Even Howard Dean thinks the “mosque” shouldn’t be built near “Ground Zero.”

From the amusingly pseudonymed Allahpundit:

Audio: I wish they’d move the mosque, says … Howard Dean

posted at 5:32 pm on August 18, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via Breitbart. Normally I wouldn’t bore you with three mosque posts in a row but this is such a thunderbolt coming from a true-blue lefty that it won’t wait. I can’t imagine that Dean-o really believes what he’s saying here; the mosque is too much of a cause celebre on the left at this point for him to deviate for reasons of conscience. Presumably he’s simply so terrified by the polling on this issue that he’s willing to do whatever damage control he can to mitigate losses in November. (He’s a former head of the DNC, remember, so he’s used to thinking in electoral terms.) If so, that’s a good idea: A new poll out from Gallup within the last hour or so shows 37 percent disapprove of Obama’s comments on the mosque last week versus just 20 percent who approve. Those numbers aren’t disastrous for Dems given that most of the opposition comes from Republicans, but the split among indies is 21/32 overall and 15/27 on the question of whether one strongly approves/disapproves. As Geraghty noted earlier today, they’re already getting killed among independents in various tight Senate races so they can’t afford to do any more bleeding. I think this is Dean’s attempt to fashion a tourniquet by signaling to lefties that it’s okay to take a more moderate position on this issue in the interest of making it go away. Think they’ll listen? Me neither.

Exit question: Will the same Democratic thoughtcrime investigator charged with examining Harry Reid’s opposition to the mosque also be responsible for investigating Dean-o’s?

Hat tip to Patterico.

The notion that Dr Dean would have taken this position — one which pretty much reflects what President Obama said, over the course of two days — as a reflection of political realities is a reasonable one, but I’m not a mind-reader, so I sure wouldn’t make a definitive statement to that effect.

But it’s a bit interesting when I contrast this with a thread on a completely different subject, from Pam Spaulding of Pandagon and Pam’s House Blend.  Miss Spaulding is upset that the Obama Administration has given lip service to “LGBT”¹ issues:

I’m kind of nonplussed; does that include your blogmistress, or do lesbian bloggers not rate in the same category of frustration for Brian Bond? I’m the only “gay blogger” he’s had a sit-down interview with, so I’d love it if he gave a shout-out by name. I was quite generous to him in my interview.

I think perhaps they only mean John Aravosis, no? But Brian used the plural, so the White House must have a LIST. I’ll have to ask John (and maybe even Joe Sudbay) what it feels like to be on a White House hit list.

Anyway, I know the WH, at least Shin Inouye (director of specialty media), reads the Blend and pings me from time to time, but who are these other peeps in power who are hand-wringing over the people on THE LIST of angry, frustration-inducing, Cheetos-stained P.J.-wearing bloggers

John said this in response to Bond’s comments:

It’s great that you’re “supportive.” But it’s the same argument gay Republicans used to describe George Bush. He was secretively supportive of us, they’d say, even if he didn’t help us a whole lot legislatively. I’m not saying you’re George Bush, but the empathy thing is wearing thin. We don’t want your support in words, we want you to keep your promises. And you’re not.

I don’t think you have to be a rocket scientist to see the point of view many of us hold – that promises were made, quite publicly to the community to both garner votes and generate cashflow, and now the bill has come due and we are seeing all sorts of shenanigans by those in charge. The delays and slow-go on DADT repeal that ends in a poor compromise and a freepable, embrarrassing “study”; inaction on ENDA, tossing the hot potato between the WH and Congress as to whose responsibility it is to take the lead; Gibbs having amnesia and feeble follow up skills at the podium. Come on. If you’re 99% supportive, that is a helluva 1% left over.

The comments — 48 so far — make the article more interesting. It seems that the Pandagonistae are discovering that the Democrats in general, and the President in particular, are politicians far more than they are “progressives.” And I have to wonder: Is it possible, just possible, that the reason the Democrats are not as far to the left as most of the Pandagonistae think they should be is that the majority of the people, of the voters, in the country aren’t “progressive,” as they would define progressive?

______________________
¹ – “LGBT” stands for “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered.”

100 Comments

  1. Dana, Howard Dean finally says something that isn’t crazy stupid, and you go and put him in the same post as that self-indulgent fat fool. I don’t understand what you’re attempting to convey, is there a point to the juxtaposition. If so, it’s lost on me.

  2. Rope, that as a politician who has to be able to gauge the mood of the people and win votes, Dr Dean, regardless of what he might actually believe, understands that the American people aren’t on the left; they are mostly conservatives or whatever you’d call “moderates,” with liberals coming in third, and a rather distant third at that.

  3. Yep, Dana, that’s the part I got, it was the additional part about the Cheeto chompin’ fat fool that I couldn’t make sense of, or find a logical connection to the first time in recent memory that Howard Dean actually said something in public that wasn’t bug-eyed crazy.

  4. And now, in Alternate Universe News…

    President Obama yields to popular demand to disregard the Constitution

    WASHINGTON, DC — Today, bowing to the opinions of Constitutional Purists and proponents of small government, President Obama sent 300,000 troops to defend Ground Zero from incursion by a fearful ‘other’ building, with fearful ‘other’ people in it. After the troops expanded their perimeter enough to discover these ‘other’ people, they were promptly and justly shot to death for the crime of belonging to the same religion as some other people that did some terrible things near there, some years ago.

    Republicans cheered President Obama for his swift, decisive action in shredding our laws and overreaching the power of the Federal Government. Dana Pico, a noted Republican blogger, said, “I know I warned you that President Obama wanted to take over the country and tear up our laws, but this demonstration of taking over our country and tearing up our laws is exactly what we demanded when we got mad because some television people told us to! Huzzah, President Obama!”

    Meanwhile, other ‘others’ belonging to this outlaw religion bowed down in respect of this display of manfulness, demonstrating that all they needed was a show of force to realize that they are wrong in all things.

  5. Dana, it just occured to me that you might be repaying a favor or throwing the Cheeto chomper a bone, if that’s the case, a response is unnecessary and I’m sorry to have spoiled your good deed.

  6. Seriously, is this what you want? Obama to say, “You guys are right,” and erase the First Amendment, move some private business outside the rage radius, and be ready to jump every time public opinion sways? Will it make you happy? Will you be proud of him?

    And shouldn’t we also stop the construction of Christian churches in Texas now because of Patrick Gray Sharp?

  7. Or is it that you want our actual laws to be Constitutional (wink wink!) but have minorities oppress themselves, to our satisfaction?

  8. Wow, so Howard Dean’s even giving in to senseless fear? There anyone out there not running around scared of their own shadow? Anyone?

    (crickets)

    Thought so. Carry on.

  9. Nangleator: Seriously, is this what you want? Obama to say, “You guys are right,” and erase the First Amendment, move some private business outside the rage radius, and be ready to jump every time public opinion sways? Will it make you happy? Will you be proud of him?

    And shouldn’t we also stop the construction of Christian churches in Texas now because of Patrick Gray Sharp?

    Important questions here that we Americans need to answer!

    The unfortunately hillarious aspect to all this is that our ‘strict constructionist’ friends all of a sudden have glomed onto the practice of ‘situational ethics’ in this instance.

    Actually, right wingers need to be reminded that their game playing is inconsistent: Absolutists when they wish, and situational ethicists when they wish. They’ll tell you that they are consistent, but I say they are consistently wrong! :)

  10. Perry, it’s well known that when conservatives count to 10, they omit the numbers 1, 4, and 9.

    Incidentally, I KNOW there’s a number between 1 and 3, but I can’t remember what it is for the life of me… :-P

  11. Important questions here that we Americans need to answer!

    You idiots still don’t get it. You just keep projecting what you THINK opponents believe. Are your “ruling class” tendencies that ingrained — are you SO intolerant of others’ views and sensibilities … despite what you claim others are?

    You hypocritical a-hole phonies.

    Let me spell it out for one last time:

    The vast majority of mosque opponents do NOT — get it? — NOT believe that any legal means should be used to force the mosque not to be built. In other words, they recognize that the builders HAVE the legal right to build it. The question is, SHOULD they build it? That is all. It’s very simple.

    Maybe the imam should ask what Pope John Paul II did regarding those nuns who inhabited that abandoned building at Auschwitz. Or, does that make too much sense?

  12. Hube, I find it difficult to believe that’s all there is to it. The national news and all right wing pundits have been talking about this for days… weeks, for some of them, to the dereliction of their regular duties.

    If it’s all just a matter of the question, “Should they?” then what are the possible answers to that? No, yes, and I don’t care? Do we have to get all people to agree on an answer, and then we’re done? Or can we have different answers, and then we’ll be done? If it was just down to a simple question, wouldn’t the answer end the issue?

    If it’s a matter of an insult to the families of 9/11, then why do Beck and Coulter care? (Actually, I don’t know that they do. I’m just guessing, here.) If an insult matters, don’t you think all the Muslims in the country feel offended? They outnumber 9/11 families, right?

  13. Hube, I find it difficult to believe that’s all there is to it. The national news and all right wing pundits have been talking about this for days… weeks, for some of them, to the dereliction of their regular duties.

    Oh, you mean like, say … the MSM, MSNBC and liberal pundits covering the “racist” Tea Party rallies for weeks on end — to the dereliction of their regular duties??

    If it’s all just a matter of the question, “Should they?” then what are the possible answers to that? No, yes, and I don’t care?

    Most Americans say “no,” they should NOT build it. However, if the imam et al insist on building it, there really are no answers for opponents. It’s as I said — legally, opponents have no recourse. The best they could do is engage in an American tradition — protest it.

    If an insult matters, don’t you think all the Muslims in the country feel offended? They outnumber 9/11 families, right?

    How is it an “insult” to Muslims to request that they build the mosque elsewhere? Ground Zero can’t move; the mosque certainly can. And using this logic, Catholics outnumber Jews, so they should have been “more” offended than Jews that John Paul II made those nuns vacate Auschwitz.

  14. What’s the radius of the insult? There’s already a mosque within four blocks of Ground Zero. Been there for many years. Is that the safe radius?

    This still feels like pressuring a minority to voluntarily oppress itself. Now imagine Hispanic-Americans in Harris County, Texas saying that white citizens shouldn’t own guns because it’s offensive, due to the Battle of San Jacinto. Sure, it’s legal to own guns. But is it wise?

    Looks silly from this point of view, doesn’t it?

  15. Nangleator: If it’s a matter of an insult to the families of 9/11, then why do Beck and Coulter care? (Actually, I don’t know that they do. I’m just guessing, here.) If an insult matters, don’t you think all the Muslims in the country feel offended? They outnumber 9/11 families, right?

    It is obvious to me that those opposed to the location of the Cordoba Community Center (not a ‘mosque’), don’t really care what Muslims think, which has been generally true for years. Therefore, nothing that these opponents do or say surprises me in the least, including certain commenters on this blog. Their comments are quite predictable!

    Moreover, most of these people on here appear to me to be haters, as can be judged by their continuous record of hateful and personal attacks, and by their extremist views on a number of important issues, like on the Palestinian/Israeli issue and on the Obama presidency. The evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable.

  16. What’s the radius of the insult? There’s already a mosque within four blocks of Ground Zero. Been there for many years. Is that the safe radius?

    This mosque predates 9/11.

    Looks silly from this point of view, doesn’t it?

    It does b/c it’s reductio ad absurdium. Your use of “oppression” is, well, laughable. It’s a request for decency, common courtesy, tolerance and respect. That’s all.

    Moreover, most of these people on here appear to me to be haters, as can be judged by their continuous record of hateful and personal attacks, and by their extremist views on a number of important issues, like on the Palestinian/Israeli issue and on the Obama presidency. The evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable.

    *Sigh* Coming from one of the biggest haters, personal attackers, and extremists in this forum, your words mean less than nothing, Dr. Mengele. You feel it within your rights to throw around the term “bigot” and “racist” whenever someone has the slightest disagreement with you, yet you have a paroxysm of anger when people similarly label YOU.

    Such comments by you are better than a good comedy show.

  17. Nangleator: What’s the radius of the insult?

    Excellent question!

    I would hope that more people will come around to seeing this as silly, and wrong.

    But in the meantime they are already antagonizing Muslims, most of whom are moderate, and empowering the Muslim fringes. Our policies have overlooked this perhaps unintended consequence, but considering the exclusivity of Christian doctrine, that their way is the only truth, therefore I have to question whether this consequence is indeed unintended.

    Now just to be clear, since I have been wrongly accused on here: I do not hate Christians per se. However, I am opposed to their exclusivity doctrine, an irrefutable core value, and I actually believe it is at the root of many of our differences and difficulties. Conservative Muslims who throw the ‘infidel’ word around suffer from the same disease, in my view!

  18. Once again: What makes this imam “moderate?” Do you consider Pat Robertson a “moderate?”

    These questions remain unanswered. As usual.

  19. What makes this imam “moderate?” Do you consider Pat Robertson a “moderate?”

    Who gives? Is he actively trying to attack American citizens? If not, why does anyone care?

  20. Who gives? Is he actively trying to attack American citizens? If not, why does anyone care?

    Yet another who refuses to address it. Or, we could interpret this as just another example of “defining deviancy down.” Now, a “moderate” is one who does not “actively try to attack American citizens.”

  21. Comrade-a-dor Perry writes:

    “Now just to be clear, since I have been wrongly accused on here: I do not hate Christians per se. However, I am opposed to their exclusivity doctrine, an irrefutable core value, and I actually believe it is at the root of many of our differences and difficulties …”

    That seems to be your view regarding any form of voluntary association, Perry.

    Must have been one hell of a childhood you suffered.

    As you once said to me in one of your more hilarious moments of self-revelation: “My sense about you is that you want to select your community, …” A remark fairly reflective of that politically sublimated form of masochism nowadays known as modern liberalism.

    That brings to mind a similarly hilarious if fictional moment delivered during an episode of that old TV show, Seinfeld.

    It has to do with Elaine and her laconic-macho boyfriend – whatever his name was – who is a Christian she discovers, after observing an iconic bumper sticker or something on his car. The upshot is that she can’t abide the thought that he can concede that she, an antagonistic disbeliever, is going to Hell. You should care, she says and …

    Oh wait this is the Internet, everything is available instantly right? What was I thinking?

    One sec …

    Ok here we are:

    Elaine: Hello boys.

    George: Hey, so, did you give that radio the old switcheroo?

    Elaine: I did.

    George: And the Christian rock?

    Elaine: Ressurected! And look what I pried off of his bumper, a Jesus fish!

    George: Jerry, do you have any fishsticks?

    Jerry: No. So you’re disappointed he’s a spiritual person?

    Elaine: Well yeah, I got him because he seemed so one-dimensional, I feel
    misled.

    Later …

    Elaine: So where do you wanna eat?

    Puddy: Feels like an Arby’s night.

    Elaine: Arby’s. Beef and cheese and do you believe in god?

    Puddy: Yes.

    Elaine: Oh. So, you’re pretty religious?

    Puddy: That’s right.

    Elaine: So is it a problem that I’m not really religious?

    Puddy: Not for me.

    Elaine: Why not?

    Puddy: I’m not the one going to hell.

    Still later …

    Elaine’s hallway. The door opens, Puddy steps out in his bathrobe. There’s a
    newspaper in front of the door across from Elaine’s.

    Puddy: Elaine, they forgot to deliver your paper today. Why don’t you just
    grab that one.

    Elaine: ‘Cause that belongs to Mr. Potato Guy, that’s his.

    Puddy: C’mon, get it.

    Elaine: Well if you want it, you get it.

    Puddy: Sorry, thou shalt not steal.

    Elaine: Oh, but it’s ok for me?

    Puddy: What do you care, you know where you’re going.

    Elaine: Alright, that is it! I can’t live like this.

    Puddy: Nah.

    Elaine: C’mon.

    Puddy: Alright, what did I do?

    Elaine: David, I’m going to hell! The worst place in the world! With devils
    and those caves and the ragged clothing! And the heat! My god, the heat! I
    mean, what do you think about all that?

    Puddy: Gonna be rough.

    Elaine: Uh, you should be trying to save me!

    Puddy: Don’t boss me! This is why you’re going to hell.

    Elaine: I am not going to hell and if you think I’m going to hell, you should
    care that I’m going to hell even though I am not.”

    The difference between a TV script liberal and a real one of course, is that if Elaine were portrayed as a true to life liberal she would feel entitled to take the paper, as well as demanding Puddy care how she wound up. Because for liberals the human huddle … well, it’s the only game in town …

  22. “Looks silly from this point of view, doesn’t it?”

    You make a silly and incompetent analogy, and things will indeed look silly, though not necessarily in the way you intend.

    You really have to work on that analogy thing …

    [retrieved from moderation - pH]

  23. DNW, now that was funny. Does that make Perry, George? I wonder who is most like Elaine? Hmmm….

  24. “Those numbers aren’t disastrous for Dems given that most of the opposition comes from Republicans, but the split among indies is 21/32 overall and 15/27 on the question of whether one strongly approves/disapproves. As Geraghty noted earlier today, they’re already getting killed among independents in various tight Senate races so they can’t afford to do any more bleeding. I think this is Dean’s attempt to fashion a tourniquet by signaling to lefties that it’s okay to take a more moderate position on this issue in the interest of making it go away. Think they’ll listen? Me neither.”

    Dean’s pragmatism, is not so much workaday centrism, sharp edges rubbed off in the give and take of politics, but rather it is representative of the pragmatism, i.e., calculation, of a subversive who realizes that his associates have overstepped, and who would like to let things die down a bit rather than keeping them so stirred up that future gambits will be imperiled.

  25. Interesting: Absolutist DNW here advises the Liberals to take a position based on pragmatism. That’s like Christian Puddy telling Elaine to steal the newspaper, since her’s was not delivered! :)

    DNW must then be a closet Liberal, no doubt about it!

  26. Hube, there’s no point in addressing it. To paraphrase Jefferson, Imam Rauf neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. So why should I care whether he’s a moderate or not?

  27. Hube, there’s no point in addressing it. To paraphrase Jefferson, Imam Rauf neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. So why should I care whether he’s a moderate or not?

    Good enough. So then there’s little reason for him to move the location of his mosque a few blocks further away then, right?

  28. Sure, Hube. It’s easy to grab any building you want in Manhattan.

    Will you move your residence if a Muslim wants you to?

  29. Perry says:
    19 August 2010 at 2:18 pm

    Interesting: Absolutist DNW here advises the Liberals to take a position based on pragmatism. That’s like Christian Puddy telling Elaine to steal the newspaper, since her’s was not delivered! :)

    DNW must then be a closet Liberal, no doubt about it!

    wow, perry is sooo up his own ass. lol,

    i make it a point to note those who really dont get seinfeld (or southpark for that matter, lol). they are incapable of understanding irony. yet they are the epitome of it.

  30. It’s a pretty strange day when Screamin’ Howie makes more sense than Barack Obama and Nancy Pilosi put together. It wasn’t two weeks ago Howard Dean was on TV spouting idiot nonsense about he Arizona Law, and now he’s back in the spotlight for stating the obvious: a clear majority of Americans oppose the Victory Mosque and want to see some sort of compromise worked out. Well, a clear majority also supports Arizona, but that didn’t stop Howard from demagoguing the issue.

    What changed Howard? The loony leftists here are still on the in-your-face bandwagon, Obama and Pilosi are still pretending their opinions matter, most of the Democrats haven’t faced up to the fact they’re so far out in left field they wouldn’t know the game was over until the crowd was gone and they turned out the lights.

    But, strangely ol’ Screamin’ Howie gets it. He’s the last one I would have expected to snap to the mid-term zeitgeist and give it voice.

  31. Sure, Hube. It’s easy to grab any building you want in Manhattan. Will you move your residence if a Muslim wants you to?

    You. Just. Don’t. Get. It.

    And as such, you keep changing the situation, offering ridiculous hypotheticals, etc. How bout you answer MY questions:

    1. How is this situation different from Pope John Paul II telling the nuns to vamoose from Auschwitz in 1993?
    2. Why is this imam a “moderate” but someone like Pat Robertson is considered by you moonbats to be a “far-right extremist?”

  32. But y’know what Nang? If there were very similar circumstances involved (like the nuns at Auschwitz and/or the mosque near GZ), I wouldn’t have even considered building my home where it would offend Muslims.

    But that’s me. I wouldn’t care if I had the right to build my home there. I just wouldn’t want piss off a bunch of people b/c I could.

  33. You idiots still don’t get it. You just keep projecting what you THINK opponents believe.

    Jesus, this is funny coming from you.

    The vast majority of mosque opponents do NOT — get it? — NOT believe that any legal means should be used to force the mosque not to be built. In other words, they recognize that the builders HAVE the legal right to build it. The question is, SHOULD they build it? That is all. It’s very simple.

    And the answer is very simple – yes. It’s their land, there’s a need for more Muslim prayer space in Lower Manhatten (note – it is not a mosque), they want it, and the whining from a bunch of racist xenophobes shouldn’t deter them.

    Now, if that doesn’t satisfy you then you’re saying that your jumped-up tempest-in-a-teacup tantrums should override their Constitutional right to freedom of religion.

  34. 1. How is this situation different from Pope John Paul II telling the nuns to vamoose from Auschwitz in 1993?

    The nuns didn’t have a Constitutional right to tell teh Pope to go hang.

    Go hang, Hube.

  35. Hube, it can’t move now. With the flap around it, moving Park51 would just sets a precedent that conservatives could whip out the waaaaaaahmbulance and get whatever they want regardless of whether or not they have a point. Park51 didn’t set out to offend anyone.

    As for the comparison to the nuns at Auschwitz, you know that’s a false comparison. One, don’t even try to compare the Holocaust to 9/11. Genocide is not comparable to a gruesome mass murder. Two, the Catholic Church has had a long, sordid history of hatred and subjugation of Jews that the Cordoba House initiative does not have regarding America. (JPII was among the first popes to recognize that history and attempt to make amends.) Three, the cross was visible from the site of the incident itself, something that cannot be said of Park51. And four, even with all those differences, I’m not convinced my fellow Jews were right to be offended by the convent next door to Auschwitz, since it wasn’t Catholicism but Nazis that killed Jews at Auschwitz.

    And no one cares whether they’re moderate or not. He could be the Islamic Pat Robertson for all I care. As long as he’s not actively plotting terror attacks, what difference is it to you or me?

  36. You idiots still don’t get it. You just keep projecting what you THINK opponents believe.

    Uh-huh.

  37. In a previous thread, Eric wrote:

    Also, why you bend over backwards to defend Islam, arguably the least liberal of the major religions, is beyond me, especially given your hatred of religion in general.

    “THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
    and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

    THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
    and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

    THEN THEY CAME for me
    and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

    - Pastor Martin Niemoller.

  38. The American Thinker has an excellent article on Barack Obama’s development from Hawaiian Prep school and Ivy league college boy to Chicago “community organizer” in search of “street creds” as an authentic black leader. Obama’s cynical selection of Reverend Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ with it’s Marxist inspired Black Liberation Theology was a key move, however it later came back to haunt Obama in his presidential bid.

    “He’s Not a Muslim (“Not That There’s Anything Wrong With That”)!
    by C. Edmund Wright, August 20, 2010

    “…In March of 2008, the initial unmasking of Barack Obama started in earnest as it became obvious to at least a swath of America that the presidential candidate had cynically handpicked Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church to gain his “black street cred.”

    After all, he had arrived in Chicago with all kinds of white cred — a Hawaiian prep school and the Ivy League, not to mention the fact that he was light-skinned, clean, articulate, and spoke with no Negro dialect unless he wanted to. (And we would like to “give a shout-out” to Joe Biden and Harry Reid for helping us construct that description.)

    That was all well and good for a career as a national politician in a white guilt-laden nation — but first came the bothersome detail of actually starting a political career in the inner city of Chicago. White cred is but funny money in certain areas there.

    And nothing could dub Obama as black enough to win Chi-town votes quicker than assimilation into the anti-white, anti-capitalist, and anti-American Black Liberation Theology community. These folks are most definitely “down for the struggle.”

    Feel free to read some Black Liberation Theology literature if you doubt it is all of the above. Besides, have you seen Obama’s jump shot lately? It screams “White Men Can’t Jump!” He needed something else.

    Of course, Ground Zero for Black Liberation Theology in the City of Broad Shoulders was Trinity Church, and its high priest was Jeremiah Wright. Wright, as we know, must be capable of some kind of Jedi mind tricks, as he was able to use sermons to simultaneously inspire Obama’s first (or was it his second?) autobiography and put him to sleep for twenty years.

    Nevertheless, it worked. Obama’s black street cred was established well enough for him to quickly job-hop through Chicago and Illinois politics — voting “present” at every step along the way. Black street cred was indeed established, and Obama carried over 90% of the black vote in the ’08 election.

    Now, in the summer of 2010, with his poll numbers tanking almost everywhere except on the “Muslim question,” it is fair to muse that maybe Obama should trot Wright back out to establish some “Jesus Cred.” This is a president who is becoming more and more of a mystery to many the more they find out about him, and fewer and fewer believe Obama has any Jesus cred as time goes on.

    And the media reaction is so predictable.

    Of course, when secular liberals start trying to go all religious on us, it becomes an intellectual struggle. Their dots do not connect. The fragile construct they had concocted about Obama’s faith life is starting to crumble. That’s why America is simultaneously getting to know Obama better and knowing less about him at the same time.

    The entire issue of religion in the 2008 campaign was somewhat successfully pigeonholed into neat little compartments by the media — pigeonholes that have little to do with reality. Everything was built around hiding or obfuscating or outright lying about who Obama is and what he believes.

    On the one hand, we were told that Obama’s relationship with Wright was irrelevant and that he slept through the hateful messages — and on the other, TUCC was where Obama practiced his professed Christianity and received inspirations for his writings. We were told that in spite of that, Obama’s relationship with Wright was no more of an issue than was John McCain’s with John Hagee, an evangelical preacher with whom McCain had shared a lectern on occasion.

    And through all of this, we were required to have enough suspension of belief to count Black Liberation Theology as Christian in the first place. Right. Never mind Jeremiah Wright’s relationship with and support of Louis Farrakhan.

    We were told to fear Sarah Palin’s devout faith — and yet told to embrace Obama’s professed Christian conversion. Every stone in Wasilla was overturned in hopes of finding some evidence of Palin’s handling of snakes or casting out of demons — while the entire “no no no — G.D. America” tape collection available on the Trinity Church website was ignored for months and months.

    We were told that Obama is certainly not a Muslim, yet he would have a magical ability to reach out to the Muslim world — thus ending America’s role as a terror target. We were told that the world, especially the Muslim world, would continue to hate America if we elected a religious nut like Palin, however.

    Of course, none of that makes any sense — and that becomes clearer and clearer to more and more Americans under the microscope of the Ground Zero Mosque issue. And it’s not the mosque issue alone, of course. As theorized by J.R. Dunn, that could simply be the tipping point.

    There’s the skipping of the Boy Scout’s 100th Anniversary Ceremony. There’s the golf instead of church almost every Sunday. There’s the “clinging to their guns and religion” comment. There’s the anti-Israel comments and policies. And on and on.

    So now we have a president haunted by the idea that he is really a Muslim — and not a Christian at all. How delicious it is that his blatantly secular liberal supporters are totally impotent at fighting this battle for him — given that so many Americans take faith seriously?

    And going back to Wright’s Trinity Church will not help. There will be no Jesus Cred available there. Listen to the tapes or order the books. You will simply find Black Liberation Theology and Marxism and so on. Jesus? Not so much.

    So Americans will likely continue to think of Obama as a Muslim in increasing numbers. But hey — “not that there’s anything wrong with that.”

    Is there?”

  39. Meanwhile, the Associated Press finds it necessary to report the following announcement from the White House.

    AP, August 8, 2010

    “White House reminds America President Obama isn’t Muslim”

    “WASHINGTON – The White House insisted yesterday that President Obama is a Christian who prays daily as it looked to tamp down growing doubts among Americans about his religion.

    White House spokesman Bill Burton made the remarks hours after a poll found nearly one in five people, or 18 percent, said they think Obama is Muslim. That was up from 11 percent who said so in March 2009. The survey found just 34 percent said Obama is Christian, down from 48 percent last year. The largest share of people, 43 percent, said they don’t know his religion.

    Burton said Americans care more about the economy and the Iraq and Afghan wars and “they are not reading a lot of news about what religion the president is.” He added, “The president is obviously a Christian. He prays every day.”

  40. Bill Burton, Obama’s White House spokesman neglected to indicate if the President faces Mecca when he’s praying.

  41. ropelight: Is there?

    Depends on whether one is a wingnut or not. Honorable people do not knowingly propagate lies!

  42. The nuns didn’t have a Constitutional right to tell teh Pope to go hang.

    Again: You. Just. Don’t. Get. It.

    You idiots still don’t get it. You just keep projecting what you THINK opponents believe. Uh-huh.

    And this shows …? Answer: Nothing.

    Lower Manhatten

    This is at least the second time you’ve misspelled Manhattan. Idiot.

    As for the comparison to the nuns at Auschwitz, you know that’s a false comparison. One, don’t even try to compare the Holocaust to 9/11. Genocide is not comparable to a gruesome mass murder.

    I like that — “Genocide is not comparable to a gruesome mass murder.” Sell that to the American public. Second, the comparison directly comparable. You have to go how far back to demonstrate what the Church did to Jews, while radical Islam is busy …. right now. Its history of subjugation and murder is happening today. Oh, but then I see you waffle after defending the Pope’s actions. All is moot, I suppose.

  43. Phoenician and Jeff handled these questions very well, but I’ll add my answers.

    1. How is this situation different from Pope John Paul II telling the nuns to vamoose from Auschwitz in 1993?
    2. Why is this imam a “moderate” but someone like Pat Robertson is considered by you moonbats to be a “far-right extremist?

    1. Their highest authority isn’t telling them to move. There’s no possible legal authority for anyone to tell them to move. We don’t assign rights based on any aggrieved party’s feelings. All the people against this have made their feelings clear. Why do they keep making their feelings clear? The issue is decided.

    2. The community center isn’t closed to non-Muslims. The imam wants interaction between faiths. I don’t know enough about Pat Robertson for you to generalize how I feel about him. I’ll dig, if you want me to. Find me a quote from the imam that he should be ashamed of, and I’ll try to match or beat it with Pat Robertson’s history.

  44. 1. Their highest authority isn’t telling them to move. There’s no possible legal authority for anyone to tell them to move. We don’t assign rights based on any aggrieved party’s feelings. All the people against this have made their feelings clear. Why do they keep making their feelings clear? The issue is decided.

    First, Nang, thanks for answering and being probably THE only reasonable liberal in this forum.

    What you say above is all correct. However, to answer your last question, the reply is precisely what you and other supporters keep referring to (even though opponents already know): The First Amendment.

    2. The community center isn’t closed to non-Muslims. The imam wants interaction between faiths. I don’t know enough about Pat Robertson for you to generalize how I feel about him. I’ll dig, if you want me to. Find me a quote from the imam that he should be ashamed of, and I’ll try to match or beat it with Pat Robertson’s history.

    Haven’t you been reading all the comments in here?

  45. This still feels like pressuring a minority to voluntarily oppress itself.

    Moving a mosque which hasn’t even been built yet is “Oppression”?

  46. Is Barack Obama a Muslim? If so, what might that imply? The New York Times thought the question was timely enough to print an Op-Ed on the issue during the presidential campaign.

    “President Apostate?”

    By Op-Ed Contributor, Edward N Luttwak
    May 12, 2008

    “BARACK OBAMA has emerged as a classic example of charismatic leadership — a figure upon whom others project their own hopes and desires. The resulting emotional intensity adds greatly to the more conventional strengths of the well-organized Obama campaign, and it has certainly sufficed to overcome the formidable initial advantages of Senator Hillary Clinton.

    One danger of such charisma, however, is that it can evoke unrealistic hopes of what a candidate could actually accomplish in office regardless of his own personal abilities. Case in point is the oft-made claim that an Obama presidency would be welcomed by the Muslim world.

    This idea often goes hand in hand with the altogether more plausible argument that Mr. Obama’s election would raise America’s esteem in Africa — indeed, he already arouses much enthusiasm in his father’s native Kenya and to a degree elsewhere on the continent.

    But it is a mistake to conflate his African identity with his Muslim heritage. Senator Obama is half African by birth and Africans can understandably identify with him. In Islam, however, there is no such thing as a half-Muslim. Like all monotheistic religions, Islam is an exclusive faith.

    As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.

    Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.

    His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive)…”

  47. They obtained their property legally. The decided to use it, legally. Now, being coerced into changing their perfectly legal plans, which they had every right to conduct… Yes, that’s oppression. Would you support me if I wanted, say, BP to move all their operations outside of U.S. territory because they offended me?

    I looked into things the imam said during interviews. (None of this was listed in this thread.) The 60 Minutes interview after 9/11 is discussed here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/08/19/ground-zero-mosque-imams-controversial-60-minutes-interview

    I’m not sure where the outrage comes from. He’s saying, the terrorists did what they did because they were mad at what the United States did. Ed Bradley sputters something like, “You say the terrorists were right?” and the guy says, “No, but I understand that they had a reason.”

    Do Americans want to believe that the terrorists did it because they’re just mean or something? Is it anti-American to say some people don’t like us because of what we’ve done?

  48. Yeah, ropelight. Remember when Obama ended the wars and attacks in Muslim countries right after he was elected? Sure drove you righties crazy. Remember how the Muslim countries embraced him as one of theirs?

    Well, maybe he’s hiding all that until he gets more power. What’s more powerful than the job he has right now? What’s he looking forward to, before he can come out from behind the curtain?

  49. “THEY CAME FIRST for the Communist blah blah blah, etc.

    Sure, Pho. Asking people to build a mosque somewhere else is comparable to throwing people into ovens.

    You are a nut.

  50. Nangleator: Why do they keep making their feelings clear? The issue is decided.

    The issue is decided, but the radical righties continue to hammer in order to, they think, make a political issue in their favor come November. This is on the same level as the birthers, and those who claim that Obama is a Muslim, and even those who derisively call Obama “the Messiah”.

    Their demonizations are all about spreading fear and ugliness, which, to the undereducated portion of our population, works, even to some of those whose ideologies have submerged their intellects!

    The fact that it works is why these radical rightests keep doing it.

    The fact that it works is why Limbaugh, Beck, FoxNewists, and Talk Radio propagandists/alarmists are so successful, in my view.

    These people are tearing the fabric of our nation to shreds, aided and abetted by Wall Street Greed and their ability to influence Congress via campaign contributions and their powerful lobbyists. These are the people who are responsible for the decline of our middle class and the rise of corporate and Congressional shadow oligarchs.

    I’m sure there are several on here who will attack me and call me all sorts of names. That’s fine. But let us also note whether any of them, or anyone for that matter, will address these concerns, which any honorable American will deem them worthy of debate.

  51. They obtained their property legally. The decided to use it, legally. Now, being coerced into changing their perfectly legal plans, which they had every right to conduct… Yes, that’s oppression.

    Is it “oppression” to protest that which you feel is not right? Or, like the right to build the mosque, is it a legally protected action?

    I’m not sure where the outrage comes from. He’s saying, the terrorists did what they did because they were mad at what the United States did.

    Interesting … “interpretation.” Here’s what he said:

    Imam ABDUL RAUF: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.

    BRADLEY: OK. You say that we’re an accessory?

    Imam ABDUL RAUF: Yes.

    BRADLEY: How?

    Imam ABDUL RAUF: Because we have been an accessory to a lot of–of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it–in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.

    Rauf refuses to call Hamas a terrorist organization.

    Pat Robertson said about 9/11:

    “We have insulted God” with legal abortion and resrictions on religion in public places. “Then we say ‘why does this happen?’ Well, why it’s happening is that God Almighty is lifting his protection from us.”

    Pretty harsh assessment. Probably why many refer to Robertson as a far-right nut. Yet, again, the imam is called a “moderate.” So why the inconsistency? Or, is the standard lower for Muslims?

  52. Now, being coerced into changing their perfectly legal plans, which they had every right to conduct… Yes, that’s oppression.

    Except no one’s coercing anybody. Everyone here has stated they have a legal right to build this thing wherever they want, and that the government has no right to force them to do otherwise. What people have done is ask them to move it elsewhere, as a gesture of goodwill.

  53. which any honorable American will deem them worthy of debate.

    I’d be wary of any American the Fossil deems as “honorable,” considering his own rather questionable mental faculties.

    The issue is decided, but the radical righties continue to hammer in order to, they think, make a political issue in their favor come November. This is on the same level as the birthers, and those who claim that Obama is a Muslim, and even those who derisively call Obama “the Messiah”.

    Sort of like “hammering” on the Tea Partiers, using demonization and ugliness? Remember your own rather nasty words about them, Perry? Of course you do (or, maybe you don’t b/c you’re so crusty). In fact, your nastiness and lies about them rather outpaced by light years the quite logical sentiments I’ve put forth regarding this mosque opposition.

    As for the “Obama is a Muslim” stuff, here’s a history lesson for you: http://colossus.mu.nu/archives/304862.php

  54. The fact that it works is why Limbaugh, Beck, FoxNewists, and Talk Radio propagandists/alarmists are so successful, in my view.

    As opposed to MSNBC, the major broadcast networks, the NY Times, etc., who have been pushing the liberal POV for decades?

    These people are tearing the fabric of our nation to shreds

    What, by merely giving their opinions? Is conservative thought to be banned in Perry’s USA?

  55. Is conservative thought to be banned in Perry’s USA?

    Most probably, by utilizing a tactic long favored by faux progressives: Labeling it as “hate speech.”

  56. Or, is the standard lower for Muslims?

    Answer: Yes. I guarantee if Islam were the dominant religion in this country, the Left would oppose it even more than they oppose Christianity, this given Islam’s illiberal treatment of women and gays, its harsh legal system as well as its habit of intermingling religion and politics.

  57. We hold that some truths are self-evident. Building a Victory Mosque at ground zero is so wrong on so many levels that even a blind man could see it.

    The proposed Islamic Center is the terrorist equivalent of an Arc de Triomphe. While hate filled anti-Americans here attempt to confuse the true meaning or blur the fundamental issue, people around the world, Muslims especially, immediately grasp the significance of building a grand monument to jihad on the site of Islam’s greatest victory over the infidels.

    A monument to Islamic terrorism is a celebration of Islam’s jihad against America. To support the Mosque is to celebrate the death of the victims and to dance on their graves shouting Allahu Akbar!

    7 out of 10 Americans see it for what it is. The others have disqualified themselves.

  58. I wonder when the fair and balanced organization will give a million dollars to Democrats?

    “Except no one’s coercing anybody.”

    This is starting to sound like, “I’m not touching you!”

  59. ropelight: A monument to Islamic terrorism is a celebration of Islam’s jihad against America. To support the Mosque is to celebrate the death of the victims and to dance on their graves shouting Allahu Akbar!

    This comprises a message of hatred, typical of the fearful righties, which has no basis in fact at all. It is just one more attempt at fear mongering aimed to demonize all Muslims.

  60. I wonder when the fair and balanced organization will give a million dollars to Democrats?

    Catch up on current events, Nang. In addition, of course there’s little concern among you faux progressives about this:

    General Electric, the parent company of NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC, has given more than $1.75 million this cycle, including $1,097,423 to Democratic candidates and committees and $651,413 to GOP candidates and committees.

    Last cycle, GE gave $2.2 million to Democrats, $1.1 million to Republicans.

    This is starting to sound like, “I’m not touching you!”

    Scratch what I said earlier about you being “reasonable.”

  61. This comprises a message of hatred, typical of the fearful righties, which has no basis in fact at all. It is just one more attempt at fear mongering aimed to demonize all Muslims.

    Sort like Perry when referring to Tea Partiers (or Jews) — just a message of hatred, typical of the fearful faux progressives, which has no basis in fact at all. It is just one more attempt at fear mongering aimed to demonize all Tea Partiers (and Jews).

  62. Eric: As opposed to MSNBC, the major broadcast networks, the NY Times, etc., who have been pushing the liberal POV for decades?

    Not again. You righties roll out this argument all the time, as if there is a journalistic equivalency between the MSNBC crowd and the FoxNews crowd, including Limbaugh and talk radio “entertainers”.

    There is no journalistic equivalency, not even close.

  63. There is no journalistic equivalency, not even close.

    You’re right. Fox News is much better and more balanced. After all, the ratings prove it.

  64. Islamic Center Exposes Mixed Feelings Locally

    Marcus Yam/The New York Times

    The debate over building an Islamic Center near ground zero has attracted the views of many, including those of Muslim residents in New York and its suburbs.

    By PAUL VITELLO
    Published: August 19, 2010

    In the storm of anger and accusation over an Islamic center and mosque planned near ground zero, one thing seems clear to Laique Khan: His fellow Muslims have a right to build the project.

    “If this really is a free country,” said Mr. Khan, 56, the manager of a trucking company in Brooklyn, “then, by all rights you must, you must, allow it.”

    The same holds true for Pervaz Akhtar, a tailor who keeps a shop a few blocks from the center’s site — and who lost his first shop and nearly his life in the Sept. 11 attacks. “There is a principle involved,” Mr. Akhtar, 58, said. “We believe in the American Constitution.”

    Yet with equal confidence, both men — who squared their shoulders and seemed to address an imaginary town hall meeting when discussing the issue — embrace a seemingly contradictory conviction about the center: It does not have to be two blocks from the site of the attacks.

    “If they want to put it 10 blocks away, that’s fine,” Mr. Akhtar said. “I believe in compromise, too.”

    The debate over building a Muslim community center so close to where terrorists claiming to act in the name of Islam killed more than 2,700 people has attracted the intense views of political and religious leaders, victims’ families and pundits. But the outcome could have its most lasting impact on the estimated 600,000 Muslim residents in New York and its suburbs.

    Many of them expressed a welter of mixed feelings in interviews this week on street corners, in stores and in mosques: Some said they felt embittered or hurt by criticism of the project, and of Islam in general, yet understood opponents’ misgivings. Others said Muslim-Americans should continue to push for the center’s construction as a means of asserting their full citizenship rights — but not too hard, lest they draw even more resentment. A few said they wished the project had never been proposed in the first place.

    While these few dozen conversations do not represent the views of all Muslim New Yorkers, they show that many are grappling deeply, through the current tension, with the lingering ambiguities of their place in American society nine years after 9/11.

    Malik Nadeem Abid, an insurance agent whose storefront window on Coney Island Avenue in Brooklyn framed a steady stream of men walking to pray at the mosque next door, said he was “not a big fan” of the decision by the Cordoba Initiative, a Muslim group that promotes interfaith cooperation, to build the center near ground zero.

    “It was not a politically smart move, from my perspective,” said Mr. Abid, 45. “No one wants a center in downtown Manhattan that stands as a permanent fixture of this terrible tension.”

    Yet the decision has been made, he said, “and we can’t let the loudest voices dictate what happens.” Still, he added, if the center were built 5 or 10 blocks away, as some people have proposed, “I don’t think it would matter very much.”

    That kind of ambivalence over the downtown project, some said, was partly the point: Muslims in America embody the same diversity as everyone else.

    “I see both sides,” said A. Chowdhry, 27. She lives in Jackson Heights, Queens, and teaches in a New Jersey grade school. “As Americans, ground zero is our hallowed ground, too. But it pains me to be excluded from this part of being American.”

    For many Muslims, nothing since the 2001 attacks has crystallized the difficulties of being both American and Muslim like the fight over the nine-story center on Park Place, which is to be called Park51. Several compared the experience to the years just after the attack on Pearl Harbor, when Japanese-Americans were presumed by many to be disloyal.

    “It’s been nine years, but it feels like we haven’t moved an inch since then to come to terms with the issues,” said Muntasir Sattar, 30, an anthropology student at Columbia University. “And now it is all coming back,” almost like a symptom of post-traumatic stress, he said.

  65. Nangleator wrote:

    Their highest authority isn’t telling them to move. There’s no possible legal authority for anyone to tell them to move. We don’t assign rights based on any aggrieved party’s feelings. All the people against this have made their feelings clear. Why do they keep making their feelings clear? The issue is decided.

    No one has said that they lack the legal right to build there; many people have said that if they exercise that legal right, they will be offended. Private citizens can exert public pressure on anyone, as long as they do so within the law, to change that person’s decisions or actions.

  66. Several compared the experience to the years just after the attack on Pearl Harbor, when Japanese-Americans were presumed by many to be disloyal.

    I think most Americans look back on the incarceration of Japanese during WWII as a terrible thing to have done. At the time, it was a matter of fear and lack of trust that justified FDR’s decision.

    I see a parallel here in terms of our singling out Muslims to distrust, even fear. Too many of us tend to paint them all with a broad brush, even to the point of demonizing them as several on here have already done. These people are guilty of extrapolating from the 9/11 terrorists to American Muslims, in effect making it unwelcome for them to build their community center in amongst other churches and strip joints. It’s as if a sexual predator buys a home in a neighborhood with children. Well it’s not.

    Sane voices need to keep expressing their concern for this hateful behavior/attitude.

  67. Dana wrote: “…; many people have said that if they exercise that legal right, they will be offended.”

    In my view, feeling some emotion about the idea is understandable, as I do myself, but to feel ‘offended’, well that is irrational. Nevertheless, the final decision remains with the Muslim property owners, as all agree should be. Perhaps they will feel so unwelcomed that they will change their plans. If so, then we Americans can take pride in our actions, correct?

    Maybe we should just shut up for a while, and promote a meeting between representative families who have suffered and the Imam and his people. This is the suggestion of Harold Howard Dean, a great idea!

  68. The New York Daily News has an article focused on the union workers who would actually build the Mosque.

    “They won’t build it! Hardhats vow not to work on controversial mosque near ground zero”

    By Samuel Goldsmith
    August 8, 2010

    “A growing number of New York construction workers are vowing not to work on the mosque planned near Ground Zero.

    “It’s a very touchy thing because they want to do this on sacred ground,” said Dave Kaiser, 38, a blaster who is working to rebuild the World Trade Center site.

    “I wouldn’t work there, especially after I found out about what the imam said about U.S. policy being responsible for 9/11,” Kaiser said.

    The grass-roots movement is gaining momentum on the Internet. One construction worker created the “Hard Hat Pledge” on his blog and asked others to vow not to work on the project if it stays on Park Place.

    “Thousands of people are signing up from all over the country,” said creator Andy Sullivan, a construction worker from Brooklyn. “People who sell glass, steel, lumber, insurance. They are all refusing to do work if they build there.”

    “Hopefully, this will be a tool to get them to move it,” he said. “I got a problem with this ostentatious building looming over Ground Zero.”

    A planned 13-story community center and mosque two blocks from Ground Zero, Park51 has exploded into a national debate.

    Louis Coletti, president of the Building Trades Employers’ Association, said unions have not yet taken a “formal position” on Park51, but he understands why members would be hesitant to work there.

    “It’s a very difficult dilemma for the contractors and the organized labor force because we are experiencing such high levels of unemployment,” he said. “Yet at the same time, this is a very sacred sight to the union guys.”

    “There were construction workers killed on 9/11 and many more who got horribly sick cleaning up Ground Zero,” Coletti said. “It’s very emotional.”

    L.V. Spina, a Manhattan construction worker who created anti-mosque stickers that some workers are slapping on their hardhats, said he would “rather pick cans and bottles out of trash cans” than build the Islamic center near Ground Zero.

    “But if they moved it somewhere else, we would put up a prime building for these people,” he said. “Hell, you could do it next to my house in Rockaway Beach, I would be fine with it. But I’m not fine with it where blood has been spilled…”

  69. This is the suggestion of Harold Howard Dean, a great idea!

    I thought it was the suggestion of John W. Bush. LMAO!!

  70. There’s Perry — messing with my comments!! And you claimed you never did that!! Yo, DANA!! DO YOU APPROVE OF PERRY EDITED MY COMMENTS W/O MY PERMISSION????

  71. “It’s a very touchy thing because they want to do this on sacred ground.

    Fact: The site is two blocks away.

    “I wouldn’t work there, especially after I found out about what the imam said about U.S. policy being responsible for 9/11″

    Fact: Imam Rauf did not say that. He said U.S. policy bears some responsibility.

    The right wing propaganda mill is alive and well, spreading disinformation like this. This is a shame. Not only that, you can bet Muslims world wide are watching us doing a disservice to innocent Muslims, letting our emotions dictate our actions instead of rational thinking.

  72. The right wing propaganda mill is alive and well, spreading disinformation like this.

    Sort of like Fossil’s propaganda, misinformation and lies about, say, the Tea Party. And how he doesn’t edit others’ comments.

  73. On August 19th, Hot Air’s, Allahpundit addressed the issue of proximity to ground zero.

    “AP to reporters: No more references to “Ground Zero Mosque”

    “…Serious question: Why would the AP or the owners of the property object to it being thought of as the “Ground Zero mosque,” or at least the Ground Zero community center? Red State compiled a list of statements from the Park51 brain trust a few weeks ago emphasizing how important it was to them that the building had taken damage on 9/11.

    That’s what supposedly made the site so significant to “bridge-building” and “dialogue” about the attack, etc.

    # A December 8th, 2009, New York Times article stated, “The location [next to Ground Zero] was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims,” and quoted Rauf as noting that they got a property “where a piece of the [9/11] wreckage fell.” ASMA then touted the piece in its 2009 Year End Report.

    # A simple Google search of the Cordoba Initiative’s website reveals the phrase “Ground Zero” to be seeded throughout as a rather inept 1999-era SEO tactic to bring people looking for information about Ground Zero to the mosque promoters’ website.

    # On May 5th and 6th, ASMA’s Daisy Khan was on her Twitter account, boasting first that the “new muslim center near ground zero gets unaminous vote of approval from community board one in downtown nyc,” and then that she had a “Media blitz day for ASMA / Cordoba [on the] muslim commuity center near ground zero.”

    # On June 15th, Daisy Khan told the Washington Post’s Sally Quinn that “a divine hand” led to the Ground Zero proximity.

    “Ground Zero mosque” versus “mosque near Ground Zero” seems an awfully fine hair to split when, presumably, there would be no more objection by mosque supporters to the former than there is to the latter. If tolerance is the name of the game, then a mosque at Ground Zero itself (next to the Freedom Tower if you like) is that much more stirring a statement of inclusion than one two blocks away.”

  74. Who cares? Will you try to stop the next one being built? Will anyone outside of Manhattan ever know?

  75. “I wouldn’t work there, especially after I found out about what the imam said about U.S. policy being responsible for 9/11?

    Fact: Imam Rauf did not say that. He said U.S. policy bears some responsibility.

    The right wing propaganda mill is alive and well, spreading disinformation like this. This is a shame. Not only that, you can bet Muslims world wide are watching us doing a disservice to innocent Muslims, letting our emotions dictate our actions instead of rational thinking.

    Especially when the truth is out there easily found.

    Clearing up false charges made against Imam Feisal:

    “On 60 Minutes, the Imam said that American Foreign policy is an accessory to terrorism”

    The ‘60 Minutes’ piece was completely incorrect as the statement was edited out of context. In the full interview, Imam Feisal describes the mistake the CIA made in the 1980s by financing Osama Bin Laden and strengthening the Taliban. This view is widely shared within the US and the US Government today, and Imam Feisal underlines the importance of not supporting “friends of convenience” who may in the future become our enemies. This is common sense.

    Imam Feisal is an American who takes his role as a citizen-ambassador very seriously. He is frequently requested by the US State Department to tour Muslim majority and western countries to speak about the merits of American ideals and Muslim integration into Western society. At the request of the FBI after 9/11, he provided cultural training to hundreds of FBI agents.

    “Imam Feisal has not condemned Hamas”

    Imam Feisal has always condemned terrorism (see his 1995 book “What’s Right With Islam is What’s Right with America” and his hundreds of speeches). Hamas is both a political movement and a terrorist organization. Hamas commits atrocious acts of terror. Imam Feisal has forcefully and consistently condemned all forms of terrorism, including those committed by Hamas, as un-Islamic. In his book, he even went so far as to include a copy of the Fatwa issued after 9/11 by the most respected clerics of Egypt defining the 9/11 attack as an un-Islamic act of terror and giving permission to Muslims in the U.S. armed forces to fight against those who committed this act of terror. Imam Feisal included this in his book to prove that terrorism must be fought even if Muslims have to fight fellow Muslims to stop it.

    “Imam Feisal is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood because his book was translated into Arabic by a publisher with ties to the Brotherhood.”

    Both charges are false. Imam Feisal has no connection whatsoever to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Arabic translation rights to his book were arranged by the Arabic book program at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, United States of America.

    “Imam Feisal is a member of the Perdana Global Peace Organization, which is a funder of the flotilla that attempted to deliver aid to residents of Gaza.”

    Imam Feisal has never been a member of this group. Several years ago, Imam Feisal was invited to Malaysia, the most moderate Islamic country in the world, to participate in a Peace Conference sponsored by the Perdana Peace Group. He was one of the hundreds of speakers present. He has no political, advisory or business affiliation of any nature with the Perdana group. A photo of Imam Feisal was taken at the conference, and this has been used to “prove” his membership in the Perdana Global Peace Organization, but the allegation is false. Because of the controversy surrounding Perdana, we have requested the Perdana Group to remove the photo of him from their publicity.

    “Imam Feisal wants to establish a ‘shariah state’ in America.”

    Actually, quite the contrary. Imam Feisal believes that all Muslims must adhere to the laws of the land in which they reside, including in America. This is a basic tenet of Islam. He has repeatedly stated that America is already one of the most Shariah compliant countries in the world because of America’s adherence to our Bill of Rights and because it allows members of all religions, including Muslims, to practice their faith freely. In other words, Imam Feisal believes that Muslims practice Shariah when they fast, pray, give to charity and uphold the commandments of protecting life, liberty, dignity, the pursuit of happiness and the right to freedom of worship.

    But the wingnuts will keep lying and lying and lying.

  76. PiaToR:“Especially when the truth is out there easily found.”

    This, of course, refutes much of the misinformation put forward on this blog and elsewhere nationwide.

    I await the wingnuts on here to publicly admit that they have provided misinformation, misinformation that probably emanated from the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, and FoxNewsitis!

    What say you now, ropelight, Hube, Eric, and gang?

  77. What say you now, ropelight, Hube, Eric, and gang?

    I say that link is akin to getting the “facts” from either the DNC or RNC headquarters websites about the economy, domestic and foreign policy, etc..

    I await the moonbats on here to publicly admit they have provided misinformation about the Tea Party, misinformation that probably emanated from the likes of Olbermann, Schultz, Maddow and the MSM!!

  78. Perry asked, “What say you now, ropelight…?

    I say it’s easy and obvious, I’m willing to stand up and be counted, I’ll stand foursquare against the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero, while you stand against the USA and with the terrorists.

  79. Anyone remember the Dubai port controversy? Here’s what NY Senator Chuck Schumer had to say (although he has still remained silent on the current mosque controversy): “Let’s say skinheads had bought a company to take over our port — I think the outcry would have been the same.”

    Gee, sound like Newt Gingrich’s “Nazi” comparison with regards to the GZ mosque?

    Schmuer was a signatory to a letter that said:

    According to the Congressional Research Service, many U.S. officials believed that al Qaeda activists have spent time in the UAE. In fact, two of the 9/11 hijackers were UAE nationals (Fayez Banihammad and Marwan al-Shehhi), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation claimed the money used for the attacks was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers primarily through the UAE’s banking system. …

    Oh, so two of the hijackers happened to be from UAE. That’s good enough to miff Schumer, but not enough that GZ was the result of violence in the name of Islam.

    Schmuer press release:

    Joined By Outraged 9-11 Families, Schumer Calls On President To Personally Intervene To Override Secret Committee’s Deal To Give United Arab Emirates Control Of Our Ports … Schumer, standing with 9-11 families called for the President to override approval for the deal and begin a special 90 day investigation into all US port contracts that involve foreign governments.

    Why doesn’t Chuck “stand with 9/11 families” now?

    The authors at CSPT seem to have been fairly consistent with their feelings on the Dubai deal and the current GZ mosque situation, in contrast. Elsewhere, the Dubai issue made strange bedfellows, notably DE Liberal’s Jason Scott who was against the deal, yet is now screaming racism etc. about the opponents of the GZ mosque.

  80. Flopping Aces has new information:

    “The Mosque issue isn’t going away and it just got more interesting. Apparently Steve Emerson, Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism (a large storehouse of archival data and intelligence on Islamic and Middle Eastern terrorist groups), has unearthed hours of audio in which Imam Rauf sounds not so moderate after all. The audio hasn’t been released yet, nor the context, but from the sounds of it….the context won’t matter a whole lot:…”

  81. ropelight: “# A simple Google search of the Cordoba Initiative’s website reveals the phrase “Ground Zero” to be seeded throughout as a rather inept 1999-era SEO tactic to bring people looking for information about Ground Zero to the mosque promoters’ website.”

    Just to pull out one example from ropelight of a lie at worst, or at least an exaggeration, from the Cordoba website:

    Why are you building a mosque at Ground zero?

    The community center is not located at Ground Zero.

    Now that said, I do agree with this quote at the end of ropelight’s post:

    It will be a multi-floor community center open to all New Yorkers, much like a YMCA or Jewish Community Center (JCC) with a designated prayer space (mosque) in one area to serve the needs of the large existing community of American Muslims in the neighborhood.

    The community center will provide a place where individuals, regardless of their culture or background, will find a place of learning, arts and culture, and, most importantly, a community center guided by the universal values of all religions in their truest form – peace, compassion, generosity, and respect for all.

    Why did you choose this site so close to Ground Zero?

    We were always close to the World Trade Center. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has been the Imam of a mosque twelve blocks from the Twin Towers for the last 27 years.

    “Ground Zero mosque” versus “mosque near Ground Zero” seems an awfully fine hair to split when, presumably, there would be no more objection by mosque supporters to the former than there is to the latter. If tolerance is the name of the game, then a mosque at Ground Zero itself (next to the Freedom Tower if you like) is that much more stirring a statement of inclusion than one two blocks away.”

    So yes, the right is splitting hairs, to stir up emotions, with a political result in mind. Honorable patriotic Americans do not behave in this manner.

  82. Honorable patriotic Americans do not behave in this manner.

    Then you’re obviously not a patriot considering how you smeared the Tea Partiers. Case dismissed.

  83. ropelight: “Perry asked, “What say you now, ropelight…?

    I say it’s easy and obvious, I’m willing to stand up and be counted, I’ll stand foursquare against the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero, while you stand against the USA and with the terrorists.”

    Typical ropelight BS.

    You were asked to comment on the evidence that PiaToR presented that counter the disinformation that you have been peddling on here. The fact that you didn’t, instead making a personal attack which is obviously wrong, speaks volumes. Now no response is necessary.

    I would counter by noting that the wingnut anti-Muslim propaganda which you promote on here will likely energize the jihadist movement, exactly the opposite of what we would like to see happen.

  84. I would counter by noting that the wingnut anti-Muslim propaganda which you promote on here will likely energize the jihadist movement

    Indeed! No one is accountable for their own actions, except conservatives.

  85. I say that link is akin to getting the “facts” from either the DNC or RNC headquarters websites about the economy, domestic and foreign policy, etc..

    As opposed to getting the “facts” as plucked straight from Pam Geller’s liposuctioned ass?

  86. Perry, if you support the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero and want to celebrate Islamic terrorism against America, there’s nothing stopping you from sending them a check to help out with building that triumphant monument to jihad.

    Go ahead, put your money where you mouth is, kick in your fair share, mass murder isn’t cheap, ya know. Heck, it might even be tax deductible.

    Some of your best friends are Jewish, Allahu Akbar!

  87. More radical wingnut BS from the Roper, hardly worth a reply other than to call out him/her out!

    Moreover, I would argue that your position on this issue actually enables more terrorism, a lesson we should have learned by now! But no, not the Roper!!!

  88. Perry, if you support the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero

    There is no “Victory Mosque” being planned for Ground Zero.

    This is a lie. Ropelight is a liar.

  89. Eric: As opposed to MSNBC, the major broadcast networks, the NY Times, etc., who have been pushing the liberal POV for decades?

    Not again. You righties roll out this argument all the time, as if there is a journalistic equivalency between the MSNBC crowd and the FoxNews crowd, including Limbaugh and talk radio “entertainers”.

    There is no journalistic equivalency, not even close.

    Sure there is, you just want to deny it. Since you don’t even watch FOX News, you have no basis for comparison in the first place. Also, you ignore FOX’s hard news dept., which includes Bret Baier and Chris Wallace, two of the most fair and professional journalists in the business.

    As for Limbaugh, he doesn’t work for FOX. He’s an entertainer just as Mike Moore and Al Franken are for your side. Only difference is, Rush isn’t a senator.

  90. Iceberg, what iceberg? There are no American troops in Baghdad. I didn’t know the gun was loaded. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. Islam is a religion of peace. The check is in the mail. She was only here to borrow a book. I always intended to pay my taxes. My plan will not raise costs by one dime. You have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it. Opponents of the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero ought to be investigated.

Comments are closed.