Pelosi Calls for Investigation into Anti-Muslim Groups

US News • Views: 4,314

Nancy Pelosi is calling for an investigation into who’s funding the Bigot Brigade.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday said she supports an investigation of groups opposing the building of a mosque near ground zero in New York.

Pelosi told San Francisco’s KCBS radio that “there is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some.”

“I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up?”

Jump to bottom

196 comments
1 Kragar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:34:38am

Rush was screaming about this this morning. “How dare she call for an investigation of the 9/11 families?” as he put it.

Lying bastard.

2 McSpiff  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:34:39am

This seems like an incredibly bad idea to me.

3 Locker  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:36:36am

I seriously don’t want to pay for an investigation to find out something we already know. If you posturing politicians want to make a difference, just stand up and speak with a clear voice.

4 KingKenrod  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:36:49am

She didn’t say a government investigation, did she?

5 Jeff In Ohio  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:37:02am

re: #2 McSpiff

This seems like an incredibly bad idea to me.

Yeah. Unless she already knows something, otherwise more grist for the mill.

6 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:37:31am

That’s not the same as calling for a ‘congressional investigation.’ I think what Speaker Pelosi was saying was, “Hey press! Do your fucking job and stop being part of the problem!” But the media is too lazy to do that, by and large. That’s why it takes a blogger at Salon to trace the outrage back to Pamela Geller, and it takes the Rachel Maddow show to put it on TV. Everyone else in the media is more interested in “How will this hurt President Obama and the Democrats in November?” It’s their August ratings booster, like the death panel fears and gun-toting teabaggers from last year’s town halls who were simply just good honest white folk worried about how that crazy black president was going to kill grandma.

7 Jeff In Ohio  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:37:44am

re: #4 KingKenrod

True. Maybe Mystery, Inc. is available.

8 jaunte  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:38:14am

re: #2 McSpiff

Double edged sword. I’d much rather keep pointing out that the anti-muslim groups are urging us to ignore our own constitutional legal protections.

9 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:38:15am

re: #4 KingKenrod

She didn’t say a government investigation, did she?

No, she didn’t. It was more a challenge to the press than anything else.

10 alexknyc  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:38:16am

re: #4 KingKenrod

She didn’t say a government investigation, did she?

It’s Pelosi. What else would she use to investigate?

I think if the funding of Cordoba House is fair game for an investigation, so is the funding of the bigot brigade.

11 Jeff In Ohio  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:38:39am

re: #4 KingKenrod

re: #6 darthstar

Good points.

12 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:39:11am

I’m sure the investigation would produce the usual suspects.

The ‘right’ doesn’t appear to care, though. It doesn’t appear to have any concern about the people funding this bigotry. I don’t think there will be a moment where people suddenly realize “Oh wait, Scaife is behind this? And the Koch family? And the Heritage people? And other culture-war, creepy, vaguely white supremacist, hyperChristian, insane nutjobs? Well then count me out!”

People still talk about ACORN as though Breitbart’s smear proved anything, as though that wasn’t a well-orchestrated, well-funded takedown of a minority get-out-the-vote organization. And that’s after Brietbart has been shown to be a complete lying scumbag.

The ‘right’ doesn’t want to make these connections.

The middle, I think, is already getting sick of the anti-Muslim idiocy; the bigots are mistaking people having an antipathy towards the building of the mosque for having the same wild-eyed frenzied hatred for it and all things Muslim that they do.

13 Locker  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:39:32am

She didn’t say “government investigation” but she didn’t use any other adjective either. Personally if a government figure makes an official statement about an investigation I would assume she means an “official” investigation.

In this day what kind of “investigation” is the press really going to do?

14 Nick Schroeder  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:41:02am

This is kind of a misleading headline. She’s not ‘calling for an investigation’ in the sense that we need a government committee or anything. Seemed more like a ‘follow the money’ type suggestion that’s been used to, for example, expose the Tea Party movement as a shill for Republicans.

15 simoom  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:41:16am

littlegreenfootballs.com

A group of prominent Arab American and Muslim Republicans circulated a letter Tuesday to top party officials, expressing concern over the language Gingrich and other notables were using in the debate.

The signers included Norquist’s wife, Samah, who served as an advisor in the George W. Bush administration; former Bush White House aide Suhail Khan; and Sherine El-Abd, president of the New Jersey Federation of Republican Women.

Dear Republican Colleague:

We are writing to you today as loyal Americans who are active members of the Republican Party. We also happen to be proud of our Arab American and Muslim American contributions to the Republican Party.

We are deeply concerned by the rhetoric of some leading members of our party surrounding the construction of the Muslim Community Center in downtown Manhattan. These comments are not only constitutionally unsound, they are also alienating millions of Arab American and Muslim American voters who believe, as we do, in the principles of our party – individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law.

As you know, our party has had a long history of inclusion – beginning with our great President Abraham Lincoln, whose leadership on the slavery issue was monumental, and continuing through President George W. Bush whose public statements and actions on the differentiation between Islam and the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 were critically important. We are particularly proud to note that President Bush appointed more Arab Americans and Muslim Americans to his administration than any other president in U.S. history.

That being said, it perplexes us as to why some vocal members of our party have chosen to oppose the construction of a cultural and religious center on private grounds. Not only does the First Amendment to our Constitution protect the right of these private citizens to worship freely, it also prevents Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion. Our party and the leaders in our party should not be engaged in judgment issues of the location of a cultural center and a house of worship in direct contravention of the First Amendment.
…
While we share the desire of all in our party to be successful in the November elections, we cannot support victory at the expense of the U.S. Constitution or the Arab and Muslim community in America. As President Lincoln so eloquently stated in his famous speech: “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”

16 RurouniKenshin  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:41:30am

re: #6 darthstar
I’m starting to wonder if Olbermann, Maddow, their staffs, and the people they have as guests on their show are the only TV news people who do any investigation at all any more.

17 Killgore Trout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:41:31am

re: #2 McSpiff

This seems like an incredibly bad idea to me.

I don’t think it would turn up anything interesting anyways. The money probably comes from the usual sources (Heritage Foundation, Freedom works and maybe even the GOP) but what’s really important is where the ideas are coming from. The anti-Muslim groups are following the model of the Eurofascist groups like Vlaams Belang, Sweeden Democrats,Geert, BNP, EDL, FN, Etc. I seriously doubt these groups have money to throw around but they are the ideological origin of anti-mosque activism and the movement to outlaw Islam as a “fascist ideology”.

18 wrenchwench  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:43:50am

The investigation has already been done. Pelosi can either read LGF, or watch this:

Youtube Video

Or better yet, both.

19 Jeff In Ohio  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:43:55am

re: #15 simoom

WHy didn’t they mention Harry Reid?

20 Charles Johnson  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:44:28am

re: #6 darthstar

That’s not the same as calling for a ‘congressional investigation.’ I think what Speaker Pelosi was saying was, “Hey press! Do your fucking job and stop being part of the problem!” But the media is too lazy to do that, by and large. That’s why it takes a blogger at Salon to trace the outrage back to Pamela Geller, and it takes the Rachel Maddow show to put it on TV. Everyone else in the media is more interested in “How will this hurt President Obama and the Democrats in November?” It’s their August ratings booster, like the death panel fears and gun-toting teabaggers from last year’s town halls who were simply just good honest white folk worried about how that crazy black president was going to kill grandma.

Not to blow my own horn, but I’ve trying to warn people against Geller and Spencer and their ilk for years, long before Rachel Maddow or Salon got into it.

21 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:45:03am

Investigate who exactly? We know that the SIOE is involved. We know that Geller and Spencer are involved. We need Pelosi to demand an investigation into where they’re getting the money?

Oh, and if she’s busy asking the media to investigation, maybe she should be better off asking why the media keeps using “Ground Zero mosque” when referring to the location in headlines - when it isn’t in Ground Zero. It’s near it, but that’s not the same thing.

My office is near Ground Zero. I can see it from my office window. But that doesn’t mean I’m in Ground Zero. Yet, that’s exactly what people are being led to believe with the incessant headlines.

And if this is really about location of the mosque - can someone point out on a map of Lower Manhattan where exactly someone would find it acceptable? Are we to believe that none should be closer than Masjid Manhattan on Warren Street? So, we’re now talking about exclusion zones?

22 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:45:11am

re: #20 Charles

Not to blow my own horn, but I’ve trying to warn people against Geller and Spencer and their ilk for years.

True, you have…

23 McSpiff  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:45:13am

This all makes me wanna go donate to my local mosque. Srsly.

24 iossarian  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:45:41am

re: #12 Obdicut

These are comforting thoughts but I’m less optimistic about the “middle”. These are the people in my lunch room who genuinely a) don’t fact-check anything they hear regarding “radical mega-mosques being built on the smoking remains of the WTC”, and, even if they do, b) don’t then go on to wonder whether, gee, it might not be a good idea to start singling out various minority groups for special “attention”.

25 Four More Tears  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:46:45am

re: #19 Jeff In Ohio

WHy didn’t they mention Harry Reid?

Everyone should be mentioning Reid. His name should appear at least once in every comment mad, preferably twice. We mustn’t forget that the left deserves just as much blame in this as the right.

(How’d I do, Walter?)

26 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:46:49am

Talk about pandering. She’s the best.

27 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:47:55am

re: #20 Charles

Not to blow my own horn, but I’ve trying to warn people against Geller and Spencer and their ilk for years, long before Rachel Maddow or Salon got into it.

So have I.

28 Kragar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:48:05am

re: #25 JasonA

Everyone should be mentioning Reid. His name should appear at least once in every comment mad, preferably twice. We mustn’t forget that the left deserves just as much blame in this as the right.

(How’d I do, Walter?)

Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid

That fills my quota for the day.

29 Cannadian Club Akbar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:48:25am

re: #26 Walter L. Newton

Talk about pandering. She’s the best.

Bingo.

30 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:48:34am

re: #25 JasonA

Everyone should be mentioning Reid. His name should appear at least once in every comment mad, preferably twice. We mustn’t forget that the left deserves just as much blame in this as the right.

(How’d I do, Walter?)

Not bad :)

31 General Nimrod Bodfish  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:49:11am

BTW, sorry to go OT, but today is the 90th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment to the United States’ Constitution.

32 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:49:38am

re: #28 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid Reid

That fills my quota for the day.

for x = 1 to infinity
print “Harry Reid”
next x

33 Charles Johnson  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:50:29am

The media should do their job and report on who Pamela Geller really is, what kind of insane garbage she writes, and who she associates with. It’s pathetic to see report after report refer to her blandly as a “conservative blogger,” when she’s completely deranged with hatred.

And the evidence for this is right there in plain view on her crazed website.

34 KingKenrod  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:50:55am

re: #10 alexknyc

It’s Pelosi. What else would she use to investigate?

I think if the funding of Cordoba House is fair game for an investigation, so is the funding of the bigot brigade.

For the mosque & center, it should be treated like any other property purchase and development appropriate for the way that area is zoned.

As far as the bigot brigade goes, they should only be investigated if there is evidence of a crime being committed. Otherwise they are free to spew idiocy just like the rest of us.

35 Jeff In Ohio  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:51:02am

re: #25 JasonA

You only mentioned Harry Reid once. Why do you hate America?

36 wrenchwench  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:51:51am

re: #31 commadore183

BTW, sorry to go OT, but today is the 90th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment to the United States’ Constitution.

Not too OT on a thread dealing with the first female Speaker of the House.

37 Four More Tears  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:52:22am

re: #35 Jeff In Ohio

You only mentioned Harry Reid once. Why do you hate America?

I need to save room for Patterson, duh.

38 Carlos Dangler  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:53:41am

re: #31 commadore183

BTW, sorry to go OT, but today is the 90th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment to the United States’ Constitution.

My own great state of Tennessee was the 36th state to ratify the 19th Amendment, making it the law of the land. I find it interesting though that Mississippi took 64 years to ratify it, in 1984 (though it was just a symbolic gesture at that point).

39 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:54:03am

re: #33 Charles

The media should do their job and report on who Pamela Geller really is, what kind of insane garbage she writes, and who she associates with. It’s pathetic to see report after report refer to her blandly as a “conservative blogger,” when she’s completely deranged with hatred.

And the evidence for this is right there in plain view on her crazed website.

I think they’d get in trouble if they were honest and placed the following honest caption under her face:
Pamela Geller
Racist, Bigot, and Hate Monger

40 General Nimrod Bodfish  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:55:05am

re: #36 wrenchwench

Well, considering what we’ve seen the past few weeks (screwing around with the 14th Amendment, disregarding the 1st Amendment for Muslims, etc), it probably isn’t too OT overall.

41 Carlos Dangler  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:55:39am

re: #38 talon_262

My own great state of Tennessee was the 36th state to ratify the 19th Amendment, making it the law of the land. I find it interesting though that Mississippi took 64 years to ratify it, in 1984 (though it was just a symbolic gesture at that point).

And that South Carolina didn’t ratify it until 1969 (though it wasn’t certified until 1973).

42 Carlos Dangler  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:57:18am

re: #41 talon_262

And that South Carolina didn’t ratify it until 1969 (though it wasn’t certified until 1973).

And that North Carolina didn’t ratify it until 1971 and Florida until 1969…seems to be a pattern there, but I can’t put my finger on it…

43 Cannadian Club Akbar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:58:08am

re: #42 talon_262

And that North Carolina didn’t ratify it until 1971 and Florida until 1969…seems to be a pattern there, but I can’t put my finger on it…

Easy there Space Jesus.
//

44 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:58:27am

re: #37 JasonA

I need to save room for Patterson, duh.

And Jeff Green in Florida and Rep. Jason Altmire (Pa.) and Rep. Mike McMahon (NY-13) and Steve Israel (NY-2) and Tim Bishop (NY-1) and 54 percent of the registered democrats in the CNN poll.

And see this Frum column here…

frumforum.com

Panderers or bigots?

45 Carlos Dangler  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:59:33am

re: #43 Cannadian Club Akbar

Easy there Space Jesus.
//

Hehe…

46 Charles Johnson  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:59:37am

re: #44 Walter L. Newton

It’s a right wing issue, Walter. It’s silly to try to pretend otherwise.

47 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:59:45am

I may be wrong, but this doesn’t smell particularly organized and/or well-funded to me. I think I might actually feel better about it if I thought it was astroturf shenanigans. I think it’s just a good old-fashioned case of extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds, conveniently seized upon and demagogued by cynical assholes for electioneering purposes.

48 deranged cat  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:59:51am

re: #41 talon_262

what was ratified recently, like in the past few months or so? i think it was an amendment that had been approved by every state for like 60 years except one.. i think it was in missouri or mississippi.. does that ring a bell for anyone?

49 webevintage  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 10:59:57am

Nancy has the biggest balls in Washington.

I hope she does this and that there will be lots and lots of sunlight shined all over this shit and the real folks behind it (not that we don’t know who they are).

50 Four More Tears  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:01:26am

Rick Lazio ad, complete with 9/11 imagery.

Scumbag.

Youtube Video

51 HoosierHoops  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:02:14am

re: #39 darthstar

I think they’d get in trouble if they were honest and placed the following honest caption under her face:
Pamela Geller
Racist, Bigot, and Hate Monger

I saw her on the O’Reilly a few weeks ago.. It’s pretty bad when Bill the Loon has to try getting her dialed back the whole segment

52 alexknyc  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:02:18am

re: #46 Charles

It’s a right wing issue, Walter. It’s silly to try to pretend otherwise.

Maybe nationally it is, but here in NYC we’re having elections for congress, state assembly and state senate in November. Our politicians know which way the wind is blowing with their constituents (especially those who represent Lower Manhattan) and we don’t have too many right-wing politicians elected here.

53 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:02:27am

re: #46 Charles

It’s a right wing issue, Walter. It’s silly to try to pretend otherwise.

When did I say it wasn’t? And the support for this right wing issue is starting to get support from more than the right wing. That can’t be ignored. A majority of independents are also coming on board. This has become a populist issue, and it is starting to cross both political and constitutional lines.

That’s what bothers me.

54 webevintage  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:02:32am

re: #1 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Rush was screaming about this this morning. “How dare she call for an investigation of the 9/11 families?” as he put it.

Lying bastard.

Rush should be reminded of how is fellow travelers Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck have talked about the 9/11 families before.

55 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:03:29am

re: #49 webevintage

Nancy has the biggest balls in Washington.

I hope she does this and that there will be lots and lots of sunlight shined all over this shit and the real folks behind it (not that we don’t know who they are).

A federal government “investigation” into people expressing their 1st amendment rights? Would you be supportive of the government looking into groups that are pro-reproductive rights or groups that are pro-immigration amnesty? Unless there is an accusation of breaking the law everyone contacted should tell pelosi to take a flying leap.

56 reidr  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:03:30am

re: #33 Charles

Yes, that is a huge failure on the part of the media. It shouldn’t take more than five minutes for anyone to visit her web site and realize the horror therein. Are reporters not even doing that much?!

57 Targetpractice  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:04:32am

re: #53 Walter L. Newton

When did I say it wasn’t? And the support for this right wing issue is starting to get support from more than the right wing. That can’t be ignored. A majority of independents are also coming on board. This has become a populist issue, and it is starting to cross both political and constitutional lines.

That’s what bothers me.

Same here. It’s a right-wing issue, but the fact that many independents and even some liberals are now coming to agree with them is scary shit. Especially when you have the “liberal” media blowing the horn 24/7, headlining stories with “Ground Zero Mosque” and talking up how people are “outraged” that a “mosque” is being built “so close” to Ground Zero.

58 Carlos Dangler  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:04:32am

re: #48 deranged cat

what was ratified recently, like in the past few months or so? i think it was an amendment that had been approved by every state for like 60 years except one.. i think it was in missouri or mississippi.. does that ring a bell for anyone?

The 24th Amendment was finally ratified by Texas last year and by Alabama in 2002, after it was ratified and made law in 1964.

59 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:05:34am

re: #51 HoosierHoops

I saw her on the O’Reilly a few weeks ago.. It’s pretty bad when Bill the Loon has to try getting her dialed back the whole segment

O’Reilly is more than happy to entertain the likes of Geller, just so long as she doesn’t get him too slimed up with the same label of openly bigoted asshole. He prefers to keep the veneer (thin as it may be) of his being a “non-bigoted bigot” as much as he can…he doesn’t want to risk losing too many advertisers or his cherished spot at 8pm across from Olbermann.

60 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:06:05am

re: #56 reidr

No… they’re not.

61 jaunte  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:07:35am

re: #54 webevintage

Rush should be reminded of how is fellow travelers Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck have talked about the 9/11 families before.

He’s expressed the opinion in the past that the 9/11 families were overcompensated, when he wanted an example of the ‘entitlement’ mentality in the country. They’re a multipurpose tool. /

62 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:08:03am

re: #57 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Same here. It’s a right-wing issue, but the fact that many independents and even some liberals are now coming to agree with them is scary shit. Especially when you have the “liberal” media blowing the horn 24/7, headlining stories with “Ground Zero Mosque” and talking up how people are “outraged” that a “mosque” is being built “so close” to Ground Zero.

Right… and it is not going to do any good at this point to keep harping on who is fueling this fire when it’s gaining traction across political parties.

We need to firmly stand ground against ANYONE who thinks that we should put constitutional guarantees aside in regards to this mosque.

That’s the real issue.

63 Political Atheist  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:08:28am

Primarily a right wing thing. It’s a black hole of logic. But like any black hole, the rest of the politcal universe is orbiting closer and closer.

re: #53 Walter L. Newton

Meredith Shiner at Politico would agree with you.

Excerpt
On Monday, a spokesman for the senator, who’s facing a tough reelection bid this fall, weighed in on what now has become a national issue.

“The First Amendment protects freedom of religion,” Reid spokesman Jim Manley said in a statement. “Sen. Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built someplace else. If the Republicans are being sincere, they would help us pass this long-overdue bill to help the first responders whose health and livelihoods have been devastated because of their bravery on 9/11, rather than continuing to block this much-needed legislation.”

64 Four More Tears  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:09:34am

Heh. Pamz is referring to CNN as “The Crescent News Network.” This woman really does see Muslims and terrorist sympathizers everywhere.

65 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:10:45am

re: #2 McSpiff

This seems like an incredibly bad idea to me.

Didn’t Mayor Bloomberg say that investigating the mosque is “un-American”?

66 webevintage  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:11:58am

9/11 Widower Ted Olson: Obama Was Right On Cordoba House

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

67 reidr  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:12:20am

re: #51 HoosierHoops

The least they could do is be extremely skeptical about anything she presents as “fact” and call her a right-wing extremist. That’s toned down enough, I’d think, but still should sound warning bells in the reader’s head… unlike “conservative blogger”, though that’s starting to have the same effect.

68 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:13:19am

re: #63 Rightwingconspirator

Primarily a right wing thing. It’s a black hole of logic. But like any black hole, the rest of the politcal universe is orbiting closer and closer.

Meredith Shiner at Politico would agree with you.

Excerpt
On Monday, a spokesman for the senator, who’s facing a tough reelection bid this fall, weighed in on what now has become a national issue.

“The First Amendment protects freedom of religion,” Reid spokesman Jim Manley said in a statement. “Sen. Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built someplace else. If the Republicans are being sincere, they would help us pass this long-overdue bill to help the first responders whose health and livelihoods have been devastated because of their bravery on 9/11, rather than continuing to block this much-needed legislation.”

And that’s why I am griping. This is now crossing political lines, and it’s not a simple issue of targeting the right as the bad boys. At this point, it has become a NATIONAL ISSUE, a populist national issue, and people like Pelosi are looking more and more foolish, knee-jerk statements, instead of focusing on the constitutional issue at hand.

I’m going to tell you what is going to happen. Waste to much time trying to make political hay out of this and those opposing this mosque will win… at the polls.

69 Max  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:13:44am

re: #66 webevintage

9/11 Widower Ted Olson: Obama Was Right On Cordoba House

[Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

God Bless Ted Olsen! The sanest conservative lawyer out there!

70 deranged cat  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:13:54am

re: #58 talon_262

The 24th Amendment was finally ratified by Texas last year and by Alabama in 2002, after it was ratified and made law in 1964.

i think i found it..
17th Amendment, ratified in Delaware in June, 2010 :P

71 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:14:00am

re: #64 JasonA

Heh. Pamz is referring to CNN as “The Crescent News Network.” This woman really does see Muslims and terrorist sympathizers everywhere.

You’d think that would be enough for CNN to begin discrediting her slimy ass wherever possible. Destroy her credibility, and then ask the loudest voices against the Cordoba project why they’re echoing talking points of a known member of a hate-group (SIOA). Tie their comments to her, and they’ll start back-pedaling faster than trained bears on unicycles.

72 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:15:14am

re: #46 Charles

It’s a right wing issue, Walter. It’s silly to try to pretend otherwise.

But all the polls taken show between 60 and 70% of Americans object to the location. That can’t just be all “right wing”.

73 webevintage  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:15:29am

OT: File under “how did I miss this story”:

Democrats’ letter to Fox News denounces News Corp. donation to Republicans


The Democrats are escalating their attack on Fox News over the $1 million donation by the network’s parent company to the Republican Governors Association.

In a letter Wednesday to Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes, the head of the Democratic Governors Association said: “In the interest of some fairness and balance, I request that you add a formal disclaimer to your coverage any time any of your programs covers governors or gubernatorial races between now and Election Day.”

74 jaunte  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:15:44am

re: #66 webevintage

9/11 Widower Ted Olson: Obama Was Right On Cordoba House

[Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

Good for him. I hope more people follow his example.

“I do believe that people of all religions have a right to build edifices, or structures, or places of religious worship or study, where the community allows them to do it under zoning laws and that sort of thing, and that we don’t want to turn an act of hate against us by extremists into an act of intolerance for people of religious faith. And I don’t think it should be a political issue. It shouldn’t be a Republican or Democratic issue either. I believe Gov. Christie from New Jersey said it well — that this should not be in that political, partisan marketplace.”

75 Political Atheist  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:16:19am

I have no idea if Firedog lake is PNG around here.
So I’ll excerpt a tiny bit, as I like this particular content…

Before Right-Wing Blogger Outrage, Conservatives Supported Cordoba House
The President’s remarks on the Cordoba House project, now placed in their full context to mean a support of the right for any religious group to worship freely, consistent with local laws and zoning ordinances, has touched off one of these “get us through the summer” debates in the political realm (see Marcy on this). But it’s worth pointing to Justin Elliott’s chronicle of the history of the Cordoba House controversy, which shows that initially, even the loudest organs in the conservative noise machine supported the project:

Dec. 21, 2009: Conservative media personality Laura Ingraham interviews Abdul Rauf’s wife, Daisy Khan, while guest-hosting “The O’Reilly Factor” on Fox. In hindsight, the segment is remarkable for its cordiality. “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.” This segment also includes onscreen the first use that we’ve seen of the misnomer “ground zero mosque.”) After the segment — and despite the front-page Times story — there were no news articles on the mosque for five and a half months, according to a search of the Nexis newspaper archive.

In the segment, Daisy Khan describes the Islamic Center as “a blow to the extremists” and says she and moderate Muslims like her are fed up with being defined by the actions of a few who have perverted Islam for their own ends.

76 Cannadian Club Akbar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:16:45am

re: #73 webevintage

A whole million dollars? Oh noes!!

77 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:17:07am

Apparently, Rush Limbaugh is on quite a tear today.

78 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:17:35am

re: #72 captdiggs

But all the polls taken show between 60 and 70% of Americans object to the location. That can’t just be all “right wing”.

Like I said above… We need to firmly stand ground against ANYONE who thinks that we should put constitutional guarantees aside in regards to this mosque. Waste to much time trying to make political hay out of this and those opposing this mosque will win… at the polls in November 2010.

And this is coming from a conservative… you can go to the bank with that.

79 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:18:26am

re: #66 webevintage

9/11 Widower Ted Olson: Obama Was Right On Cordoba House

[Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

His wife, Barbara Olson, was killed in the flight that crashed into the Pentagon.

80 darthstar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:18:42am

re: #76 Cannadian Club Akbar

A whole million dollars? Oh noes!!

True…it’s “only” a million dollars…but it is a million dollars from a network news organization which indicates that organization’s commitment to supporting the Republican party.

81 Max  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:18:45am

re: #77 negativ

Apparently, Rush Limbaugh is on quite a tear today.

I know. Yikes! Rush was in full race-baiting mode today.

82 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:19:13am

re: #78 Walter L. Newton

Walter, why are you trying so damn hard to avoid the fact that the opposition to the mosque was sourced within the right wing, has been endorsed by nearly the entirety of the GOP, and is being popularized by every right-wing commentator?

Have you ceased being an atheist, and started to worship full time at the feet of the Magical Balance Fairy?

83 webevintage  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:19:54am

re: #72 captdiggs

But all the polls taken show between 60 and 70% of Americans object to the location. That can’t just be all “right wing”.

No, but they can be seriously mis-informed.
Miz Blanche said yesterday:
“”Out of respect for the families who lost loved ones in our nation’s worst terrorist attack, if I were making the decision I would prefer that the Mosque be constructed a few blocks away from the World Trade Center site,” Senator Lincoln said. “However, the people of New York City didn’t ask for my opinion and I believe the local community, including family members of 9/11 victims and church leaders, should make that decision together.”

If our elected officials can’t even get their facts straight how can one care what other American’s think about what is basically a local Manhattan issue.

I wonder if polling of anything matters anymore when you read all the mis-information out there about so many issues.

84 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:20:42am

re: #78 Walter L. Newton

Pelosi’s statement could easily be interpreted an attempt at intimidation, regarding freedom of speech. So here we have dueling Constitutional protections.

85 reidr  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:21:35am

re: #72 captdiggs

But all the polls taken show between 60 and 70% of Americans object to the location. That can’t just be all “right wing”.

I would hope a lot of that is rooted in ignorance of the issue. That too calls for a little more investigative journalism.

I would also like to hear more of an explanation from those informed on the issue and any “9/11 families” who are against the community center why they’re against it. I’m referring to those people who claim “hurt feelings” or that it’s “being insensitive”. Seems like the underlying ugly emotions are being glossed over and assumed to be valid, while everyone’s focused on he said/she said and polls.

86 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:21:53am

re: #82 Obdicut

Walter, why are you trying so damn hard to avoid the fact that the opposition to the mosque was sourced within the right wing, has been endorsed by nearly the entirety of the GOP, and is being popularized by every right-wing commentator?

Have you ceased being an atheist, and started to worship full time at the feet of the Magical Balance Fairy?

Are you of the belief that 70% of the public is “right wing”?

87 Cannadian Club Akbar  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:22:09am

All righty, work calls.

88 webevintage  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:22:14am

re: #76 Cannadian Club Akbar

A whole million dollars? Oh noes!!

Really?
It does not give you pause that a media company donated that much money?

89 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:23:18am

re: #15 simoom


Tuesday to top party officials, expressing concern over the language Gingrich and other notables were using in the debate.

The signers included Norquist’s wife, Samah, who served as an advisor in the George W. Bush administration; former Bush White House aide Suhail Khan; and Sherine El-Abd, president of the New Jersey Federation of Republican Women.

Dear Republican Colleague:

We are writing to you today as loyal Americans who are active members of the Republican Party. We also happen to be proud of our Arab American and Muslim American contributions to the Republican Party.

We are deeply concerned by the rhetoric of some leading members of our party surrounding the construction of the Muslim Community Center in downtown Manhattan. These comments are not only constitutionally unsound, they are also alienating millions of Arab American and Muslim American voters who believe, as we do, in the principles of our party – individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law.

As you know, our party has had a long history of inclusion – beginning with our great President Abraham Lincoln, whose leadership on the slavery issue was monumental, and continuing through President George W. Bush whose public statements and actions on the differentiation between Islam and the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 were critically important. We are particularly proud to note that President Bush appointed more Arab Americans and Muslim Americans to his administration than any other president in U.S. history.

That being said, it perplexes us as to why some vocal members of our party have chosen to oppose the construction of a cultural and religious center on private grounds. Not only does the First Amendment to our Constitution protect the right of these private citizens to worship freely, it also prevents Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion. Our party and the leaders in our party should not be engaged in judgment issues of the location of a cultural center and a house of worship in direct contravention of the First Amendment.
…
While we share the desire of all in our party to be successful in the November elections, we cannot support victory at the expense of the U.S. Constitution or the Arab and Muslim community in America. As President Lincoln so eloquently stated in his famous speech: “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”

But crap on the blacks and Hispanics all you want.

There. I fixed that for them.

90 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:23:49am

BTW, according to politico Pelosi is trying to have it both ways by investigating both the funding of the mosque and the funding of the opposition, and IMHO she’s wrong on both:

politico.com


“I support the statement made by the Interfaith Alliance, that ‘We agree with the ADL that there is a need for transparency about who is funding the effort to build this Islamic center,’” according to Pelosi’s statement, which quotes the Alliance’s position. But the speaker went a step further: “At the same time, we should also ask who is funding the attacks against the construction of the center.”

91 Charles Johnson  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:23:58am

re: #86 RogueOne

Are you of the belief that 70% of the public is “right wing”?

You’re seriously going to deny that the anti-mosque silliness is a right wing issue?

Really?

Sure, it’s crossed lines to some extent, but if you’re actually going to try to say it’s just as much left wing as right wing, I’m going to laugh.

92 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:25:04am

re: #83 webevintage

This is all about emotions. The constitutional issues raised are not challenged by those who object to the location.
And it is all about *sensibilities*. The competing sensibilities are those of the muslims who want to put their center in that location, and those who object because of the 9/11 attack.

93 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:25:31am

re: #86 RogueOne

Are you of the belief that 70% of the public is “right wing”?

No. Maybe you could read my post so you could avoid asking completely irrelevant questions.

94 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:26:37am

re: #91 Charles

You’re seriously going to deny that the anti-mosque silliness is a right wing issue?

Really?

Sure, it’s crossed lines to some extent, but if you’re actually going to try to say it’s just as much left wing as right wing, I’m just going to laugh.

Since the D’s are far less ideologically monolithic than the R’s, you will always have strays (“Blue Dogs” and the like) on any issue.

95 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:26:40am

re: #86 RogueOne

Are you of the belief that 70% of the public is “right wing”?

I am of the belief that at least that much of the population is dumb enough to buy into the propaganda on this issue.

It is pertinent to know who is paying for that propaganda.

96 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:26:46am

re: #91 Charles

You’re seriously going to deny that the anti-mosque silliness is a right wing issue?

Really?

Sure, it’s crossed lines to some extent, but if you’re actually going to try to say it’s just as much left wing as right wing, I’m just going to laugh.

I’m not denying it’s a right wing issue, I’m denying it’s solely a right wing issue. Dems running for office in NY are against it, those that have spoken up, and I don’t believe the vast majority of the country is close to what I consider “right wing”. You’ll notice in the entire pelosi episode, and even the obama weekend, not once did they say the mosque location was a good idea. Is that because they’re concerned about losing the right wing vote? I’d say not.

97 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:26:57am

re: #82 Obdicut

Walter, why are you trying so damn hard to avoid the fact that the opposition to the mosque was sourced within the right wing, has been endorsed by nearly the entirety of the GOP, and is being popularized by every right-wing commentator?

Have you ceased being an atheist, and started to worship full time at the feet of the Magical Balance Fairy?

And why are you lying, I never claimed it wasn’t sourced with the right, and my repetitive overbearing comments above make that point a number of times…

So… don’t waste my time.

98 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:27:38am

re: #95 Fozzie Bear

I am of the belief that at least that much of the population is dumb enough to buy into the propaganda on this issue.

It is pertinent to know who is paying for that propaganda.

Then let the press do it. Having the federal government holding investigations into people expressing their first amendment rights smells bad on every level.

99 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:27:46am

re: #91 Charles

In the NYC metro area - it definitely is a bipartisan clusterfuck. You’ve got politicians on both sides of the aisle posturing, preening, and looking for the cameras (with the curious exception of Sen. Schumer). Bloomberg stuck his neck out to defend the project and isn’t running for office again. Paterson isn’t running for reelection and tried to have it both ways.

For me, the issue was decided when the Community Board approved the project and then further backed the rejection of landmarking for the building that would ease the construction of the project. When the LPC rejected the landmarking, that should have been the end of it.

Instead, the echo chamber got turned up to 11 and national politicians began chiming in.

100 jaunte  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:27:46am

re: #92 captdiggs

This is all about emotions. The constitutional issues raised are not challenged by those who object to the location.
And it is all about *sensibilities*. The competing sensibilities are those of the muslims who want to put their center in that location, and those who object because of the 9/11 attack.

Not really. It’s the objectors feelings vs. the owners property rights.

101 allegro  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:27:55am

I think it’s important to consider the questions asked in these surveys that are being use to support all of this opposition. If I recall correctly, the survey in which 70% of people stated opposition asked simply “Do you support or oppose the building of a mosque at ground zero?”

I saw another poll that asked essentially “Do you feel the mosque should be allowed to be built?” With that question, I believe 61% of the people said “yes”.

The question asked and it’s wording makes a whole bunch of difference.

102 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:28:42am

re: #99 lawhawk

Weird that camera happy Schumer hasn’t told us his opinion. I wonder why that is?

103 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:28:54am

I thought that a great deal of the opposition to the Cultural Center rested on doubts about the source of its funding…

I think Nancy’s ploy is to point out that this is not a “grassroots” movement, it is one carefully funded and orchestrated from high levels of the Republican party.

As if that would make any difference to the ranters.

104 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:29:03am

re: #98 RogueOne

Meh, nobody needs to do it. The press can’t, and the gov’t shouldn’t.

105 reidr  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:30:13am

re: #92 captdiggs

This is all about emotions. The constitutional issues raised are not challenged by those who object to the location.
And it is all about *sensibilities*. The competing sensibilities are those of the muslims who want to put their center in that location, and those who object because of the 9/11 attack.

The latter is the part I wish they’d dig into more. I’d love to see an interview with someone whose sensibilities are offended by the mosque and hear them explain that, um, well, muslims flew into the WTC, and they’re also muslims, so, um, they’re, like, terrorists?

106 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:30:45am

re: #100 jaunte

Not really. It’s the objectors feelings vs. the owners property rights.

Still have to disagree.
9/11 is a highly emotionally charged topic. Not one public persona I have seen object has said they “have no right” to build it.

107 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:30:53am

re: #104 Fozzie Bear

Meh, nobody needs to do it. The press can’t, and the gov’t shouldn’t.

I agree. Personally I don’t need to know who is funding what side before I form my opinion. If the press wants to look into it though, that’s their job and I have no problem with them doing it. I just don’t believe this kind of investigation is at all proper for the government to be doing.

108 Four More Tears  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:31:23am

re: #102 RogueOne

Weird that camera happy Schumer hasn’t told us his opinion. I wonder why that is?

Ah. So now we’re going to expect everyone to chime in on this non-issue. Even US senators, who have zero say and can’t affect the situation, have to say something?

109 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:31:50am

re: #106 captdiggs

Still have to disagree.
9/11 is a highly emotionally charged topic. Not one public persona I have seen object has said they “have no right” to build it.

Well, then that should have been the end of it. You don’t protest other people having rights. That is the definition of unAmerican.

110 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:32:35am

re: #108 JasonA

Ah. So now we’re going to expect everyone to chime in on this non-issue. Even US senators, who have zero say and can’t affect the situation, have to say something?

C’mon. Schumer would knock down an old lady if she got between him and the camera. You don’t find it at all interesting, or amusing, that he hasn’t been out front on an issue that’s going on in his own backyard?

111 jaunte  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:32:44am

re: #106 captdiggs

Still have to disagree.
9/11 is a highly emotionally charged topic. Not one public persona I have seen object has said they “have no right” to build it.

That’s a political dodge on the part of the public persona. The basic underlying conflict is between the emotional objections of one side, and the legal rights of another.

112 Targetpractice  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:32:57am

re: #99 lawhawk

In the NYC metro area - it definitely is a bipartisan clusterfuck. You’ve got politicians on both sides of the aisle posturing, preening, and looking for the cameras (with the curious exception of Sen. Schumer). Bloomberg stuck his neck out to defend the project and isn’t running for office again. Paterson isn’t running for reelection and tried to have it both ways.

For me, the issue was decided when the Community Board approved the project and then further backed the rejection of landmarking for the building that would ease the construction of the project. When the LPC rejected the landmarking, that should have been the end of it.

Instead, the echo chamber got turned up to 11 and national politicians began chiming in.

Of course. Once they failed to win legally, they turned to ginning up national exposure and national condemnation, playing up how “insensitive” it is to build a “mosque,” especially building it “so close” to Ground Zero. They’ve been working the last few weeks at poisoning the well, turning the argument in their favor even if they’re not the ones asking the questions and making the accusations. They’ve not got the media calling it the “Ground Zero Mosque” and asking poll questions like “Do you oppose/support a mosque so close to Ground Zero?”

113 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:33:19am

re: #107 RogueOne

I agree. Personally I don’t need to know who is funding what side before I form my opinion. If the press wants to look into it though, that’s their job and I have no problem with them doing it. I just don’t believe this kind of investigation is at all proper for the government to be doing.

It is appropriate for political parties to do. The DNC can and should use this issue to tear the GOP apart publicly. Too bad the DNC is composed entirely of spineless pussies.

114 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:33:36am

re: #108 JasonA

He represents the district (and the state). His daughter was at Stuy HS the day of the attacks and had trouble reaching her to know whether she was okay. I’d say that he’s plenty connected to the area to let people know that he sides with the Constitution and the group’s right to build at that location, if that’s what he wants.

115 alexknyc  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:33:52am

re: #110 RogueOne

C’mon. Schumer would knock down an old lady if she got between him and the camera. You don’t find it at all interesting, or amusing, that he hasn’t been out front on an issue that’s going on in his own backyard?

They say the most dangerous place to be in DC is between Chuck Schumer and a camera.

116 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:33:59am

re: #109 Fozzie Bear
/

Well, then that should have been the end of it. You don’t protest other people having rights. That is the definition of unAmerican.


Building projects are objected to all the time for all sorts of reasons despite ownership of the property.

117 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:34:19am

re: #103 ralphieboy

I thought that a great deal of the opposition to the Cultural Center rested on doubts about the source of its funding…

Since we always ask that about every community center or house of worship.

Those sorts of arguments (“They haven’t sufficiently denounced Hamas” or “I don’t trust Rauf” or “I want to know more about where the money comes from”) all start from a place of treating this project differently than any other, solely because this is Moslem and not Christian or Jewish or B’ahai or Mormon.

It starts with saying that there are favored and disfavored religions and then it goes downhill from there.

118 Four More Tears  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:34:36am

re: #110 RogueOne

C’mon. Schumer would knock down an old lady if she got between him and the camera. You don’t find it at all interesting, or amusing, that he hasn’t been out front on an issue that’s going on in his own backyard?

Rogue, I wish no one had something to say about this nonsense.

119 RogueOne  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:35:22am

re: #116 captdiggs

/


Building projects are objected to all the time for all sorts of reasons despite ownership of the property.

In indianapolis last year it was a Victorias Secret that everyone was up in arms about.

120 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:36:08am

re: #117 garhighway

Yep. The only reason anyone opposes this is due to bigotry, because ALL the other avenues have been explored, and found to be baseless.

This is bigots, run wild. If this were a YMCA or a JCC, there never would have been even a peep about it. The fact is, park51 is basically the same thing as a YMCA or JCC.

121 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:36:44am

re: #119 RogueOne

In indianapolis last year it was a Victorias Secret that everyone was up in arms about.

Which is OK: there isn’t a Constitutional Amendment that protects those. (Although there ought to be.)

122 jaunte  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:38:30am

re: #119 RogueOne

In indianapolis last year it was a Victorias Secret that everyone was up in arms about.

I support a full investigation.

123 palomino  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:38:40am

On equivalency, are any pols on the right speaking out in favor of Cordoba?

Sure, it’s split the Dems, like nearly everything does. But the gop seems in lockstep opposing this, and with venom.

Seems like an equivlency fail to me.

124 sagehen  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:38:46am

re: #20 Charles

Not to blow my own horn, but I’ve trying to warn people against Geller and Spencer and their ilk for years, long before Rachel Maddow or Salon got into it.

And that work gave Maddow and Salon some good pointers what strings to tug on. Blogs are where most of the worthwhile investigations start these days; once a story has proved to have some there there, cable gives it a signal boost.

Your work is of value to people who’ve never read it, who’ve never even heard your name.

125 captdiggs  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:39:18am

re: #121 garhighway

upding for

(Although there ought to be.)

lol

126 alexknyc  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:39:47am

re: #120 Fozzie Bear

Yep. The only reason anyone opposes this is due to bigotry, because ALL the other avenues have been explored, and found to be baseless.

This is bigots, run wild. If this were a YMCA or a JCC, there never would have been even a peep about it. The fact is, park51 is basically the same thing as a YMCA or JCC.

I’ve called it the equivalent of the 92nd street Y.

92y.org

127 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:40:40am

Actually I find these comments by Pelosi bothersome. Since when does ones freedom of speech to come out for or against a matter have something to do with whether or not there is financing behind the debate.

Talk about treading on constitutionally granted rights. I see her comments as being as populist and partisan as the right wing stirring up this anti-mosque rhetoric.

At this point, a lot of people, on both sides, have put the constitution on hold to pander to the electorate.

Not good.

128 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:40:59am

re: #97 Walter L. Newton

And why are you lying, I never claimed it wasn’t sourced with the right, and my repetitive overbearing comments above make that point a number of times…

So… don’t waste my time.

I didn’t say you’re claiming it isn’t, I’m saying you’re working really, really hard to tray to invoke the Magical Balance Fairy, by talking about how we need to stand against ANYONE.

This was hatched on the right wing, has been nourished on the right wing, and is being fometed by the right wing.

Furthermore, by the actual literal meaning of your statement: the ONLY people trying to actually work against the constitutional rights of the group to build the community center— the only people who are actually talking about using legal means to stop it, such as eminent domain— are on the right.

Your name is not Walter Subtlety Newton.

129 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:41:34am

Off-topic, but probably not too far:

Sarah Palin to endorse Tarquin Fim Bim Lim Bim Wim Bim Bus Stop F’tang-F’tang Ole Biscuit Barrel (Silly Party) because she reportedly “has guts”.

130 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:42:25am

re: #123 palomino

Chris Christie. Gov. of NJ.

131 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:42:30am

re: #104 Fozzie Bear

Meh, nobody needs to do it. The press can’t, and the gov’t shouldn’t.

I respectfully disagree. The press can and should. Knowing where the money comes from demonstrates the true agendas at issue.

Does anyone really think Koch or Heritage or Scaife give a shit about land use issues in downtown Manhattan or the tender sensibilities of a subset of 9/11 survivors? Horseshit. They spend money to advance an agenda, and it is a worthy task for the press to expose those connections.

It is the same as demonstrating that fossil fuel companies fund the AGW deniers. It clarifies our view of the true agenda of the players.

132 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:43:17am

re: #126 alexknyc

In fact, the promo materials used before the Community Board and online were to pose the community center in terms of the 92nd street Y and the JCC of Manhattan with similar offerings to the community.

133 iossarian  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:45:37am

re: #127 Walter L. Newton

Actually I find these comments by Pelosi bothersome. Since when does ones freedom of speech to come out for or against a matter have something to do with whether or not there is financing behind the debate.

Actually, I think that the failure in the US to properly regulate campaign finance (and indeed the financing of any political speech) is one of the biggest impediments to “freedom of speech” that there is.

Basically, what it amounts to is that people with more money get to hold the microphone for longer than those with less. And if you have no money, you don’t get to speak at all.

134 jayzee  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:45:56am

re: #99 lawhawk

In the NYC metro area - it definitely is a bipartisan clusterfuck. You’ve got politicians on both sides of the aisle posturing, preening, and looking for the cameras (with the curious exception of Sen. Schumer). Bloomberg stuck his neck out to defend the project and isn’t running for office again. Paterson isn’t running for reelection and tried to have it both ways.

For me, the issue was decided when the Community Board approved the project and then further backed the rejection of landmarking for the building that would ease the construction of the project. When the LPC rejected the landmarking, that should have been the end of it.

Instead, the echo chamber got turned up to 11 and national politicians began chiming in.

You’re 100 percent correct. It’s really not a partisan issue here (the entire NY-NJ-CT area). The feelings run deep, but that’s one of the reasons we got a constitution right?

135 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:49:09am

re: #133 iossarian

Actually, I think that the failure in the US to properly regulate campaign finance (and indeed the financing of any political speech) is one of the biggest impediments to “freedom of speech” that there is.

Basically, what it amounts to is that people with more money get to hold the microphone for longer than those with less. And if you have no money, you don’t get to speak at all.

Hmmm… I think the Supreme Court recently made some really big decisions lately in SUPPORTING of our campaign financing methods. But let’s not have the Supreme Court get in the way.. huh?

136 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:49:39am

re: #134 jayzee

You’re 100 percent correct. It’s really not a partisan issue here (the entire NY-NJ-CT area). The feelings run deep, but that’s one of the reasons we got a constitution right?

Populist issue can trump the constitution.

137 alexknyc  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:50:28am

re: #136 Walter L. Newton

Populist issue can trump the constitution.

In practice, yes.

But, in theory, the constitution is supposed to provide protection from populist rages.

138 Political Atheist  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:50:37am

re: #112 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
OT
Hey how are ya? We will be off to the Steel Challenge Saturday. D_L is a range safety officer at The Gauntlet. Working for USPSA for 3 days. Kinda cool. I work it as a relief RO.

139 palomino  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:52:10am

re: #130 lawhawk

Chris Christie. Gov. of NJ.


I guess there’s always one. So it’s not a right wing issue. Equivalency success!

140 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:52:35am

re: #137 alexknyc

In practice, yes.

But, in theory, the constitution is supposed to provide protection from populist rages.

In practice? I’m not talking about practice. I’m talking about actual historical fact. It’s happened in the past. Theory fine… but what is happening right now is reality.

141 sliv_the_eli  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:52:57am

re: #57 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

It is not so clear that independents and liberals are coming to agree with the right-wing crazies who believe that the Cordoba House/Park 51 project should be stopped by the government (or anyone else). The recent polls, notwithstanding how they are portrayed by the generally irresponsible media (who, as many here have pointed out, continue to falsely call the project a “ground zero mosque”), indicate only that many independents and liberals have qualms about whether the project should be located at the proposed site. I suspect that many of the same independents and liberals (full disclosure: I consider myself an independent) would have a different answer to the following questions:

1. Do the developers of the proposed Muslim Community Center a few blocks away from the World Trade Center have the right to build the project and to include a mosque in the center?
2. Should the government prohibit the project from being built if it otherwise complies with the local zoning and other land use laws?
3. Should the government seek to influence the proponents of the project to locate the center somewhere else?

142 iossarian  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:53:38am

re: #135 Walter L. Newton

Hmmm… I think the Supreme Court recently made some really big decisions lately in SUPPORTING of our campaign financing methods. But let’s not have the Supreme Court get in the way.. huh?

I’ve never been a big fan of the “important person says X, therefore X must be true” line of argument.

Do you disagree that the current state of affairs privileges the speech rights of the rich over those of the poor?

143 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:54:00am

re: #137 alexknyc

In practice, yes.

But, in theory, the constitution is supposed to provide protection from populist rages.

Precisely.

It is as if one whole political party and some parts of the other have forgotten our entire history.

144 alexknyc  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:56:36am

re: #141 sliv_the_eli

It is not so clear that independents and liberals are coming to agree with the right-wing crazies who believe that the Cordoba House/Park 51 project should be stopped by the government (or anyone else). The recent polls, notwithstanding how they are portrayed by the generally irresponsible media (who, as many here have pointed out, continue to falsely call the project a “ground zero mosque”), indicate only that many independents and liberals have qualms about whether the project should be located at the proposed site. I suspect that many of the same independents and liberals (full disclosure: I consider myself an independent) would have a different answer to the following questions:

1. Do the developers of the proposed Muslim Community Center a few blocks away from the World Trade Center have the right to build the project and to include a mosque in the center?
2. Should the government prohibit the project from being built if it otherwise complies with the local zoning and other land use laws?
3. Should the government seek to influence the proponents of the project to locate the center somewhere else?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Not the government but if private citizens do, that’s their right. However, it’s also the right of the developers to say “sorry but we’re building it here.”

145 sagehen  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:58:05am

re: #85 reidr


I would also like to hear more of an explanation from those informed on the issue and any “9/11 families” who are against the community center why they’re against it. I’m referring to those people who claim “hurt feelings” or that it’s “being insensitive”. Seems like the underlying ugly emotions are being glossed over and assumed to be valid, while everyone’s focused on he said/she said and polls.


I’d like to know where was all that conservative concern for sensitivity and hurt feelings when millions of people were begging Georgia and South Carolina not to fly the Confederate Battle Flag.

There were many, many in the right wing who defended the Banner of Treason in Defense of Slavery with the explanation that “we don’t mean it that way, it’s about heritage, and anyone who’s offended just needs to get over it. We won’t cower to political correctness.”

I guess some people’s feelings are just more important than some other people’s feelings.

146 sliv_the_eli  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:58:17am

re: #69 Max D. Reinhardt

Much as it hurts to admit it, I agree with President Obama on the issue. If one reads his comments in full, he was crystal clear that the project’s proponents have the right to build and that their right to do so is a basic constitutional right, not that he believed they should do so.

The First Amendment gives people on both sides of the issue — including the bigots and crazies — the right only to debate the latter point. The former point should be unassailable.

147 lawhawk  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:58:19am

Pelosi has now issued the requisite clarification (it seems that you can’t go more than a few hours before a politician who speaks inartfully or just flat out gets something wrong has to issue modifiers):

“The freedom of religion is a Constitutional right. Where a place of worship is located is a local decision.

“I support the statement made by the Interfaith Alliance that ‘We agree with the ADL that there is a need for transparency about who is funding the effort to build this Islamic center. At the same time, we should also ask who is funding the attacks against the construction of the center.’

“For all of those expressing concern about the 9/11 families, we call upon them to join us in support of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act when Congress returns in September.”

148 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:58:31am

re: #142 iossarian

I’ve never been a big fan of the “important person says X, therefore X must be true” line of argument.

Do you disagree that the current state of affairs privileges the speech rights of the rich over those of the poor?

The Supreme Court is pretty important. Would you be a big fan of them if they made a decision on something you agreed with.

And yes, I agree with you on privilege speech, but that’s not the issue here. No one has done anything illegal that I can imagine.

You mean Pelosi is going to investigate someone/something cause she doesn’t like what they are saying?

Shades of 1984.

149 palomino  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 11:59:25am

re: #130 lawhawk

Chris Christie. Gov. of NJ.

Actually Christie has taken no real position on the mosque other than to criticize both his fellow republicans and president obama for talking about it, regardless of what they say. Which kinda makes him the biggest pussy of all.

150 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:00:16pm

re: #145 sagehen

I’d like to know where was all that conservative concern for sensitivity and hurt feelings when millions of people were begging Georgia and South Carolina not to fly the Confederate Battle Flag.

There were many, many in the right wing who defended the Banner of Treason in Defense of Slavery with the explanation that “we don’t mean it that way, it’s about heritage, and anyone who’s offended just needs to get over it. We won’t cower to political correctness.”

I guess some people’s feelings are just more important than some other people’s feelings.

I guess tu quoque is a waste of time, certainly doesn’t address or solve the issue at hand.

151 Political Atheist  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:05:10pm

At risk of rhetorical excess try a word swapping game with some of these politicians quotes. . Swap out the term Cordoba or Muslim Cultural Center and insert African American Baptist Church, or some other hot button group. Wow.

152 sliv_the_eli  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:05:29pm

re: #144 alexknyc

And that is more or less how I think most, if not all of the liberals and independents who are on record as “opposing” the “ground zero mosque” would respond. Unfortunately, the “if it bleeds, it leads” media prefers to keep fanning the flames of this “controversy” rather than find real issues and world events of importance to report on.

153 Slap  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:06:18pm

I don’t have sound here — but didn’t John Stewart make a relevant comment yesterday to the effect that, if we’re going to be focusing on Park51, we should perhaps consider whether Catholic Churches should be built in proximity to playgrounds?

154 iossarian  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:07:27pm

re: #148 Walter L. Newton

The Supreme Court is pretty important. Would you be a big fan of them if they made a decision on something you agreed with.

I would be a big fan of the decision. The Supreme Court is made up of people just like you and me. Sometimes they are right, sometimes not.


And yes, I agree with you on privilege speech, but that’s not the issue here.

Nice to agree with you!


You mean Pelosi is going to investigate someone/something cause she doesn’t like what they are saying?

Shades of 1984.

I think it’s perfectly legitimate, and indeed necessary for a functioning democracy, for the funding of political speech to be entirely transparent at the very least. Ideally it should also be limited.

You could argue (and I know that you are a 1984 expert) that one of the big problems in that world is that political speech is entirely concentrated in the hands of one entity. Well, in the US, it is becoming more and more concentrated in the hands of corporations.

155 Political Atheist  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:08:04pm

re: #153 Slap

Yeah except the Catholic Church would likely own the school grounds, and the whole school. There are many Catholic schools. I do not think even Hitchens demands they be closed.

156 Charles Johnson  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:08:14pm

re: #99 lawhawk

In the NYC metro area - it definitely is a bipartisan clusterfuck.

Absolutely — now it’s a bipartisan disgrace in New York. But the issue originated with and was driven by the right wing. It found resonance with the public because of the inflammatory term “Ground Zero Mosque,” a phrase coined by right wing bigots and inexplicably seized on by the media, despite the fact that it’s flat out dishonest.

Democratic politicians are now trying to capitalize on the populist mob, because it’s what politicians do. But they didn’t drive this issue to the forefront.

157 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:09:00pm

re: #156 Charles

Absolutely — now it’s a bipartisan disgrace in New York. But the issue originated with and was driven by the right wing. It found resonance with the public because of the term “Ground Zero Mosque,” a phrase coined by right wing bigots and inexplicably seized on by the media, despite the fact that it’s flat out dishonest.

Democratic politicians are now trying to capitalize on the populist mob, because it’s what politicians do. But they didn’t drive this issue to the forefront.

It is less that they are capitalizing on the mob than it is that they are running from it.

158 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:11:50pm

re: #156 Charles

Absolutely — now it’s a bipartisan disgrace in New York. But the issue originated with and was driven by the right wing. It found resonance with the public because of the term “Ground Zero Mosque,” a phrase coined by right wing bigots and inexplicably seized on by the media, despite the fact that it’s flat out dishonest.

Democratic politicians are now trying to capitalize on the populist mob, because it’s what politicians do. But they didn’t drive this issue to the forefront.

No they didn’t. The right wing drove this issue to the forefront. But me, I, personally, I’m not going to forgive anyone on the left or independent, or whatever, any more than anyone on the right who is supporting, even tacitly, this anti-mosque rhetoric.

I don’t mind being non-partisan once in a while, especially when so many people are just so wrong.

159 HappyWarrior  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:13:45pm

It’s a strange world for me where Ted Olson has made sense to me twice. Not that I mind because I really appreciate Olson’s thoughtfulness on this issue and the gay marriage one.

160 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:14:21pm

re: #145 sagehen

I’d like to know where was all that conservative concern for sensitivity and hurt feelings when millions of people were begging Georgia and South Carolina not to fly the Confederate Battle Flag.

There were many, many in the right wing who defended the Banner of Treason in Defense of Slavery with the explanation that “we don’t mean it that way, it’s about heritage, and anyone who’s offended just needs to get over it. We won’t cower to political correctness.”

I guess some people’s feelings are just more important than some other people’s feelings.

Hmmm.
Really great point.

161 sagehen  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:14:38pm

re: #69 Max D. Reinhardt

God Bless Ted Olsen! The sanest conservative lawyer out there!

162 HappyWarrior  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:16:08pm

re: #145 sagehen

I’d like to know where was all that conservative concern for sensitivity and hurt feelings when millions of people were begging Georgia and South Carolina not to fly the Confederate Battle Flag.

There were many, many in the right wing who defended the Banner of Treason in Defense of Slavery with the explanation that “we don’t mean it that way, it’s about heritage, and anyone who’s offended just needs to get over it. We won’t cower to political correctness.”

I guess some people’s feelings are just more important than some other people’s feelings.

That’s a terrific point.

163 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:17:51pm

re: #142 iossarian

I’ve never been a big fan of the “important person says X, therefore X must be true” line of argument.

Do you disagree that the current state of affairs privileges the speech rights of the rich over those of the poor?

Um.
The Supreme Court is a bit different than “important person X”, and the decisions there carry different weight than those of “important person X”.

And I don’t understand why you believe the rich have greater free speech “privileges” than the poor?

Perhaps the wealth gives them greater access to the vehicles of speech; but it doesn’t give them greater privilege, does it?

164 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:20:21pm

I’m curious….
…Just asking mind you!
Will the Cordoba Center/Mosque be broadcasting an
audible call to Prayer 5 times a day?
Do the other mosques in NYC have a call to prayer?

I’m asking because if I were a New Yorker/9/11 survivor vehemently opposed to this,it might set me off!

165 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:20:59pm

re: #164 reloadingisnotahobby

I’m curious…
…Just asking mind you!
Will the Cordoba Center/Mosque be broadcasting an
audible call to Prayer 5 times a day?
Do the other mosques in NYC have a call to prayer?

I’m asking because if I were a New Yorker/9/11 survivor vehemently opposed to this,it might set me off!

How are you regarding church bells?

166 wrenchwench  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:22:16pm

re: #164 reloadingisnotahobby

I’m curious…
…Just asking mind you!
Will the Cordoba Center/Mosque be broadcasting an
audible call to Prayer 5 times a day?
Do the other mosques in NYC have a call to prayer?

I’m asking because if I were a New Yorker/9/11 survivor vehemently opposed to this,it might set me off!

They won’t. Can’t remember where I read that.

167 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:22:16pm

re: #165 garhighway

Depends on if it’s the 12 th century and I lost loved one and friends to the Inquisition!

168 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:24:50pm

re: #166 wrenchwench

They won’t. Can’t remember where I read that.

I recall reading that as well.

169 iossarian  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:25:39pm

re: #163 reine.de.tout

Um.
The Supreme Court is a bit different than “important person X”, and the decisions there carry different weight than those of “important person X”.

My point was that, when forming my opinion of an issue, I don’t think it’s particularly helpful to consider establishment views as inputs. They can be helpful for sanity-checking outputs though.


Perhaps the wealth gives them greater access to the vehicles of speech; but it doesn’t give them greater privilege, does it?

Is there a difference? Of course, people are technically “free” to say whatever they like, but in practice, poor people get less of a say than rich people, which in my book isn’t exactly “freedom of speech”.

It depresses me how much fund-raising politicians in the US have to do, and how beholden to corporate interests they become as a result. The recent Supreme Court decision only furthers this process.

170 garhighway  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:26:50pm

re: #167 reloadingisnotahobby

Depends on if it’s the 12 th century and I lost loved one and friends to the Inquisition!

How about if you were molested by a Catholic priest from some other state? Do you get to shut down church bells from the Protestant church up the street?

171 sagehen  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:28:04pm

re: #164 reloadingisnotahobby

I’m curious…
…Just asking mind you!
Will the Cordoba Center/Mosque be broadcasting an
audible call to Prayer 5 times a day?
Do the other mosques in NYC have a call to prayer?

I’m asking because if I were a New Yorker/9/11 survivor vehemently opposed to this,it might set me off!

Of course not, NYC (lower Manhattan in particular) is a bastion of serenity, where we enjoy the whisper of wind through the trees, the gentle lapping of waves upon the shore, and our nightly cricket serenade.

WTH?!? Car alarms and gunshots are barely noticeable above the din of city life. I’ve been told that the cathedral has bells, too, but I’ve sure never heard them.

172 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:34:06pm

re: #169 iossarian

My point was that, when forming my opinion of an issue, I don’t think it’s particularly helpful to consider establishment views as inputs. They can be helpful for sanity-checking outputs though.

Well, your opinion is one thing. However, as regards what actually happens, the decisions of SCOTUS bind us, and no matter how much you may agree or disagree, it is what it is.

Is there a difference? Of course, people are technically “free” to say whatever they like, but in practice, poor people get less of a say than rich people, which in my book isn’t exactly “freedom of speech”.

It depresses me how much fund-raising politicians in the US have to do, and how beholden to corporate interests they become as a result. The recent Supreme Court decision only furthers this process.

There are many organizations with money to spend that are not the dreaded corporations - employee unions, special interest advocacy groups (both conservative-leaning and liberal-leaning), advocacy groups for the poor, the disabled, the elderly (that’s me!) - the list goes on and on and on.

I trust that in the end, the important needs and points of view of all groups get promoted somewhere, by someone, who has the means to promote them. Candidates receive money from all sorts of groups; individual candidates may get more from one type of group than another; in the end, all the elected officials must eventually work together, and so all the various needs of the various groups get balanced out, maybe to your liking, maybe not, but at least enough that we are not stagnant. Just my .02.

173 sliv_the_eli  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:38:37pm

re: #172 reine.de.tout

And the beauty of our constitutional republic is that every so often, those who don’t have the economic power have the right to get off their collective duffs, vote in percentages above the mid-teens (which is the typical voter turnout in a primary election in a non-presidential election year) and replace incumbents with others who promise (at least on the campaign trail) to be more attentive to their needs.

174 Aceofwhat?  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:41:26pm

re: #154 iossarian

You could argue (and I know that you are a 1984 expert) that one of the big problems in that world is that political speech is entirely concentrated in the hands of one entity. Well, in the US, it is becoming more and more concentrated in the hands of corporations.

yeesh. yes, unions never spend gobs of money on political speech. it’s only corporations.

175 Aceofwhat?  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:42:07pm

re: #172 reine.de.tout

you beat me to it!

176 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:45:59pm

re: #164 reloadingisnotahobby

I’m curious…
…Just asking mind you!
Will the Cordoba Center/Mosque be broadcasting an
audible call to Prayer 5 times a day?
Do the other mosques in NYC have a call to prayer?

I’m asking because if I were a New Yorker/9/11 survivor vehemently opposed to this,it might set me off!

Probably not. Sound ordinances for one thing.

177 Spare O'Lake  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:47:25pm

Leave it to self-destructive Dem clowns like Pelosi to make scum like Geller into victims and champions of the right to freedom of expression. Is she insane?

178 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:47:59pm

re: #175 Aceofwhat?

you beat me to it!

Just call me “quick draw McGraw”.

179 reine.de.tout  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:48:25pm

re: #174 Aceofwhat?

yeesh. yes, unions never spend gobs of money on political speech. it’s only corporations.

hehehehe.
Exactly.

180 sliv_the_eli  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 12:49:29pm

re: #177 Spare O’Lake

Is there a sarc tag missing?

181 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 1:06:08pm

re: #176 SanFranciscoZionist

Probably not. Sound ordinances for one thing.

How did they pull it off in Dearborn, MI?

182 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 1:12:33pm

re: #181 eclectic infidel

How did they pull it off in Dearborn, MI?

Never mind. I just found out.

183 kutabeach  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 1:15:28pm

re: #180 sliv_the_eli

No tag, Pelosi really is making them out to be the victims here. Pelosi is clearly not fit for the Speaker position.

184 sliv_the_eli  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 1:23:29pm

re: #183 kutabeach

I thought SOL might have inadvertently forgotten a sarc tag when asking if Pelosi is insane. Unless that was a serious question, in which case I think there is some literature out there about the potentially toxic side effects of Botox use.

On a more serious note, I think we are witnessing the Dems and Repubs fighting over which side is better able to engage in abject idiocy and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this November.

185 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 1:47:46pm

re: #177 Spare O’Lake

Leave it to self-destructive Dem clowns like Pelosi to make scum like Geller into victims and champions of the right to freedom of expression. Is she insane?

So basically you’d prefer that nobody know where the bigots are getting their funding?

heh.

186 Super-ego  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 2:19:08pm

Granted there is plenty of rhetoric against the mosque. Even over the top rhetoric.

But the Left sure loves to find ways to suppress free speech. Makes my laugh out loud.

187 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 2:31:57pm

re: #186 Super-ego

The suppression of this community center is a suppression of free speech, you jackass.

188 Super-ego  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 2:37:25pm

re: #187 Obdicut

The suppression of this community center is a suppression of free speech, you jackass.

Silly. Don’t be so angry. It’s not good for you.

189 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 2:39:09pm

re: #188 Super-ego

Anger is a fine emotion, especially when confronted with people trying to subvert the constitution.

You’ll find you encounter it frequently.

190 Super-ego  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 2:45:24pm

re: #189 Obdicut

Anger is a fine emotion, especially when confronted with people trying to subvert the constitution.

You’ll find you encounter it frequently.

People have a right to free speech. There is nothing unconstitutional about that. So far the mosque is moving forward. What’s your point.

191 Pacificlady  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 4:23:57pm

See what happens when you get too many face lifts, it makes you stupid.

192 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 5:43:29pm

re: #188 Super-ego

Silly. Don’t be so angry. It’s not good for you.

Hey dead-threader! To scared to hang on a real thread? :D

193 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 5:46:39pm

re: #191 Pacificlady

See what happens when you get too many face lifts, it makes you stupid.

Is this another real brilliant, real original, real impressive anti-Pelosi slam from the same dumbass mouthbreathing troglodyte Freeper AM-radio devotee confederate flag waving aw shucks I’m just a mom with three kids and my husband has a crewcut and marriage is between a man and a woman and I love America and Apple Pie and god damnit let’s get those disgusting brown bastards out of our Beloved Christian Nation crowd that keeps on posting to dead threads here?

194 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Aug 18, 2010 5:49:11pm

re: #164 reloadingisnotahobby

I’m curious…
…Just asking mind you!
Will the Cordoba Center/Mosque be broadcasting an
audible call to Prayer 5 times a day?
Do the other mosques in NYC have a call to prayer?

I’m asking because if I were a New Yorker/9/11 survivor vehemently opposed to this,it might set me off!

Is this a joke?

195 taw77  Thu, Aug 19, 2010 12:12:22pm

remember man for all seasons..
when a person as powerful as the Speaker calls fr an investigation some government toady will start one..

196 ihateronpaul  Fri, Aug 20, 2010 6:58:47am

I feel like this is a bad political move. We know who is funding these initiatives: anti-muslim bigots. They don’t hide themselves, have you seen the ny post lately? it’s just vitriolic hatred yellow journalism by the truckload.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
3 days ago
Views: 118 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 279 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1