A new Tumblr blog seeks to demonstrate that contrary to the overuse of the phrase, Muslims are not identifiable by their "garb":
Former NPR analyst Juan Williams, among other ignorant people, has an irrational fear of Muslims, and thinks you can identify them based on what they look like. Here I will post pictures of Muslims wearing all sorts of things in an attempt to refute that there is such a thing as "Muslim garb" or a Muslim look.
And of course, even if there was such a look, the morons who exist in significant enough number to make President Obama afraid to appear in a turban would probably get it wrong anyway.
Leave a Comment:
I'm perfectly happy when people wear their beliefs on the outside, because it visibly displays where they are in their mental development/maturity--which also makes it easier to decide whether or not to express true feelings about their belief system in front of them. Example: I wouldn't say, "I hate the catholic belief system" in front of a little old lady wearing a cross necklace. It would be rude. Unless of course she *wanted* a debate..
I have a question ....
What if .... it were Bill O'Reilly on NPR and he made a statement such as:
"I get nervous when I see black people in hip hop dress approaching on a dark street".
Can you just imagine the uproar from the NAACP, liberal groups and the "mainstream" media...not to mention a majority of the American public?
Fox would likely not fire O'Reilly...because it is a biasedl network to begin with...but any other network would fire a news commentator for making this statement, just as NPR did with Williams.
Even though O'Reilly and Williams may harbor these fears, and there are no laws prohibiting these expressions of stereotyped fears, like Carrie Prejean, doing so will have other consequences.
More hypocrisy from FOX....it's ok to stereotype Muslims....but not other larger, more powerful minorities.
Do you people ever bother to fact check the talking points spewed by Limbaugh et all? You can go to NPR's website and look up their broadcasters. This is the most ridiculous talking point ever. Geeze. Additionally I am so happy about your comment about Jews. Ya know because they're evil awful terrible people *rolls eyes*
This statement is so ignorant because it has nothing to do with what Juan said or meant. Here's the full out of context quote:
He then went on to say, he didn't act on the nervous or worried feeling and no one else should either. Muslim should not be discriminated against in any way.
Worried and nervous are what's called emotions. They are involuntary. None of the 9/11 attackers were wearing "Muslim garb." What Juan said was when he sees that at an airport about to board a plane the anxiety of 9/11 come rushing back.
Look at Juan's body of work and you'll see he is not a bigot or ignorant. Those who would pretend it was NOT Muslim extremist who attacked us and those who would pretend that there has been a Muslim look from Middle Eastern countries for decades are the ones whom I would label ignorant.
Worried and nervous are what's called emotions. They are involuntary. None of the 9/11 attackers were wearing "Muslim garb." What Juan said was when he sees that at an airport about to board a plane the anxiety of 9/11 come rushing back.
That is exceedingly naive.
Williams is an experienced radio/TV broadcast personality and he was professionally "on the air" with a Fox commentator, very much aware of his audience and how it would react to what he said. He is not so stupid that he doesn't know that a comment like this will be taken as a "dog whistle" by the audience that supports the Fox agenda. He is not so amateurish that he could possibly have been making a spontaneous comment about an involuntary emotion. He said what he said in his experienced, professional capacity, well aware of what he was doing. THAT is why he was fired by NPR, not because there was anything wrong with having an irrational fear of Muslims on an airplane. He was fired for irresponsible professional behaviour, not for personal failings.
Naturally, none of this will ever find its way into a right-wing blog or a mainstream news analysis.
Gaor,
So that would mean that NPR's CEO's comments were on purpose and she knew what she was saying when she suggested Williams needed psychiatric care or was doing it for publicity?
So you think Williams Knew this would get him fired?
So why is Nina Totenber still working there after saying Helm's or his grandkids would get AIDS if there were any retributive justice? That is certainly stronger than Williams remarks.
The only chance I get to listen to NPR is for a few moments on the drive to work and that time is shared with Chicago's Progressive Talk. At that hour of the morning, most of the NPR coverage is local stuff, so I did not know Juan Williams as anyone other than the token dissenter on the Fox News Sunday roundtable (yes, I watch it. Please don't hate me.) I don't know the whole deal with Mr. Williams. Perhaps he was clearly in breach of contract. Perhaps he was warned about offering up his opinion by NPR management on several other occasions and this was just the last straw. But he has never struck me as an extreme or hateful individual. I think the cheap shot by the NPR president about Mr. Williams needing to take up his issues with his psychiatrist was tacky. You don't fire someone for offering an opinion and then offer your own unfounded opinion on his state of mind. (It is no surprise that mental illness goes untreated in this country when there is still a negative stigma associated with seeking treatment. Just saying.) If NPR is truly intent on enforcing their ethical guidelines on analysts offering up opinions, then I wonder if Mara Liasson is next on the chopping block, since she is also a regular on the opinion-driven roundtable of FNS. If not, why not? Fair is fair.
I think this story brings up a valid talking point, though. Perhaps it would be more useful for this country to engage in civil discourse in a diverse setting rather than providing sound bites on an opinionated talk show for the media to run riot with. It seems to me that the best way to take the scariness out of the Boogeyman would be to sit down and have a conversation with him. Most hatred is bred from ignorance. And I don't think there is a single person who can honestly say that they haven't crossed over to the other side of the street out of nervousness when they saw someone approaching that they weren't sure of. 9/11 stirred up a lot of emotions in this country. I'm in no way perfect, but I can honestly say I do not scare easily by people who dress in "Muslim garb". This is undoubtedly due to having a Muslim as one of my best friends. When we go out, she wears her hijab. I've been places with her and her husband while they have both worn "Muslim garb". It doesn't phase me. Perhaps if we all get to know the people that we "hate" or "fear" or who "makes us nervous", then maybe some of these feelings will dissipate and we can have a truly peaceful existence. A naive thought, I know, but I am a believer in hopey-changey sort of things.
Does that mean the only safe Muslim is a naked Muslim?
A little too risque, if you ask me?
A lot of insane from the right wing, if you ask me too...
I get nervous when I see a politicion with his mouth open...Mostly because if the mouth is open the other end is sucking wind and that is surely a sign of trouble for someone...
And what about people who carry a bible everywhere? Or wear a crusafix or star of david, or keep buddah's chubby little cheeks on thier dashboard or people who only eat at diners that have a four tooth minimum...do we have enough pigeonholes for all these folks?
Gosh, if it were not for 'profiling" we couldn't tell the players from the fans!
Do you suppose there is a bigot uniform? Redneck colors? Are there special glasses for those blessed with a double digit IQ? Perhaps a special hat for folks who blindly follow anybody who says they know or can speak for any particular god?
Oh,sorry...Guess the special aluminum-foil model qualifies...My bad!
My point is that if this is the worst thing Mr. Williams has ever said in public...Well... they weren't paying him enough and he should have quit a long time ago!
Maybe" Farts News "will be at least smart enough to not ask for his opinion!
Oh wait...this is "Farts News" we're talking about here...sorry again! I'll go now!
Sara Palin must have terrible breath
On both ends!
Rachel –
Please know I am a big fan and try to watch your show every chance I get. I value the fact that when I watch the Rachel Maddow show, I don’t just get a crowd of screaming partisans arguing endlessly without teaching me anything. I am spoiled by you to expect information, information, information – not just agenda, agenda, agenda.
Regretfully, I feel compelled to say that I am disappointed by the treatment you gave the firing of Juan Williams by NPR head Vivian Schiller. You are welcome to your opinion of Mr. Williams’s character, personality, opinions and remarks. However, you presented a mere snippet of his remarks on The O’Reilly Factor show on Fox News. If you had shown his remarks in their entirety, I think your audience would have seen a very different picture of his opinions regarding Muslims.
I often disagree with Mr. Williams but I respect his honesty and decency. He has the courage to stand in the public arena and express himself (as do you) and any remarks of his should be considered in the whole context of the remarks in question and in the context of his career. I believe you could have and should have afforded him the respect you yourself would want. In short, you should have presented a more complete and professional report – the kind of report your viewers have come to expect.
Did you ask Mr. Williams if he would appear as your guest to engage in a dialog on the subject of his remarks and his opinions? It is unlike you, Rachel, to ambush someone from the “journalistic bushes.”
Personally, I intend to keep listening to NPR, although I hope Ms Schiller is forced out as a result of her poor judgment and reckless actions. And I intend to keep watching the Rachel Maddow show but with less enthusiasm pending your apology to Mr. Williams and to us, your viewers, for a disappointingly irresponsible report.
On Thursday, Rachel Maddow showed clip after clip of commentators on Fox stating their bigoted beliefs toward Muslims and of the commentators stating what actions, formed by their bigoted beliefs, should be taken against Muslims. After which, a clip of Juan Williams stating the following was shown, “When I get on a plane, I gotta tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb, and I think, you know, they’re identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried, I get nervous.” end of clip.
Rachel Maddow then went to state the following, “Your employment as a person paid to speak is at the pleasure of your employer. And in this case is displeased Juan Williams’ employer , at least one of them, for him to have reassured the Fox news audience that, he too was afraid of Muslims on airplanes and that that’s not a bigoted thing.”
What the clip left out, and what Ms Maddow is surely by now aware of, was Mr. Williams detailed assertion, that despite whatever feelings of unease he or anyone else has, they are not cause, reason or justification for prejudiced views, policies or actions towards an entire religious community.
The net result of the segment Thursday night, was to demonstrate that Ms. Maddow was applying precisely the pre-judgmental, prejudicial standard to Mr. Williams, of which she had wrongly accused him of doing so to Muslims.
It’s election season, things get a little intense, Mr. Williams will survive well enough. But, Ms. Maddow may well take heed from such a feelin her oats moment. The whole incidnet of the NPR firing, and Ms. Maddow’s mistaken relaying of it’s import, reminds one of the infamous line from the movie, Shattered Glass: “Every competitor we ever took a shot at, they're going to pounce. And they should. Because we blew it..”
Raw-- you are correct. However, I think many of the previous comments were more to the point.
Mr. Williams did a Fox piece, and he has done NPR work-- what he did on Fox would not fly on NPR, and the reverse is also true. NPR does not offer multi-million dollar contracts.
Could this have been a way, [I'm posing a question here, I do not have inside information] to leave NPR and gain a lucrative speaking slot? FOX loves controversy- every one of their personalities has called for legal action, or withdrawal of federal support of NPR because they fired Williams. Boy, one overreaction followed by MORE overreaction. Great.
Any journalist is conscious of audience. I am sure that Mr. Williams was capable of doing work that would work on both networks. Losing his slot as a commentator for NPR surely didn't impact his pocketbook much.
That TRMS found clips to support the point they were making-- FOX loves to push the envelope and stir up their favorite issue- FEAR.
Is this untrue?
I tried to watch FOX... I did. I consider myself reasonably intelligent, and I convinced myself that I should watch both sides and winnow the chaff my self. I couldn't take it. EVERY news room or program selects what they are going to cover. The fantasy of round-the-clock coverage without commercial interruption once we instituted subscription service. Since that is not the case, the hour format has a limit... and choses its targets every day. The choices FOX made drove me bananas... I felt like I was in the head of one of Hitler's speech writers- And before everyone goes nutz- I mean looking for the thing that a) the audience most fears and b) selecting the target for the rage-- FOX wants to target certain elements, while they prop up the feelings of others. (Palin support, O'Donnell... as righteous, rather than nut-job... Angle as intellectual ...)
Dare we consider TRMS does, too??? Well, what I watch is usually what I think... feel... internalize. So, do I love TRMS just because it reflects my personal belief system? Yeah, or... I have a choice of other channels. I do watch Oberman... I caught O'Donnell, the other night, and found I did enjoy the show. However... I'm DVR'ing Rachel as it is...cuz I'm usually not home from work yet...
I still think NPR overreacted. I think Juan Williams is an honest commentator- like the other personalities in the MSNBC lineup... in the NPR line-up... and, I'm not sure about FOX, because, as TRMS show has demonstrated, the single belief system, or "personal truths" aren't consistent on FOX.
Juan Williams will either, and one can have hope, bring some logic and class to FOX. Or, he may chose to get down into the muck and wallow in that cash from his contract...
My brain didn't turn to mush because NPR PTB's panicked.
Melody P
Raw-- you are correct.
-this may be the only succient point you made, but let us continue.
However, I think many of the previous comments were more to the point.
- I don't see a point, congruent to the one I made. Previous comment were largely highlighting the fact the majority of commentators on Fox are highly biased and prejudiced, that is not news.
Mr. Williams did a Fox piece, and he has done NPR work-- what he did on Fox would not fly on NPR, and the reverse is also true. NPR does not offer multi-million dollar contracts.
- If this observation were as accurate as you believe, then it's a pretty damning indictment of both organizations.
Could this have been a way, [I'm posing a question here, I do not have inside information] to leave NPR and gain a lucrative speaking slot?
-Yes, he his masterplan worked like charm. Bait NPR and Rachel Maddow into taking a statement out of context, have NPR fire him for it, Maddow amp it, and collect 2 million from Fox. Yes, the mastermind Mr. Williams foresaw every move of NPR and Ms. Maddow and followed his dasteredly concieved design to rake the big bucks. Snap out of it, Mr. Williams is not that smart, nor Ms Maddow, any universe, that guillible,,NPR, though, I'm not so sure.
FOX loves controversy- every one of their personalities has called for legal action, or withdrawal of federal support of NPR because they fired Williams. Boy, one overreaction followed by MORE overreaction. Great.
- a completely, un-expected turn of events......
Any journalist is conscious of audience. I am sure that Mr. Williams was capable of doing work that would work on both networks.
-that speak much to your sense of what journalist integrity should be.
Losing his slot as a commentator for NPR surely didn't impact his pocketbook much.
-like i said, he's a mastermind, they typically are well compensated.
That TRMS found clips to support the point they were making-- FOX loves to push the envelope and stir up their favorite issue- FEAR.Is this untrue?
-No. the point they were making was all that Fear that Fox does indeed purvey, clouded NPR's and Ms. Maddow's judgement on the point Mr. Williams was making during the entire segement, in question.
I tried to watch FOX... I did. I consider myself reasonably intelligent, and I convinced myself that I should watch both sides and winnow the chaff my self. I couldn't take it. EVERY news room or program selects what they are going to cover. The fantasy of round-the-clock coverage without commercial interruption once we instituted subscription service. Since that is not the case, the hour format has a limit... and choses its targets every day. The choices FOX made drove me bananas... I felt like I was in the head of one of Hitler's speech writers- And before everyone goes nutz- I mean looking for the thing that a) the audience most fears and b) selecting the target for the rage-- FOX wants to target certain elements, while they prop up the feelings of others. (Palin support, O'Donnell... as righteous, rather than nut-job... Angle as intellectual ...)
-Have a cream soda, lie down for awhile, you haven't seen nothin yet.
Dare we consider TRMS does, too??? Well, what I watch is usually what I think... feel... internalize. So, do I love TRMS just because it reflects my personal belief system? Yeah, or... I have a choice of other channels. I do watch Oberman... I caught O'Donnell, the other night, and found I did enjoy the show. However... I'm DVR'ing Rachel as it is...cuz I'm usually not home from work yet...
-I usually just watch her, DVR's someone sounds kinda too personal.
I still think NPR overreacted. I think Juan Williams is an honest commentator- like the other personalities in the MSNBC lineup... in the NPR line-up... and, I'm not sure about FOX, because, as TRMS show has demonstrated, the single belief system, or "personal truths" aren't consistent on FOX.
Juan Williams will either, and one can have hope, bring some logic and class to FOX. Or, he may chose to get down into the muck and wallow in that cash from his contract...
My brain didn't turn to mush because NPR PTB's panicked
-at least no more so than already, you could say.
Labour: London borough becomes 'Islamic republic'
By Andrew Gilligan, October 22nd, 2010
Telegraph UK
Outside the Wellington Way polling station in Tower Hamlets yesterday, as at many other polling stations in the borough, people had to run a gauntlet of Lutfur Rahman supporters to reach the ballot box. As one Bengali woman voter went past them, we heard one of the Rahman army scolding her for her “immodest dress.”
That incident is perhaps a tiny taste of the future for Britain’s poorest borough now it has elected Mr Rahman as its first executive mayor, with almost total power over its £1 billion budget. At the count last night, one very senior figure in the Tower Hamlets Labour Party said: “It really is Britain’s Islamic republic now.”
For the last eight months – without complaint or challenge from Mr Rahman – this blog and newspaper have laid out his close links with a group of powerful local businessmen and with a Muslim supremacist body, the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) - which believes, in its own words, in transforming the “very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed… from ignorance to Islam.” Mr Rahman has refused to deny these claims.
link: http://is.gd/ge1qu
More on the IFE:
Islamic Forum of Europe - IFE
In a six-month investigation, in UK, by the Daily Telegraph and Channel 4’s Dispatches, involving weeks of covert filming by the programme’s reporters, they recorded IFE leaders expressing opposition to democracy, support for shariaa law or mocking black people. The reporters discovered that the Islamic Forum Europe - IFE organized meetings with extremists, including Taliban allies, a man named by the US government as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the 02/26/1993 World Trade Center bombing, and a man under investigation by the FBI for his links to The 9/11. The program was published and aired on 02/27/2010.
http://www.globaljihad.net/view_page.asp?id=1858
Since Rachel knows a thing or two about London from her Oxford days during the mid 90s, it would be great if she can make a special (a detailed and rigorous expose) on the rise of Islamism (which we can no longer pretend to be nonexistent) in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, and Australia.
Non-existence is such a strong claim that it would never have been correct.
I don't see the value in your propaganda sites and their claims. Really, what rise of Islamism in Europe? Does the word rise have a meaning?
Strangely this unfounded claims are always found on conspiracy sites and right-wing tabloids.
@ChrisE84: splitting hairs over the words 'nonexistence' and 'rise' is silly and loses sight of the reality that Islamism is indeed a rising threat to free societies.
Here is another disturbing news item on Islamists and Islamic extremists running amok in the UK:
--
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hardliners-call-for-deaths-of-surrey-muslims-2112268.html
Hardliners call for deaths of Surrey Muslims
By Jerome Taylor, Religious Affairs Correspondent
Thursday, 21 October 2010
Islamic extremists have started openly calling for the destruction of a controversial Muslim sect in a major escalation of sectarian conflict within British Islam, an investigation by The Independent has revealed.
-
Hardline Islamists in Britain have been distributing leaflets calling for the murder of AhmadiMuslims in Kingston-upon-Thames whilst mosques have been vandalised in Newham and Crawley. Preachers in south London have also been orchestrating a boycott of Ahmadi businesses and Ofcom has had to reprimand an Islamic satellite channel for repeatedly calling the sect "Wajib-ul Qatal" - an Arabic phrase used to describe those who digress from mainstream Islam that translates as "liable for death".
--
The degree of radicalization in a given Muslim community is closely related to the percentage of Muslims to whom the Muslim identity comes ahead of their national identity. In a 2007 Pew poll, 85% of the Muslims in Britain picked Muslim identity over their British identity. The corresponding number for Muslims in the US was 45% in 2007, but I suspect that it has gone up since then. As more and more people are exposed to science and rationality in a society, the number of people to whom their religious identity is the dominant identity decreases, as it should. That's the natural trend wiht most communities in most places, with the notable exception being Muslim communities in the UK and other western countries, and Islamists (such as the IFE and the extremists spewing venom against the Ahmadiyya Muslims in this story are examples of this) drumming up Islamic (radical and non-radical) sentiments is one of the main reasons why. You perhaps would agree that it is desirable for Christians in America to identify as Americans first. Likewise, Muslims in America should also put America ahead of their Muslim identity.
'Strangely this unfounded claims are always found on conspiracy sites and right-wing tabloids.'
Read about the IFE. It is a radical and fundamentalist Islamist group, and there is nothing "unfounded" about them having grabbed mayoral-ship in that borough of London. Evidently to members and supporters of such groups, being Muslim come ahead of being a British citizen, etc.
Also, trying to typecast and dismiss off-hand criticism of Islamism and radical Islam as "right wing" is oxymoronic, as those Islam-centric political ideologies are among the most illiberal and intolerant ones that you can find anywhere.
A reality-based examination of all ideologies that threaten democratic and secular foundations of free countries necessarily requires us to keep a close watch of the rise of Islamism in the West. Individual Muslims should be treated no different from individuals of any other community, and people should not hate or irrationally fear Muslim communities, but political and radical aspects of Islam, Islamism, radical Islam and Islamic Jihad should be closely tracked, and good journalists such as Rachel Maddow need to make people aware of such trends in an unbiased, objective and truthful fashion.
@Willatwork and all TRMS: Thank you so much for posting this. I often dress in "Arab" garb because I like the style. If anyone ever actually bothers to, you can ask a Muslim or Arab woman if she likes to wear a Hijab (or any other article of "Arab" or "Muslim" clothing; but I digress). 9 times out of 10 she'll say "yes." In fact most women I know who're Muslim or who're Arab wear their Hijab based on their moods. They (meaning the women I know) know that people will look and react differently to them, primarily by keeping distance, so when they feel like having distance they wear a hijab. For the record, I love middle eastern fashion and find comments by O'Reilly and Juan et all to be not only offensive, but blatantly against the free market. And after all, isn't the free market what they're fighting for????:
http://www.luxist.com/2009/07/16/middle-eastern-inspired-fashion-pushes-buttons/
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=middle+eastern+fashion&FORM=IGRE4#focal=56b00df6bc7b3a91aa937549671eaafa&furl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.blogcdn.com%2fwww.luxist.com%2fmedia%2f2009%2f12%2f88889435.jpg
http://www.ameinfo.com/246297.html
http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/fashion-news/newsdetails.aspx?news_id=92281
so errrmmm Rachel, are you gonna have shah rukh khan on your show anytime soon?:-)
I think its great to use humor like this to diffuse bigotry and fear. This is the perfect response to Juan Williams' comments. Firing him was not, however. That's just an overreaction that plays into the conservative's hands.
Well, he wasn't just fired for this. There were conflicts about his Fox appearances before and I guess his bosses had enough.
Agree, ChrisE84. NPR as an employer can fire any employee any time for anything so long as the firing is not discriminatory under applicable EEO laws, and the employee in question is not protected by collective bargaining contract or other employment contract that would prohibit such action. US citizens have the right of free speech, and employers have the right to terminate employment if they do not like that speech. Outside of collective bargaining there is no right to be employed.
Some have suggested that NPR was looking for an opportunity to let Williams go. I think it is equally likely that Williams was looking for an opportunity to leave NPR, and chose a path that would make him appear to be a victim.
http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/just_so_were_clear/
The post itself is short. The comments deconstruct the various memes floating around in support of Williams, and are worth a read for anyone who sympathizes with him.
Help the citizens of Sidney, NY impeach Islamophobe Bob McCarthy:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/impeachbobmmcarthy/
I am a country guy from a small town. I am naturally curious. You don't know the answer if you don't ask. I was in San Francisco and I asked a cab driver if the picture on the dash was a politician or a religious figure. His answer was rude. "It looks like some #@&!ing Arab to me." This was when I discovered that I had made a mistake. He had to borrow that cab from someone else because his was in the shop for repairs. But I realize that it is my mistake. I assumed that since he was middle eastern he must know who that was.
My point about this is that, in America, we are taught nothing about other cultures,... except that they are wrong. I would love to know who in the middle east are our friends and who are our enemies. If you are not educated you can't tell. ( and who can you ask?)
I found this pretty interesting. Just to show another side of the issue. http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=222601&catid=3
On first read, I thought you said "the mormons who exist in significant enough number"...those pairs of guys on their mission rounds are pretty numerous and very identifiable with their dark suits and ceremonial neck cloths. (aka ties)
Dear Rachel and Team TRMS, may I recommend Asra Nomani, a reform Muslim author, for appearance on the show?
Her site: http://www.asranomani.com/
Site for her Award winning book: http://www.themosqueinmorgantown.com/
And her recent Daily Beast article:
..
Get Over the Quran Burning
by Asra Q. Nomani
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-08/get-over-the-quran-burning/
As a Florida pastor calls off a Quran-burning bonfire on 9/11, The Daily Beast’s Asra Q. Nomani, herself a Muslim, says there are a few brutal passages in the Quran that should go up in smoke.
--
I think that the right and progressive approach to dealing with the various social issues that are arising regarding Islam in the West is to promote progressive reform-seekers such as Ms. Nomani, and not papering over or making excuses for what Islamic extremists and hardliners do or try to do.
Award-winning film, not book.
It's really amazing to watch the republicans whining and crying about a man that lost a six figure job, and gained a 2mil dollar job. To bad they don't do any of that whining and crying when it comes to mainstreet/middle class people loosing their jobs. They just vote NO to keeping or bringing jobs to mainstreet/middles class amercia. But they All vote YES to outsourcing of american jobs. They will do anything for rich republicans, but they only want the votes of the middle class/poor, that call themselves republicans.......
It makes no sense to blame the suffering of citizens of all races during the Great Recession on President Obama. Without the actions taken under his administration. the situation would have been much more dire.
http://www.neontommy.com/news/2010/10/obama-brings-positive-changes-america
well, sure; if you can ID illegal immigrants by how they dress, why not Mulsims?