Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Democrats' craven silence on Ground Zero mosque continues

Steve Benen, Matthew Yglesias, and Kevin Drum all have posts up blasting Republicans for their unwillingness to step forward and condemn bigoted criticism of plans to build an Islamic center near Ground Zero.

Drum asks whether there are any Republicans who are "willing to just quietly and frankly defend traditional American notions of religious freedom and traditional American notions of tolerance and decency."

It's a good question, and by all means, pressure Republicans. But what about the Democrats who are refusing to condemn the opposition and call it out for what it is? What about Dems who won't stand up for the aforementioned traditional American notions of religious freedom and tolerance and decency?

I asked Chuck Schumer's office for his position on the Islamic center this morning. All his spokesman would say is that he "not opposed" to the plan. Asked for Schumer's views of the opposition, and asked if he actively supports the right of the center's builders to put it two blocks from Ground Zero, Schumer's spokesman declined to elaborate and said Schumer was declining an interview.

Schumer is also refusing to answer direct questions from reporters about this topic. This isn't good enough.

That's not all. As I noted here yesterday, Dem Rep. Anthony Weiner, who's been widely hailed as a hero on the left for his supposed willingness to engage the opposition, is also refusing to say word boo about his position on the Islamic center.

Weiner wants to be mayor of New York. Last I checked, that city is home to a few Muslims, all of whom would become his constituents. Yet he can't bring himself to stand up for their right to worship two blocks from Ground Zero. The guy he wants to replace, Michael Bloomberg, had the guts to do this very eloquently yesterday. Where's Weiner?

Other members of Congress, such as Jerrold Nadler, have stood up and done the right thing, vocally condemning the opposition for what it is. Yes, Nadler's district includes Ground Zero. But again, Weiner wants to represent the whole city, and Schumer already represents the whole state.

No question: It would probably do the opposition's case more damage if Republicans stood up and condemned them. But Dems are complicit here, too. By remaining silent on this issue, they are ceding the fight to those who are actively engaged in an effort to make defending the rights of Muslims too politically toxic an enterprise even for Democrats. By staying silent, Dems are enabling this effort.

I don't see why Dems should get a pass on this.

UPDATE, 11:54 a.m.: Here's another Dem who has done the right thing: Reshma Saujani, an attorney and activist who is running against Dem Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan.

Also: Adam Serwer made this case very well.

By Greg Sargent  |  August 4, 2010; 11:34 AM ET
Categories:  Foreign policy and national security  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sharron Angle: Obama and Reid are making government our false "God"
Next: Birtherism, alive and well

Comments

"Democrats' craven silence on Ground Zero mosque continues"

So the only option here is to vote for the Republican's, who are being very vocal about their opposition to Muslim Community centers near the WTC.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

For Weiner to be against the mosque would be cowardice - and stupidity.

Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam who is in charge of the project, is NOT a radical Muslim. My understanding is that Osama Bin Laden considers imam's like Feisal Abdul Rauf a bigger threat than the west. They fight against Bin Laden and try to bring Islam into the 21st century, and they are in a much better position to do so than all the bombs in the US arsenal combined.

For Weiner, or any Democrat, to side with Bin Laden AND the Republicans... Cowardly. Stupid. Inexcusable.

As to the Republicans: It is the Southern Strategy, just like the "repeal the 14th amendment," and the, "New Black Panther Party," and the Shirley Sherrod stories.

Come on Greg, you've seen this before. We all have. This is just more of the Southern Strategy, heck; they aren't even doing a good job of disguising it.

The only real question, to me, is: Why isn't the media pointing out that the GOP has been doing this kind of xenophobic, nationalistic, nonsense for 40 plus years? Every few years a prominent Republican (Mehlman, Steele) comes out and apologizes for the Southern Strategy, but then they keep doing it.

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Would Bloomberg be backing this project if he were running for reelection?

Posted by: ath17 | August 4, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

"Drum asks whether there are any Republicans who are 'willing to just quietly and frankly defend traditional American notions of religious freedom and traditional American notions of tolerance and decency.'"

Not any that are up for election any time soon. None of them want to become the Pro-Victory Mosque on the Smoldering Ashes of the WTC candidate during their next election campaign.

Arguably, at least the Republicans are willing to take a position. It's a hypocritical position, but it is an actual, articulated position that the 9/11 Victory Mosque be built further away from Ground Zero because, you know, it's all about how many blocks away they are. 1 block away? Bad. 10 blocks away? Good!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

@ath17: "Would Bloomberg be backing this project if he were running for reelection?"

I think he would. Bloomberg is pretty much a true believer, and--while some may question his judgement on a whole host of things--at a distance, he seems to be governing on his principles.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

AIPAC & the ADL would not like it, this is why. Israel controls the Congress and the newspapers opeds in Jewish papers recently have indicated that they just don't want a mosque that close to Ground Zero. Whatever you say, Israel!

Posted by: carolerae48 | August 4, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Greg, your right on this.

Courage and principle can't be dependent on context. You either believe in the rightness and reason of religious freedom, and church/state separation, or you don't.

Hell, it's not even only a mosque. Xenophobia, ya'll.

Posted by: BGinCHI | August 4, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Kevin - I disagree, it could be 100 blocks away and the GOP would still make a big issue of it. Why? Because it is a wedge issue meant to inflame racial tension and help the Republicans at the ballot box.

The Republicans aren't TOTAL morons. They know there is no basis in law to deny the mosque the right to build. Just like they know they won't be able to repeal the 14th amendment. Just like they knew they couldn't amend the constitution to outlaw abortion or deny gays the right to marry. It has nothing to do with actual policy - nothing at all.

This is about the Southern Strategy, nothing more.

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"your"? Geez, "you're." Waiter? Bring me the coffee urn. Yes, the whole thing.

Posted by: BGinCHI | August 4, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

So far, there is only a drawing of the proposed Center. No money has yet been raised for the project. Have you seen how the actual site looks currently. It is an empty wreck of a place, that looks like something out of New York's 19th Century dilapidated tenements era.

If the mere proposal of such a center can cause so many of our leaders, who are charged with providing national security. to start wetting their beds, then the Terrorists have already won.

Weren't a lot of Muslims killed by the attacks on the Twin Towers, so how could a Muslim center be an affront to all those who were killed?

Those who launched the attacks, frequently attack Mosques, using suicide bombers, in several Muslim countries, so for people to still wanting to ostracize all Muslims, for the evil deeds of a fanatical few, is absurd and also evil.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Greg:
Two things. As far as Democrats are concerned, you expected more of them? Why? Most of them are afraid of their own shadow. And you expect them to take a position on the Cordoba House?

And Reshma Saujani an activist? How, exactly? Other than for the super rich?

Posted by: Calvin_Jones_and_the_13th_Apostle | August 4, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Right Wingers should purchase the property, and convert it into a detention center for rounded up undocumented fetuses.

That should poll very well in today's Xenophobic America.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

And here I thought the matter was settled. And does anyone but me find it more than a little surreal to even be having this conversation at the dawn of the 21st century? This really doesn't strike me as one of those Silence = Death things. It strikes me more as a few crazies trying to drum up a national issue out of a position on a local zoning issue that's so far beyond the pale it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. You only validate their argument by dignifying the question with an answer. Screw that.

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Their silence may be because the site of the 911 tragedy does not need a mosque, a church, a temple, a synagogue, or any other kind of religious symbol. What is needed at the site of 911 is peace, enlightenment, LOVE, and HEALING.
Read the words to this song:

"Heal the World":
In this place you'll feel
There's no hurt or sorrow.
There are ways to get there
If you care enough for the living
Make a little space, make a better place.

Chorus:
Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me and the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough for the living
Make a better place for
You and for me.

Michael Jackson sings it better than I can write it.
Please click on the video link below (or copy and paste in into your address bar)
and read, listen, and let's pray for
Healing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WJrtms8EoQ&f eature=related

Thank you, Michael Jackson.


Posted by: Cherubim | August 4, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

I believe Bloomberg would support the project if he were running for reelection, too.

Keep in mind, Bloomberg disbanded Saint Rudy's Street Crime Unit on the grounds that it was exacerbating racial tensions. He did this in the face of severe criticism and demagoguery, and that was during his first term.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 4, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: "Right Wingers should purchase the property, and convert it into a detention center for rounded up undocumented fetuses. That should poll very well in today's Xenophobic America."

Thanks! Every day, you make me look forward to voting a straight Republican ticket in November. And given the nature of the Republicans right now, I gotta find something to keep me motivated.

@nisleib: "Kevin - I disagree, it could be 100 blocks away and the GOP would still make a big issue of it. Why? Because it is a wedge issue meant to inflame racial tension and help the Republicans at the ballot box."

I don't think 100 blocks away would work. It's the nearness to Ground Zero that provides the leverage. Southern Strategy or not, it doesn't do much good to complain about a Muslim Community Center being built in another city. It's the proximity to Ground Zero that provides the controversy--without that, none of us would ever have heard of it, and there would have to be something else for the Southern Strategy to hang it's hat on.

BTW, I disagree that there's any "Southern Strategy" in the sense you mean it, but I suspect we'll just have to agree to disagree there.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

The Time Is Now. Bloomberg took a stand now. For that he deserves credit. All this speculative rubbish about what he might do under different hypotetical circumstances, is just people trying to erect a strawman, to divert from what Mayor Bloomberg has said now.

He did the right thing now, and stood with all those all those who believe in equal treatment for all.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Is there a poll that shows whether Americans think this is a good idea? I'm not talking about politicians; I'm talking the American public at large.

The reason I'm asking is, America is a center-right country, in general. It's relatively more right-wing than Europe. But this decision to build a mosque on the site of 9/11 sounds like something straight out of Sweden or Norway: ultra-liberalism and multiculturalism. A tilt to the left is unusual for the US, but I get the feeling that most people are supporting this?

Posted by: eugene8 | August 4, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

@Greg

There's still no indication that the bigotry involved here is in any way affecting the actual building of the islamic center. Why would Dems actively seek to elevate what amounts to a non-story. I'd be like the President responding to the New Black Panthers story...there's no real justification for anything beyond a passing response, and voting rights are just as important as religious freedoms in this country.

And I have to say...the use of the "craven" here seems a bit much. All we've seen is that Dems doesn't seem to be rushing out to attack a small group of bigoted (and ineffective) protesters. Are there any concrete indications that they are purposely withholding support for the center out of some fear of political backlash?

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 4, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

OK, one more time: The correct response to a publicity stunt is....

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Kevin says, "it doesn't do much good to complain about a Muslim Community Center being built in another city..."

I agree 100%. It doesn't do much good. In fact, there is absolutely no way anyone can deny them the right to build their mosque because of religious considerations. There is literally NO basis in law to deny them.

That is why I say this is a nothing wedge issue meant to inflame racial tensions. That is also why I say it doesn't matter if it is one block or 100 blocks from the WTC.

Look, if you'll admit that there is no basis in law to deny this imam the right to build then the question becomes, "So why are the Republicans doing this?"

The answer is obvious: For political gain.

Does the GOP have a history of just this kind of thing? Yes, they do.

I'm just baffled that the media isn't calling them on this. The GOP keeps apologizing for the Southern Strategy, but this kind of nonsense puts the lie to those apologies.

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to stand with Scott Stringer, Borough President of Manhattan (who was on Hardball last night with the idiot Dan Senor).

The nationalization of this issue is a DISTRACTION from more pertinent issues, most importantly, the Republican Party's shameful rejection of health care funding for 9/11 FIRST RESPONDERS.

Greg, you're being taken in, and it's starting to get to me.

This issue PALES in comparison to the 9/11 responders issue, much less JOBS, THE ECONOMY, THE BP GULF SPILL, THE BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH.

You are just helping the cause of the extremist Islamophobes.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I don't think 100 blocks away would work. It's the nearness to Ground Zero that provides the leverage. Southern Strategy or not, it doesn't do much good to complain about a Muslim Community Center being built in another city. It's the proximity to Ground Zero that provides the controversy--without that, none of us would ever have heard of it, and there would have to be something else for the Southern Strategy to hang it's hat on.
...
Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 12:14 PM
=============================

=>Last week protestors poured into the streets of Murfreesboro, TN to voice their displeasure at a proposed new mosque just outside of the city in central Tennessee. Some of the protestors were very clear on why they were opposed to a mosque in their neighborhood. “We’re at war with these people,” said one woman. Local political figures likewise did not mince words. Lou Ann Zelenik, a congressional candidate said Muslims aimed to “fracture the moral and political foundation of Middle Tennessee."<=

http://open.salon.com/blog/jonathanhayden/2010/07/21/protesting_the_mosque_a_post_founding_fathers_america
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | August 4, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

If you answered, "Taking the bait," go sit in the corner and think about that.

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

calD: "OK, one more time: The correct response to a publicity stunt is...."

Sargent: Milk it for as many hits as I can, no matter whom I needlessly insult along the way?

Posted by: converse | August 4, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

"his decision to build a mosque on the site of 9/11"

First of all, it's not ON THE SITE OF 9/11. It is near it.

Second, nobody's building anything. The group already owns the space.

Republicans are just DEMAGOGUING THIS ISSUE FOR POLITICAL REASONS (aka to scare white Christians into thinking they are under attack).

Frankly, as someone who has lived in or near the most ethnically and religiously diverse portion of real estate in the world for most of my life, the Radical Right's abuse of this local issue is decidedly as ANTI-NEW YORK as it is ANTI-AMERICA.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Greg: While Dems haven't bathed themselves in glory on this one, saying you are not opposed to the center is a position. Weiner's refusal to comment (has he put out a statement yet?) is more problematic... Have any dems actually come out against building the center there as a matter of law or supported any proposals to change the zoning commission's decision to go forward, not just their personal preference.

It seems like an easy thing to say, "While I personally don't like the idea of an Islamic community center including a Mosque so near to ground zero (why they don't like it is a great followup question), I will defend the constitutional right of both religious freedom and property rights and not oppose the building, if it passes local zoning committees."

It just insane for dems not to go this far...But these are the same people that ran to support Bush's Iraq debacle to avoid being called soft on terrorism, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 911 and inspectors found no WMD before or after the invasion. They are pathetic, spineless worms when it comes to national security or support for Israel. AIPAC says jump and dems ask, "How high?" Thank you sir, may I have another?

BTW, where are the tea partiers sending their thousands into the streets to defend the constitution?

Crickets....

This shows the total hypocrisy of the tea partiers. Constitutional righst for me, not thee...
Maybe they are too busy trying to keep the govt's hands off their social security and medicare...

Posted by: srw3 | August 4, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse


OK, one more time: The correct response to a publicity stunt is....

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:24 PM

What publicity stunt are you talking about. Are you calling the proposed center just a stunt, or do you mean the opposition to it, is just a publicity stunt?

If it is the latter; then when should people speak out against such bigotry? How do you know that it will not escalate into something bigger, and far worse?

I keep hearing a line running through my head: "Never Again". Just ignoring the hate mongers did not work the last time.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

@ifthethunderdontgetya: "Last week protestors poured into the streets of Murfreesboro, TN to voice their displeasure at a proposed new mosque just outside of the city in central Tennessee."

Interesting. I don't see any indication that that protest is part of an organized Republican southern strategy, but perhaps it is. Wait, I just found an article where a Republican congressional candidate is attacking the mosque:

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100714/NEWS02/7140346/Candidate-Lou-Ann-Zelenik-airs-Murfreesboro-mosque-suspicions

Hmmm. Maybe there is an Islamophobic southern strategy at work.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Once again the media is trying to drive story. Schumer's response was appropriate. I hadn't heard that Weimer had declared his candidacy for Mayor - Oh my mistake he hasn't it's just supposition by the writer.

It's private property. Priate - means the owner can sell to whomever they please.

Posted by: rlj1 | August 4, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

@eugene8: "But this decision to build a mosque on the site of 9/11 "But this decision to build a mosque on the site of 9/11 "

Good grief! For the thousandth time, as Ethan pointed out, it's not ON the site of 9/11. How do you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously if you can't even get the basic facts right?

Posted by: schrodingerscat | August 4, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

There is A Right Wing National Islamophobic, and a Right Wing Xenophobic Strategy at work.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Okay - typo
Private property...should be "private"...

Posted by: rlj1 | August 4, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Great. This story is the top story on WaPo politics section

"Dems mum on Ground Zero mosque"

I knew this was all the Dems' fault somehow.

I don't get it Greg, I just don't get why you'd want to help the cause of the extremists like Newt Gingrich. And you DO know that you're helping them, right?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "Look, if you'll admit that there is no basis in law to deny this imam the right to build then the question becomes, 'So why are the Republicans doing this?' The answer is obvious: For political gain."

Well, yes, obviously, I'm not debating that. Though I think many folks are sincere in their objections, if not considering the large consitutional issues.

My point is that, as a wedge issue on a national scale, the community center has to be near Ground Zero (and many Republicans have said as much, so if they pulled up and built a mile away, it would be difficult to continue to object). 100 blocks away, it simply doesn't make a compelling issue. If it didn't matter at all, then Republicans could just run ads saying "Muslims are Scary. Vote for me", which would involve a lot less work.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

MUCH more important news c/o Benen:

SENATE PASSES KEY LEGISLATION ON STATE AID, TEACHERS' JOBS....

This morning was a key test -- of the Senate's ability to address a public need, of policymakers' commitment to the American economy, of Republican moderates' willingness to take "yes" for an answer.

In a pleasant surprise, they passed the test.

At issue was a state aid package, including $10 billion to save school teachers' jobs, and $16.1 billion in state Medicaid funding (FMAP). The measure was financed through a combination of cuts -- including cuts to food stamps in future years -- and closing foreign tax credit loopholes. For Republicans who claim to want to improve the economy, but not at the expense of the deficit, there were no excuses -- Dems offered a modest, sensible bill, which would save jobs, help struggling states, all without adding to the deficit.

Indeed, Senate Democrats practically wrote the bill to the specifications of Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine. Fortunately, they acted in good faith -- after getting the provisions they wanted, at the cost they wanted, Snowe and Collins voted with Democrats. The vote this morning was 61 to 38. Every other Republican in the chamber voted to kill the legislation -- there's money for the wars and tax cuts, they said, but not for teachers and health care.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_08/025040.php

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, the protest against the mosque that will be built in Temecula, CA was an EPIC fail.

"In the end, the people trying to stop the construction of a mosque in Temecula, California were vastly outnumbered by the crowd welcoming the growth of the Muslim community in Riverside County. Last week, we told you about the plan by some conservatives opposed to the construction of the new mosque to show up over the weekend outside the Temecula-area Muslim group's current digs to tell those inside they weren't welcome. To prove the point, the group planned to bring dogs -- which one protester characterized as pretty much the Muslims' mortal enemy, saying that Muslims "hate dogs."

Here's how it all turned out: the anti-mosque protesters were outnumbered by pro-mosque supporters, the local tea party disavowed the protest and called it hate speech, the protester we talked to dropped off the face of the earth and only one dog made it to the planned protest.

It was a fittingly unexpected end to an extraordinary tale.

First, the scene on the ground at Friday's protest. As the Los Angeles Times reported, "a small group of protesters took over a patch of grass across from the Islamic Center of Temecula Valley," but they were "greatly outnumbered by supporters from area churches who were there to support the Islamic Center." Overall, the paper reported, the opposition was "vocal but relatively tame."

The anti-mosque group numbered at "about 20," according to the Press-Enterprise. Other local press reported that the group carried signs with messages like "Muslims Danced with Joy on 9/11," and "No Allah's Law Here." The counter-protesters, on the other hand, "wore white shirts in solidarity" with the Muslims and carried signs reading "Leave These American Citizens Alone."

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/bigotryfail_planned_rally_to_harass_muslims_with_d.php?ref=fpb

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 4, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010 is absolutely correct in asking why Greg is helping the extremists.

Why is it the headline on the WaPo Politics section is NOT something along the lines of, "Republicans use the Southern Strategy, again," or "Repubicans sow hate, reap prejudice, just like always," or, "Will the GOP succeed in its effort to spread hate?"

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

"There is A Right Wing National Islamophobic, and a Right Wing Xenophobic Strategy at work."

Must be working. I look forward to voting for Republicans that much more, every time I read the comments. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

@ Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:32 PM:

See: Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:10 PM (above)

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Ethan,

How hard would it be for Schumer or Weiner to say, "Religious bigotry in any form is just simply un-American, and we must reject it outright." I get your gist, and don't completely disagree, but it does seem odd for NY Dems to be completely and totally silent.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 4, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

I concur with the others above that you are really over the top on this local zoning issue, turned into a Republican pseudo-issue. Schumer's position is perfectly reasonable and an appropriate low-key answer to this ginned-up issue. You usually have a better perspective on Dem strategy, and I'm surprised you are allowing yourself to be used by the rightwing bigots this way.

Posted by: TomBlue | August 4, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

"Must be working"

Wow... admitting you're a xenophobe... unreal.

Why do you hate the diversity that has made America a superpower?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Islamophobia is a rational response to a very deadly threat.

World War III will be fight-to-the-death between Islam & the West.

In the meantime, let them build all the mosques they want. Burning them all down will be cathartic some day.

Posted by: pmendez | August 4, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

"First of all, it's not ON THE SITE OF 9/11. It is near it."

Would it still be OK if it were? Seriously, if the Port Authority decided to sell the World Trade Center site to an Islamic group that wanted to build a mega mosque on the site, would any of you who support Cordoba House object? And if so, why?

Posted by: ath17 | August 4, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Kevin - I'll grant you that the reason this has caught national attention is the proximity to the WTC site.

The proof of that, as can be seen from some of the other posts in this very thread, is that the Republicans are doing the same thing in Murfreesboro, TN and in Temecula Valley California, but not getting the same amount of attention.

Does nobody else see the pattern? I'll keep repeating: This is the Southern Strategy.

And no, Kevin, the GOP can't just say, "Muslims are Scary. Vote for me." My understanding is that they tried being straight up with their racism in the sixties and it backfired in a big way. Since then, they've done their best to be clever about it, and developed the Southern Strategy to push their hatred.

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

@kw:Hmmm. Maybe there is an Islamophobic southern strategy at work.

Ya think? This is just the latest "Lets demonize Muslims and stereotype them as terrorists or terrorist sympathizers" move by the repiglicans...

"If it didn't matter at all, then Republicans could just run ads saying "Muslims are Scary. Vote for me", which would involve a lot less work."

This is too easy to call out as bigotry. The "mosque at ground zero with terrorists dancing on the smoking ruins of WTC" is just veiled enough to be a clear dogwhistle to the bigots (Mooselims are scary, evil, and devious) and only 90% out and out bigoted. Republicans have pushed the envelope of what is considered within the realm of political discourse for years, and this is just the latest stretching of the political discourse balloon. As Raygun said "There [they] go again..."

Posted by: srw3 | August 4, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

"Here's another Dem who has done the right thing: Reshma Saujani, an attorney and activist who..."

(wait for it)

"...is running against Dem Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan."
---------------------------------------------

LOL! Gee. Wonder why?

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"Why do you hate the diversity that has made America a superpower?"

When the US became a superpower (1917-1945) is was over 90% white and over 95% Christian.

Now that we enjoy all this diversity, things don't seem to be going so well, now do they?

Posted by: pmendez | August 4, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Sue, THEY are not the issue.

The Right Wing's demagoguery IS THE ISSUE.

Any attempt to make Weiner and/or Schumer the issue helps the Right Wing.

I don't see any other way of looking at it other than that.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Liam: "I keep hearing a line running through my head: "Never Again". Just ignoring the hate mongers did not work the last time."

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we have another Godwin Winner!

Posted by: converse | August 4, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Yes! The silence of the Democrats is deafening. They are also pandering to the wave of islamophobia that is sweeping the country.

I found it particularly upsetting that no Democrat told Schumer to retract the comments he recently made against Arabs. Any such comments against any other group would have earned him numerous, very well deserved, reprimands. If against Jews or blacks they would have cost him his leadership position. But that only tells us the standing of various groups in the hierarchy.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | August 4, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"Seriously, if the Port Authority decided to sell the World Trade Center site to an Islamic group that wanted to build a mega mosque on the site, would any of you who support Cordoba House object?"

Seriously?

Sorry, but that is not a serious question.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

@ Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:32 PM:

See: Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:10 PM (above)

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 12:49 PM

..................

OK, I went back and read it, and I disagree with your stance that we should just ignore those hate mongers, just because you feel they are just a few crazies.

Just a few crazies got their start, in a beer hall, in the earlier 1930s, and people did not speak out then, with tragic consequences.

You can ignore it. No one is forcing you to do otherwise, but why are you so concerned about others speaking out against the hate mongers?

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "Wow... admitting you're a xenophobe... unreal. Why do you hate the diversity that has made America a superpower?"

I don't. And I don't think I suggested I was a xenophobe.

What would make you think that?

I do happen to think that conservatives, Republicans, and southerners are all people, too. Maybe that makes me a xenophobe?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

"In this world there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants and the other is getting it."

Oscar Wilde

Posted by: Cherubim | August 4, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

"When the US became a superpower (1917-1945) is was over 90% white and over 95% Christian."

Yeah and what do you think happened in the first decade or two of the 20th century?

One of the biggest influxes of immigrants the country has ever seen. Irish, Italian, Jews. If you think those immigrants didn't help this country become what it is, then you simply don't know the first thing about American History.

Btw, "diversity" doesn't just mean whites and blacks.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "And no, Kevin, the GOP can't just say, "Muslims are Scary. Vote for me." My understanding is that they tried being straight up with their racism in the sixties and it backfired in a big way. Since then, they've done their best to be clever about it, and developed the Southern Strategy to push their hatred."

Then, being clever about it means that they cannot treat a Muslim community center built 100 miles away from the WTC the same as one built 1 block away. It is the proximity that gives the issue leverage that they can use. That's all I'm saying.

That, and I generally disagree with the idea that the objections are racist or bigoted, though there may be elements of Xenophobia. Or that the Republicans (or, repiglicans, to borrow swr3's colorful term) are, on the whole, applying a Southern strategy that uses racism and bigotry as an appeal, and that appeal works, and leads to sometimes significant victories, and that the 1994 house sweet and the Bush victory in 2004 are all because they managed to appeal in the right way, with the secret Masonic handshake, to all those closeted bigots and racists out there.

But, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

All, check out the new birther numbers in the CNN poll:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/birtherism_alive_and_well.html

startling.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 4, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

@ath17

"Seriously, if the Port Authority decided to sell the World Trade Center site to an Islamic group that wanted to build a mega mosque on the site, would any of you who support Cordoba House object? And if so, why?"

No, I would not object at all in that situation. Freedom of religion is freedom of religion. For something so costly, I'd suggest close supervision of where the money was coming from - but I'd suggest the same if it was a Christian megachurch or a Jewish center.

I'm still an advocate of the Federal Government taking ownership of the land. I always thought that immediately after 9/11, the Federal Government should have bought out everyone involved to take full ownership of ground zero, and build a national monument in it's place. Maybe a sybolic monument, a giant museum dedicated soley to American History, or multicultural/multireligious community center.

It would have cost billions...but I don't think people would have cared in 2001/2002 about deficit spending for it or the idea of a one-time "9/11 Monument Fund" tax being created to pay for it.

If we had done that...it wouldn't still be a giant hole in the ground because the owners can't find enough renters to afford to rebuild. Instead we'd have a shining beacon of "eff you Bin Laden" already built.

I'm not sure it's financially/politically possible anymore, unfortunately. A sad statement in of itself, really.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 4, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis, this is what Liam said:

"There is A Right Wing National Islamophobic, and a Right Wing Xenophobic Strategy at work."

You replied:

"Must be working. I look forward to voting for Republicans that much more"

What other conclusion should I draw from your comment?

The Right Wing National Islamophobic, and a Right Wing Xenophobic Strategy "must be working"...

..."I look forward to voting for Republicans that much more"

Do you not understand your own comment?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 4, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Must be working. I look forward to voting for Republicans that much more, every time I read the comments. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 12:44 PM
....................

You get to cast your vote, for whom ever you want, like you always have. You keep rattling on about your vote, as if it counted more than other votes do. It does not. You have just one vote, but all the times that you have wrote that the comments of others, have shored up your intent to vote straight Republican reveals, that you either are not very sure of what you stand for, or else you are just a dedicated Right Winger, who thinks that talking about how you are going to vote, will make people like me back off. It will not.


Why not just come right out and state clearly, what you have been beaten around the bush about; You feel Muslims should agree to be confined into some New York district, A Ghetto; if you will?

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

And no, Kevin, the GOP can't just say, "Muslims are Scary. Vote for me________

I would be more afraid if this construction is done for some right wing bigot to BLOW it up and kills hundreds of people than for anything else to happen.

you know there is a Tim McVeigh right wing nutjob already planning to take out anything associated with a mosque (even though this building IS NOT A MOSQUE).

Besides Rethugs only love the Constitution when it suits their purpose (ie guns) the rest of it they would throw in the trash. Why else are they trying to convince the world that a. we are a Christian nation. b,. trying to take out the 14th amendment.
c. debating whether the Civil Rights Bill is actuallly constitutional etc etc etc.

Why do they hate the concept of a freely religious society anyhow? how unamerican

Posted by: racerdoc | August 4, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

They need all the Muslim voters they can get to help them in November... Far as I'm concerned they can have them...

Posted by: rosamon6069 | August 4, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

@pmmendez: "When the US became a superpower (1917-1945) is was over 90% white and over 95% Christian."

It also had less than half our current urban development (thus, much more open land). We consumed much less energy. We had, as a percentage of population, something like 40 times the amount of family farms. For most of that time, there was no television, and, even when there was, it consumed a fraction of the average persons day, or none at all. And so on. We had much, much, much lower taxes, and much less government spending. We great our standing army from 1900 to 1940, but nothing like we would from 1941 onward. Our existing military--a large part of what makes us a super power--is much larger than it was even at the end of WWII.

We had no nuclear power plants in 1945. Not satellites or cell phones. No DVDs, CDs or VHS. No Internet.

There was a lot more going on than the ratio of white and Christian people to Scary Others. Whatever else you might say about such a race-based comparison, I think the point should be made that correlation dos not equal causality. In this case, it wouldn't even be close, even if your numbers were verifiably correct. Which I don't think they are.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

If this doesn't show the total inept and reprobate nature of some of these nitwits allowing this, then NOTHING WILL !!!!!!!!!

Posted by: votingrevolution | August 4, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

It's official,NY has now become the laughing stock of the world!!!!

Posted by: votingrevolution | August 4, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: To clarify, I'm looking forward to voting against the ideological bent that says that every policy difference, or every disagreement, is based on the racism, bigotry, and general backwardness of Republicans, conservatives, flyover country, etc.

I apologize if that wasn't clear.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Kevin - Wait a second, you admit the GOP is doing this for political gain and when we call them on their obvious racism that makes you want to vote for Republicans? Really?

I'm not saying there aren't lefties that call racism where their isn't racism. But in this case the Republicans are clearly using the Southern Strategy.

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: "You get to cast your vote, for whom ever you want, like you always have."

Of course I do. Greatest country in the world, and all that.

"You keep rattling on about your vote, as if it counted more than other votes do."

It's interesting that you immediately choose the negative interpretation. Maybe I'm just going on about my vote, because I like it. Doesn't mean it's more important than yours, or anybody elses. It certainly isn't! I just like mine. It doesn't come around a lot, so when it does, I really want to enjoy it. I want to walk into the polling place with a spring in my step. When my candidates are, well, not ideal, it's a little harder. But then, I participate in free and open discussions that I find highly motivating. And I just want to thank you. Otherwise, I might just stay home on election day, and then my vote would not only not matter more than anyone else's, it wouldn't matter at all. So, again, I'm saying thanks!

"else you are just a dedicated Right Winger, who thinks that talking about how you are going to vote, will make people like me back off. It will not."

I don't think it will make you back off. I wouldn't say it, if I thought it would make you back off. Quite the contrary. If you gave up that easy, I'd just be disappointed.

"Why not just come right out and state clearly, what you have been beaten around the bush about; You feel Muslims should agree to be confined into some New York district, A Ghetto; if you will?"

To be clear, I don't think that. They have a right to build a Community Center anywhere they please, assuming the community wants it, and, clearly, the actual community where they would be building the center does want it. Other than regular zoning limitations, that do and have applied in various communities since the birth of our nation, that government should have no role in restricting the building of houses of worship based on religious grounds (up to, and including, the unserious hypothetical of building some sort of mega-mosque on Ground Zero.

There is no grounds for restricting or attempting to restrict the community center from being built where they want to build it, although that some people would react negatively is entirely predictable, and should have been (and probably was) expected. But that's a tangential issue.

Again, very interesting that you'd interpret any ambiguity on my part in the most negative way possible. But, I suppose, a predictable reaction.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

@nsleib: "Kevin - Wait a second, you admit the GOP is doing this for political gain and when we call them on their obvious racism that makes you want to vote for Republicans?"

Political gain does not automatically equal "obvious racism". That's where we part company.

"But in this case the Republicans are clearly using the Southern Strategy."

If you mean they are relying on stealth racism to win the votes of the people I work and live with, that I buy my groceries from, that I've gone to church with--if you're telling me Republicans are winning my home state on a regular basis because they make racists appeals, and my friends and neighbors vote that way because they're racists and bigots, I'm telling you that you are wrong.

If you mean something else by "Southern Strategy" and "obvious racism", I apologize for my misunderstanding.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

The decline of the American economy was not caused by the influx of non white emigrants.

It was caused by The Republican attacks on well paying union jobs. Reagan started the decline of American Industrial might. Before him; America was paying good wages to production workers, and manufacturing it's own consumer products.

The Republicans have destroyed all that. Now the factories are all overseas, so those who could never meet college entrance standards, no longer can find a good paying factory job.

All the consumer electronics, and appliances are no longer made in the USA. The textile mills are all gone, as are all the clothing makers.

Most furniture is made overseas. Hell, even all our dinner plates are made in place like China, where labor is paid so little, that they can not afford to buy anything from us. Of course, we no longer make anything to sell to them, anyway, so we have screwed ourselves both ways.

We hear all this talk about restoring consumer confidence, so they will go shopping again. China will appreciate that, because they will get to manufacture the stuff we will purchase. It will not create very many jobs here, because we will have no handing in manufacturing the products, to meet the increased demand.

It is a sick joke.

America used to be an Independent self sustaining Manufacturing Power.

Republicans have given that all away to China, and now we borrow from them, to purchase manufactured goods from them. An economic house of cards model, that the Republicans sold the American people on, and now it has come crashing down.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, I've got to chime in here that you seem to be a reasonable, thinking and informed member of the GOP. You seem to agree you are unusual in that regard and you even seem to agree that a great number of your fellow republicans are unreasonable and uninformed. Certainly you must realize that includes many of your elected officials, candidates and media elite. Yet you also seem to proudly declare that despite your knowledge, you have every intention of voting a straight republican ticket.

I don't understand.

As far as the topic of this thread, you have now acknowledged that there are right wingers not only demagoguing on the center to be built in Manhattan as well as those in Tennessee and California. Your comments then become obviously contradictory.

I suggest you get back and re-read your posts and perhaps you could explain the contradictions?

Posted by: cmccauley60 | August 4, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

The decline of the American economy was not caused by the influx of non white emigrants.

It was caused by The Republican attacks on well paying union jobs. Reagan started the decline of American Industrial might. Before him; America was paying good wages to production workers, and manufacturing it's own consumer products.

The Republicans have destroyed all that. Now the factories are all overseas, so those who could never meet college entrance standards, no longer can find a good paying factory job.

All the consumer electronics, and appliances are no longer made in the USA. The textile mills are all gone, as are all the clothing makers.

Most furniture is made overseas. Hell, even all our dinner plates are made in place like China, where labor is paid so little, that they can not afford to buy anything from us. Of course, we no longer make anything to sell to them, anyway, so we have screwed ourselves both ways.

We hear all this talk about restoring consumer confidence, so they will go shopping again. China will appreciate that, because they will get to manufacture the stuff we will purchase. It will not create very many jobs here, because we will have no hand in manufacturing the products, to meet the increased demand.

It is a sick joke.

America used to be an Independent self sustaining Manufacturing Power.

Republicans have given that all away to China, and now we borrow from them, to purchase manufactured goods from them. An economic house of cards model, that the Republicans sold the American people on, and now it has come crashing down.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

@ eugene8 and Republicans generally -

It's actually not about what Americans think - it's about what NEW YORKERS think. Yes, the people who actually physically went through and witnessed 9/11. Since when do y'all care about NYC anyways - I thought it was just full of elitists? If you are pro-state's rights and less intrusive government and still oppose the construction of this mosque, you are a hypocrite, pure and simple. Leave NYC alone - the city doesn't need your advice or your help.

Posted by: CTgirl3 | August 4, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

@ Liam-still | August 4, 2010 1:02 PM:

Mahatma Ghandi famously said: First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. Ever think about the flip side of that statement?

I know we're conditioned by Fox News and Politico to think in terms of false equivalencies, requiring every crazy thing anyone says to be answered in pursuit of balance; and by a PC culture of inclusiveness to believe that every viewpoint no matter how bizarre has validity and is deserves a voice. But that's simply not right. Some ideas are intrinsically better than others and some points of view very simply aren't deserving of being treated as though they had any place in reasoned discussion.

And frankly, your point about the beer hall crazies in 1930 is a textbook specimen of a classic fallacy of critical thinking called the Slippery Slope. It turns out that while very low probability events do occasionally occur in nature, the overwhelming majority of beer hall revolutionaries never actually succeed in starting world wars or perpetrating acts of genocide.

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

I got a kick from the guy who said this would be like erecting a memorial to the kamakazies who attacked Pearl Harbor. There were no kamakazies during that attack.

Posted by: jckdoors | August 4, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

@ Liam-still | August 4, 2010 12:32 PM

"I keep hearing a line running through my head: 'Never Again'".

Was the irony there intended? Or were you actually unaware "Never Again!" is most famously the slogan of the ADL, who of course have been among the most vocal opponents of the downtown mosque?

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

@cmcauley60: "Kevin, I've got to chime in here that you seem to be a reasonable, thinking and informed member of the GOP. You seem to agree you are unusual in that regard and you even seem to agree that a great number of your fellow republicans are unreasonable and uninformed."

I don't think I'd put my opinions like that. First of all, I think being unreasonable and quick-to-judge are bipartisan traits. I don't think I'm particularly unusual--except perhaps in the comments here, maybe, where there aren't any cogent conservative arguments made. But they do exist, elsewhere.

"Certainly you must realize that includes many of your elected officials, candidates and media elite.Yet you also seem to proudly declare that despite your knowledge, you have every intention of voting a straight republican ticket. I don't understand."

I have a choice between very bad and even badder. So, I vote against even badder.

"As far as the topic of this thread, you have now acknowledged that there are right wingers not only demagoguing on the center to be built in Manhattan as well as those in Tennessee and California. Your comments then become obviously contradictory."

Well, I'm not voting in New York. I will be voting in Tennessee, but I don't live near Murfreesboro. If there was something truly heinous coming from anybody I might actually be voting for, I might have to spend some time debating the choices. But there's not, so that just leaves me the option of voting against the people who call me and the people I work and live with racists and bigots and pick-your-epithet at every possible opportunity. So, that's what I'm going to do.

"I suggest you get back and re-read your posts and perhaps you could explain the contradictions?"

I'm supposed to guess what you consider to be contradictions? Ask for clarification, and I'll try to explain.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 4, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Dems silent on Ground Zero Mosque?

Where were you yesterday?

So long as it's built on top of the grave of Osama Bin Laden, it's ok by me.

Otherwise, no!


Posted by: lindalovejones | August 4, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

TO: Kevin_Willis who wrote:
“So the only option here is to vote for the Republican's, who are being very vocal about their opposition to Muslim Community centers near the WTC.”

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Where did you get that crap?

Republicans, and in particular the Mayor of New York City who is also a Republican, is in favor of this mosque crap.

Democrats are against it.

The friggin Republicans can’t even get small things right, like who’s on which side of the fence.

Geez!

Posted by: lindalovejones | August 4, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Schumer and Weiner are just afraid of Abe Foxman and the rest of the Sanhedrin.

Gutless wonders.

Posted by: Garak | August 4, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

CalD.

ADL has become a sick joke.

Their new Doctrine is: Some Bigotry can be justified, as long as it is against those we do not care for.

I will always speak out against irrational hatred of any group, and not wait to see if it caught on or not. You can wait and see if it turns into a slippery slope or not. What will you do about it, should it actually get out of hand?

I prefer to try and fight a fire, before it spreads, in order to keep it from spreading.

In the immortal words of Deputy Fife:

"Nip It In The Bud Andy; Just Nip It".

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Kevin says, "If you mean they are relying on stealth racism to win the votes of the people I work and live with, that I buy my groceries from, that I've gone to church with--if you're telling me Republicans are winning my home state on a regular basis because they make racists appeals, and my friends and neighbors vote that way because they're racists and bigots, I'm telling you that you are wrong."

I don't know who you buy your groceries from. I don't know what state you live in. But I do know that the GOP has been using the Southern Strategy for the last 40 years. They've admitted to it and apologized for it, but they are still doing it.

And yes, Kevin, they are pushing this story to appeal to racist. You know there is no basis in law to deny the building rights. You've admitted they have political motivations. Who do you think this appeals to?

Posted by: nisleib | August 4, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I'm not silent. I agree with Mayor Bloomberg, and the last time I looked, he wasn't a Democrat.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | August 4, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse


Its cool, I’m opening my pork BBQ right next door, the décor is cartoon drawings of Mohamed.

Posted by: nuke41 | August 4, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

The Dems are just being the cowards they are. Obama is running around using Republicans as his scapegoat because Hope and Change are out and they have already shown contempt for Americans so all he has is Bush (who has been out of office for awhile now and is not running) and showing no respect for the GOP.

We may not like some policies of the GOP but Obama does not realize that these people actually worked to get there. Not like him who sits back and blames the world and not himself for the lousy job both he and his party of "It's Not Our fault" has done.

They have NOTHING to campaign with so they are doing the schoolyard crap and guess what?

The American people that they hold in such contempt are stupid enough to go for it.

It is disgusting but expected.

Posted by: ieklein | August 4, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

There are plenty of other nefarious Repub doings without worrying about this Mosque. C'mon Greg, this pitiful "controversy" isn't worth the pixels you provide it.

Now, the Discolse Act, that's worth pounding away on.

Posted by: morganducks | August 4, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I hear you. Grizzly Palin boasting about the size of Gov. Jan Brewers Testicles; that is not school yard crap at all. That is Political Discourse in it's most Pure and Elevated form.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 4, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Do have a look at "Presenting Islam to Non-Muslims - The Role of the Masjid"

http://www.islamicsolutions.com/presenting-islam-to-non-muslims-the-role-of-the-masjid/

Posted by: ffa7 | August 4, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Of course, if you're a Democrat and you come out with a balanced view, you'll be on Fox (or in the Washington Post) as a Taliban-lover.

If you're name happened to be Weiner or Schumer, you would also be a self-hating Jew.

And if your name happened to be Obama... it would be proof that you actually are in the Taliban.

Posted by: curmudgeonlytroll | August 4, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

@Nuke41:

Sounds great! Will there be a place I can tie my 3 dogs up outside the front door while I eat BBQ?

Posted by: pmendez | August 4, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

I think it is shameful for the Democrats to not speak out in support of this.

Then again, I think keeping their mouths shut while the Republigoons make themselves look like a bunch of neo-nazis is smart too. Give them just enough rope to hang themselves with Hispanics, Muslim Americans, gays, and the GOP and supporter will happily continue on their march off a cliff.

Posted by: B-rod | August 4, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

The fact that the Journolist bloggers and their fellow leftist comrades are the only people who think building a mosque at Ground Zero is acceptable tells you all you need to know about them.

Posted by: TomR4 | August 4, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

@ TomR4

Ummmm wow - did you not read this article? I had no idea Mayor Bloomberg was a journolist blogger or leftist comrade and interestingly, he seems to be pretty darn in favor of building this mosque (it's not AT ground zero btw, it's a few blocks away). Seriously, this is one of the dumbest posts I've seen and that's saying something.

Posted by: CTgirl3 | August 4, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

THE MUSLIM MOSQUE-A STATE WITHIN A STATE

You guys really need to take off your wish-washy liberal hats and start to understand something about Islam. You need to understand that it violates the US Constitution in two ways. You need to undertand that Islam has two "Faces". You need to undertand the DUALITY of Islam. It is not a religion. It is a universal belief system of religion and government that is based entirely on the Q'ran-the Ahadith and the Sunna of te Prophet. It uses the "nice" faith to establish a foothold (this correlates to Mohammed's earlier life in Mecca when he had few followers and is the face that is presented to the west, or to those that Islam wishes to subjugate) but when the numbers of Muslims increase they will start to exercise demands disproportionate to their numbers. This corresponds to the last 10 years of Mohammed's life, when he waged war against the Jews, the Qu'resh and the Christians.

Critical to this understanding is that
ALL of sharia (Islamic) law relates to the later, violent, Medinan phase of Mohammed's life.

And they WILL hold a country hostage to their demands.. and the weak, liberal west appeases.. it answers the demand.. this leads to more demands.. then when it is powerful enough, then the fun REALLY begins.

For further understanding of the mosque in all this, please examine this timely article: "The Mosque-a State Within a State" written by Congressional candidate for Tennessee 5th District, Vijay Kumar. He has first experience of living in a Muslim country. He was in Iran during the Iranian Islamic Revolution. More than one of his friends and assocaties were murdered at that time. http://kumarforcongress.net/2010/08/03/the-muslim-mosque-a-state-within-a-state.aspx

Posted by: PaganRebel | August 4, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

When Muslims fear to speak out — http://www.twf.org/News/Y2010/0803-Fear.html, why blame Democrats?

Posted by: twforg | August 4, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

@ Liam-still | August 4, 2010 2:21 PM

In the immortal words of Deputy Fife:

"Nip It In The Bud Andy; Just Nip It".
----------------------------------------------

Yikes. Again, I have to wonder if the irony there was intended: The character of Barney Fife of course having been an excitable busybody who was perennially over-reacting to mundane events, imagining a mountain inside every mole hill and a tempest in every teapot, each week finding some new windmill to engage in mortal combat and conjuring up a huge mess out of nothing much in the process, until his calm, level-headed boss finally stepped in to rescue him.

Gotta admit though he'd be a pretty apt analogy for the case at hand, now that you mention it.

Posted by: CalD | August 4, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

What, pray tell, does the location of a mosque or any other religious institution have to do with "religious freedom?" I think most opponents, like I, of the mosque's location at this particular site have no objection to its being built elsewhere.

To frame this debate in terms of religious freedom is specious. Just as opponents of open borders and illegal immigration are labeled "anti-immigrant" and "anti-immigration," opponents of a mosque at Ground Zero are labeled "anti-freedom of religion" and "anti-Muslim." Twaddle.

On a side note, it's really quite amusing to watch people, who under normal circumstances have no use for organized religion or the religious and, in fact, scorn them, go to the mat for this mosque.

Posted by: SukieTawdry | August 5, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company