here are times when one should join a chorus of criticism.  And surely one such time is Senator Hilary Clinton’s response on 60 Minutes to the question: “Is Obama a Muslim?”  Now, Barack Obama is not at all my person for the office of President of the United States.  Yet, it is as clear to me as the night follows the day that the appropriate answer to the question posed by 60 Minutes is a resounding “No”.  The “I-have-no-reason-to-believe-he-is-a-Muslim” response is anything but a resounding “No”.  Indeed, it is not even clear that it is a “No”.  Rather, that response is much more like “I will say “No” for the moment, but I am more than prepared to be told that I am mistaken.  Perhaps you know something about him that I don’t”. 

The “I-have-no-reason-to-believe” response would have satisfactorily worked for any number of questions, such as those pertaining to his marriage or his performance in college or whether he has ever given to a charity.  And so on.  But absolutely not to the question: “He is a Muslim?”  Certainly not at this point and time in history. 

To be sure, if Obama were a Muslim this would have to be acknowledged.  But we all know if that he is not a Muslim.  He is a Christian.  He attends the Trinity United Church of Christ.  Mere social osmosis will deliver the insight that he is a Christian.  And the slightest inquiry on the internet will deliver the particulars.

Now, either Hilary Clinton is a fool, in which case she should certainly not hold the office of President of the United States or she is an utterly mean-spirited and malicious individual, in which case she should certainly not hold the office of the President of the United States.  Clearly, she is not a fool.  So that leaves me with the conclusion that she is an utterly mean-spirited and malicious individual. 

If, up until last night, I had been undecided between Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton, her malicious response last night to the question “Is Obama a Muslim” would have been a decisive strike against here. 

Basic moral decency requires that at the very least we acknowledge without hesitation the obvious that is acceptable about a person’s moral character.  For suppose that the question had been “Do you think Obama has ever murdered someone?”  The only decent thing for Hilary Clinton to say would have been “Of course not”.  The “I-have-no-reason-to-believe-that-he-is” response is tantamount to her expressing doubt about his moral character in this regard.  And that would have been a despicable thing to do.  One can think of a multitude of examples in this regard.  Here is a good one: “Do you think Obama watches child porn?”   

Now, as always, it reasonable to ask what on earth does a person think she or he might gain in failing to give the obvious answer that pertains to a person’s moral accountability.  I mean we all know that lying and being misleading can have its advantages.  This tends to work, though, only when others generally are not well-informed—not when the answer is already public knowledge and all rightly expect the person answering to have at least that much knowledge. 

No one likes to be on the losing side.  Yet, with regard to some things decency requires that we take the moral highroad.  And that is so in this case.  And there is the rub.  Far from casting any doubt upon Obama’s religious suitability (assuming that being a Muslim raises doubts in that regard), Hilary Clinton’s “I-have-no-reason-to-believe” response only revealed just how morally depraved she is or has become in the throes of desperation. 

There is very little about Obama’s political views that are too my liking.  Though obviously charismatic, he is, to my mind, no John F. Kennedy.  Yet, I have spent no time at all wondering whether he is a Muslim although his name is Barack Hussein Obama.  After all, Obama was given that name long before Islam was an issue in terms of world politics. 

In the U.S. Senate, Hilary Clinton has worked side-by-side with Barack Obama.  She knows the identity of this man.  In particular, she has always known his religious affiliation. 

Thus, on 60 Minutes last night she attempted to cast aspersions upon Obama’s commitment to America by aligning him with Islam.  She could not say that he is Islamic, since that would have been a bold face lie.  Nor could she have said that she did not know whether he is Islamic or not, since that, too, would have been a bold face lie. Instead, she opted to play with words and invoke the “I-have-no-reason-to-believe” response.

This suggests to me that Hilary Clinton is so evil that she failed to realize just how much she her response insulted the intelligence of her audience, including her supporters. And if her supporters  thought that her

“I-have-no-reason-to-believe-Obama-is-a-Muslim”

response was a particularly deft move on her part, then indeed it is a wicked nation that America has become.  Or, at any rate, so it is for that aspect of America that stands by the evil Hilary Clinton. For it is impossible to support evil and be morally good.