Which fear will control Obama’s response to the planned Quran burning? (photo: Jimee, Jackie, Tom & Asha on Flickr)
President Barack Obama faces pressure from a number of different directions as September 11 and the planned burning of the Quran at Dove World Outreach Center draw closer. It can be assured that no matter what response he chooses, that response will face strong opposition. Because many of his previous actions can be interpreted in terms of which fear controlled the response, it is informative to look at the pressures he will be facing in this situation and how fear when facing those same pressures has controlled his past behavior:
The Muslim label The Islamophobic and racist tea party movement has succeeded in convincing thirty-one percent of registered Republicans that Obama is a Muslim, while prominent Republicans are doing little to combat that perception.
It could well be that fear in the face of this pressure of being labeled Muslim was behind his backtracking on his initially strong statement in favor of the Park51 project to build a mosque in lower Manhattan.
Endangering the troops With General David Petraeus now clearly stating that if Dove World goes through with the burning, it will place US troops at a higher level of danger, Obama faces intense pressure to intervene against the burning to avoid the charge of needlessly endangering the troops.
Note that it was this exact same charge of endangering the troops that led to his reversal on the release of torture photographs in May of 2009.
Soft on terrorism Terry Jones and his supporters are making the claim that the burning of the Quran is a courageous and defiant act in the face of the Islamic extremists who have organized multiple attacks against the US.
It could well be that fear of being labeled soft of terrorism is one of the factors that has led to Obama allowing it to be public knowledge that a list of people targeted for killing has been drawn up by the US.
The Constitution Recall that as a Presidential candidate, Obama often touted his experience as a constitutional law professor. Reprehensible as they are, Dove World’s actions in burning the Quran fall within First Amendment rights of free speech.
However, note that in quashing the release of the torture photos, Obama was acting in direct contradiction to a court order, so in that case at least, the fear of being accused of endangering the troops overcame any fear he had of accusations that he violated the Constitution’s separation of powers.
Not Pragmatic It would seem to me that the single biggest fear controlling Obama’s actions is that of being labeled as not pragmatic. Obama’s claim to pragmatism is what allows him to take positions that are so wildly at odds with what would be expected of him based on his campaign promises or what would be expected from him as a Democrat or constitutional law professor.
I’m a big fan of the writing of Terry Pratchett and happen to be reading "Guards! Guards!", which he wrote in 1989. In a particularly prescient moment, Pratchett delivers this bit of dialogue from Sergeant Colon of the Watch, speaking to Corporal Carrot, who has been citing law to him:
"Don’t you keep quoting all that sort of stuff," snapped Colon. "We don’t have any of them laws anymore! That’s all old stuff! It’s all wossname now, Pragmatic."
The result? It simply is not possible to give in to each of these fears on the issue of the Quran burning, since they dictate opposite responses in some cases. The fear of endangering the troops argues for direct intervention to prevent the burning, but works in opposition to the fear of being labeled Muslim, which would argue in favor of letting the burning proceed. The Constitution also argues in favor of allowing the burning to proceed, as does the fear of being labeled soft on terrorism.
Note that so far, the highest level Obama administration official to speak out against the burning is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama will be forced to go on the record soon, both in words and in action. But whatever course of action and words Obama chooses, rest assured that he and his fans will characterize his position as the most pragmatic response.




56 Comments




It may or may not be protected speech. Yelling fire in a theatre is not protected speech. I don’t know.
But just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.
So much for religious tolerance of our founding fathers.
nice post, Jim.
Interesting thing about your pragmatics section: Bush/Cheney took that attitude about laws and treaties being “quaint” and inconvenient, pointing to pragmatics in their own way, too.
I sure hope this time he doesn’t listen to Rahm, who’s deserting him anyway after screwing up his first 2 years, and allows his conscience be his guide.( I hope he’s still got one, in fact, I’m counting on it.)
Barack, you’ve GOT to stand for something or you’ll fall for ANYTHING!
I wonder if Obama plays 11 dimensional chess simply because he is afraid of losing in a garden variety 3-D game. He figures if he just confuses his opponent sufficiently (i.e., 11-dimensions?!? Huh???) then he’ll win by default. Leadership by confusion and fear. Yeah that’s the ticket.
“But whatever course of action and words Obama chooses, rest assured that he and his fans will characterize his position as the most pragmatic response.” That’s part of the problem right there: the president has fans, as if this was some sort of fucking sports team.
Or does it get eleven dimensional because he responds to so many different individual fears without an underlying belief system?
This little attention-getting attempt isn’t akin to shouting fire in a theatre (falsely), which is a speech-act that causes imminent risk of harm and death. This is a form of protected expression that these people are using to demonstrate that, gee, they hate Islam and Muslims an awful lot.
They’re not deceiving anyone into rushing down the stairs for their lives. They’re not starting a stampede that will kill people. They’re just burning some books.
All we accomplish by talking about this over and over and fretting is to a: spread publicity for them and b: inflame their narcisstic egos. Which is of course precisely what they want.
“Pragmatic” behavior is “expedient” behavior which should never be under-estimated by them considered “expendable” or “annoying” to the thrust of the larger drama.
In other words, people who bring germane ideas and human reality to the fore are both annoying and expendable, while those whose behavior has knee-jerk consequences, politically, are actually encouraged, through “attention” and “fame” to regularly “up” the ante, so that the show might profitably go on.
If Obama does have a moral compass, then it is either broken or suffering from “declination”, owing to some large deposits of metal or money.
Thanks Jim, for staying on all the many absurdities.
DW
Hey, D Dub. Good to see you. How goes the mending?
I love Terry Pratchett as well. He does a brilliant job of skewering the way the world works. You are also right, far too many people today view the law as unnecessary without thinking about what will happen without it. This is very true of politicians.
As I said the other day, I think Obama should go down
there and make a big speech at the same time of the burning.
Slowly. And a bit curmudgeonly … must be the weather …?
Thanks, for asking, Jim.
;~DW
All this “fretting” also shows that most Americans don’t approve of this behaviour, regardless of the attention seeking aspect. I’d be interested to know where would you draw the line as to whether to ignore such antics or not?
Gonna be really crowded here that day. There is a home football game, so the stadium will have over 90,000 in it andthe city is only about 100,000. Lots of people are descending on the area for the burning or counter-demonstrations, so adding a Presidential visit would probably give total gridlock for at least 24 hours.
It’s gonna be crowded enough without Obama locking the city down on top of everything else. Would give us a chance to give him an earful, though.
Very interesting post, Jim, thanks.
Pondering this situation it becomes clear that this is not about free speech per se, but the consequences of free speech. My right to tell my boss to fuck off must be weighed against my desire to continue receiving a paycheck every two weeks. The Dove Church (irony is officially dead) must wiegh it’s right to burn Holy books against the probability that their actions will result in blood on their hands. Obama may not have the power to stop their actions, but he does have the responsibility to say and do the lawful thing, despite the political consequences.
You’re probably right about the absence of an underlying belief system. That may explain why the man is incapable of defending a position. You can’t defend what you don’t possess.
However, I’m not sure I would describe them as individual fears. I think a singular fear is sufficient. He just holds up a mirror to it and flashes it in all different directions.
So here’s a chicken and egg question for you… Which came first the lack of a set of beliefs or the fear?
Great post by the way : )
Hi ya, Twain.
What would Obama talk about?
Something uplifting?
Obama has lost all credibility. What, in the largeness of the universe can he conceivably say that would open minds … and hearts … that would be believed?
Sorry, Twain, But I am not sanguine that Obama truly understands or cares what pain and misery is going on, including a good deal of which he could, were he of a mind to do so , actually “DO” something about.
It is actions, not words that Obama must stand behind.
He has no position of virtue or moral suasion to stand upon, that he may be seen, heard AND believed, from my perspective.
DW
Hey, DW. Well, I guess my idea was not such a good one since I don’t want to tie up the entire state. Obama has no cred left with me but I thought he might draw attendance away from the burning. It just disgusts me that these wingnuts are doing this. I can’t imagine burning a book of any kind.
Anyway, are you recovered from you accident? hope so.
Sure, ask away, figure it out.
I’m pretty close to a free speech fundamentalist. I also find most political protests boring as hell. This book burning thing is just performance art of another kind, and it’s not novel or particularly creative, so I think I’d rather attend something else, but, you know, different strokes and all that.
I say, unless someone is breaking the law and/or directly endangering life and limb, let them be. They want to burn books? Fine. Just abide the fire code, keep it under control. I couldn’t care less, and what books they burn is irrelevant. Now, if they wanted to burn objects of historical or archaeological significance, pricless pieces of history, that’d be different morally, and might even be illegal, in which case, by all means the state could intervene. I’ve seen no indication of that, however. From everything I’ve read, these people wouldn’t know what a rare Koran looks like anyway.
So, ignore them. That’s the thing they’re most afraid of anyway. They don’t care about our scorn, or the scorn of Muslims around the world; they relish it.
There is a livestream available for the interfaith service now going on in Gainesville in response to the burning. Click on gainesville.com to view.
Edit: the service is over now but a recording can be seen there.
WTF does that mean? I didn’t ask a question.
If you’re ever in St Petersburg, FL during any type of protest or demonstration you might want to find something else to do. We wouldn’t want you to get bored or anything.
Martin Niemoeller, survivor of Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps from 1937 to 1945
You apparently don’t agree with Pastor Niemoeller
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post already in progress: BP Report Designed to Make Partners Liable
I’ve put up a new diary with the interfaith prayer service embedded.
That’s the key. If Obama was going to exercise leadership on this, he would already have done so. But this begins a near infinite regress because if Obama would show leadership on this, then he would have shown leadership on a dozen other issues, which in fact he never did. So really we should probably be looking at this the other way round. He has not shown leadership up to now so why should we expect him to on this issue?
I think I get your position now. Thanks for explaining it (and I intend no snark with this comment).
I guess I just don’t like book burnings, period. To burn someone’s holy book seems a bit misguided to say the least. I wonder how they would feel if someone decided to have a Bible burning? It’s rather provocative and demands a response (I guess that’s where I differ with you). But I do get your point.
Obama’s “style” is all about “consensus” which to me means he is more facilitator than leader. It also means he’s going to let everyone else go on the record first before saying anything.
What in the hell are you talking about?
That’s not even remotely close to an appropriate comparison and may be the worst Godwin’s Law violation I’ve ever seen. They aren’t ‘coming’ for anyone here, they’re not harming a single human being, or throwing them in prison, or killing them. They are burning inanimate objects.
I mean, come on. First they came for the Koran, and I did not speak up, because I was a Koran? Next they came for the cookbooks, and I didn’t speak up, because I…..was a cookbook?
I said it before; I don’t care WHAT books they burn that they own, as long as said burning is in accordance with the law and safe. These people aren’t ‘coming for’ Muslims; they’re trying to annoy them. There’s no point at which they’ll ‘come for me’, either. If they want to annoy me by burning a book, they are more than welcome to try.
Much like building a mosque (or, not-mosque) is an exercise of one’s First Amendment rights, so is burning a Quran. Or a flag. Or a Bible. Good for them.
As for Obama, he just needs to STFU.
Gina from St Pete for Peace is on the radio and sez that right now we have 10 carloads of people going to Gainesville. The road to the Dove World Church, which is about 10 miles outside Gainesville, will be blocked off to cars by the police. We’ll park about 5 blocks away and walk to the church.
Lame. Sayonara.
No problem. I don’t think a response is needed, but the sheer beauty of free speech is that if you do, you can make one!
If you don’t like burning books, don’t burn one. If you want to replace the books they burned, pay to have some printed, buy some from the publisher, read a Koran on the streetcorners, it’s all good.
Every year here in Madison we have a big Halloween street party, it’s a big civic event. And every year, a group of fundamentalist, fun-hating Christians shows up with a life-size cross and stands in the middle of the throngs, conversing civilly but unhappily with everyone there for beer and costumes and music.
It’s legitimately beautiful that they have the right to do that, and that they exercise that right. I think that they’re complete and total tools and I hate both their religion and their practical ideology that says they need to shame people having fun, but wow, isn’t it great that they can make fools of themselves in public by hauling around a giant piece of wood? Isn’t it great that free expression isn’t limited to talking at one another, and that you can do something big, and bold, and creative, even if it annoys everyone around you?
You’re right, your comment comparing a harmless form of political protest to the Nazi deathcamps was lame. I accept your apology, though you really should refrain from such overheated rhetoric in the future if you want to convince people who disagree with you.
Last word I heard is that there will be a drivers’ license check point but there are currently no plans to prevent access.
Personally, I’m leaning toward going to the counter-demonstration downtown. Details on that can be seen here.
First off I don’t apologize to you for anything and wouldn’t try to convince you of anything. Ignoring you is my choice.
Your ability to process abstract concepts leaves much to be desired.
Right. The church is sorta in the boonies and only folks who live within the blocked off section of road will be allowed in by vehicle. Gainesville police apparently have no problem with people walking in. We’ll be on public property.
Yet you don’t ignore me. How strange.
You’re still coming unhinged if you think burning a small quantity of paper is remotely comparable to jackbooted thugs hauling entire classes of people off for mass murder in the night, though.
That seems more likely!
Myself, I would use the word “incendiary” to describe the affect of knowingly burning someone’s “holy book.” More like setting a fire in a crowded theater than in just calling out “fire.”
This story from the Gainesville Sun (July 2009) says tax abuse allegations were being investigated, so I wonder if Pastor Jones will throw his church “records” on the pyre, too.
Only stupid people burn books.
Yes, because burning a book you own is completely akin to setting fire to a building with people inside.
Isn’t that exactly what the military is asserting?
At the same time, doesn’t Dove’s act incite others of their ilk to “riot”?
Succinctly put.
Among other things, this presents a chance to test our various “theories of Obama.”
Mine, offered for entertainment and explanatory value, is that Obama is a very right-wing guy posing as a centrist Democrat. Obama’s actions–and the evenc more important inactions–can be well explained as those of a President who wants to do the most right-wing thing possible while maintaining his facade.
To a conservative, the argument that the protest might bring harm to our troops will trump all other considerations. If I’m right, Obama will try to do something to quash the burning of the Koran. He will characteristically try to it all behind closed doors.
LOL!
All’s I know is that murderous hatred between christ-tards and must-tards is a win-win for us atheists.
The book-burner was denied a fire permit, wasn’t he? Why not just have a fire marshall and a couple of cops on hand to immediately put out the fire and issue a citation? It’s the only law being broken. He can still deface books if he insists, but he’ll have to use other means, which sort of deflates the event. A shredder doesn’t have the drama of a bonfire.
Let the Right Wingnut preacher get punished “by the court of public opinion” and dont let the Right Wing Press control the real agenda. The agenda is about Jobs, the economy and the economy and which movement “has done the most” and which movement “has done the least”. And the Democrats win on all counts and the “Party of No” loses on all counts. Obama, and the Dem candidates must…must stick to the “what main street” cares about and get out of the “one issue, religious stuff”. People will not be voting for who will build or dismantle the most church.s in November, they will be voting on which candidate/party they perceive will help them “after they vote them in”. Trust me. So get out there and get angry !
This is an easy one. I don’t have to talk it over with my rabbi. Burning the Koran is wrong. It isn’t illegal because the 1st Amendent protects the rights of assholes. But it’s wrong.
That’s all you need to know,Mr. President. .
microwave the book. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmDING!
would look kinda silly no?
The fire permit denied only regulates fires larger than 36″ by 36″. Under controlling, local ordinance, smaller fires do not require permits.
Why don’t a couple good progressives just break up the fire ceremony?
I’m a poverty stricken oldster, not much too lose. If I were in Gainesville, instead of Santa Monica, I’d stand at the inner edge of the crowd, and just as the flame is being put to the book(s), I’d run in and tackle the guy.
I’d probably suffer some beating, but I think there will be lots of cops around. With two or three helpers to spark the melee, there’d be no Quran burning.
I know there’d be a civil rights violation lawsuit against me filed by the church/pastor, but I’ll take my chances, especially if I can get it in front of a jury.
Any progressives home in Gainesville?
I was musing on this as one of the concerns of new media.
In the old days, it would have been serious work for radical Muslim fundamentalist recruiters to use this on a visceral level. First, there’d have to be film of the event, and second, that film would have to be publicly available domestically or maybe in a few other countries, and third, al-Qaeda or another group would have to get their hands on it, and fourth, they’d have to cut it into something they could use for their own purposes and distribute it on their own dime.
But now, it’s pretty obvious that if a Quran burning goes down, tons of people will be there with video recording equipment in their pockets. No one is going to be able to enforce a rule banning it; Quran-burners themselves will take the video and post it proudly.
Those little al-Qaeda online recruiter nerds who get quoted in our news all the time will be tapping the refresh button frantically, and then immediately capture the video, cutting it with crappy Microsoft Movie Maker subtitles and posting it everywhere they can, where it will then be watched by crowds of people in Internet cafes all over the Muslim world.
Instant propaganda for the other side. I’d say maybe one hour, tops, before video of the event appears online, and then perhaps two hours before it’s reproduced into a suicide-bomber recruiting tool?
This, I’d also note, is the difference between the far social right of the country and people like George W. Bush. Bush at least realized that the battlefield between us and Muslim fundamentalists was the collective opinion of the Muslim world.
And he did a lot of bullshit to try to get that, including citing it as a justification for getting into Iraq, since we’d set up a grand democracy full of chain stores there and everyone would want to be in on that. But Bush also hammered over and over that this was not a war against Islam, that Muslims were not the enemy even if the enemy was Muslim, and that the religious practices of Muslims from America to Iraq to the Philippines were to be respected.
I don’t think he did a great job of carrying that out in practice, either, but I think if he were President today, the right wing would have squashed this before it got any further than Billy Bob’s Big Ol’ Blog of Flag-Defendin’.
But the people who are the most dedicated and avid consumers of money-making right-wing media see the battleground as the collective souls of the world, and the opponents as Christianity and Islam. A soul who is Muslim is the enemy. He’s not an undecided to be cajoled or even forced to go along with ‘the good guys’, he’s an enemy soldier, and he’ll do it to you if you don’t do it to him first.