Tag Archives: newt gingrich

Slate Affiliate Equates Newt Gingrich With Koran Burner Jones

Imagine for a moment you were the editor of a magazine owned by the Washington Post and Newsweek. Would you a day before the ninth anniversary of 9/11 publish an article with the following headline: The Talibanization of America Viewed from Pakistan, the rise of U.S. Islamophobia looks depressingly familiar.  Seems rather inflammatory hours before such a solemn day in America, don’t you think? Yet, such was published Friday by Foreign Policy magazine, an affiliate of the Slate Group.  Sadly, the contents  – which in paragraph three equated former House Speaker Newt Gingrich with prospective Koran burner Terry Jones – will likely be even more offensive to the vast majority of Americans  especially  on September 11: In Pakistan, “Talibanization” is a label used to describe regressive and parochial conservatism, not just the political ascendancy of Mullah Omar and his extremist disciples. When we use the label “mullah,” it is not the same thing as honoring someone by calling him “Father” or “Reverend.” Instead, we’re most likely referring to a person’s narrow-mindedness, bigotry, and possible racism. So when we try to explain to fellow Pakistanis how the United States is much grander than the pettiness of Quran-burning circuses or mosque-defying extremists, we don’t use the same labels that Americans would. Describing the ideological kith and kin of opponents of the Park51 project — including the fringe element of folks like Terry Jones and his flock at the Dove World Outreach Center — with terms like the moral majority, far-right evangelicals, or even neocons is useless. Instead, when we try to explain what is happening in America, we simply say that a great country is going through a kind of Talibanization — led by mullahs like Newt Gingrich, Pamela Geller, and the occasional Terry Jones. Isn’t that special? So, as far as this author is concerned, the highly-esteemed former Speaker of the House is the same as a nutty Pastor in Florida that up until a few weeks ago almost nobody in America ever heard of. But that was just the beginning of the nonsense on display at this Slate affiliate: What if we didn’t present the Quran-burners and mosque-attackers as part of a fringe movement of ideologically driven extremists? Then of course, the only other possibility is for us to accept that International Quran Burning Day and the controversy over the Park51 community center both in different ways signify mainstream America’s growing discomfort with Islam. Simply put, if the Islamophobia of an American fringe is in fact not on the fringes, but in the mainstream, then the United States has an Islamophobia problem. But therein lies the problem, for this whole idea of Islamophobia is a fiction created by America’s press that’s been negligently presented as a mainstream fear rather than a fringe sentiment in a dishonest attempt to change the public’s view of the Ground Zero mosque. If the media had done a better job of describing what this issue was really about when the Islamic center was first proposed rather than taking sides and presenting a distortion that impugned the overwhelmingly large percentage against the project, this wouldn’t have resulted in as significant a controversy here or abroad. That our press, as they have been doing at almost every turn lately, championed the minority view against the very citizens they serve is at the heart of this so-called Islamophobia. As it pertains to Jones, had these same media outlets completely ignored his attention-getting stunt, this too wouldn’t have represented a problem either here or throughout the Arab world. Unfortunately, that’s not the way this FP op-ed contributor saw things: In the places where the 9/11 attacks were planned, financed, and conceived, meanwhile, the warm and fuzzy Islam of America’s suburbs is a nonexistent fantasy. On the Muslim Main Street, in Saudi Arabia, in Afghanistan, and in flood-ravaged Pakistan, Muslims can’t see past the Talibanized narrative of the U.S. mid-term election. Just as the mainstream news media in America cannot be held responsible for transforming Terry Jones from a walking punch line into an international celebrity, mainstream media in a country like Pakistan can hardly be blamed for reporting Jones’s shenanigans to 180 million — mostly Muslim — Pakistanis. On Sept. 10, as Afghans celebrated Eid, many decided to protest against the Islamophobic events planned in Florida. During the protests, NATO troops, surrounded by angry protesters, opened fire, killing at least one person in Badakshan province. It is easy to become partisan in assigning blame for this death. Many will blame Terry Jones. Others will blame the media. Many others will blame the mullahs who stoked Afghan anger. No doubt, some pundit at Fox News will blame the protester himself, and most people in Afghanistan will blame NATO. It barely matters anymore who pulled the trigger in Badakhshan. The point is that progressive thought is being lost in the places where it would matter the most. In the nine years since 9/11, there has not been a single domestic Muslim reawakening in any of the Organization of the Islamic Conference’s almost 60 Muslim-majority countries. In countries like Pakistan, mosque leaders still make the same anti-American references. They still exhibit the same resistance to change. They still get treated with kid gloves by governments that are run by culturally dislocated Muslims. Is this America’s fault? The United States today is a nation deeply divided along political lines. It’s currently impossible to generate a consensus view on how to stimulate our economy, how to bring down healthcare costs, or how to solve the looming crises involving the unfunded liabilities associated with Social Security and Medicare. In fact, we can’t even create a consensus as to whether or not Social Security and Medicare are looming crises. But we should be held responsible for what foreigners think when we can’t even get our own people to agree on simple matters facing our own country? This seems especially absurd when one considers the number of things many Americans are deeply confused about. As Newsweek humorously noted  a few weeks ago:  21 percent of Americans believe in witches 20 percent believe the sun revolves around the earth 41 percent don’t know Judaism is older than Christianity Less than 25 percent can name two members of the Supreme Court 63 percent of young Americans can’t find Iraq on a map; 90 percent can’t find Afghanistan 60 percent can’t identify the three branches of our government With all of our money, media, and education, we can’t properly inform our own people. Yet we should be responsible for controlling the thought processes of foreigners thousands of miles away with governments employing their own methods of propaganda to reach their own goals? Preposterous!  With this in mind, maybe this FP op-ed contributor should look at himself for answers, for he is more a part of the problem than the solution. After all, nowhere in his article did he mention the facts concerning the canard that is American Islamophobia. Maybe if he informed his readers that FBI statistics show hate crimes against Muslims in this country are a rarity compared to those against blacks, Jews, and gays, they’d realize that this really isn’t the problem the media are making it out to be. And maybe if he ignored Terry Jones, rather than mentioning him six times in this piece, the exploits of this fringe Pastor wouldn’t be a propaganda tool in the Arab world. At the very least he and his ilk should go to great lengths telling their readers that a tremendously small percentage of Americans support Koran burning as a protest against Islam. What this FP op-ed contributor and virtually all our liberal media don’t seem to understand is that America’s enemies abroad are looking to conflate anything that happens here or involves us internationally to foment anti-American hatred in their countries. This has been going on for decades and didn’t start after 9/11.  As such, if this FP op-ed contributor and all liberal press members would more accurately report events here rather than sensationalize everything in order to paint the most negative picture of the average American citizen, our enemies would have less fuel to add to their propagandist fires. I would say this was pretty darned obvious if not for that Newsweek presentation previously mentioned. 

See the article here:
Slate Affiliate Equates Newt Gingrich With Koran Burner Jones

Schultz Guest Suspects Palin-Gingrich ‘Fingerprints All Over’ Koran Burning

Fire doesn’t melt steel–and a Florida pastor apparently isn’t capable of burning a Koran without a plot by Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich behind him . . . On The Ed Show this evening, guest Karen Hunter, responding to a leading question from host Schultz, went deep conspiracy theory, saying she “wouldn’t be surprised at all” if the “fingerprints” of Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich were “all over” Pastor Terry Jones’ plan to fire up some Korans. Really.  Can’t you just see it? “Terry?  Sarah and Newt again.  Did the FedEx arrive with the dozen Korans and the pint of Zippo lighter fluid? Good.” Fortunately, Heidi Harris was there to restore some sanity, pointing out that Palin and Newt had come out against the Koran burning and describing Jones as a “totally separate entity.” Note: Hunter suffers under the double burden of being a Pulitzer Prize winner and a Hunter College professor.

The rest is here:
Schultz Guest Suspects Palin-Gingrich ‘Fingerprints All Over’ Koran Burning

Open Thread: Gingrich Says Americans Are Afraid of Obama’s Radicalism

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tells Greta Van Sustern Americans are afraid of the radicalism of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. Thoughts?

Read more from the original source:
Open Thread: Gingrich Says Americans Are Afraid of Obama’s Radicalism

CBS: Despite Unpopularity, Obama Still ‘Raking in Millions’ for Dems

While teasing an upcoming report on President Obama campaigning for Democrats on Tuesday’s CBS Early Show, fill-in co-host Chris Wragge touted: “…plunging poll numbers haven’t stopped the President from raking in millions at fund raisers across the country.” Later, White House correspondent Chip Reid observed: “You know, the President’s approval rating is only 44%, but he is still quite popular with the party’s base and he’s using that clout to raise millions of dollars for fellow Democrats.” Reid went on to declare: “President Obama and the Democratic Party are managing to raise big bucks in the hope of retaining control of Congress. The Democratic National Committee is committing $50 million to help candidates in 2010, $20 million in cash, and $30 million to get out the vote.” A campaign sound bite was played of the President attacking Republicans: “We do not fear the future. We shape the future. That’s part of what this election’s about. The other side wants you to be afraid of the future.” Reid concluded: “President Obama is doing six fund-raisers over three days in five states. By week’s end, he’ll have raised over $56 million this campaign season.” Only at the end of his report did Reid briefly notice the money raised by the GOP: “Now, Republicans are also raking in the cash this campaign season. The Republican Governors Association, for example, has brought in $58 million since President Obama came into office.” In addition to the President’s fundraising efforts, the segment also focused on political fallout from the Ground Zero mosque controversy, though only in terms of how the issue would impact the elections. Reid explained how Obama was “now dealing with a split in the party over the issue of religious freedom.” Reid continued: “President Obama’s support of the right to build an Islamic community center and mosque near Ground Zero is causing a rift within the party.” He noted how Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid disagreed with the President’s position and added: “Some in the party fear the controversy will carry over into the midterm campaigns.” Following Reid’s report, fill-in co-host Erica Hill asked Democratic strategist Tanya Acker and Republican strategist Bay Buchanan about the issue. Speaking to Acker, Hill wondered: “President Obama made these remarks and now it’s really forcing a lot of Democrats to choose sides. So moving forward, what’s the best message for Democratic candidates as they tackle this – what’s now become a national issue?” Acker argued: “I think this is an issue about religious freedom and the Constitution….Democrats, and frankly Americans generally, need to understand what this issue is about.” Hill then turned to Buchanan: “Bay, how much of an issue should Republicans make this? Because at the end of the day, for most voters, the real issue here is still the economy.” Buchanan challenged Acker’s assertion: “This has nothing to do with religious freedom. There’s 100 mosques or so in New York City. Nobody’s suggesting we tear them all down. What we’re saying is Americans respect hallowed ground. This is hallowed ground, 9/11 is – Ground Zero is hallowed ground.” Acker shot back at Buchanan: “I’m pleased to know that Bay is not in support of tearing down mosques in the United States of America. I’m glad that that issue is off the table….to suggest that Islam – a faith that billions of people around the world adhere to – is endemically somehow compared to terrorism is just wrong.” Here is a full transcript of the August 17 segment:  7:00AM TEASE CHRIS WRAGGE: In-fighting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid breaks with President Obama over the proposed Ground Zero mosque. HARRY REID: I think that it’s very obvious that the mosque should be built someplace else. WRAGGE: But the controversy and plunging poll numbers haven’t stopped the President from raking in millions at fund raisers across the country. We’ll have a live report. 7:01AM SEGMENT ERICA HILL: We want to take a look at politics now. It is day two of President Obama’s cross-country campaign-style fund-raisers. Today he will be in Seattle for the first time since he was a candidate. CBS News chief White House correspondent Chip Reid is traveling with the President. He joins us this morning from Los Angeles before heading north. Chip, good morning. CHIP REID: Well good morning, Erica. You know, the President’s approval rating is only 44%, but he is still quite popular with the party’s base and he’s using that clout to raise millions of dollars for fellow Democrats. But at the same time, he’s now dealing with a split in the party over the issue of religious freedom. [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Mosque Controversy; Top Dem Breaks Ranks With Obama] President Obama’s support of the right to build an Islamic community center and mosque near Ground Zero is causing a rift within the party. The latest, the Senate’s top Democrat, Majority Leader Harry Reid, breaking ranks with the President. HARRY REID: The Constitution gives us freedom of religion. I think that it’s very obvious that the mosque should be built someplace else. CHIP REID: Reid’s comments come after the President’s speech Friday night. BARACK OBAMA: But let me be clear. As a citizen and as president, I believe that Muslims have the right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. REID: Some in the party fear the controversy will carry over into the midterm campaigns. But so far, President Obama and the Democratic Party are managing to raise big bucks in the hope of retaining control of Congress. The Democratic National Committee is committing $50 million to help candidates in 2010, $20 million in cash, and $30 million to get out the vote. OBAMA: We do not fear the future. We shape the future. That’s part of what this election’s about. The other side wants you to be afraid of the future. REID: President Obama is doing six fund-raisers over three days in five states. By week’s end, he’ll have raised over $56 million this campaign season. UNIDENTIFIED MAN [POLITICAL ANALYST]: People want access to the President. They’re excited to be in the room with the President and if they can get a couple minutes to whisper in his ear, they’ll pay a lot of money for it. REID: Now, Republicans are also raking in the cash this campaign season. The Republican Governors Association, for example, has brought in $58 million since President Obama came into office. Erica. HILL: Chip, thanks. CBS’s Chip Reid in Los Angeles this morning. Also joining us from Los Angeles this morning, Democratic strategist Tanya Acker and in Washington, Republican strategist Bay Buchanan. Good to have both of you with us this morning. BAY BUCHANAN: Thanks, Erica. TANYA ACKER: Good to see you. [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Countdown to Midterms; Assessing the Impact of Obama’s Mosque Comments] HILL: Tanya, I want to start with you. Forget the should he, shouldn’t he have said it. It’s been established, President Obama made these remarks and now it’s really forcing a lot of Democrats to choose sides. So moving forward, what’s the best message for Democratic candidates as they tackle this – what’s now become a national issue? ACKER: I think that it’s very important for Democrats, frankly, and look, I would expect – I don’t think this should simply be a partisan issue, I think this is an issue about religious freedom and the Constitution. And I think that whether or not the President should have stepped into this fray – I think he should have – Democrats, and frankly Americans generally, need to understand what this issue is about. And if Democrats lose seats because they took a stance for religious freedom, then we’ve got far bigger problems than simply winning elections, frankly. HILL: Bay, how much of an issue should Republicans make this? Because at the end of the day, for most voters, the real issue here is still the economy.              BUCHANAN: There – well, it’s going to be hard to beat the economy when it comes to the election, but I got to tell you, this is an important issue because it just shows a complete lack of understanding of what is happening here. This has nothing to do with religious freedom. There’s 100 mosques or so in New York City. Nobody’s suggesting we tear them all down. What we’re saying is Americans respect hallowed ground. This is hallowed ground, 9/11 is – Ground Zero is hallowed ground. We don’t want malls built next to Manassas, we don’t want casinos built next to Gettysburg. It has nothing to do with us being against development. What we want is this hallowed ground to be respected. And it does not respect or honor those that died to build a mosque, the very kind of statement to those who died, it’s an insult to them. HILL: But – but how much- ACKER: Well, I’m pleased to know that- HILL: Go ahead, Tanya. ACKER: I’m sorry. HILL: Go ahead. ACKER: I was just going to say, I’m pleased to know that Bay is not in support of tearing down mosques in the United States of America. I’m glad that that issue is off the table. But talking about what this issue really means, of course it’s hallowed ground, but to suggest that Islam – a faith that billions of people around the world adhere to – is endemically somehow compared to terrorism is just wrong. And as Americans, we should not be, we should not be propounding that message. It’s just wrong. So, of course it’s hallowed ground- HILL: Well, we know that this is a debate that will continue, but I do have to move on to this, ladies, before we let you go. We’ve seen so much this primary season, there’s been so much talk about the fact that what Americans really want is a change, that the incumbents are going to be on their way out. Bay, I’ll start with you. Can either party or any one candidate really change the way things are done in Washington? BUCHANAN: One person can change a lot. By just speaking out, being bold. In representing the millions of Americans that are expecting that. But what we’re going to find in November is it’s not just going to be one. We’re going to have dozens upon dozens of new fresh faces coming to Washington with one intent and that is to represent the will of the American people, to be there to fight for them, to stop this outrageous spending and to try to turn the country back to a safe and sound course. That’s where you’ll find real change. HILL: We’re going to have to leave it there. Bay Buchanan, Tanya Acker, always good to have your perspective. Don’t worry, Tanya, I promise you’ll be back. You both will. Thank you.

The rest is here:
CBS: Despite Unpopularity, Obama Still ‘Raking in Millions’ for Dems

Time’s Joe Klein Unhinged on Mosque: Gingrich a ‘Demented, Anger-Infused Doofus’ – and a ‘Jerk’ Too

Opposition to building a mosque near Ground Zero really sent Time’s Joe Klein into a tirade. In a Monday night post on the magazine’s “ Swampland” blog , Klein began: “Shame on all those Republicans salivating over President Obama’s support for the Cordoba Islamic Center…” Then he got personal, condemning “slimeball politics” has he slimed Newt Gingrich: “This is slimeball politics, pure and simple, except for when it descends into outright religious bigotry – which seems to be what happens every time Newt Gingrich opens his mouth.” Klein disparaged Gingrich as a “demented, anger-infused doofus” – all before proving, as if that weren’t already established, he didn’t care about offering any reason as he simply trashed Gingrich as “a jerk.” And liberals say talk radio and the Fox News Channel are lowering the level of political discourse. The first paragraph of “ The Soft Bigotry of Soft Bigotry ,” Klein’s August 16 post: Shame on all those Republicans salivating over President Obama’s support for the Cordoba Islamic Center, which is to be built several blocks away from Ground Zero in New York. Despite all the high-minded words about “sensitivity” for the families of the victims, this is slimeball politics, pure and simple, except for when it descends into outright religious bigotry–which seems to be what happens every time Newt Gingrich opens his mouth. Does that demented, anger-infused doofus actually believe that putting the mosque near Ground Zero is the equivalent of putting a swastika next to the Holocaust Museum? Does he really want to slander the tens of thousands of hard-working, freedom-loving, fiercely entrepreneurial Muslims living in this country? I mean, what a jerk.

Originally posted here:
Time’s Joe Klein Unhinged on Mosque: Gingrich a ‘Demented, Anger-Infused Doofus’ – and a ‘Jerk’ Too

Olbermann Hints Moral Equivalence Between U.S. & Islamic Empire, Blocking Mosque May Be First Step to New Holocaust

On Monday’s Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann delivered a “Special Comment” in which he invoked Nazi Germany and suggested that blocking construction of a mosque near Ground Zero could be the first of a “thousand steps” toward another holocaust. He also suggested a moral equivalence between the Islamic Empire’s conquests and America’s expansion into the lands of Native Americans as he attempted to discredit former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s concerns about the choice of “Cordoba House” as the original name planned for the mosque as being intentionally symbolic of a Muslim victory at Ground Zero. After starting his “Special Comment” by quoting Pastor Martin Niemoller’s famous words about the Holocaust of World War II, he at first tried to make his rant sound more moderate and not really a comparison to the Holocaust: “I make no direct comparison between the attempts to suppress the building of a Muslim religious center in downtown Manhattan and the unimaginable nightmare of the Holocaust.” He added: “Such a comparison is ludicrous – at least, it is now.” But the Countdown host was still alarmist enough to fear the mosque controversy could lead in that horrific direction: “Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust. He was warning of the thousand steps before a holocaust became inevitable. If we are at merely the first of those steps again today, it is one step too close.” Citing Gingrich’s contention that members of the Islamic Empire historically engaged in a practice of building large mosques on the holy sites of their conquests as monuments to their victories – citing the mosque that was built in Cordoba, Spain, as an example – Olbermann at first argued that, because Cordoba was eventually recaptured by Christians, Gingrich’s concerns are somehow undermined. The MSNBC host even sounded as if he were defending the Muslim expansion into Spain as he recounted that Christians continued to fight even though the Muslim conquerors built “multicultural, nondenominational institutions of learning.” Olbermann: Those Muslim conquerors are a figment of Gingrich’s lurid imagination. In Spain, in Cordoba, though the Muslims established multicultural, nondenominational institutions of learning, they were under constant attack from Christian armies and from a series of internal all-Muslim civil wars. The Muslims lost Cordoba and the Christian church they transformed into the world’s third largest mosque complex, that was turned back into a Christian cathedral in the 13th century, and it has been one ever since. But moments later, Olbermann seemed to contradict himself by acknowledging that Gingrich was correct in his reasoning about the historical significance of the name “Cordoba” being provocative, as the MSNBC host gave the Muslim group credit for changing the name in response to the former House Speaker’s criticism. Olbermann: “When the historical implications of Cordoba were made clear to the backers of this project, the property developer, Sharif Gamal, changed the name. They’ve already compromised.” Olbermann did not theorize about why the Muslim group was motivated to choose this provocative name in the first place. The Countdown host also suggested a moral equivalence between America’s history of confiscating land from Native Americans and the Islamic Empire’s conquests. Olbermann: “And is there not a logical extension to Mr. Gingrich’s conclusions about Cordoba and triumphalism? Virtually every church, virtually every synagogue, every mosque built on this continent stands where a Native American lived or died or was buried or saw his world – his religions included – wiped out, by us. What are we, then, Mr. Gingrich?” But, unlike many predominantly Muslim countries, the United States provides full citizenship rights to Native Americans, who are now even greater in number than when Christopher Columbus first visited the New World. By contrast, not only do many countries that are successors to the Islamic Empire sharply restrict the rights of their citizens, but, as recently as the period between 1948 and 1975, in many predominantly Muslim nations, Jewish residents faced so much persecution in the form of violence and confiscation of property that the number of Jewish refugees who fled Muslim countries is estimated to be greater than the number of Palestinian refugees who fled Israel after the Arab states invaded the tiny nation in 1948. Some estimate that the land confiscated from Jewish residents by governments in Muslim countries amounts to several times the total area of the state of Israel. After recounting the story of a mosque that was bombed in Jacksonville, Florida, Olbermann also declared that Muslims in America are more likely to be targeted by terrorism than non-Muslims: “As the Jacksonville mosque bombing shows, since 9/11, Muslims have been at far greater risk of being victims of terrorism in the United States than have non-Muslims.” Below is a complete transcript of the “Special Comment” portion of the Monday, August 16, Countdown show on MSNBC, with critical portions in bold : KEITH OLBERMANN: Finally, tonight, as promised, a “Special Comment” on the inaccurately described “Ground Zero mosque.” “They came first for the communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. And then they came for me and by that time, no one was left to speak up.” Pastor Martin Niemoller’s words are well known, but their context is not well understood. Niemoller was not speaking abstractly. He witnessed persecution; he acquiesced to it. He ultimately fell victim to it. He had been a German World War I hero, then a conservative who welcomed the fall of German democracy and the rise of Hitler, and he had few qualms about the beginning of the Holocaust until he himself was arrested for supporting it insufficiently. Niemoller’s confessional warning came first in a speech in Frankfurt in January 1946 – eight months after he had been liberated by American troops. He had been detained at Tyrol, Sachsen-hausen, and Dachau for seven years. He survived the death camps. In quoting him, I make no direct comparison between the attempts to suppress the building of a Muslim religious center in downtown Manhattan and the unimaginable nightmare of the Holocaust. Such a comparison is ludicrous – at least, it is now. But Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust, he was warning of the willingness of a seemingly rational society to condone the gradual stoking of enmity towards an ethnic or religious group or more than one, warning of the building up of a collective pool of fear and hate, warning of the moment in which the need to purge outstrips the parameters of the original scapegoating, when new victims are needed because a country has begun to run on a horrible field of hatred – magnified, amplified and multiplied by politicians and zealots within government and without. Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust. He was warning of the thousand steps before a holocaust became inevitable. If we are at merely the first of those steps again today, it is one step too close. Yet in a country dedicated to freedom, forces have gathered to blow out of all proportion the construction of a minor community center to transform it into a training ground for terrorists and an insult to the victims of 9/11 and a tribute to Medieval Muslim subjugation of the West. There is no training ground for terrorists. There is no insult to the victims of 9/11. There is no tribute to Medieval Muslim subjugation of the West. There is, in fact, no “Ground Zero mosque.” It is not mosque. A mosque, technically, is a Muslim holy place in which only worship can be conducted. What is planned for 45 Park Place, New York City, is a community center. It’s supposed to include a basketball court and a culinary school. It is to be 13 stories tall, and the top two stories will be a Muslim prayer space. What a cauldron of terrorism that will be. Terrorist chefs and terrorist point guards. And truly those who will use the center have more to fear from us than us from them, for there has been terrorism connected to a mosque in this country, in this year. May 10, Jacksonville, Florida, a pipe bomb at the Islamic Center of Northeast Florida. The FBI thinks the man in this surveillance video could be the bomber. The bomb went off during evening prayers and it was powerful enough to send shrapnel flying 100 yards. Fortunately, the bomber didn’t know where to place it, so the 60 Muslim worshipers were uninjured. If he had put it inside and not outside, they had been dead and you probably would have heard about it on the news. Or maybe not. Maybe those exploiting 45 Park Place would still shake their fists and decry terrorism by extremists who happen to be Muslim and never faced the shameful truth about our country. As the Jacksonville mosque bombing shows, since 9/11, Muslims have been at far greater risk of being victims of terrorism in the United States than have non-Muslims . But back to this Islamic center. Its name, Cordoba House, is not a tribute to the Medieval Muslim subjugation of Spain. Newt Gingrich has been pushing that nonsense that Cordoba is dog whistle for triumphalism : “It refers to Cordoba, Spain – the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world’s third largest mosque complex. Today, some of the mosque’s backers insist this term is being used to ‘symbolize interfaith cooperation’ when, in fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest.” Those Muslim conquerors are a figment of Gingrich’s lurid imagination. In Spain, in Cordoba, though the Muslims established multicultural, nondenominational institutions of learning, they were under constant attack from Christian armies and from a series of internal all-Muslim civil wars. The Muslims lost Cordoba and the Christian church they transformed into the world’s third largest mosque complex, that was turned back into a Christian cathedral in the 13th century, and it has been one ever since. And is there not a logical extension to Mr. Gingrich’s conclusions about Cordoba and triumphalism? Virtually every church, virtually every synagogue, every mosque built on this continent stands where a Native American lived or died or was buried or saw his world – his religions included – wiped out, by us. What are we, then, Mr. Gingrich? And by the way, a point Mr. Gingrich has not even whispered as he has shouted fire in a crowded theater: When the historical implications of Cordoba were made clear to the backers of this project, the property developer, Sharif Gamal, changed the name. They’re already compromised. “We are calling it Park 51 because of the backlash to the name Cordoba House,” he told the Financial Times. “It will be a place open to all New Yorkers, and that is a very New York name.” A very New York name. Like Ground Zero. Except that this place, Park 51, is not even at Ground Zero. Not even right across the street. Even the description of it being two blocks away is generous. It is two blocks away from the Northeast corner of the World Trade Center site. From the planned location of the 9/11 memorial, it’s more like four or five blocks, even. You know what is right across the street, though? I went there yesterday to refresh my sense of the World Trade Center, in which I worked nearly 30 years ago. At Church and Veezy Street so close that the barbed wire of Ground Zero obscures its spire is St. Paul’s Chapel. Been there since 1766, where Washington went the day he was inaugurated, where the first responders came for relief nine years ago. You know what’s also closer to Ground Zero than this Muslim community center will be? Church of St. Peter, at Church and Barclay Streets. As the sign says, “New York’s Oldest Catholic parish.” People hear “Ground Zero mosque” and they think Mecca in the backyard and the loud call to prayer and they take umbrage. “We’ve got no more than a few inches of skin and a couple pieces of bone. Ground Zero is the burial place of my son,” said Joyce Boland at the public hearing about this center. “I don’t want to go there and see an overwhelming mosque looking down at me.” I honor her pain and her fear, but Mrs. Boland has nothing to worry about. Unless she walks directly over to it, several blocks away, she’ll never see the thing. This is what you see from where the center will be. Another nondescript building is across the street. This building and others like it would block views of the Trade Center and views from the Trade Center. The community center certainly will stand out on the north side of Park Place, but amid the canyons of lower Manhattan, it will just be a distinctive building that, if you happen to wander down a side street near the Trade Center, you might see it. You know what you’ll see there now? This. The Burlington coat factory, abandoned since 2001, when the landing gear from one of the planes fell 90 stories and went through the roof. For nine years, nobody’s been willing to buy that building, just to knock it down and build a new one. It sold for $4,850,000. In New York City real estate, that is spare change. And you know why it’s spare change? Because walk around Ground Zero any day of the week and it’s packed with tourists and our version of pilgrims. But walk two and three blocks away, and not so packed. Not packed at all. Empty stores, boarded up windows, nine years later, and two and three blocks from the action, it’s a ghost town. What was that about government not getting in the way of private business? What was that about letting the private sector spur new jobs in blighted areas? Oh, and what was that about Iraq? Why did we go into Iraq again? I don’t mean the real versions or the naked vengeful blindness that enabled the forging of a nonexistent connection between Iraq and 9/11, I mean, the official explanation. To free the world, and especially Iraq’s citizens, of the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. That’s its supporters’ defense of the Iraq invasion to this hour. Well, who lives in Iraq? Muslims. I hate to reveal this to anybody on the right who did not know this, but when they say Iraq is 65 percent Shia and 32 percent Sunni, you do know that Shia and Sunni are both forms of the Muslim religion, right? We sacrificed 4,415 of our military personnel in Iraq to save Muslims, and there are thousands of us still here tonight to protect Muslims, but we don’t want Muslims to open a combination culinary school and prayer space in Manhattan? From the beginning of this nation, we have fought prejudice and religious intolerance and our greatest enemy, stupidity, exploited by rapacious politicians. It is only 50 years now, this month, since Americans publicly and urgently warned their countrymen not to support a presidential candidate because he was a Roman Catholic. He would bow to the will, not of the American people, but of the Pope. He would be a papist. He would be the agent of a foreign state! His name was John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

MSNBC: Obama ‘Did the Right Thing’ With ‘Uncontroversial’ Mosque Remark

On Monday’s Morning Joe, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski went out of their way to defend President Obama’s Friday statement defending the planned mosque near Ground Zero in New York City. Brzezinski cooed that the President ” did the right thing by saying what he said ” and Scarborough labeled the remark “uncontroversial” and later stated the controversy over the mosque was a ” wedge issue ” . As NewsBusters’ Noel Shepard reported , the former Florida congressman turned MSNBC anchor blasted Newt Gingrich for his barrage against the President for his defense of the mosque. Earlier in the broadcast, just after the top of the 7 am Eastern hour, Brzezinski related her personal anecdote about discussing the issue over her recent vacation, and went right into her “right thing” defense of the President’s stance. Scarborough replied to this by berating Gingrich, in an early preview of his later attack: SCARBOROUGH: David Ignatius, talking about the mosque on ‘This Week’- BRZEZINSKI: Actually, that’s a fascinating issue. We talked about it over the weekend, and, certainly, on vacation, it was much the dinner table conversation. I thought the President actually did the right thing by saying what he said , but- (shakes head) SCARBOROUGH: The President’s getting pounded. I ‘ve got a quote I’m going to read in a little bit when David’s here- from Newt Gingrich, a guy I know, a guy I worked with, a guy who I always considered to be one of the brighter guys – BRZEZINSKI: Yeah- (shakes head) SCARBOROUGH: But, my gosh, this quote is stunning, and I would say, stunning and irresponsible and – BRZEZINSKI:  It’s over the top . SCARBOROUGH: He’s not alone. Minutes later, the two MSNBC anchors brought on Ignatius to discuss the controversy. Scarborough read one of Gingrich’s attacks on Obama, and included his “non-controversial” label of the President’s statement on the mosque, as he asked the editor to respond to the former House Speaker. When Ignatius expressed his disagreement with this label, the former congressman erupted with a sharp retort. The editor replied with liberal platitude about how the Republicans needed to take care, as the world was watching: SCARBOROUGH: Let me read you what Newt Gingrich said and you tell me what kind of impact this has across the globe: a former speaker, somebody whose name many people across the world know. Gingrich said this, according to The New York Times- quote, ‘There’s nothing surprising in the President’s continued pandering to radical Islam. What he said last night is untrue and inaccurate.’ Do you care to respond about the level of heat that this non-controversial statement that the President said on Friday night has generated? DAVID IGNATIUS: Well, you couldn’t really call it a non-controversial statement because- here we are still talking about it , but I do think that kind of- SCARBOROUGH: Well, no, no, no- I’m just saying, though- I mean, David, he said this, though: Muslims have a right to worship as they choose . IGNATIUS: Yup. I understand- BRZEZINSKI: It shouldn’t be controversial .              SCARBOROUGH: It should not be – IGNATIUS: I understand. SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. I’m sorry- go ahead. We have a delay. IGNATIUS: You know, it seems to me that this rhetoric about pandering to radical Muslims really is inappropriate. I do think Republicans, including Newt Gingrich, have to be careful when they speak to the world about us, about- and by that, I mean our political debate . The Washington Post editor went on to echo his earlier praise of the President’s stance on Sunday’s This Week on ABC . As he lauded Obama, Brzezinski took the time to express her agreement with him: IGNATIUS: What I found striking about the President’s comments on Friday night was he knew that this was going to be unpopular. The polls showing two-thirds of Americans disagreed with the essence of what he was about to say were already out. If you look carefully at the Friday night statement, he said we have to be sensitive to the feelings of people in lower Manhattan. This is hallowed ground, but even so, this is America, and we have to live by America’s rules, and he stated- I thought, the rules that we live under here, in terms of freedom- you buy a piece of property, you have a right to put up a mosque or whatever you want on it. And I thought it was, in that sense, a courageous statement by the President – BRZEZINSKI: Mmhmm- me too – IGNATIUS: It was a kind of leadership, frankly, I’d like to see more from him. I’d like to see more of that, not less. I was a little troubled by all of the nuance back-in filling that followed the next day, but I think it’s okay for our president to say things that people disagree with. He just needs to continue the dialogue. He needs to explain to Americans, this is the kind of country we are . He’s got a lot of support; he’s got Mayor Bloomberg; he’s got- you know, many of the prominent legislators up there who are going to stand behind him- not Peter King, maybe, but an awful lot of other people. So I didn’t think it was- you know, Obama’s mistake, and I think the attacks on him really paint us in a bad light around the world- I have to say that. Later in the hour, Scarborough actually went on the offense against not only Gingrich and the opponents of the NYC mosque in general, but also President Obama himself for his recent “demagoguing” of the Social Security issue. His co-anchor, however, couldn’t help herself to continue her praise of the executive: PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (from August 14, 2010 weekly address): Some Republicans leaders in Congress don’t seem to have learned any lessons from the past few years. They are pushing to make privatizing Social Security a key part of their legislative agenda if they win a majority in Congress this fall. That agenda is wrong for seniors, it’s wrong for America, and I won’t let it happen, not while I’m president. I’ll fight with everything I’ve got to stop those who would gamble what you got with Social Security on Wall Street, because you shouldn’t be worried that a sudden downturn in the stock market will put all you’ve worked so hard for- all you’ve earned- at risk. SCARBOROUGH: Oh, boy (laughs). BRZEZINSKI: I’m glad. SCARBOROUGH: Not exactly a weekend for political courage on either side . BRZEZINSKI: Oh, come on! SCARBOROUGH: You have the Republicans demagoguing the mosque issue and you’ve got Barack Obama demagoguing Social Security . It’s almost like- BRZEZINSKI: What!? He’s protecting us. It’s nice . SCARBOROUGH: Yeah- protect us, please, from those bad Republicans who want to destroy Social Security! You know, Mark Halperin and I have been having this conversation for some time. And I said, will Barack Obama really allow the Democrats to demagogue on Social Security, even though he says he wants to save it? And he said- well, he will until after the election, and then it will come to Republicans. Saturday, he sent me a press release and as I- whoops! Okay, I guess he is kind of jumping into the water himself- BRZEZINSKI: Well- SCARBOROUGH: This is the oldest, most cynical trick in the book – BRZEZINSKI: You are cynical. SCARBOROUGH: Especially when Social Security is dying. Social Security is running out of money, along with Medicare. Every economist that’s not a political hack will tell you the entitlements pose the greatest long-term economic risk to us, and Barack Obama decided to use his radio address this weekend to demagogue Social Security. It is shameless. It is shameless, every bit as shameless domestically- because this is the big issue- as Republicans demagoguing the mosque is in foreign affairs . BRZEZINSKI: So cynical! Over an hour later, near the end of the 8 am Eastern hour, as the two anchors discussed the mosque, among other issues, with Matt Lewis of Politics Daily and Republican political advisor Mark McKinnon, Scarborough used his “wedge issue” label to describe the controversy and referenced his earlier attack on both Obama and Gingrich: SCARBOROUGH [to Lewis]: Hey, Matt, this morning, we- I attacked Republicans for demagoguing the mosque issue- so I’ll get hate e-mails all day from right-wing nuts. And then, I attacked Democrats for attacking Social Security shamelessly, like they do, so I’ll get hate e-mails from left-wing nuts all day . When you posted a blog- as a conservative taking on both sides- what was the response? MATT LEWIS: Well- you know, the funny thing, Joe, is that both sides think that I was dead-on when I talked about the opponent- SCARBOROUGH: Of course- LEWIS: But that I was really wrong and overreached. There are a few blogs out about me today. I’ll just give you a couple headlines. One is called, ‘Civil discourse is overrated.’ One is called, Conservative blogger Matt Lewis ducks the fight.’ And one is called, ‘Matt Lewis proves he is a girl: g-u-r-l.’ [Scarborough laughs] So that will give you an idea. I think I’m starting to feel the Joe Scarborough love there. SCARBOROUGH Yeah. Well, here’s what I found that is so disappointing is that- it’s disappointing that all these symbolic issues- all these wedge issues take a backseat to the real issues- whether you’re going to stand up to balance the budget; whether you’re going to stand up to cut taxes; whether you’re going to stand up to show restraint in foreign policy- actual ideas don’t matter for a lot of these freaks. It is where you stand on these red-hot issues.

View original post here:
MSNBC: Obama ‘Did the Right Thing’ With ‘Uncontroversial’ Mosque Remark

Keith Olbermann Revises History to Praise Clinton and Bash Gingrich

Keith Olbermann on Monday revised history to praise former President Bill Clinton and bash former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. In the opening segment of MSNBC’s “Countdown,” the host railed against a proposal by Republicans to once again reintroduce the balanced budget amendment. Olbermann pointed out to his tiny audience that this was “also pushed by then Speaker Newt Gingrich as part of the 1994 Contract With America.” With total disregard for historical facts, the “Countdown” host continued, “Gingrich failed to pass it, President Clinton raised taxes, balanced the budget, created 22 million jobs” (video follows with transcript and commentary): KEITH OLBERMANN: Sick of Democrats accusing them of having nothing to improve the economy but ideas from the Bush era, Republicans are planning to introduce instead a bold new initiative from the Gingrich era. Our fifth story tonight, it’s called the balanced budget amendment, but it’s real objective is to protect the rich from tax cuts, and without those tax cuts, Republicans will not tell us how they would balance the budget, even if they do give us a few hints, as you’ll see. It was Republican Senator Jim Demint telling the newspaper The Hill that when Congress returns after the August recess, he and his colleagues, including John McCain and Lindsey Graham, will introduce a resolution to amend the U. S. Constitution. The balanced budget amendment, also pushed by then Speaker Newt Gingrich as part of the 1994 Contract With America, would prevent the federal government from spending more than it takes in. But, and there is the rub, it also has a clause barring any tax increases without a two-thirds vote in each chamber of Congress. Gingrich failed to pass it, President Clinton raised taxes, balanced the budget, created 22 million jobs. Really? Well, first of all, Clinton’s tax hikes were part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Gingrich didn’t become Speaker until January 1995. Nice try, Keith. But it gets worse, for what Olbermann conveniently omitted – like so many media members are currently doing to misinform the public about the difference between Republican and Democrat tax policies – was that Gingrich and the Republican Congress forced Clinton to sign the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 which cut taxes. This was when the economy really took off as the GDP grew by 4.4 percent in 1997, 4.5 percent in 1998, 4.8 percent in 1999, and 4.1 percent in 2000. During this period, employers added over 12 million workers to their payrolls. As for the budget being balanced, this also occurred after the 1997 tax cuts in years 1998 through 2001. With this in mind, one seriously has to wonder whether the folks at General Electric and NBC consider this kind of shoddy reporting acceptable on their cable news network. Consider that just a few minutes later, a regular guest on MSNBC, Arianna Huffington, showed an absolutely staggering ignorance of business, taxes, and economics. Two hours earlier, MSNBC host Ed Schultz completely misrepresented the causes of the government shutdown in November 1995. Exit question: would any other corporation in America tolerate such negligence from high-profile employees without at least a reprimand? 

Read more from the original source:
Keith Olbermann Revises History to Praise Clinton and Bash Gingrich

Open Thread: Gingrich Says Obama Doesn’t Understand America

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Newt Gingrich says President Obama doesn’t understand America (h/t Ed Morrissey ). Thoughts?

Follow this link:
Open Thread: Gingrich Says Obama Doesn’t Understand America

Obama’s Next News Cycle: A Breakdown

Barack Obama went into this Labor Day weekend amid a firestorm of controversy over his back to school speech .

Visit link:
Obama’s Next News Cycle: A Breakdown