.

      It was an epiphany that came when I realized that people who dig up bad shit in the quran are actively looking for bad shit which they can use to justify hating muslims. They are just the other side of the coin of islamic fundamentalists who dig up the same bad shit in the quran so that they can justify hating non-muslims.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  4. Forget black or female president... by thenewguy001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dream of the day when an atheist/agnostic person can be elected to the presidency; when a candidate's religious orientation does not matter; when we can truly have separation of church and state.

    1. Re:Forget black or female president... by PhasmatisApparatus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Let's see...
      Republican Christians will claim the Athiest is the antichrist.
      Democrat Christians will claim the Athiest is too Fundamentalist(TM).
      Republican Athiests will never get any airtime.
      Conspiracy theorists will still claim he's Muslim. In chain emails.

    2. Re:Forget black or female president... by aaron+alderman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Australia had an openly atheist Prime Minister in the 80's. (Bob Hawke)

  5. In other news, Texas secesseds by russlar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Forms Republic of Dumbfuckistan

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
  6. Re:woah woah woah by CSMatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I don't like the idea that I must submit to Allah. Does this make me hateful? A bigot?"

    Which is why the Constitution prohibits a state religion. And at any rate, the President does not legitimately have the power to declare law, only enforce it.

    "The President has the ability to veto and make decisions, and these in turn affect me, you and the world. What is his or her ideology? Are they pro women's rights? A Muslim, holding to Sharia law, sees women as less-than-human."

    Is this much different from the fundamentalist Christain view that women belong in the home (a view that itself is far more moderate compared to what the Bible says about women's rights)? Just like everyone doesn't agree with the Christain fundamentalists yet still claims to believe in the religion, not everyone who labels themselves as Muslim necessarily has the same strict interpretation. Not to mention that if this kind of thing does happen, the President risks losing his or her re-election because of the small amount of Muslims in the country, many of which might not even agree with his or her specific ideology.

  7. Truth Revealed by Jekler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If nothing else, this year's campaigns have shown me how easily manipulated the general public is. It's not just people in Texas, but close friends of mine. I can't even vocalize how shocked I was to have someone I always believed to be an intelligent person confide in me his belief that Barack Obama is a "secret Muslim".

    I can't believe how often and with how much confidence I see pundits, news anchors, editors, and journalists make claims about one candidate and simultaneously brush off exactly the same claim about their favored candidate. I mean to watch Bill Kristol essentially say, with a smile on his face, "It's only socialist if a Democrat does it." or "They're only radical associates if we're talking about Barack Obama." and then brush off the entire conversation the moment Palin's associations are mentioned.

    It makes me think of one of Dr. Phil's favorite phrases "Right Fighters". They don't want to do what works, they want to be right. 95% of the people in this country wouldn't care if the candidate they've chosen blew up the whole fucking world, they'd never admit to being wrong. They'd just smile as their skin boiled off and say "Yeah, well your guy would have been worse."

    I'm ashamed to even participate in this process. I'm ashamed to be saddled with the burden of even having to share a species with Sean Hannity. I don't want the other species of the world to make the mistake of thinking we've got anything in common. More than anything else, I think this election has just made me feel hugely ashamed. It doesn't matter who wins, humanity already lost.

    The political interests now directly control the media. Journalists aren't even reporting or investigating anymore, they work for lobbyists and politicians while pretending to be informing the people. It's sad that comedians like Jon Stewart are so much closer to reporting reality than Fox News or CNN. As I'm sure everyone has now watched, they discussed Marsha Brady on CNN like she's a real person. That's what this whole thing is about. People who can't differentiate between reality and fantasy. Of course so many people believe Obama is a secret Muslim, anyone who thinks the Brady Bunch is a documentary is prone to believe anything.

    1. Re:Truth Revealed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I doubt you're really interested in expanding your mind but, since I feel like taking a break from work, I'll venture to suggest a slightly less simple-minded world view.

      The difference between Christians, Jews, and Muslims is seen in the differences in the countries in which they're dominant.

      Really? So would you care to elaborate on the difference between the Philippines (dominated by Christians) and Indonesia (dominated by Muslims)?

      ... I don't see anyone trying to force the worst parts of fundamentalist Christianity on everyone by law and succeeding.

      That may depend on your definition of worst.

      Let's start with a well-known, but rather trivial, example: clothes. There are a couple Muslim countries in the world that require women to wear burkas. Pretty bad, right? Clothes are a matter of individual freedom, right? So, try walking around naked in the USA. See how far you get before you're a convicted sex offender facing a lifetime of severe persecution. We talk about the USA and all of a sudden clothes are a matter of community standards (rather than individual freedom). Oh, the problem in the Muslim countries is discrimination: that they have different dress standards for men and women? Well, try walking around topless in the USA as a woman and see how far you get.

      But let's move on to a more serious example: forcing your religion on other people. It turns out that there are young men that live such limited lives that they conclude that their own culture and religion is so superior to other religions and cultures that it must imposed on people in foreign countries by force. So, these young men travel to other countries and kill people in those other countries in an attempt to force them to adopt the "superior" culture and religion. How many simple-minded young men from the USA are currently killing people in the Middle East in an attempt to force people in the Middle East to adopt a more American culture and religion? A couple hundred thousand - quite a few. Now, how many people from the Middle East are killing people in the USA in an attempt to force people in the USA to adopt a more Middle Eastern culture and religion. Not very many. Maybe a few dozen - depending how you count.

      But let's take a step back and look at the specific situation in the Middle East. You've got a bunch of immigrants from Europe and the USA who have moved to the Middle East, driven out most of the locals and set up a country that is explicitly proclaimed to be a country for an ethnic group of people other than most people in the Middle East. At present, this new little country of European and American immigrants has set up a system very similar to South African apartheid to beat up on the locals.

      Why? A lot of it has to do with certain aspects of fundamentalist Christian and Jewish religions. The Jewish fundamentalists believe they were given the land by their god. The fundamentalist Christians believe that they've got to set this little country up to bring about some kind of apocalyptic "end-times" scenario.

      Either way, to people in the Middle East, it looks like they're getting beat up on by people who are drawn to the worst aspects of Christianity and Judaism. Of course, if I've convinced you of the evils of religion generally, you might try going to live in one of the last remaining communist countries that favors atheism: say, North Korea.

  8. Re:Not Muslim, but... by samkass · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, he's not Muslim, but his attending a rather radical black theology church with a rather strange pastor combined with other "interesting" seeming Muslim-sympathetic beliefs or actions do seem to point to a non-full disclosure of his beliefs, etc.

    Um, you haven't read his book, have you? The first one, titled "Dreams from my Father", describes in detail how he was referred to Rev. Wright's church and what it meant to him, and described his transition from being Christian only in name to acquiring a belief system. The second one, "The Audacity of Hope", was named after the name of the first sermon he heard at Rev Wright's church and discusses the progression of his thinking and approach to government and belief. He may be accused of a lot of things, but lack of full disclosure CAN NOT be one of them. His entire life is, quite literally, an open book available for all to read.

    Obama is the type of person who can freely discuss ideas with a great variety of people without adopting them. He especially values differing opinions, which I like as something that will help prevent any "failures of imagination" in his administration. Rev. Wright to him was a focal point for many disparate beliefs and influences, and despite some incendiary language helped him see many issues more clearly. In other words, Rev Wright was more of a lens than the source of light for Obama (at least that's my impression from his books).

    I think this is why McCain has rightly shied away from challenging Obama's beliefs. Because they actually are one of Obama's strengths, especially compared to McCain's own.

    --
    E pluribus unum
  9. Re:woah woah woah by MicktheMech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you're reading a different New Testament than I am.

  10. Real question by SupremoMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How many of the 23% think that him being a Muslim would be a problem? There is difference between being uninformed and being a bigot.

  11. Re:I wouldn't be so sure if I were you by Clandestine_Blaze · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, Osama Bin Laden can call President George W. Bush a Muslim for efficiently doing something that he couldn't do - increase membership to al-Qaeda. But that wouldn't make Geroge W. Bush a Muslim. When I visit my relatives in Iran, the government of Iran considers me a Muslim, but I don't consider myself one, and I'm not. They don't ask me to pray five times a day and don't quiz me on the Koran upon entering the country. And so what if Senator Obama WAS a Muslim? There is no way Obama would be able to suddenly install Sharia Law all over America (which is what most people fear) without approval from Congress and the American people. He would be impeached for treason immediately.

    There are many American Muslims that would be certainly qualified for Presidency. There are also many Muslims that serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, but I don't see you bitching about them. So it's okay for them to die for this country, but not okay to lead it?

    I couldn't care less about a candidate's religion unless they wore it on their sleeve and wanted to pass laws and executive orders that changed the way I lived. This is precisely why the current crop of Republicans concern me, because they abandoned their "small Government" platform and went after the evangelical vote. They started pandering to the very people who want ME to follow their laws, their version of history, and their Bible. I am willing to vote for a Muslim, a Christian, a Catholic, a Buddhist, a Zoroastrian, an Atheist, and a Satanist (etc.) as long as they lead the country with rational thinking, intelligence, and submit to the will of the American people, not the other way around.

    Besides, Obama would not last a MINUTE in office if he became President, then suddenly said "GOTCHA, I'm an evil Muslim, and I'm going to enslave you infidels." :P