At a dinner ceremony honoring the holiday of Ramadan, President Obama waded into the controversy over the Cordoba House project, strongly and unequivocally supporting the construction of the Islamic Center near Ground Zero in Manhattan. Not only that, he supported the proposition of allowing Muslims to build their own houses of worship anywhere in America, as part of the free exercise of religion.
Here is the key part of the statement Obama made last night at the iftar celebrating Ramadan, a White House tradition that dates back to Thomas Jefferson:
Recently, attention has been focused on the construction of mosques in certain communities – particularly in New York. Now, we must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of lower Manhattan. The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country. The pain and suffering experienced by those who lost loved ones is unimaginable. So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.
But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure.
The Cordoba House, actively fearmongered by the right wing, has become a lightning rod for criticism across the country. In a recent poll, nearly 70% of all Americans oppose the construction of the Islamic Center, which has been falsely called a “Ground Zero mosque” (there’s a place of worship inside the Islamic Center, but it’s mainly a kind of YMCA for the Muslim community. And, it’s not on Ground Zero, but near it).
Even liberal critics of the President were impressed with his forthright stand for tolerance and religious freedom. Glenn Greenwald called it “one of the most impressive and commendable things Obama has done since being inaugurated.” Obama lines up on an issue with minority support, with no real political gain to be had. As Greenwald says, “when is the last time a President voluntarily entered an inflammatory public controversy by taking a position opposed by 70% of the public?”
The controversy over the Islamic Center is a proxy fight about multiculturalism and ethnicity generally. The connections between the Cordoba House fight and the movement to repeal birthright citizenship are obvious. These appeals to bigotry, fueled by economic anxiety and the need for a scapegoat, have no place in the American ideal, but come back time and again throughout American history. Many have risen in objection to this rank hatred; seldom has it been a President leading the way. Obama should be commended.




64 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Have you people been drug tested yet?
LOL.
Yes. Have you?
Obama “strongly and unequivocally” taking a position supporting the Constitution? Rahm must be out of town?
The decision was already made. This is a case of Obama bravely leading from the rear.
I”m still glad that he took that position. The very idea of religious suppression in this country makes me sick.
Waiting for Bloomberg.
That’s gonna leave a mark in 2012.
Obama has said that which took political courage and he also said that Social Security privatization is absolutely off the table which did not. Both are good signs but we’ll see what happens when the Republics start calling him names.
I’m far from impressed. obama has repeatedly shown that he has the “guts” to do things that are contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of the people (see public option, re-importation of pharmaceutical drugs, maintaining social security the way it is, transparency in government, etc.). What he also has shown is a complete cowardice when it comes to confronting the corrupt power structure in our country. Time and time again, he has served their interests while fucking over the people. His “stand” here is predictably not a stand against bug moneyed interests … which it has in common with all his other “stands”.
Z
Timing it for the iftar dinner makes sense.
Good to see Obama do something right. Not surprising that it isn’t gaining him a lot of praise even with the minority that knows it is the right thing to do. He needs to step up like this on so many other issues, but getting one right deserves applause.
As a Jew I support the building of a Mosque where it got proposed.
As for the 14th amendment and citizenship how about we rescind citizenship for the descendants of those who fought for the confederacy in the Civil War?
On most of the progressive sites I see annoyance with Obama’s corporatism and rightly so.
However I see virtually no proposed solutions.
I have a solution.
Go to any search engine but Google and type these words in quotes
“Help me change America”
I have a solution.
Thank you.
If anyone needs to throw up (like, say, you drank some poison or something) you may want to have a look at Politico’s take on this:
It does not involve economics really as it looks like a cheap thing to support. It does not go up against the major corporations in this country. So if one mosque gets built and it gets him support then he can do it with not much political loss.
With me, a progressive, Obama sold out on the prescription drug issue, once again caving to big pharma and on the government run health care insurance Obama caved into to the whore Karen Ignani who lobbies for the big health insurance companies.
Or, if one were a fan of irony, a Jewish community center.
Still, Obama took a position that doesn’t clearly have an upside. My cynical guess is that it’s getting near the time when he has to sound like a progressive again.
It involves civil rights. not sure why you’re bringing up economics.
And the timing makes sense, talking about Islam is a natural thing for the WH iftar. I don’t think it was waiting for Bloomberg to speak first.
giving props for doing something right makes sense. If we can’t give praise when it’s due then even stronger progressives aren’t going to be friendly. I think encouraging good behavior is a complement to calling out bad behavior.
I’m hoping this is a sign, after squandering almost half his first term (with no guarantee of a second), that Obama is becoming a leader and growing beyond his impulse to be a facilitator. This is a single incident, but if Obama can be like this more often he might find the “professional left” will be a lot more supportive. Everyone expects a president to be decisive and forthright, and this was a good showing.
I can’t seem to hit the cup.
Sad that this no-brainer of a stand has to be celebrated. It really says a lot about what Obama has and has not done since his election.
I took that to be the economics of re-election, as in it wasn’t going to cost him any contributors of note.
Thank you for pointing out that it doesn’t hurt a bit to give kudos when kudos are due. Came over here specifically today to see what the response would be from the angry progressives as the president not only took on this politically risky stand for religious freedom but also stood firm today in his support for Social Security. Methinks there was a lot of unnecessary gnashing of teeth over the “catfood commissions” imagined intention to jigger with SS and I was hoping to see some of that fear and loathing dismissed here after the presidents statement.
Well, he stood up for no privatizing anyway (though that still leaves raising retirement ages or other ways of cutting benefits)
So he’s willing to lose political capital for this non-issue but not for HCR or finance reform. Fucking A.
I believe this as much as I believe anything O sez.
Tinman tinman tinman, why don’t you go back to work on your knees.
He must be getting worried about votes and dusting off his campaign personality for us – anyone else remember the “Fierce Urgency of Now?” It is now the “Fierce Urgency of Whatever.” So – he finally speaks on an issue. Even has a bit of conviction. I remember that. Someone must have told him this would swing some right of the center folks over to him … the man is a political sociopath. Watch him start to rekindle the fires again … appears to me that the only change I ever got was switching out a white man, a white woman, two white daughters for a black man, a black woman and two black daughters. That might be enough for some folks. Not me. I was fooled by an excellent speech pattern after 8 years of Bush. Shame on me.
P.S. Forgot to add – yes, I have been drug tested. I work for an employer that does that regularly. Thought I better add that for Mr. Gibbs – when was HE last drug tested?
It’s worth noting Obama has walked his remarks back slightly (h/t digby).
He supports the right to build the Cordoba project, but isn’t saying whether he supports the project itself.
Still worth some props, but not so much.
Same thing with a march by the KKK – they have a right even if you wish they didn’t. Although this mosque is not the proper analog to a nazi march, but apparently teabaggers think it is.
Yup.
Here’s Ali Abunimah’s take along the same lines:
http://aliabunimah.posterous.com/why-i-think-obama-is-already-retreating-from
This is a no-brainer and as u said it also doesn’t require him to have to stand up to his Corp. backers. Courage ? Not so much.
No. But he’s going to be attacked for it.
Have you seen those Rethuglicans who claim that Islam is “not a religion at all — but a cult”? Well frankly ALL religions are cults. But if you want weird try the Mormons. They’re every bit as wack as the Scientologists.
Nevertheless, he’s buying trouble, and he’s smart enough to know there’s going to be trouble. That’s a bit of courage, even if Nate Silver’s right, and it’s not a lot of trouble.
He may be buying trouble in the short run, but in the long run acting as if you stand for something is worth a whole lot more than going with the crowd all the time. Openly taking a principled stand is actually good politics. GW Bush showed how this works with his you may not always agree with me but at least you will know where I stand bit. Democrats suffer more from a significant public impression that they lack principles rather than a public belief that their politics were out of step with voters. (I tend to agree with the former assessment, but you do not have to in order to agree with this point).
I do not mean to take anything away from the well deserved praise for this act – it goes against everything the Village is about, and for Villagers like Obama, that is usually terrifying.
Book Salon up with Thomas Geoghegan’s Were You Born on the Wrong Continent?: How the European Model Can Help You Get a Life hosted by masaccio
I,__________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States faithfully, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. So help me God.
I am glad the president took the stand he did but it is sad that we feel it appropriate to recommend commendation for simply doing the job he swore to do.
I am sure you are aware that is the customary but not the Constitutionally-prescribed oath. It couldn’t be, since the word “God” is not in the US Constitution.
There are many, usually JCC, not YMCA.
1. Your headline is literally false. Obama did NOT voice support for the construction of the mosque near ground zero. He voiced support for the RIGHT to build the mosque there, in line with local laws and ordinances.
2. @Reisz is correct–Politico’s take on this story is flagrantly incendiary with purpose. How anyone reads that rag is as big a mystery to me as to how educated civil people can watch Fox and not understand they are being puppeteered.
3. @wmd1961 and digby are wrong–Obama is not “walking back his comments” at all. He’s merely clarifying them. He spoke very precisely. It is the media that that is creating the ruckus by intentionally misinterpreting his remarks for easy copy and ratings.
4. That we are even having this debate is a testament to how far down the rabbit hole we’ve fallen. Freedom of religion is non-negotiable in this country.
5. I’m normally carping about how big a corporatist sellout Obama is, but this entire cycle of spin is just incredibly frustrating. We’re fighting two wars, a fifth of our country is idle, our balance of payments is accelerating our decline, we’re now living in 1984, the opposition party is divided between fanatics and liars, and the middle class is going away because a bunch of immoral parasites can make money entrenching the oligarchs for as long as possible. And we’re having this ridiculous debate about building a place of worship? About how we can save social security so we can raid it? About how tax cuts solve deficits and improve economies?
Why the fuck am I reading news and blogs on a Saturday afternoon?
Sorry for the outburst. I realized not only was I reading news and blogs on a Saturday afternoon. I was also trying to configure a wireless router that is not cooperating at the same time. Unhealthy combination.
Guess what, Obama is back to Standard Cowardly Clump Mode. He just walked back his statement. See Greenwald’s Update II.
I believe a benefit cut, i.e. raising retirement age to 70, is the issue with Obama’s Catfood Commission. I’d prefer partial privatization to a basically 20% cut in benefits by raising the retirement age.
Anything good Obama does is due to an oversight.
When he says HIS Catfood Commission will not reduce our Social Security benefits in any way (raise the freaking cap if you want to monkey with it), then I will give him credit for something. As it stands now, he created that commission by executive order and he staffed it with people itching to cut our “entitlements” (i.e. FICA payments WE’VE been making for a long time that were borrowed to pay for tax cuts for the rich).
Show the man what he’s won…..
from http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/
UPDATE II: In the face of the controversy created by last night’s remarks, Obama came out today and emphasized the very limited nature of the position he took:
It’s technically true, as Darren Hutchinson points out, that Obama isn’t changing what he said, as his speech last night was devoted to a defense of “the right” of the mosque to be built, and it said nothing about whether it should be built near Ground Zero. But clearly, the tone and the emphasis of his speech — and the absence of the fine distinctions he’s drawing today — made it obvious that it would be interpreted as siding with the mosque proponents and against those opposing the mosque, and that’s exactly how it was interpreted by virtually everyone.
But by insisting now that he was merely commenting on the technical “rights” of the project developers — as a way of responding to Republican criticism that he was advocating for the project itself — he has diminished his remarks from a courageous and inspiring act into a non sequitur, somewhat of an irrelevancy.
I understand what he said and what he meant. Most of the headlines on this have been misleading and unprofessional ALL AROUND. I very much support the right as long as all the applicable local laws ad codes are followed. I really have no opinion on whether they should or whether it is appropriate. I also support the right of morons to bitch and moan about things they do not even fathom the importance of, including me ; )
The news talk as well as the political discussions have been inept to intentionally misleading. Obama is getting pooched on this one but only has himself to blame. Had he led and spoke up regarding the religious freedoms being targeted at the outset the discussion would have been framed in reality.
Since the discussion has been framed by the inept and unethical, the distortions continue to color the meaning of Obama’s very clear choice of words.
The headline above is no exception.
I rarely disagree with Greenwald. But Glenn is simply upset with himself for giving BO more credit than he deserved. His remark about “how it was interpreted [this way] by virtually everyone” is simply not Glenn’s usual class. Glenn is almost always very articulate and very precise. Anyone who reads Obama’s complete remarks objectively must concede he was supporting the right, not the choice to build the ground zero mosque. Obama was splitting the middle, just as he always prides himself with doing. And the media outlets are having a field day with it because showcasing mudwrestling makes them money.
Glenn quotes and emphasizes Ben Smith saying
This too is false, as Nate Silver’s numbers, to which Glenn links, clearly show.
I may need to look up the definition, but I find your over-inclusive claim to be wrong and offensive. For some reason, you may like to offend rather than respect, I assume
I personally think it took a lot of guts for him to do what he did. He’s going to take a hit in the polls, but it was the right thing to do. This will be one of those moments that they write about in his biographies. He stood up for those with the least voice, the sign of a good liberal.
-Crank
FDR: “I welcome their hate.”
Obama: “Beck is criticizing me?! She’s fired/I didn’t mean a word of it!”
I don’t think so. Saying that you’re not saying that something is a good idea often implies it’s a bad idea – one can certainly draw that conclusion here. He could have just reiterated that it was the right of the folks who are building this community center to build it, subject to local zoning laws, etc., and left it at that.
And frankly, given the stated objectives of this community center, he should have said something nice about it. Hell, I have no use for religion whatsoever, and I said something nice about it. It’s a lot more like the kind of thing religions ought to be doing instead of inspiring fear and xenophobia.
I could have said all that without either endorsing or panning the project. Something along the lines of “I note the irony that this CC’s purpose is to try to bridge differences, not create more. Maybe its opponents ought to think about that.” If I could, then so could he. The guy has speechwriters, after all.
It’s fishing for votes season, so I expect to see lots and lots of WORM’s showing up.
WORM–What Obama Really Meant
Obama simply cannot stand up to the right wing. He has no balls.
Agreed, Wigwam. Let’s just say that our president is a fierce advocate for the rights of Muslims.
For the President of the United States to come in favor of the First Amendment ought to be a “dog bites man” story that goes unnoticed. In the current political/media environment, some seemed to regard it as a courageous stand. Until the walk-back.
Yeah, basically I think Greenwald was reaching for something to be positive about regarding obama after justifiably torching him so many times. And he knows it …
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/13/mosque/index.html
If anyone has ever earned a mulligan for not being ruthlessly objective for once, it is Greenwald.
Z
Agree totally. Obama didn’t support the construction of a mosque there or anywhere else. He simply asserted the 1st amendment, as he should. It’s the behavior of the media on this that has been atrocious. They’ve simply been opportunistic, relishing the chance to profit from, and promote, sensationalism. That they do so by echoing the Right and displaying their own ignorance and lack of ethics is of no concern to the assholes.
I agree on all points – indeed it is time for bed.
SS privatization being off the table is nice – but is ending the wage cap for the payroll tax and for benefits on the table?
I’m told age 70 is off the table and age 68 (a one year increase) is the likely suggestion – not a big deal given the increase in life span.
Also is Clinton’s 1997 idea to invest a portion of the assets in non-gov bonds on the table – it is done in other countries and is needed here to put a stake through the heart of the “worthless IOU’S” nonsense.
And is the special SENIOR CPI calculation off the table?
And is a program that is an add on savings via payroll going to be proposed to be run by SS and invested in shares of a “fund invested in non-gov assets” run by SS – and not by Wall Street – on the table?
Are military and agriculture company welfare programs on the table? Is a national health budget going to be suggested to be enacted via premium controls? Is outsourcing to be cut back to recapture the waste that is private overhead and profit (a military cost review a few weeks back came out with a suggestion that the Pentagon become less sensitive to excessive private profits – crazy world given our “deficit” worries).
I hate getting 3rd and 4th hand information as to what is going on.
Too good to believe. All this praise for “strongly supporting” this travesty and then Obama comes out less than 10 hours later backtracking as fast as Gibbs finishes off a bucket of fried chicken.
“I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there.” Wow, that is strongly supporting something. Looks like almost as much as he supports our troops.
There is an expiration date on every belief of Mr. Obama. Get used to it.
I am seriously starting to think that President Fierce Advocate doesn’t want to be president anymore.
No actually this supporting of the mosque appears a cheap thing to do. If Obama did something progressive on health care and the prescription drug benefit it would have gone against the corporate pirates in insurance and the drug companies and could have pissed them off.
Instead he pissed off retired and disabled people on the left and those under 55 on the left as well because Obama caved into the pirates who cheat people on insurance and prescription drugs.
Health care and the prescription drugs appear an economic issue that Obama refused to act progressive on so instead he acts on this cheap mosque issue which does not involve economics hoping he will get the left to stop acting pissed at him. No dice President Obama. I like you but I find myself strongly disappointed in you such that I will
write in the name of Tom Harkin in 2012 unless I see a single payer public option and a prescription drug benefit in Medicare Part B.
70%ish of Americans find it offensive. Most don’t deny their right to build the whatever on their private property but we have the right to think and call them /ssholes… and to display an image of the prophet mohammed in a jar of urine.
This is how I understood President Obama’s remarks. Legally, under our laws, they have every right to build a community center/mosque at that location. However,NO ONE, can say for sure, whether it is a good idea or bad. If we embraced the idea, it could be our monument representing america’s right to practice whatever religion we choose, or not, peacefully. Or some homegrown terrorist could cause another tragedy. In the end, its up to Americans to define what it will represent.