Malebox: Response to the Obama Speech

Home

Last week our editor called out President Obama for not focusing enough on persecuted Christians during his speech in Egypt. The post provoked a variety of responses from New Man readers. Our thanks to those of you who provided these interesting takes on the speech.

Obama does everything with a purpose, but I'm sure he felt that bringing up "Christians," who are seen equal to being "Westerners," would cause him to lose his audience. Yes, he failed those brothers of his who suffer, if in fact he truly is a follower of Christ.

But what else really bothered me was his equation of the Holocaust to Palestinian treatment by Israel, and his insistence on a two-state "solution" for peace. Let's not forget to remember that he spoke of a new world in which no nation is above the other.
Anonymous
Via blog post

What bothered me about Obama's whole speech is his totally identifying himself as a Muslim and that he consistently tears down the United States and the past stands we have taken in our dealings with other countries. We may have taken some unpopular stands, but WHAT president goes to other countries and reveals secrets and criticizes his OWN country for the stand former presidents have taken?

All we hear about is Obama's going to the Muslim nations. How many times has he gone to Israel? AND then he decides to use his full middle name, when he was insulted when it was an issue here in the U.S. when people harped on his Muslim heritage. … He didn't want them to use "Hussein" because it made him appear to be a Muslim. Now he wants to put pressure on Israel more than ANY U.S. president has done to give up their land to the Palestinians. This man is scary!
Anonymous
Via blog post

President Obama is not what he seems or what the media hails him as. He has not impressed me. In fact, his economic policies here in the U.S. are downright destructive. My hope is there'll be enough of the America we once new after he's gone to rebuild with.
Anonymous
Via blog post

I listened to the whole speech and felt that it was on the whole a good, well-balanced speech; diplomatic but fairly clear about what he as president expects from Muslim majority nations. Reading some of the comments I can't help feeling that some judgments are already colored by anti-Obama sentiments.

He did make quite a deal about how minorities (obviously religious minorities in the Middle Eastern context) should be treated, and he did make specific reference to Coptic Christians in Egypt as an example. He did not in any way equate the Holocaust to Palestinian treatment by Israel. Also, President Bush was the first president to officially back a two-state solution (rightly or wrongly). In no way did President Obama totally identify himself as a Muslim (yes, he quoted from the Quran, but Christians often do this when witnessing to Muslims).

In fact, at the beginning he stated plainly that he was a Christian (yes, he may not be born again; but that he has a certain belief in or respect for or "fear" of God is, to me, evident). This speech is the beginning of a dialogue ... (hopefully )... the ball is now in their court.
Anonymous
Via blog post

There is no such thing as "dialogue" with Islamofascists; there never will be. The destruction of Israel and the continued saturation of the West with Islam is their goal. Only the citizens of the Middle Eastern countries could bring about real change and peace, but history has shown this will never happen.

Also, I was disappointed that President Obama did not use the word "terror" or "terrorism" in his speech. Strong language was needed.
Anonymous
Via blog post