Those who slander the prophet

Something is dreadfully wrong with President Obama and his public face on Islamic terrorism.

Maybe it is his affinity for the religion and culture he was raised. Or maybe it is far-left ideology that tells him that all terrorism against the United States has its roots in the past actions of the United States. I don't know, but it's getting damn weird.

I invite you to take a close look at this timeline complied by the Washington Post this morning. It shows the rhetoric of the administration following the assassination of our ambassador to Libya in Benghazi. For days, the Obama Administration clinged to the crazy storyline that it was caused by a film that dissed Muslims. Even to this day, President Obama has not used the word "terrorism" to describe Benghazi and adheres to the "disrespectful movie' cover story.

Lay that weirdness over the president's speech to the U.N. in which he said: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” and one must wonder who Obama is on the world stage. A leader of America and it's interests and values ... or something else?

We have intellectual freedom in America. With that comes literature, art and movies that give organized religion the full spectrum of attention. Monty Python's "Life of Brian" brutally satirizes the Jesus story. Mel Brooks has given the same treatment to Jews. Adam Sandler doesn't exactly treat Muslims with any great reverence. Yet we tolerate all this because we value it. And personally, I'll take intellectual freedom and the American way of life over the Muslim state as it is current expressed in Iran any day of the week.

Yet, our president tells the world that "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." What the hell does that mean? Is he talking about American filmmakers like Mel Brooks or novelist Salman Rushdie? Can you imagine what Hollywood would look like if Obama took action to make sure the future doesn't belong to those who slander Jesus?

Look, we've got one strange president on the world stage. We can only hope that in the upcoming debates his opponent, Mitt Romney, can flesh out some answers from the president.

Maybe he can even get the president to use the world "terrorism." Or (and wouldn't this be great) get the president to explain what he meant by slandering the prophet.