Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

GOP Senate candidates drag Obama's mosque speech into their races

More and more GOP Senate candidates are doing it now. Here's Senator David Vitter's email to supporters, calling on Obama to "reverse" his "support" for the Islamic center, and demanding that his Dem opponent, Charlie Melancon, break his silence on the issue:

President Obama's support of building the mosque at Ground Zero is a slap in the face to the American people and I've demanded that President Obama reverse his position.

Charlie Melancon's silence on the issue is troubling to Louisiana families. But, we should not be surprised. Melancon endorsed President Obama, gave him an A grade and now is eerily quiet as Obama thumbs his nose at the American people on this important issue.

Americans will never forget the pain and anguish of September 11, 2001.

In my opinion, the prospect of a mosque right near this site of reverence and respect for lost loved ones from the attack shows a serious lack of sensitivity.In fact, the majority of the country is strongly opposed to building a mosque at the site of the most tragic terrorist attack on America.

I will continue to demand President Obama to reverse his support on this, especially out of respect to those who lost loved ones on September 11. It's ridiculous that my opponent, Charlie Melancon, refuses to join in me in calling on Obama to reverse his support.

Sincerely,

David Vitter

Talling this up so far, we now have Vitter, Sharron Angle, and NRSC chief John Cornyn making an issue of Obama's speech.

The question to ask here is this: What, precisely, about Obama's statement are they criticizing? Are they saying Obama should "reverse" his support for the right of the group to build the center? If so, that would be incoherent -- most Republicans are claiming the group does have that right. If not, what exactly are they criticizing? After all, Obama never endorsed the center, and nor should he have.

One side note: This shows that Obama's clarification on Saturday, such as it was, has done nothing whatsoever to stop claims that he directly supports the center itself.

By Greg Sargent  |  August 16, 2010; 12:22 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Foreign policy and national security  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: How many commentators will denounce GOP mosque strategy?
Next: Breaking: Halal food carts spotted ON Ground Zero!

Comments

Predictable. Congratulations.

Posted by: CalD | August 16, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

so, are they also going to demand that the *existing* mosques in the area be torn down? if not, why not?

and what about the mosque at the pentagon? are there any facilities/rooms for muslims to pray at other or planned buildings in the area?

should those be closed too? if not, why not?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | August 16, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

The lightning fast reaction of the GOP to pounce on this leads me to believe they had all intentions for the WH to eventually weigh in and had a strategy in place.

My suggestion....

Stop reporting on it. Ignore the race and religious baiting imbeciles and they'll go away and find some other non controversy.

Like I said, they are like the loud person in public places. Ignore them and they find something else to do. If you print what they say you're giving voice to a non issue.

How about this.

Harp on how the Gulf is getting better. I haven't seen the Gulf Governors or the Parish Presidents on the news every day harping on how inefficient the Govn't is any longer.

You're getting sucked into the feeding frenzy. But hey, you wanted the Pres to weigh in on it. You got what you wished for. Was it because it was the right thing to do or because you knew it would create a firestorm and give you endless he said, she said different angles on the politics behind it when all this discussion is doing is alienating Muslims even further?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

I hate to date myself but I remember when the repuggies went postal over the Vietnam memorial. Although the corporate party of avarice and greed, the repugs never miss an opportunity to run up the flagpole some paranoid delusional nonsense as legislative agenda.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld1 | August 16, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are NOT SERIOUS.

Across the board. None of them.

We need MUCH more focus on substantive policy issues. It would be better for the country and at the same time will render the idiot children silent. They have nothing to say about moving America forward, so let's talk about moving America forward and not get distracted by their bullsh*t anti-American hysterics.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 16, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Birds of a feather, flock together
And become xenophobic.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

It's David Vitter. The response writes itself:

"I support the First Amendment in all it's forms. I support the constitution. The first Amendment gives these people the right to build their commuinty center where they will regardless of how Senator Vitter or any member of the Federal Government feels about it. Just as it gives Senator Vitter the right to claim to be a family values conservative while frequenting prostitutes and advocating for violating religious freedoms. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Does my opponent want us to take away his right to be a hypocrite given him by the First Amednment? I ask my opponent Senator Vitter what other Constitutional rights he thinks the Federal Government should infringe upon?"

Posted by: zattarra | August 16, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Remove all Catholic churches near middle school. If "decency" as defined by the religious right is the litmus test for denying First Amendment rights, then pervert priest hiding Catholics need to be denied theirs as well.

Huckabee contempt for the Constitution is promoting the overthrow of it. They would like to cherry pick Constitutional rights like they do their scriptures.

Posted by: areyousaying | August 16, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

"In my opinion, the prospect of a mosque right near this site of reverence and respect for lost loved ones from the attack shows a serious lack of sensitivity."

The man who dragged his wife out in front of the press so that he could discuss his diaper-wearing prostitute fetish sure has a lot of nerve to be talking about someone else's "serious lack of sensitivity".

Posted by: schrodingerscat | August 16, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Better to read this.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamas-Clintonian-speech-pulls-rug-from-under-mosque-supporters-100716539.html

Sargent evens gets some ink.

Posted by: pyellman | August 16, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

btw, i haven't read the earlier threads from today, but, judging from the threads from previous days, i don't really expect our resident rights squashers, xenophobes, islamophobes and frightwingers to respond to my questions above.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | August 16, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

OT:

Steroids Still Stalking Linda McMahon

Linda McMahon, the Republican wrestling impresario, has crept to within striking distance of Richard Blumenthal in the Connecticut Senate race. But news that a 29-year-old former WWE wrestler died over the weekend of heart failure is bound to be a setback because it puts a spotlight on an issue--steroids--that's McMahon's Achilles heel. Why is steroids a problem? Because professional wrestling is rife with steroid abuse that has killed, or probably killed, a small army of current and former employees of McMahon's company, WWE.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/08/steroids-still-stalking-linda-mcmahon/61529/

More about the wrestler's death here:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=dm-wrestlerdeath081310

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 16, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

If I were the WH I would push back hard while quoting the Constitution, specifically items in the Bill of Rights.

This has nothing to do with 9/11 at all since its not even at the WTS site. Even if it were it would still have nothing to do with that.

This has everything to do with why many came to this country in the first place, and that was to avoid religious prosecution.

I think this would be a moment to address the nation from the WH and remind American's what's great about this country and how it was built on immigrants and religious freedoms.

Knock out two birds with one stone.

Let the people then decide which side they stand on but make the delineation very clear.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Republicans never liked the Constitution anyway. Bush claimed, "It's just another Godda____d piece of paper." Perhaps Republicans and many others feel the same way?

The Muslim Religious Center may not be a popular attraction 2 blocks from Ground Zero where 75 innocent Muslims among the near 3000 people died.

But I will fight to the death for their RIGHT to build it! Many have fought and many have died to protect the Constitutional Right of Religion for us all.

Posted by: ddoiron1 | August 16, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Nate Silver's tweet:

[noun] [verb] [ground zero mosque] about 1 hour ago reply

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

@ mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 12:37 PM

Ya think?

Posted by: CalD | August 16, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

@MikeFromArlington:

"If I were the WH I would push back hard while quoting the Constitution, specifically items in the Bill of Rights...Let the people then decide which side they stand on but make the delineation very clear."

***********************

Maybe at the same time Obama could extol how the Constitution protects flag burning, wife-swapping and Nazi marches thru Jewish neighborhoods.

The people already know which side they stand on, and 2/3rds have enough common sense to know that Cordoba House has nothing to do with freedom of religion and everything to do with Moslems celebrating the destruction of the Twin Towers.

Remind me to never hire you as a political consultant.

Posted by: pmendez | August 16, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Nate Silver's tweet:

[noun] [verb] [ground zero mosque] about 1 hour ago reply

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

God, we're easy.

Posted by: CalD | August 16, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

This is yet another instance when the GOP is tossing a softball right over the plate for Dems. I hope they swing for the fences.

"It's increasingly troubling how willing today's GOP is to toss the US Constitution overboard for the sake of a catchy attack line. From wanting to throw away our Nation's promise of religious freedom, or stripping away citizens' right to vote for their own US Senator, or to eliminate the right of natural born citizenship...we are seeing an extremely disturbing trend. It's a trend which leads to fundementally undermining the Constitution of this nation, and it's a trend that needs to stop immediately."

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 16, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"2/3rds have enough common sense to know that Cordoba House has nothing to do with freedom of religion and everything to do with Moslems celebrating the destruction of the Twin Towers."

You call that common sense.

I call that believing a bunch of garbage from a bunch of idiots who's only intention is to turn American's against all Muslims, starting with Pamella Gellar the psychopath and the rest of the islamophobes that hang with her and then propagated by the piece of garbage Murdoch to be used as a tool to further turn American's against Islam.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

John Cole:

"The crazy people are running the show, and folks who remain in the GOP but tepidly speak out against it aid and abet the lunacy. We should stop using the phrase “reasonable Republican” and “sane conservatives” and call them what they really are- accomplices. It’s Malkin and Gellar and Louis Gohmert and Palin and Bachmann’s party now, and they’re just providing them cover."

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/08/16/the-republican-party-in-a-microcosm/

Posted by: schrodingerscat | August 16, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

OT:

Petraeus: Bush ROYALLY SCREWED UP Afghanistan

“Over the last 18 months or so” [...] “what we’ve sought to do in Afghanistan is to get the inputs right for the first time,” Petraeus said.

“We needed to refine the concepts — to build, in some cases, concepts that didn’t exist” seven years after the Afghan war began in October 2001.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38698040/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press/

I guess General David Petraeus is now a member of the "Blame America" crowd. Republicans suck.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 16, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Pretty interesting article at Salon on the timeline of the mosque-troversy. Amazingly, it's been under the radar since December, 2009, even though the NYT had a long front page article about it back then, AND Laura Ingraham interviewed the imam's wife, Daisy Khan, on The O'Reilly Factor, and PRAISED the project. " "I can't find many people who really have a problem with it," Ingraham says of the Cordoba project, adding at the end of the interview, "I like what you're trying to do."

http://www.salon.com/news/ground_zero_mosque/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/08/16/ground_zero_mosque_origins

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 16, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

"""We should stop using the phrase “reasonable Republican” and “sane conservatives” and call them what they really are- accomplices."""

YES.

That is exactly right.

It doesn't matter how "thoughtful" a Republican is, nor how "reasonable" they appear.

ANYONE -- A-N-Y-O-N-E! -- who votes for, or contributes money to, the Republican Party or a Republican candidate IS an accomplice to the growing power of the Limbaugh/Beck far-right extremist fringe.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 16, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

This issue has been a real eye opener. It appears that Republicans really do believe that the protections guaranteed by the Constitution only apply to white, fundamentalist Christian, Republicans.

Posted by: Deirdre_K | August 16, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

The first amendment does not include freedom of religion for Christians only. It's about time Americans, in particular, the GOP realized that.

Hopefully, this will wake Americans up to how crazy the GOP has become.

Posted by: chi-town | August 16, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

This is all right-wing lunatic politics. Either you support the Constitution, or you don't. People have private property rights and can build what they want within LOCAL zoning laws. They have no integrity, no decency, all they care about is election results. And what happened to the whole state's rights issue? Why do people in Tennessee think they have the right to decide what goes on in a LOCAL zoning issue in New York City? Mind your own business Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Alaska, and any other right-wing breeding grounds.

Posted by: nsu1203 | August 16, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Like I said yesterday I think, the GOP bozo's will overplay stoking racial and religious bigotry and anyone with any sense will see what they are up to and drop out of the conversation.

When you've got Newt teaming up with Gellar and that nutcase Wilders, you know they've jumped the shark.

Let it be known that Republicans can't pick and chose when to protect our Constitution.

You either believe in it or you don't. Let them decide where they stand.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 16, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

All, this is an important dimension to the debate:

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

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 16, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Well, Sargent, your're gossip article is predictable. You and your pc fanatical followers never actually pay attention to what is said. If it has anything related to a conservative view, it is automatically attacked. This issue, however, crosses party lines. You know, those people who actually think for themselves and don't rely on your ridiculous gossip column for actual information.

Yes. Obama made a political statement before a muslim group. As usual, he was playing the crowd. No one disagrees that they have the right to observe their religion or even build the mosque. If this group involved in the mosque had any sensitivity, they would respect the wishes of the majority of Americans (not just Republicans as your fans have claimed) and quietly move to another site. Rather, they appear to want to play "king of the hill" and ignore the wishes of our citizens for political reasons. Now they have the support of Hamas? That's like Mexico weighing in our immigration issue.

How does that work for you, blahgblogwordpresscom?

Posted by: bethg1841 | August 16, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Greg:

You are hilarious.

Two days ago, in a post celebrating the "finest moment" of Obama's presidency, you delared that Obama went "much further" than just supporting the mere right of the organizers to move forward with the project. You claimed that he was "welcoming" the project, and that anything less was "un-American", contrasting this with the "clever little dodge" of opponents who "say they don't question the group's legal right to build it under the Constitution" but are "merely criticizing the group's decision to do so."

You even gleefully predicted that, by going "much further" than just voicing support for the right to build it, Obama might "further stoke" passions to his own political detriment, but you welcomed this as a "display of presidential spine."

How quickly things change!

Now, you say, Obama's critics have nothing to criticize. He afterall, is simply saying exactly what most of them are saying, namely that the group does have the right to build. He never actually endorsed the project, for goodness sakes!

Shameless, Greg. Shameless.

Posted by: ScottC3 | August 16, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

So basically, the practical effects of all this:

The radical right has been gifted with a highly emotional symbolic issue with which to whip their base into apoplectic frenzy for the end game of the election cycle -- and keep in mind that there are about half as again as many of them as there are of us.

The political left, conversely, suffers a net loss in enthusiasm. A small but highly vocal group of us will of course take this as (yet more) proof that Democrats suck, because obviously the president and congress should be doing more... of something!!!! (about a local municipal zoning dispute that our side actually won before the battle was even joined). The rest of us will be left shaking our heads as usual, wondering WTF the first group is all wound up about this time and frankly wishing for the thousandth time that they'd consider getting a clue at some point.

Best of all for the radical right, none of this cost them a dime. All they had to do was drop a couple of op-eds, then sit back grinning and wait for people like Greg Sargent and the firetards to do the heavy lifting. Once the level of ado reaches a point where Democratic congress-critters or if they're really lucky, maybe the president (jackpot!) start to weigh in, all that remains for right-wingers to do it grab their boards and head for the beach.

Surf's up!

Posted by: CalD | August 16, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

@beth: "How does that work for you, blahgblogwordpresscom?"

it worked out exactly as i thought -- you dodged my questions above. why won't you answer them?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | August 16, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Americans wake up! Here we have the president, like him or not, fulfilling his oath to defend and uphold the constitution and the sheople of America are led by the nose by a group of opportunistic propagandists to believe he has done something disloyal. Can all Americans be so ignorant? I surely hope not. If anything it should awake us to the fact that these same propagandists will be coming after our rights next if we are so easily hoodwinked. We should be wary of these opportunists who would love to take away our freedoms one at a time or in one fell swoop. Maybe when we start to lose our right to read what we want to, associate with whom we like and think what we want we will snap out of our trance of television, Xbox and MTV and stand up for the principle this country was founded on. Freedom!!

Posted by: rocknwroll | August 16, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "ANYONE -- A-N-Y-O-N-E! -- who votes for, or contributes money to, the Republican Party or a Republican candidate IS an accomplice to the growing power of the Limbaugh/Beck far-right extremist fringe"

In other words, let's do all that we can to alienate any right-of-center fence sitters. I may be wrong, but I'm not sure that's the best strategy.

But let me know how it works out.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 16, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Once upon a time, conservatives opposed large centralized authority, and they believed that smaller local government units would make the wisest and most beneficial policies.

It is amazing how many Republicans are jumping on the band wagon of saying that a decision that has made by the community, following a rigorous review with input from all sides, must not stand.

Also note the sort of persons being allowed into the Republican "tent" for the purpose of exploiting this issue (this from a posting by Matt Duss):

"The right-wing group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) has announced that it will be hosting a rally against the proposed Cordoba House Islamic community center on September 11.

The confirmed list of speakers includes former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, Andrew Breitbart, and, notably, the far-right Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders. “Islam is not a religion, it’s an ideology,” Wilders told the Guardian in 2009, “the ideology of a retarded culture.”

In the past, Wilders’ extremism has been condemned by conservatives such as Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and even Glenn Beck, who called Wilders “fascist.” It’s a clear sign of how far the Republicans have shifted to the right and embraced Islamophobia as a political tool that movement figures like Gingrich, Bolton, and Breitbart now have no problem sharing a stage with Wilders."

Posted by: Patrick_M | August 16, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

@beth: "How does that work for you, blahgblogwordpresscom?"

it worked out exactly as i thought -- you dodged my questions above. why won't you answer them?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom
==========================================
You don't have a legitimate question to answer. There are mosques all over the country and many in New York specifically. I don't have a problem with them. Ground zero is the issue. Not the right of muslims to worship or build houses of worship. They have that right. The fact that they are ignoring the wishes of the 9/11 survivors and the majority of Americans is also the issue.

Posted by: bethg1841 | August 16, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

@beth: "How does that work for you, blahgblogwordpresscom?"

it worked out exactly as i thought -- you dodged my questions above. why won't you answer them?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom
==========================================
You don't have a legitimate question to answer. There are mosques all over the country and many in New York specifically. I don't have a problem with them. Ground zero is the issue. Not the right of muslims to worship or build houses of worship. They have that right. The fact that they are ignoring the wishes of the 9/11 survivors and the majority of Americans is also the issue.
______________________________
that's what's incoherent about this debate. no one is suggesting that there isn't some insensitivity here, and that it's a bit much to expect everyone to assume the good intentions of the builders of the mosque. not even Obama. the hypocrisy is that Gingrich et al. want to pander to the hate crowd so much they don't have the decency to point out that they agree that there's no legal basis to stop it and that the owners have no obligation to condsider anyone's feelings, let alone that it's the GOP that usually champions the rights of property owners.

what would Gingrich or Vitter have Obama or anyone else do?

Posted by: JoeT1 | August 16, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

beth,

there are *already* moseques in the area and at the pentagon. if this community center is an affront, then certainly the others are as well.

what makes this one different and worthy of your outsized fear and bedwetting?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | August 16, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Of course, the Pavlovian reaction is for the "GOP Senate candidates [to]drag Obama's mosque speech into their races", and for AIPAC-guided Dems to cower. Entirely predictable. The motivations behind each are probably worth covering too.

In my view, reporters, such as Greg (thank you), who have expressed a principled opinion on this ought to always, but always give the motivations behind any politician's behavior.

In this case: POTUS is motivated by the solemn oath to protect the Constitution; Rs by pure demagogy ie to take advantage of the hate and ignorance prevalent among their constituents. This must be said, and repeated, with every story on the topic.

PS: Although a Muslim myself, I strongly disapprove of this project. I do wish this imam hadn't started this mess. I do think it is needlessly provocative. I wish they would drop the damn project, given public sentiment.

Muslims are supposed to respect the laws AND (majority) feelings of the land where they are. Cordoba House is NOT wanted by the people. But as Barack, Glenn and many others say, they ought not to be denied the right, this is America.

Posted by: Mag3 | August 16, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Well the good news for Vitter is that if he goes to NY, he can visit the strip clubs near ground zero. I'm sure his money can work it's usual magic in that regard. Really, this from the most disgraced memeber of the Senate is too ridiculous!

Posted by: 54465446 | August 16, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Mag3 Hope you stay around and post frequently. I'd love to see Muslim opinion represented on this blog. Perhaps I should correct that...don't wish to place the albatross of all Muslim opinion around your lone neck. But the opinion of at least one Muslim would be truly appreciated.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 16, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Attention, Republicans! Your cross-aisle colleagues have made these upcoming midterms a veritable walk in the park for you. Simply memorize and repeat:
Mosques-Mexicans-Morons.

Posted by: sosueme1 | August 16, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

sosueme1 @ August 16, 2010 3:48 PM wrote "Attention, Republicans! Your cross-aisle colleagues have made these upcoming midterms a veritable walk in the park for you. Simply memorize and repeat:
Mosques-Mexicans-Morons."

I understand what you mean. I also fear that November will show that there are a great many morons here.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | August 16, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Quislings in both parties (from Bloomberg to Obama) have already politicized this issue. They've trotted out smears of racists, fascists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, Neanderthals-- the whole Star Wars cantina of boogeymen and cranks standing opposed to poor, innocent Imam Rauf.

Now they shriek full-throated about (*gasp*) "a spasm of nativist panic". Does that (alleged) "panic" include "nativist" Muslim-Americans opposed to sharia vendors of Cordoba House?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080603006.html

But when patriotic Americans object to stealth jihadists-- and (yes) that accurately describes the Cordoba House cabal-- opening a 9/11 snuff porn vendor emporium (and jihadi recruitment center) on the hallowed graves of Ground Zero-- Leftist hypocrits shriek with indignation!

American Muslims may be the very soul of moderation. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable for Americans to ask for more from (allegedly) “peaceful” Cordoba House jihadists than insincere bromides and disingenuous whitewashing of uncomfortable elements of Islamic sharia law, as practiced by the Cordoba House cabal and their financial sponsors.

A genuine tiny minority of anti-jihadist Muslims may be found @
http://secularislam.org/blog/post/SI_Blog/21/The-St-Petersburg-Declaration

Americans remain breathless in anticipation of the sharia law vendors of Cordoba House supporting this genuinely tiny minority of their co-religionists-- but don’t hold your breath.

When will these Quislings support Secular Islam advocates' right to live free from the sharia law intimidation of Cordoba House Islamo-supremacists?

Be advised these Cordoba House sharia-fascists have their eyes on your throat, too.

"Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!" [Matthew 23:24]

Greg (and his ObaMedia ilk) created this delusional demonization campaign against patriotic Americans opposed to the mosque-- yet now they have the temerity to climb up on their hind legs and howl about politicizing the debate?

Patriotic Americans can always tell when you're hitting all the right notes-- when the Quislings start warning you to shut up.

Booga-Booga!

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 16, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Gregs demands to "denounce" opponents of Cordoba House should be regarded as an open threat from the Obamedia to intensify their slander war.

Be prepared to be tarred by these neo-Pravda mouthpieces as racists, fascists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, Neanderthals, etc., ad nauseum.

They sense that they can't win the argument on the merits; so it's time to fling the smears and slanders.

Greg's campaign to "denounce" (that's right, DENOUNCE!) political opponents of Cordoba House bears chilling echoes of the Moscow Trials during Stalin's Great Purge. After being denounced by their comrades, many of those defendants were executed.

This naked reflex to ideological purges from the paranoid Left is as shocking as it is grotesque. If Greg thinks this orchestrated Obamedia intimidation campaign will succed in impressing Americans, you can all go to hell.

Lan astaslem!

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 16, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

@blahgblogwordpresscom: There is no mosque at the Pentagon. There is a Muslim prayer room. It is NOT a mosque. If there were, the ACLU would be shieking for separation of mosque and state.

Don't be a lying taqiya vendor your whole life.

In the first place, the 13-story mega-mosque will not be a few blocks away. Walk half a block down the street from the Burlington Coat Factory that is set to be the site of the mega-mosque, turn left, and you will see Ground Zero. It is actually just 600 feet away from Ground Zero proper.

But alas, and more importantly, the Burlington Coat Factory building is in a larger sense part of Ground Zero. The landing gear from one of the jetliners hijacked on September 11, 2001 flew into the building that the Islamic supremacists want to tear down to construct their mosque. That makes this building part of the 9/11 attack site, and will make the mosque -- particularly, in the eyes of the Islamic world -- exactly what the Dome of the Rock is: a mosque of victory built right on the site of the Muslim defeat of the Infidels. The Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, built on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, are declarations of the superiority of Islam over Judaism, and its victory over Judaism. The mosque at the Burlington Coat Factory site, built on the site -- not near it, but on it, because of that landing gear -- of the Islamic jihad attack on September 11, 2001, will be seen as a declaration of the superiority of Islam over the United States, and its victory over the American economic machine.

The Burlington Coat Factory building, 45 Park Place, which was severely damaged by that part of one of the 9/11 planes, is Ground Zero, as is the former World Trade Center site. That's why the Islamic supremacists want that building, and only that building, and why they have rebuffed Governor Paterson's offer to help them move elsewhere, and why they persist in their plans despite a rising chorus of public disapproval and public anguish that shows up their claims to be "building bridges" with this mega-mosque.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 16, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

@mikefromArlington: Remind us again, what "race" are Muslims?

I’d also like to point out how bigotted, ignorant and intolerant it is of Quislings to condemn the spiritual commitment of Muslims who faithfully obey Islam by observing “honor killing” fatwas.

By what authority do Quislings excommunicate (takfir) devout jihadists when they practice “honor killing” to enforce sharia fatwas, endorsed by the Corboba House sharia law advocates?

Again, the prerogative to issue apostacy fatwas is granted only to Islam’s prophet, or authoritative representatives of the— which are Quislings invoking?

Have the Quislings’ handlers in the Apartheid Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood approved these anti-jihadist fatwa?

But don’t take my word for it. “Honor Killing” is absolutely Islamic.
http://www.islam-watch.org/SyedKamranMirza/honor_killing.htm

Don't be an apologist for Islamo-supremacism your whole life, mike.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 16, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Gee, Greg. Who knew Harry Reid (D-NV) was a member of the GOP?

"Reid: Build mosque elsewhere"
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hHYUXhXg36rpzKeUva55Llvea41AD9HKOTM04

The Senate's top Democrat says a mosque should not be built near the site of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada on Monday became the highest profile Democrat to break with President Barack Obama, who on Friday backed the right for the developers to build a mosque near ground zero.

"In a statement, Reid said the first amendment protects freedom of religion and he respects that, but the mosque should be built somewhere else..."

[Let the Obamedia's Soviet-style show trial denunciations begin!]

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 16, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

The Mosque near Ground Zero is a bad idea!

For their own good, the Muslims should look elsewhere. It is not outside the realm of probability to think that some Easily Excitable Knuckle-dragging Conservative Religious Right Christian Republican Tea Party Taliban would drive a truck though it!

Posted by: kishorgala | August 16, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Who cares about the stupid mosque, it was Bush and his neo-freak friends that killed all those people on 9,11. Here, go to You Tube and watch all the floors being blown out of Building 7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=972ETepp4GI&feature=related

Posted by: HemiHead66 | August 16, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Rovian Republicans have exploited the eternal squabbling of Abrahm's war mongering spawn, Christians, Jews and Muslims alike.

While the President calls for upholding the Constitution, balless Democrats like Henry Reid run and hide in fear of RNC FOX NEWS, the 25% of American who are lemmings of Limbaugh and some wacko teabagger seditionists.

America's evil brew of religion, white supremacy, fear and politics for wedge issues is a disgusting spectacle of what was once a great nation.

Posted by: areyousaying | August 16, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

It seems that the farther away from New York City the writer is, the more vociferous the opposition. We citizens of New York City are perfectly capable of running our own affairs without the hicks from the sticks telling us what they think we should do!!

My guess is that the biggest critics were not there on 9/11 and probably never visited the site afterward.

As for it being "sacred ground" ... hogwash!! That's like making a shrine of the site of an automobile crash long after the event. How Americans love to manifest grief behaviors for people they don't know and never met! All those teddy bears and flowers. Reallllly !!!! How phony can it get?

As Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor said ... "Come onnnn" ...

Moreover, it's NOT a mosque. It is not at Ground Zero. And it is not being built, financed or run by terrorists.

Perhaps if it were called the "YMAA" it would be more comprehensible -- the Young Men's (and women's I hope) Arabic Association. Or the YMIA, the Young Men's Islamic Association. Get it?

Of course it would have a prayer space ... people who attend may adhere to the practice of praying five times a day. Where are they to go? Shall they spread their prayer rugs on the basketball court? Or between the tables of the food court? Or between the seats in the performance space? Get real!!

Our Constitution starts out with "We the People ..." -- not "We the WASPs". The 300 Muslims that died on 9/11 were as American as the rest of us. It is positively UN-American to say otherwise.

Posted by: wide-eyed1 | August 17, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

@ areyousaying :America's evil brew of religion, white supremacy, fear and politics for wedge issues is a disgusting spectacle of what was once a great nation.

Well put, but race and religion baiting have been with us since the founding. Clearly we have had better political dialog than we have now. Its only the Bush depression that gives it the legs it has today. Shame on Harry Reid. Reid was never my favorite guy [what kind of caucus leader lets his members regularly defect on procedural votes?], but to lower himself to Angle's level (and that's gettin' down there) shows how close he feels he is to losing to a candidate from rightwingnutistan.

Posted by: srw3 | August 17, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

@kdaffy:But don’t take my word for it. “Honor Killing” is absolutely Islamic.
http://www.islam-watch.org/SyedKamranMirza/honor_killing.htm

"If you look at the regions of the world where honour killings occur, you’ll see that it crosses religious divides, and where you see it among Muslims in the country, the numbers are just as high among Christians, Hindus and Sikhs. It is absolutely cultural. Had it been religious, logic tells you that perhaps these practices would exist across the Muslim world, but it can easily be isolated to a relatively few number of countries. Have you heard of honour killings in Indonesia, the country with the largest population of Muslims in the world?"

Posted by: srw3 | August 17, 2010 5:44 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