Ground Zero Once Removed

Is the irony completely lost on you that the First Amendment and the right of freedom of speech it contains that you are whining about here is also the First Amendment that prohibits "impeding the free exercise of religion"? You like one part of the First Amendment when it allows people to express their hatred of others freely but you object to the First Amendment when it involves the freedom to worship what and where you choose to worship. At least you're a typically predictable Rightie arguing out of your a$$. Newt Gingrich is going to be the big loser here not the Democrats as your wishful thinking drools for.

"The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances."

 

I have said all alone they have the constitutional right to build the mosque. A person has a constitutional right to jump of a bridge but does that make it right. Once again you resort to attacking and making assumptions of others. When it comes to displaying the Ten Commandements you lefties are the first to start screaming. The country is waking to the fact that hatred is a product of the left. Hell, our president hates America. If you can pluck your head out of the sand long enough, check the polls (even the more left wing ones). The dems are losing bad on this one and constantly shooting themselves in the foot every day. Are you that insensitive to the people murdered and their families? BTW how do you feel about W. coming in to help stop the bleeding?

 

Moen,

I notice that you had no comment about my response on the issue. And while constitutionally, we are right, the US constitution does not get to vote in November. The simple fact is that 70% of the American public is so enraged by this issue that they are ready to throw out the consititution to stop the mosque. I see nothing between then and now that will change the emotional response of the American public on this issue. Furthermore, any politician who publicly states their support of this mosque is committing political suicide.

The leaders of the democratic party are evidence of this. Obama tried to support the mosque and freedom of religion and the public response to his statement was so negative he was forced to flip flop and attempt to straddle the issue. Harry Reid followed suit by saying he supports freedom of religion but "thinks it should be built someplace else". Pelosi was the only democrat crazy enough to come right out an support the mosque. However, that craziness only exists because she is the congresswoman of California's 8th district which might be the most liberal congressional district in the entire country. She basically has no fear of ever losing re-election and thinks she can say whatever she wants. What is she hoping to gain from an investigation into the funding of the mosque opposition?

The Democrats are in trouble in November. The economy is in danger of falling into a double dip recession, the unemployment rate is not getting better, the President's approval rating is falling and will not help win any close election races, and now the Republicans have an issue that is completely independent of the economy at their disposal for the next two months. It seems the Democrats (you included) are content to ignore their situation until it is too late an they actually lost control of the House. If that happens, you can bank on the Republicans stopping just about everything Obama tries to due during his re-election campaign.

 

I think that says it all. You never seem to get around to admitting your mistakes when you have been corrected. Is your ego just that big?

 

I agree the Muslims have a right to build their mosque (call it a community center if it makes you feel better, but it is indeed a mosque) wherever it is legal to do so but that sure doesn't make it right. It would be just like opening a gun shop across from Columbine or putting a liquor store at the site in Carrolton, KY where dozens of kids where killed by a drunk driver- may be legal but it's a bad, bad decision. Legal doesn't make it right. I do believe the location was intentionally chosen to cause grief to the US. The imam has been a vocal critic of the US & US policy and he is on record advocating the implementaion of shiria law.
I would love to see contractors & vendors refuse to perform services for these people.

 

So how come you think our forefathers were right on the money with the freedom of speech thing. But way off with the right to bear arms?

 

I at no time ever said that they were wrong about the right to bear arms. Now try to stay on topic.

 

''Do we really need to cling to our guns just because we once had a need for the protection they afforded us while settling this country or have guns outlived their necessity?''. .....................................That is your quote. Wouldnt that mean that the 2nd amen. is antiquated? Obsolete? That the enduring quality of the 1st amen. does not apply to the 2nd? You brought up freedom of religion. I was just wondering what makes that amen. everlasting and the 2nd old and in the way. Thats all.

 

Sorry. Double post.

 

WOW, do you need to do some fact checking. Why don't you start by reading your left newspaper http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...nd-zero-mosque-poll,0,4600723.story?track=rss

 

You have to watch the hypocrits (like Dr moen) as they are the most dangerous. They will claim they support, for example, the 2nd Amendment and lull into a false sense of security while the whole time they are working to dismantle it.

 

....and, does anyone really know where BO stands on the mosque issue? One day, in front of a Muslim group, he was a supporter then the next day, in front of the public & press, he seemed to back away from his earlier remarks....the the WH spin machine injected itself into the fray? Does one hand know what the other is doing? Does one faction of the WH know or care what another is saying?
And why does BO even involve himself & the WH into such a local matter?

 

It COULD mean that but it DOES mean that the 2nd Amendment may have outlived it's usefulness in our modern society BUT was perfectly appropriate at the time it was written. Again, why you have taken a severe right turn trailing off on this tangent simply because we were talking about Constitutional Amendments, is beyond me. It seems to me that your mind has simply wondered and you were grasping at some tenuous connection. Instead of trying and failing to play gotcha, please stay on topic. You can certainly have the last comment on this tangent of yours but I am done with it.

 

OK, do you mind pointing out exactly what you are referring to?

 

In Dr moen-speak, this means craig made an argument that he cannot dispute. Rather than admitting he is wrong he will simply fold the tent & flee.

 

In all fairness, BO's stance on this issue is very representative of the American people. Legally he understands that it is impossible to prohibit the mosque from being built. On and emotional level, it is painful to contemplate a mosque being built in such proximity to ground zero.

The larger problem is that BO does not seem to understand the political implications of his comments. This issue has been around for months and he never responded to it. Then suddenly and without reason he voluntarily offers his opinion on the subject. The issue is a catch-22 for all politicians and his decision to weigh in was like swinging at a pitch in the dirt. I don't fault his opinion, I fault his decision to share it. If he had just kept his mouth shut, he would have been fine.

 

Again, it's not a mosque, it never was, and the concern over anyone's reaction to this ginned up "controversy" is nothing more than calling in a false fire alarm and standing around criticizing the fireman for showing up at a false alarm. If this proves nothing else, it proves that if you make enough noise, people will look in your direction.

Nobody can deny that this "controversy" was pushed into the public spotlight entirely by the Right wing media machine until it reached the point that the Left had to comment on it. It is a pure appeal to emotion and nothing more than a distraction for the real issues facing this country. It wasn't Islam that attacked the twin towers, it was a group that did it in the name of Islam. Using the same logic, we shouldn't allow Christian churches to be built any where near woman's clinics because nutty people have shot doctors and bombed clinics in the name of Christianity...and again, this isn't even a mosque in NYC.

 

Every single report I have read from every source characterizes the project as an Islamic community center that includes a mosque. You repeated attempts to deny that a mosque will be built only serves to give credibility to the idea that building a mosque at that location is wrong. Just accept the fact that it is a mosque which is protected by the first amendment.

Furthermore, it makes no difference how the issue came to light in the media. The issue is here now and here to stay. I find it pathetic and ironic that a liberal is complaining about the right wing media. Islam can't attack anything since religions are not phyical entities, but the attacks on 9/11 were celebrated by many in the muslim world as a victory over the tyranny of the infidels (US & Israel). And whether you believe it or not, the erection of a mosque at the ground zero site will serve as a monument for these same muslims. It will serve to embolden their cause and resolve. And that is to say nothing of the emotional pain that it will cause most New Yorkers and most Americans for that matter.

You keep calling this issue "ginned up". The only other person I have heard use that terminology is Pelosi and I certainly hope you are not following her lead. Are you in support of her desire to investigate the financial supporters of the opposition to the mosque?

 

I just listened to a Los Angeles religious leader say that the two greatest lies being told about this building project are that it is a mosque and that it is at ground zero. And guess what, you just repeated both lies.

The war in Iraq that killed over a million Muslims in the last 8 years and displaced 2 million others was celebrated in this country and continues to be celebrated by countless peolpe like you. Does that make Christianity evil?

So nobody has the right to complain about the Right wing media that has produced such whoppers as the Shirley Sherrod lies, the lies and distortions to about Van Jones, and the fabricated stories about ACORN. I find it ironic that the words "news media" are even associated with the Right. Why not just call it the overt right wing propaganda lying machine and at least be honest about it.

Osama Bin Laden's stated goal, words he posted online, said that he hoped that by attacking the twin towers, he could create a war between Islam and Christianity. People on the Right in this country are doing their level best to help Osama Bin Laden while people on the Left in this country are actively working against letting him win. Check your mailbox, he may have sent you a thank you note or a gift card.

"You keep calling this issue "ginned up". The only other person I have heard use that terminology is Pelosi and I certainly hope you are not following her lead. Are you in support of her desire to investigate the financial supporters of the opposition to the mosque?"

I know nothing of Pelosi's position on this issue and have yet to hear her or even see her quoted anywhere. I know nothing of an investigation either. I would be interested in seeing who is funding this nonsense but on the other hand, I probably already know who it is.

 

What religious leader? I guarantee he isn't a Muslim one! Moen, wake up. Muslims are required to pray 5 times per day. A mosque is defined simply as a place of worship for followers of Islam. Do you really think they are going to build an Islamic Community center and not include a place of worship on the premises. The real question here is why it is not obvious to you that it is a mosque. Are you claiming because it is not just a mosque, that it is somehow deceiving to call it a mosque?

It makes no difference that the site is two blocks away from ground zero. The American people have spoken and they feel it is close enough to warrant their oppostion. When we refer to the mosque being built at ground zero we mean NEAR ground zero. Is that to your liking or would you like to nitpick it further.

I don't know anyone who celebrated the war, but death is a fact of war. And as far as I know, nobody in the US government publicly stated that the invasion of Iraq was done in the name of Christianity. Therefore your little analogy is pointless.

When the vast majority of the media sources are controlled by the liberal left, NO, you don't. Want an example. The death toll in Afghanistan is at its highest point since the start of war in 2001 but nobody know this. I guarantee that we had a Republican President, the lead story every night would be the death toll in the war. Hate the right wing bloggers and news sources as much as you want but the left wingers are guilty of the exact same tactics.

I agree with your take on Bin Laden but it is not the Right wing that it is guilty. It is the whole damn country, democrats and republicans. The polls have 70% against the mosque.

If you say you have not heard her say that, then OK. But when I see two people using a rather obscure expression like "ginned up" and one is the Speaker of the House, the assumption is an easy one to make. Here is a quote from Pelosi.

Earlier Wednesday, 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?”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41204.html#ixzz0xBQLTB1h


So I have a few questions. Why are the liberals like yourself worried more about the funding of an opposition movement that is supported by 70% of the US population but not at all interested in knowing where the funding for the mosque it coming from? There are rumors that some of the money is coming from middle eastern states that are sponsors of terrorism. Isn't that worth exploring or are you worried that it may appear to be racial profiling?