Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Morning Plum

*America agrees -- the "mosque" is sacrilege: A New Time magazine poll offers this striking finding:

"More than 70% concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center."

Also: The poll "revealed that many Americans harbor lingering animosity toward Muslims." And here, in a nutshell, is one key reason why standing up for the project is so important: It's a high-profile opportunity to make a rational case against continuing to harbor "animosity" towards all Muslims over 9/11.

* And some Republicans really want to believe Obama is one of "them": The new Pew poll finds that the number believing Obama is a Muslim is up to one in five. But it turns out that rise is driven largely by Republicans, more than a third of whom believe this:

The belief that Obama is a Muslim has increased most sharply among Republicans (up 14 points since 2009), especially conservative Republicans (up 16 points).

The number is also up eight points among independents. It's good to see that voters can be persuaded to change their minds on important questions when presented with new information contradicting their long-held prejudices.

* Question of the day: Steve Benen asks a good one: What will it do to our political rulebook if the GOP's counter-intuitive strategy of moving right (not to the center) after the devastating 2006 and 2008 losses actually works over the long term?

* Targeting Target: An interesting overview of a standoff I've been meaning to write about here: The Target boycott.

* New Senators getting serious about reform: Efforts to reform the filibuster may depend on the efforts of a new crop of young, reform-minded Senators who frankly acknowledge the system is broken.

* Cultural issues, again? Jonathan Capehart discerns a common thread running through the controversies of the moment, concluding that the GOP is back to using cultural wedge issues.

* A milestone? The last combat brigades have now left Iraq.

* Here's a thought: In response to Liz Cheney's new anti-mosque ad invoking memories of 9/11, Joan McCarter suggests Liz also run one urging the GOP to support the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act.

* Head-spinner of the day: Howard Dean has now told Sam Stein he stands by his opposition to the mosque, simultaneously blasting opponents of it for "race baiting" while claiming liberal critics who stood up to that race-baiting didn't show "flexibility."

* And: Dean says the families of Muslim-Americans killed on 9/11 might view the "mosque" as an affront.

* And the Terrible Two will put the Tea on full boil: Yes, Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle are going to campaign together.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  August 19, 2010; 8:36 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Foreign policy and national security , Morning Plum , Senate Dems , Tea Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Open Thread
Next: How politically catastrophic were Obama's "mosque" comments?

Comments

@Greg - Actually, not done. My sage advice to all is to never even briefly consider marrying a woman from Dallas. They come with stuff...so much stuff it could furnish three or four small Mennonite communities.

Posted by: bernielatham | August 19, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

What else is happening?

Sarah Palin defended Dr. Laura's racist rants.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/36981_Sarah_Palin_Defends_the_Right_to_Use_the_N_Word

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

mike, from Dr. Laura's blog:

Sarah Palin and Motherhood
September 2, 2008

I am extremely disappointed in the choice of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential candidate of the Republican Party. I will still vote for Senator McCain, because I am very concerned about having a fundamental leftist, especially one who is a marvelous orator, as President.

...

I’m stunned - couldn’t the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain? I realize his advisors probably didn’t want a “mature” woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age. But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?

http://www.drlaurablog.com/2008/09/02/sarah-palin-and-motherhood/

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

GOP sure is silent on Iraq.

and

1/5 Americans think Saint Sarah's tweets is some sort of Shakespearean prose.

Are you really surprised?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Ouch. I'm guessing Saint Sarah didn't know about Laura's slamming of her.

Someone should let Palin know.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Capehart nailed it.

Odd that he didn't mention the Southern Strategy though. The GOP has been injecting racial tension into the national conversation for 40 years, they have admitted to it and apologized for it, but they keep doing it.

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

"* Targeting Target: An interesting overview of a standoff I've been meaning to write about here: The Target boycott."

I want to make sure I have this right. Target offers benefits to domestic partners, has been an annual sponsor of the Twin Cities Gay Pride Festival, and has otherwise been a model corporate citizen regard gay rights, and because it gives money to one candidate--i.e., strays of the reservation one time--now it's time for protests and boycotts?

Don't wander off the reservation, Upstanding Corporate Citizens. Not even a little bit.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

"Steve Benen asks a good one: What will it do to our political rulebook if the GOP's counter-intuitive strategy of moving right (not to the center) after the devastating 2006 and 2008 losses actually works over the long term?"

Greg, my view is that parties only fundamentally re-position after they hit bottom. The GOP hasn't yet, or at least they don't believe they have. And reality bears that out. And that explains much of my fury at the Democrats: they should have been able to make the GOP pay an excruciating price for its increasing radicalism but, due to their own timidity, the Democrats have utterly failed so far. It will take a serious electoral trouncing before the GOP can rise above the Rush Wing and moderate leaders can emerge. Til then it's all Red Meat all the time.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 19, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

"More than 70% concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center."

Wow. That's a heckuva a margin. A greater public consensus on that than Global Warming. ;)

Question is, why? I'm sure we can blame Republican anti-Islamic propaganda, but that works on Harry Reid? Howard Dean? The fairly large percentage of that 70% that had to have voted against Republicans last time around?

"The belief that Obama is a Muslim has increased most sharply among Republicans (up 14 points since 2009), especially conservative Republicans (up 16 points)."

Which is funny, because he seems fairly irreligious to me. If were to guess at his secret, hidden religious beliefs, I'd suspect he was an agnostic, not a Muslim. Indeed, his "my Muslim faith" faux pas during the campaign struck me more as someone who couldn't remember the difference between Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, rather than some admission of a deep and abiding love of Mohamed.

"Question of the day: Steve Benen asks a good one: What will it do to our political rulebook if the GOP's counter-intuitive strategy of moving right (not to the center) after the devastating 2006 and 2008 losses actually works over the long term?"

Haven't read the article, but I have a thought: it will provoke greater ideological divides between the parties. This is a natural; all you have to do is look at the comment boards of any political blog, or the transcripts of the Journolist (heh!) to see that people are naturally partisans, not centrists. We tend to embrace extremes, not reject them. You will see the Democrats embrace much of the obstructionist techniques of the Republicans, and the base will still say they aren't doing enough to stop the Republicans.

Most importantly, I think you'll see fairly radical switches as to which party is in power more often. If it works, the Democrats may lose the presidency in 2012--and almost certainly in 2016. If Obama does a full 8 years, at least the last two years will be spent with significant Republican majorities in the house and senate. And the following Republican president will see a similar pattern: the opposition will blame whatever is going on on him, after two years, and mount a highly charge partisan campaign that ends up getting them back the house and the senate, and so on. No more 40-year rule.

Anyone who is talking about 40 years in the wilderness for Republicans or Democrats is engaging in wishful thinking, in my opinion. Even if the Republicans lurch to the far right is ineffective. But even moreso if it is effective.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

@sue - great catch.

re the Benen piece and the rightward rush of the GOP... he's right, of course, that wins in November will embolden this ugly and destructive dynamic. And he's right to suggest that what the party/movement has 'decided' was counter-intuitive and doesn't fit the mold of prior history (at least so well as I've experienced it).

And this all brings up a number of very interesting questions as to why this has happened. What and who have made the party/movement ahistorical and unique?

I don't have time this morning to write up a full analysis of what factors I have found causal here but it's where the real story sits regarding how politics in the US has come to this vulgar and self-destructive pass.

Posted by: bernielatham | August 19, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Kevin - We are free to shop where we want to shop. If we don't want to go to Whole Foods, Target or Wallmart that is our choice.

Personally, as much as possible, I try to shop at locally owned, non-chain stores. I never shop at Wallmart and rarely shop at Target. Removing Target from my list of places to shop is not a major decision.

And yes, Kevin, if a corporation donates money to a cause I am opposed to I will refuse to spend my money with them. I don't want my money working against me. The smart bet, in my opinion, is for Corporations to stop trying to influence elections all together. After all, I am consistent in my support of freedom. Rightwingers should not "have" to shop at "Sammy Socialists Electronics Store" any more than I should have to shop at Wallmart. In other words I'm a big fan of freedom.

But consider the source; I haven't purchased Exxon Gas since the Exxon Valdez went ashore on Bligh Reef.

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

"* And: Dean says the families of Muslim-Americans killed on 9/11 might view the 'mosque' as an affront."

I'm so glad it's not just my side saying stupid things about the Burlington Coat Factory Community Center.

And I've been thinking about it. You know who else might consider Cordoba house an affront? Burlington Coat Factory aficionados, for whom the old Burlington Coat Factory is now sacred ground.

Dean woud have a point if what was being proposed was the Al Qaeda Mosque and Jihad Center (as would conservative critics). As it is, what, exactly, do even orthodox Muslims wanting to build a community center have to do with Al Qaeda? Anyone? Bueller?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

In addition to the newer Dem senators, the real hope for the nation lies in the inevitable failure of the GOP's anti-rational approach to policy matters. Sort of like the Taliban. Unfortunately for us all, inevitable failure can take a very long time.

Later, All!

Posted by: wbgonne | August 19, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

And let's point out and underline that with the elimination of combat activities (or a reality somewhat like those words mean to imply) in Iraq, liberal/progressive hopes for this President are again validated.

This man is getting a LOT done and in the face of a political operation probably even more cynical than Nixon's. It's no small feat.

Posted by: bernielatham | August 19, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

Kevin, go look at some Gallup polling on equality and interracial marriage back in the 60's. Your logic would come up with the same conclusions regarding race equality as you're using now.

The only reason anyone is talking about Cordoba house is because Pamella Gellar the bigot hasn't let up and has made all the rabble-rousers that love to inject sensational headlines and speeches in ways that trigger nativist reactions from people.

If she didn't, the place would have been built, peoples lives would have continued, and nobody would have given two craps about it. Instead, they decided to make this faux link between this place and 9/11. Of course American's are gonna freak. 9/11 is a sacred date for many American's. If it's either a positive or a negative link, people are going to react strongly to it.

The Cordoba House has squat to do with ground zero.

Now, if they were actually trying to acquire land on the ground zero spot and were openly promoting its reason was to erect a shrine to the hijackers or some crap, that would be different.

Instead you've got a group of people, the head guy being a moderate who's worked with the FBI in the past and the previous administration, and who's spokesperson just came out with a statement saying that Hamas doesn't speak for them and that they promote a message of peace and moderation.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

@Bernie

"but it's where the real story sits regarding how politics in the US has come to this vulgar and self-destructive pass."

I agree Bernie this is the real story. I look forward to your analysis when you get the time.

Personally I can hardly bear to look at all this ugliness much less try and delve into the deeper root causes of all this fear and hate. I take comfort from only one thing...history.

We have been through this kind of crap before as a nation and somehow seem to manage to work our way out of it. I keep hoping there is some seminal event that brings our country back to reality instead of the fantasyland created by the fright wing...it just seems disgusting to me that we even spend more than five minutes on death panels...or the loons who think Obama is a Muslim. There is enough solid evidence to the contrary that this is actually wishful thinking among many...same with the birthers...a convenient rationalization for their existential hatred of Obama that has nothing to do with policy.

Then again Bernie perhaps it's all back to James Carville's admonition..."It's the economy stupid."

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "And yes, Kevin, if a corporation donates money to a cause I am opposed to I will refuse to spend my money with them"

My issue isn't with that, it's with the idea that if a company does/donates to 5 things/causes you emphatically support, and then donates to 1 you don't, you dump them because of that?

BTW, I fully support shopping at smaller places. Although I still buy gas from Exxon. They have that Fast Pass thing! ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

@mikefromArlington: "Instead you've got a group of people, the head guy being a moderate who's worked with the FBI in the past and the previous administration, and who's spokesperson just came out with a statement saying that Hamas doesn't speak for them and that they promote a message of peace and moderation."

Just to be clear, I agree with all of that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

P.S., I urge all to join the Just Say Now movement to legalize marijuana. I realize it's sponsored by Firedoglake and some people may be disinclined to participate for that reason, but try to look past that and consider the merits of the issue.

http://firedoglake.com/justsaynow/just-say-now-sign-the-petition

Every rational step is a step forward.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 19, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Smart piece by Yglesias...

"Sharon Angle and the Depression


I haven’t written much about the Sharon Angle Follies, but this exchange is quite interesting:

'Q. Did Keynesian economics, the stimulus spending, work in the Depression of the ’30s?

A. No. And I think history has really proven that to be true. Most economists agree that the thing that really worked, which is a sad commentary, is the war.'

And she’s right. Stimulus spending during the 1930s had little positive impact on the economy since there was in fact very little stimulus spending during the 1930s. Expansionary monetary policy moves made a great deal of difference in FDR’s first term, but then contractionary fiscal and monetary measures undertaken in 1937 prompted a new recession. Shortly thereafter, World War II revived the economy. But as Steve Benen says “The war was a shot in the economy’s arm because of all the spending.” The war is a textbook example of how deficit spending by the government can boost the economy by mobilizing real resources for some public purpose.

Now obviously it would be morally wrong to revive the economy over the next two years via a deficit-financed effort to destroy Germany and Japan. But the point is that if we use deficit spending to target and mobilize idle resources, the economy will grow. What’s more, if we target those resources and mobilize them to do something useful we’ll reap substantial benefits."
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/08/sharon-angle-and-the-depression/

Posted by: bernielatham | August 19, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

You know, now that News Corp has decided to drop 1 million on the RGA, we've now got Saudi money going indirectly to the Republican Party.

Neat.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

mikefromArlington - Good point. How much of NewsCorp does the Saudi Royal family own?

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Is that even legal? Can you have a partially foreign owned company donate to a U.S. political party? What's the cutoff in foreign ownership when the illegalities kick in?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

The Plum Line is much better when you link instead of talk. Thanks.

Posted by: happyacres | August 19, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

To all...geeshh...we gone through all the explanations that Al Qaeda does not represent all Muslims.

Now we continue to call this the Cordoba Mosque. Because Imam Rauf WAS SENSITIVE to us they actually changed the name to Park 51.

It's not the Cordoba Mosque...the ground zero mosque and again Sufi Muslims are not Wahhabbi Muslims. If you must hate Muslims could you at least hate the correct ones...the jihadist crooks come almost exclusively from the Wahhabbis...if you must hate...if you must extract as much revenge as possible..please at least get the right folks...not innocent peace loving Americans who happen to be Muslim.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal now owns a 7 percent stake in Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, making him the company's largest shareholder outside of Murdoch's own family. Alwaleed is best known for going to Ground Zero after the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks and personally handing then-mayor Rudolph Giuliani a check for $10 million to help finance relief efforts. Afterwards, Alwaleed released a statement blaming the attacks not on the Saudi airline hijackers, but on U.S. policies in the middle east.

http://www.prwatch.org/node/8906

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

News Corp. is a US corporation, if I am not mistaken. Their global HQ is in NYC, and they filed Articles of Incorporation in Delaware a few years back.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Quislings (and their Islamo-supremacist allies) have already created "animosity" on this issue. They've trotted out smears of patriotic Americans as racists, fascists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, Neanderthals-- the whole Star Wars cantina of boogeymen and cranks standing opposed to poor, innocent Imam Rauf. *sob*

Now Greg shrieks about (*gasp*) "animosity" toward Muslims. Does that "animosity" include sincere Muslim-Americans opposed to sharia vendors of Cordoba House?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080603006.html

Meanwhile, 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-- Pelosi demands investigations!

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 Speaker Pelosi support Secular Islam advocates' right to live free from the sharia law intimidation of Cordoba House Islamo-supremacists?

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

Pelosi (and her media puppets) 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 "animosity" and demand investigations of Americans?

Patriotic Americans can always tell when you're hitting all the right notes-- when the Quislings in Congress (and their media parrots) threaten political harrassment of voters.

Booga-Booga!

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 19, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse


@mike - in the prior thread, in a post to wb, I brought up Dennis Potter, the Brit genius screenwriter who died a decade ago (as David Milch said, "Potter influenced EVERYBODY"). And that's true including not just writers for TV but Woody Allen and the Cohen brothers and others.

Before Potter died, he gave an interview on BBC to Melvin Bragg and one subject of conversation was politics in Britain. Potter, knowing he was terminal and soon to die, said that, for a writer, this brought up the dramatic possibility of being in that position where, as a terminal case, one could decide to commit and act such as murder but, for a responsible person, this would entail picking someone clearly and seriously destructive in the community (and this was a narrative element in his last work). He said his choice would be (this was a decade ago) Rupert Murdoch because no one had been so responsible for the degradation of political discourse in Britain as Murdoch (a media presence there before here).

Posted by: bernielatham | August 19, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Now, I wonder if the Fox propagandists will weigh in on their parent companies largest stake holder blaming 9/11 on U.S. policies?

Inquiring minds want to know!!!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Bernie, I know the history of Murdoch. He's trying to influence the globe with his trashy style of journalism that stimulates the worst parts of human instinct. He's in a battle right now with Berlusconi who basically controls Italian media. Murdoch owns Sky Italia who is a direct competitor and Murdoch is now attacking Berlusconi relentlessly from his U.K. papers the Times and Sunday Times, among others.

He's also got his footprint in about 50 other countries.

The guy is a cancer to this planet.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 19, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

@bernielatham: " He said his choice would be (this was a decade ago) Rupert Murdoch because no one had been so responsible for the degradation of political discourse in Britain as Murdoch (a media presence there before here)."

As if talking about who you would choose to murder (or assassinate, given the political flavor of the comments) does not degrade and debase political discourse.

I suppose he'd support constituents standing up at campaign rallies and suggesting that other politicians were ruining the country, and somebody should "shoot them". But I think that degrades political discourse more than any number of bloviating talking heads screaming at each other (in a box that, if you so choose, you can just turn off) could ever do.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

The Citizens United thing is pretty complicated. Supposedly, foreign corporations are banned from political contributions. BUT...

Royal Dutch Shell, plc is a foreign entity. Shell Oil USA is not. It's a US corporation, and a subsidiary, but it is a separate entity.

If my understanding is correct, Shell Oil USA can contribute. What stops RDS from funneling money through the US corporation?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

@Bernie...

My memory of history lessons on the Great Depression are actually a bit different. I was always taught that the "New Deal" spending...CCC..TVA..rural electric programs etc DID actually stimulate the economy.

One thing that is clear...after that infusion of New Deal spending unemployment dropped from a catastrophic 25% to an improved but still unsatisfying 15%. It was those readjustments in the late 30's you pointed out that flatlined the UE at 15%. I don't know anybody who disagrees that WWII was the ultimate deficit spending splurge that actually finished off the job.

As someone who does support Keynsian principles I've marveled at the horrible state of our infrastructure and the lack of response by the Federal Gov't. It's the perfect opportunity to invest cash with a terrific multiplier effect...and yes I know..the stimulus is at least a start in the right direction. I mean how many more Interstate bridges have to fall into the water before we wake up.

Anecdotal observation about the long lasting effects of FDR's New Deal. Our summer cottage is WAY UP on the UP on the shores of Lake Superior. The little 9 hole golf course and the wonderful resort of log cabins capped by a beautiful giant log restaurant/clubhouse/meeting space was built by FDR's CCC, with Fed New Deal $.
Electric came to our part of the U.P. under "New Deal" subsidies in the rural electrification program. In other words FDR's investment back in the early 30's is still paying dividends some 75 years later!

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Jon Stewart was in great form last night explaining in his Glenn Beck persona the money trail from News Corp to the GOBP. (It's COMPLICATED! LOL!)

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/jon-stewart-imitates-glenn-beck-follow-the-moneydirectly-from-fox-to-the-gop-video.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Kevin said:

"if a company does/donates to 5 things/causes you emphatically support, and then donates to 1 you don't, you dump them because of that?"

Yes. Absolutely.

Corporations are not people. They do not have a conscience. They must be guided by the only thing they understand. Profits. So yes, when they do something out of line -- maybe it was one board member's pet cause -- they must be held to account by boycotting them and giving them bad PR. The same is true for politicians, of course, but at least some of them are actual human beings with thoughts, emotions, and a conscience.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

The unfolding humanitarian disaster in Pakistan:

Where is the international relief Armada?

This looks like it is going to take a greater toll on lives, and leave far more homeless, and exposed to the spread of disease, than even the Haitian earthquake did.

Yet their appears to be very little response from world leaders to rush in relief and rescue teams.

Where is Bill Clinton, and all those other prominent leaders on this disaster?

To hell with all this Mosque bullshite.

Lets try and exert pressure on governments and relief organizations to help save the lives of millions of people in Pakistan now, before it is too late.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 19, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

@nisleib

I share your and Ethan's thoughts about using your consumer clout politically on corporations. As Ethan correctly points out they respond to only one stimulus..profits. (I'm not saying that's evil, it's just the way it is)

However Kevin does raise a valid point. Often it's not simple.

nisleib you brought up a situation where it gets complicated. You boycotted Exxon..understandably...can you imagine how we Floridians feel about driving into a BP station? My wife went ballistic on me for doing that. Understandable? Yes!!!
Correct? Not so sure. You see the BP stations in our town are mostly owned by franchisees not BP. In addition...while perhaps not a pure monopoly, the big oil companies are a very tightly run cartel and so it's impossible to really harm them economically short of giving up driving.

Then again..anecdotally speaking...many of these stations here in St. Pete are owned by....OMG...Muslims!!!

So if I really want to protest I have to take the time to find out which stations are company owned...and even after finding locally owned and operated franchisees I have to worry or not whether it's Arab Muslims who own them. (The last part of course being snark since I'm not a member of the fright wing)

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Check this out....

Anatomy Of A Fail: Rise And Fall Of The Tea Party Exchange

"It seemed like a brilliant idea: provide a way for tea party-conscious consumers and tea party-sympathetic businesses to join forces and, well, support their local tea party. It ended in disaster, hurt feelings and more than a few accusations of flim-flammery."

much more: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/anatomy_of_a_fail_rise_and_fall_of_the_tea_party_e.php?ref=fpa

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

@suekzoo1

Thanks for that link. I've actually grown to feel sorry for many tea partiers. Not the ones who are simply venting and spewing hatred...but for the poor fools who are against entrenched politicians (throw them all out yadda yadda) and DC politics only to be led by the ultimate insider scumbag extraordinaire DICK Armey!!!!

It saddens me to see the legitimate and honest tea partiers taken advantage of by crooks like DICK Army..Marco Rubio...and other money grubbers like Sarah Palin.

It'll be a frightening day for the R's if the tea party folks ever wake up and actually vote for what they talk about.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

rukidding7 - I get your point about BP, but, well, it is complicated.

I live in the south now, but I was born in raised in the part of Alaska most affected by the Exxon Valdez. My father was a commercial fisherman, as was I for many, many years. I won't shop at Exxon because of the lies they told me to my face and their actions preceding and following the spill. They've lost me forever.

As to the franchisees, well, it is not like BP had a good reputation before the spill. When you get a franchise you are partnering with a company and you had best do your due diligence.

I've never once doubted my decision to boycott Exxon or Wallmart. They may have lower prices, but those price reductions come with a sizeable (non-monetary) cost.

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Josh Marshall points to this article from Ali Soufan just published in Forbes regarding the national security implications of the hot Muslim rhetoric. This sh*t is serious.

Josh's comments:

"As Ali Soufan, a near legendary FBI counter-terrorism interrogator has just written in Forbes, in the wake of the anti-Mosque furor, bin Laden's "next video script has just written itself."

What is important to recognize is that this opinion is close to universal among people in the counter-terrorism business. And by this I mean, people who actually operationally work in counter-terrorism, people who work in public diplomacy for the US abroad and people who study trends in counter-terrorism and Islamic radicalism both in the US and abroad. In this regard, it's important to distinguish people in the counter-terrorism business or what we might call counter-terrorism professionals from what we might term counter-terrorism or anti-radical Islam activists, of whom almost all the high profile opponents of the Cordoba House project fall. These are the Pam Gellers, the Robert Spencers and David Horowitzes and all the rest.


http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/18/ground-zero-mosque-controversy-opinions-contributors-ali-soufan_print.html

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

[rukidding7: "It's not the Cordoba Mosque...the ground zero mosque and again Sufi Muslims are not Wahhabbi Muslims."]

Rauf can call it Rosebud for all I care. It's still a proposed 9/11 snuff porn vendor emporium and jihadi recruitment center.

As for Rauf's (alleged) Sufism, Sufis from al-Ghazali to the present day have taught the necessity of jihad warfare, and have participated in that warfare. And in January 2009, Iraqi representatives of the Naqshabandi Sufi order met with Khaled Mashaal of Hamas, praised his jihad, donated jewelry to him, and boasted of their own jihad attacks against Americans in Iraq.

But never mind the evidence. Sufis are all monolithically peaceful!

Quislings have apparently been in a coma (both before and after 9/11) since they appear to think 9/11 was the only incident of Muslims attacking non-Muslims. If they weren’t in a coma, there’s no excuse for such gross stupidity.

Muslims must take some responsibility for their global jihad when thousands of their co-religionists over the past two decades kill thousands of innocents of every religion around the world; and when they deprive non-Muslims of their human rights in 57 of 57 Muslim governed countries.

Look. American Muslims may be the very soul of moderation. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable for folks to ask for more from (allegedly) “peaceful” Muslims than disingenuous whitewashing of uncomfortable elements of Islamic sharia tradition, as practiced in Iran, Gaza, Kashmir, Malaysia, the Paris banlieue… and (pointedly) Cordoba House in NYC.

A genuine tiny minority of anti-jihadist Muslims may be found @ SecularIslam.org.

Americans remain breathless in anticipation of the vast majority of (allegedly) “peaceful” American Muslims supporting this genuinely tiny minority of their co-religionists… but don’t hold your breath.

+15K deadly Islamo-supremacist attacks since 9/11 don’t lie. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 19, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

"I've actually grown to feel sorry for many tea partiers"

I hear you RUK.

Today's Filth Mail (the neo-confederate email lists I'm on) was all about pointing scared conservatives to OFF-SHORE accounts. Guaranteed to be a scam.

These poor pathetic conservative voters have been driven into a seething froth over social issues, and now the corporate establishment of the GOP is praying on them ruthlessly for pure profit. It really is unfathomable that this is what is considered 'good politics' to some. And it is just as unfathomable that these deluded conservative voters continue to fall for the most transparently scammy pitches by "trusted" sources like Glenn Beck and these listservs.

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice shame on me.

Fool me over and over and over and OVER again, I must be a conservative.

Sad, really.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Al-Qaeda and Pamela Geller Agree:

They each want to ignite a Holy War, between Muslims and Christians.

Ben-Laden's battery had run down, and he was stranded, in the middle of no where.

Along came Old Geller to give him a jump start.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 19, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

NASA "before and after" images of the flooding in Pakistan.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=45343

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 19, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Liam - That is why we call the rightwing the "American Taliban."

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

@nisleib

We are basically in agreement. And as someone who now lives under the constant thread of tarballs washing up on our beaches(I'm being very parochial here..Pinellas County beaches..they've already hit Pensacola) I offer my condolences on your family's suffering due to the Exxon Valdez spill. I'm sure it's awful when your very way of life is threatened and even eliminated.

Nisleib I'm sure you more than others must have really ached at seeing all those La fishermen..some of them 3rd and 4th generation family businesses...get harmed by the horrific oil spill.

BTW. My thoughts at harming the local business guy who happened to make a mistake in his brand selection(where's he/she to turn..Exxon? NOT..Shell..really..BP..sucks as a choice..but again where should they turn since the big oil cartel has offered us no decent corporate citizens) occurred almost immediately after first news of the gusher.
Yesterday I noticed our neighborhood BP had posted a sign on their pumps..
"We are local businesmen trying to make a living..we are not BP"

It's just very complicated but I absolutely respect your decision to boycott Exxon...I made an expensive decision about a decade ago to exclude Exxon and all big oil companies from my retirement portfolio...but then again since I have lots of mutual funds...many of them index funds...I obviously still hold big oil in my portfolio.

I love your posts nisleib and agree with 99% if not all...I'm just frustrated that this part of the issue is so complicated.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Mosque yes, church no, say New York officials.

"Decision Not to Rebuild Church Destroyed on 9/11 Surprises Greek Orthodox Leaders"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/18/leaders-disappointed-government-declares-deal-rebuild-ground-zero-church-dead/

...George Demos, a Republican candidate for New York's 1st Congressional District, also has drawn attention to the negotiations. He released an open letter to President Obama Tuesday urging him to, as he did with the mosque debate, weigh in on the church discussions.

"While we may disagree on the appropriateness of the mosque, we can surely agree that it is an issue of national importance that the only house of worship actually destroyed on September 11, 2001, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, be rebuilt," Demos wrote. "Mr. President, please stand up and defend our Judeo-Christian values, express your public and unwavering support for St. Nicholas Church, and ensure that it is rebuilt."

[Religious Freedom for jihadi... but not for thee?]

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 19, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

This is for Kevin Willis and anyone who thinks that "moderate" Republican voters like him are truly "moderate":

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) hosted a town hall meeting in Bartlett, TN this week, where she sought to assure the right-wing crowd that Republicans won’t become more “moderate” if they take back control of Congress. Underscoring this point, Blackburn said that one of the top priorities of Republicans would be to repeal health care reform

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/08/19/blackburn-health-repeal/

See that Kevin?

She's pledging NOT to be Moderate.

You must be so proud.

Here are some comments from her approving constituency:

“If we do take the house back, I don’t want to see civility.”

“I’m not convinced that we don’t have an illegal immigrant in the Oval Office,” he said in a remark that drew applause from most in the room.

“I don’t think we should have one built anywhere because they are all Muslims,” he said. “Muslims all stand together when they come down to who they are going to fight for. … I don’t think that needs to be built where it’s proposed to be built or built anywhere. We’ve got enough of them already.”

Heckuva job Mr. Moderate!

Way to support extremists and then pretend that you are a thoughtful person.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Holy cow, this is insulting:

Chamber Blames Women For Pay Gap: They Should Choose The Right ‘Place To Work’ And ‘Partner At Home’

Today is the anniversary of the passage of the 19th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which granted the right to vote to women. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has decided to use this day of equal rights for women to argue that women are now to blame for unequal pay in the workplace. On the organization’s official blog, ChamberPost, Senior Director of Communications Brad Peck today makes the argument that the pay gap between men and women in the American workforce — women currently earn roughly 77 cents to every dollar a man earns — is “the result of individual choice rather than discrimination.” He argues that, instead of bold legislative action being taken to help correct this pay gap, women should pick the “obvious, immediate, power-of-the-individual solution: choosing the right place to work and choosing the right partner at home“:

"""Most of the current “pay gap” is the result of individual choice rather than discrimination. [...]

It is true that culturally speaking women are more likely to have to make the tough choices about work-life balance. But as we all seek to fit our values into a dynamic 24/7 economy, let’s not overlook the obvious, immediate, power-of-the-individual solution: choosing the right place to work and choosing the right partner at home."""

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/08/18/chamber-gender-pay/

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

[Liam spat: "Al-Qaeda and Pamela Geller Agree"]

Quislings (like Liam) and jihadists agree. They've been objectively demonstrated to have formed an unholy alliance.

Those interested in a more scholarly discussion of the issue may read "Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left" @
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

Don't be an odious mouthpiece for Islamo-supremacism your whole life, Liam.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 19, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Hmmm. Well, the mosque may have taken a beating the Morning Plum in the bullet point count, but at least it still owns the lede and is holding it's own nicely in column inches. Allah Akbar!

Posted by: CalD | August 19, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Pamela Geller hearts Bin Laden. He will just use her, and toss her aside, after he has had his way with her.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 19, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

All, please check out my interview with Gallup's Frank Newport about whether Obama's mosque comments were really the political catastrophe everone says they are:

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

Posted by: sargegreg | August 19, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Liam has the audacity to climb up on its hind legs and howl at patriotic Americans (like Ms. Geller) after he (no doubt) spent the last decade goose-stepping at kristallnaght-style gutter riots (masquerading as “peace” protests) in support of Islamo-supremacism?

Patriotic Americans are encourage to Enter the “Leftist-Fascist Hall of Shame” and recall what Jihad support looks like.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

So, when is billionaire progressive George Soros financing the unhinged Leftist rent-a-mob rally against ObaMao’s summary execution of three (un-Mirandized) Somali teens at sea? Afterall, that tactic was clearly more “fascist” than our patriotic moistening of KSM, et.al. The one year anniversary of ObaMao’s high seas shooting spree has already passed. Get busy, Quislings.

Rage against the machine, Liam!

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 19, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst, can you please stop calling people "Quislings"?

I just looked it up and it basically means "Nazi sympathizer".

I find that to be totally and utterly offensive.

I'm asking you nicely, please be considerate when you call people Nazi sympathizers. I am Jewish and lost family in the Holocaust, and while we are all free to agree or disagree, I believe that calling people Nazi sympathizers violates the commenting rules at Plum Line.

Please stop using that word.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Meanwhile,

Back in the real world:


"Millions displaced in Pakistan floods"

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0819/breaking5.html

"Thu, Aug 19, 2010

More than four million Pakistanis have been made homeless by nearly three weeks of floods, the United Nations said today, making the critical task of securing greater amounts of aid more urgent.

Only a small minority of the 8 million Pakistanis desperate for food and clean water have received help after floods that have killed up to 1,600 people.

"According to rough estimates, over 4 million people in Sindh and Punjab still do not have a roof on their head," said Giuliano, referring to southern and central provinces worst hit by the flood.

"This situation is of high concern".

Fears are rising for possible epidemics.

Juan Miranda, ADB Director General for its Central and West Asia department, said it was hard to quantify damages.

"But what is clear is that this disaster is like no other in living memory -- and that our response must also be unprecedented, equal to the need, and fast."

Posted by: Liam-still | August 19, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

@Ethan: "See that Kevin? She's pledging NOT to be Moderate. You must be so proud."

You know, I've never claimed to be a moderate. I never even said I favor "moderates", unless it's a highly caveated definition. I'm for civil discussion. I am disappointed that it missing from most dialogs, as I think we can be civil no matter how much we disagree.

"'If we do take the house back, I don’t want to see civility.'"

That's unfortunate. But it does seem that a steady stream of vitriol is the recipe for electoral success. I would prefer to see a hard-nosed civility. Civility is not rolling over for your political opponents, but it is being straight forward about your goals, and discussing legislation in good faith.

"I don’t think we should have one built anywhere because they are all Muslims,” he said. “Muslims all stand together when they come down to who they are going to fight for. … I don’t think that needs to be built where it’s proposed to be built or built anywhere. We’ve got enough of them already.”

Yeah, I don't think that kind of stuff is going to serve the GOP well over the long term. As I think I've mentioned already. That sort of nativism never works out well (I refer you to Thomas Sowell's excellent Race and Culture, and Migrations and Culture, for examples of how poorly racial preferences--which usually operate in favor of the dominant class in a culture, against minorities--serve the countries and cultures in which they occur) and lacks political sustainability. However, and though I love the people of Bartlett (it's an awesome city), I can't control the ratio of cranks, crackpots and jingoists to thoughtful citizens.

Unless Harold Ford Jr. is running against her, I'm still voting for Marsha. ;)

"Way to support extremists and then pretend that you are a thoughtful person."

Man, you have got me so pegged. Congrats. I didn't think anyone would see through my clever deception, and you've just nailed me.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Quisling..quisling..quisling...slave..slave..slave..yadda..yadda..yadda...

I wouldn't mind if I didn't live in Fla. But the temp's in the 90's the humidity in the high 80's today..we really don't need another blast of hot air.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 19, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Old Geller would not recognize True Patriotism, if it sat down next to her in a Plastic Surgeon's office.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 19, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

@Ethan: "KaddafiDelendaEst, can you please stop calling people "Quislings"?"

I agree. The meaning is offensive, and it's an indication, right off the bat, that you aren't serious about discussing anything. The commenters here are people, not slaves or quislings or Nazi sympathizers, and even though I occasionally read you comments, after the first "quisling" I usually stop.

It's also tiresome. You've said it a million times now. Point taken. You think everybody here is a dhimmi. Got it.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

BTW: How many people think the flooding in Pakistan is related to Climate Change? Many scientists do. I do. But the Right Wing Taliban's political correctness machine -- GOP-TV -- squelches all such discussion. That's where anti-rationality gets you in the real world. Better to stay in ideological fantasy camp.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 19, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Ethan, Kevin and rukidding7: Please ignore KaddafiDelendaEst. If you read his posts it is apparent that he rides the short bus and is not worth engaging in conversation.

Don't feed the trolls.

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

"""Man, you have got me so pegged"""

Yes, I do. You admit as much when you say "I've never claimed to be a moderate."

You only get angry when I expose you for the fraud you are.

Civility on chat boards doesn't mean a gdmn thing if you vote for people who hate it, hypocrite.

Just like the idea that "nativism never works out well ... and lacks political sustainability" is an obvious lie or ignorant statement at best. The Republican Party that YOU SUPPORT WITH YOUR VOTE has been engaged in a racist nativist strategy for OVER 40 YEARS. Not politically sustainable? My arse.

You are just lying in an attempt to deflect the criticism by minimizing and ignoring the impact of what is clearly a racist, nativist strategy employed by the Republican Party of the past half-century.

And that is -- or should be -- unacceptable to any thinking person in the 21st Century.

Obviously you don't care about that. Your whole "civility" game is a total fraud. You could care less about being civil. You use it as a facade to hide the fact that you are just like every other Republican who approves of the Republican race-baiting and fear-mongering tactics and strategy that has persisted in your party for decades.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

"Please ignore KaddafiDelendaEst"

I can only ignore it up to a point.

The breaking point being the fact that he is calling me a Nazi.

Calling the progeny of people who were mass murdered by Nazis a Nazi is truly the next lowest form of behavior outside of actually participating in the genocide.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Folks, sorry I am all for religious freedom but the fact is that despite whatever the legitimate intentions are of the developers of the proposed mosque, there are 2 facts that bother me about it:
1. It is insensitive to 9/11 victims and families. The fact that these people were killed because of someone's belief in Islam, regardless of whether these extremists are a minority or not, should be reason enough to locate it elsewhere. Period.
2. Extremists will be buoyed by the building of mosque there. The fact is that Mosques have been built on top of important places by conquering Muslims throughout history. There is a reason that the Dome of the Rock was built on the Temple Mount and Hagia Sophia, the equivalent of the Vatican for Eastern Orthodox Christians was converted to a Mosque for over 500 years. Whatever the intentions are of the builders, extremist Muslims will see it as sign of a conquering Islam.

Tangentially, I was very annoyed to read yesterday that although this mosque is being developed, the Port Authority is refusing to rebuild the only actual religious building destroyed on 9/11, tiny St. Nicholas church which had been on that site for almost 80 years. What a twisted travesty...

Posted by: tinapnyc | August 19, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Climate change appears to be taking place. What is the main cause of it, is hard to prove beyond doubt.

Since China, India, Brazil, etc have opted out of any meaningful enforceable standards, to limit carbon emissions, the USA needs to move on to preparing for the worst.

Regardless of what is causing climate change, the USA needs to get on with the development of clean dependable domestic energy supplies. We have to ween ourselves off our "Addiction To Foreign Oil".

The cure is still the same, for our future clean air, and energy needs, regardless of if mankind has trigger global climate change or not.

Forget about what is causing it, and focus on what has to be done, to make us less dependant on foreign energy supplies, and what will get us to a point where we will be able produce and abundance of clean domestic energy.

We still have to develop the same cure, regardless of what caused the problem, so let us get on with it.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 19, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010 - Understood.

The sad thing is I highly doubt he has any clue what a Quisling is. He is probably just regurgitating the nonsense he sees on rightwing blogs.

Posted by: nisleib | August 19, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

nisleib, one would hope that were the case... but frankly, I doubt it.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 19, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan: "Yes, I do. You admit as much when you say 'I've never claimed to be a moderate.'"

Well, that's because I haven't. You keep saying "moderate" like I claimed to be a moderate, and I hadn't done that, so I was hoping to clarify.

"You only get angry when I expose you for the fraud you are."

(A) When have I gotten angry? and (B) what fraud are you talking about? I am who I am.

"Civility on chat boards doesn't mean a gdmn thing if you vote for people who hate it, hypocrite."

One of the great things about America is everybody is entitled to an opinion.

"Just like the idea that 'nativism never works out well ... and lacks political sustainability' is an obvious lie or ignorant statement at best. The Republican Party that YOU SUPPORT WITH YOUR VOTE has been engaged in a racist nativist strategy for OVER 40 YEARS. Not politically sustainable? My arse."

Then I guess you're saying you think it's a good idea? That not only does it works, but it's going to keep working indefinitely?

"You are just lying in an attempt to deflect the criticism by minimizing and ignoring the impact of what is clearly a racist, nativist strategy employed by the Republican Party of the past half-century."

And my motivation for these intentional falsehoods is . . . what again?

"Obviously you don't care about that. Your whole 'civility' game is a total fraud."

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

"You could care less about being civil."

Well, I certainly hope you're wrong about that. I sure think that I do.

"You use it as a facade to hide the fact that you are just like every other Republican who approves of the Republican race-baiting and fear-mongering tactics and strategy that has persisted in your party for decades."

Okay, but . . . come on, Ethan. Why don't you tell me how you really feel?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 19, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Re: Milestone? Kudos to NBC/MSNBC for televising the last combat brigade leaving Iraq. It was a salute to all the American troops. It did beg the question: where was their Commander-in-Chief?

Posted by: dozas | August 19, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

"...concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center."

If Time's pollsters framed the question that way (embedding the argument of the critics of the project directly into the question) it is little wonder that an under-informed individual would tend to concur.

Had the question been instead:

"Do you believe that constitutional liberties in the Bill of Rights should be suspended in neighborhoods when there is popular sentiment to do so, or would you concur that such rights should remain absolute and inviolable?"

...the result would likely have been that people would "concur" that constitutional freedoms are sacrosanct, even when their practice by particular groups in particular places might in some way offend the sensitivities of some among us.

This looks like a "push poll" to me. It would be more interesting to know how people react to the project after hearing a succinct summary of the facts, and the arguments made pro and con. By the right wing's design, many people have now heard about a supposed "Ground Zero mosque" and little else, and so they have a very vague and distorted understanding of the facts of the controversy.

Posted by: Patrick_M | August 19, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

The Quisling collaborators with the Islamo-fascists of Cordoba House have spent the past week demonizing patriotic Americans as racists, bigots, Islamophobes, xenophobes, neanderthals-- the whole Star Wars cantina of boogeymen-- and now they have the temerity to climb up on their hind legs and howl about being accurately characterized as Quislings?

PC physicians, heal thyselves.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 19, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Some of us continue to believe that the Bill of Rights is quite literally "politically correct."

Posted by: Patrick_M | August 19, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Marsha Blackburn Voted FOR:
Omnibus Appropriations, Special Education, Global AIDS Initiative, Job Training, Unemployment Benefits, Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations, Agriculture Appropriations, FY2004 Foreign Operations Appropriations, U.S.-Singapore Trade, U.S.-Chile Trade, Supplemental Spending for Iraq & Afghanistan, Flood Insurance Reauthorization , Prescription Drug Benefit, Child Nutrition Programs, Surface Transportation, Job Training and Worker Services, Agriculture Appropriations, Foreign Aid, Debt Limit Increase, Fiscal 2005 Omnibus Appropriations, Vocational/Technical Training, Supplemental Appropriations, UN “Reforms.” Patriot Act Reauthorization, CAFTA, Katrina Hurricane-relief Appropriations, Head Start Funding, Line-item Rescission, Oman Trade Agreement, Military Tribunals, Electronic Surveillance, Head Start Funding, COPS Funding, Funding the REAL ID Act (National ID), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, Thought Crimes “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, Peru Free Trade Agreement, Economic Stimulus, Farm Bill (Veto Override), Warrantless Searches, Employee Verification Program, Body Imaging Screening, Patriot Act extention.

Marsha Blackburn Voted AGAINST:
Ban on UN Contributions, eliminate Millennium Challenge Account, WTO Withdrawal, UN Dues Decrease, Defunding the NAIS, Iran Military Operations defunding Iraq Troop Withdrawal, congress authorization of Iran Military Operations, Withdrawing U.S. Soldiers from Afghanistan.

Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
See her unconstitutional votes at :
http://mickeywhite.blogspot.com/2009/09/tn-congressman-marsha-blackburn-votes.html
Mickey

Posted by: mickey1956 | August 19, 2010 7:26 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