Friday, February 6, 2015

Obama: Let's not "get on our high horse" about Islamic terrorists ...

...They're no worse than Christians.  At the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday Barry played the moral equivalence card:
Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” [Good grief! Leaving aside the questionable equivalence of the deeds, didn't the Crusades and the Inquisition happen a millennium and half a millennium ago?]
So that's what Obama was doing the day before meeting with (unnamed) Muslims at the White House - getting his hug-a-Muslim talking points for the Prayer Breakfast.

Roger Simon put it well (first link above):
... frankly I was appalled by what Obama said. Many faiths could be cited, including communism, obviously, also a kind of religion that was responsible for exponentially more deaths — via Stalin’s Gulag, Mao’s Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward, the killing fields of Cambodia, etc. — than all other belief systems combined, although none of them are doing it now.
... And yet Obama saw fit to lecture his audience on the Crusades and slavery, done “in the name of Christ,” subjects of which his audience was undoubtedly well aware and, needless to say, did not approve in the slightest. Yet still the president felt he had to hector them.
... Obama is not a Manchurian candidate and never was. He never had to be. He is just absolutely the wrong human being to be leading the West at this point in history. Heaven help us.


Anonymous said...

The man is deranged.

Anonymous said...

the new argument is
"you christians did terrible horrible deeds in the name of christ therefore now that we remember those days we are justified in doing terrible horrible deeds in the name of ..........."
is this Obama's reasoning

Martin said...

I find it unconscionable that a leader of a major western nation would feel the need to apologize for the crusades. This implies that it was totally acceptable for Islam to expand into Spain or the Balkans by armed force, but that it was unacceptable for Christians to try to occupy the birth place of Jesus.
Apart from the fact of discussing events of 1300 years ago, what is the logic to such an apology?

JR said...

I liked this comment from 'Eric_The_Red_State' at The Blaze

Our President —
- More concerned with illegal immigrants than citizens
- More concerned with caring for the people that want to kill us than the ones in the coffins
- More concerned with his job than your job
- More concerned with how he looks than what he has to look at
- Loves the poor so he creates more
- Lies about jobs
- Lies about healthcare
- Hates Israel – Loves Israel’s enemies
- Spends money we don’t have
- Watch’s a man burn ……… diverts our attention with vaccinations

Anonymous said...

He condemns himself. What was the cause of the crusades? Muslim conquest.

What is the cause of Obama's War on "ISIL". Muslim conquest.

If it were not for King John III Sobieski Europe would already be conquered.