Chris Cillizza must have been the first one with his hand up in the Washington Post editorial meeting to volunteer to write the “Democrats in disarray” piece, about the Cordoba House project. He must have dialed with glee into all the campaigns and heard all the anguished responses. I particularly enjoyed the anonymous operative at the front of the article, who said, “Obama is right on substance but wrong on politics, and right now we need to focus on politics.”
Here are some sharp political types with their canny takes:
Some Democrats running for office in conservative states sought a middle ground that would appeal to supporters and opponents of the proposed mosque. “I support freedom of religion, but let’s give the families of 9/11 victims a voice about where this mosque should be placed, because putting one near Ground Zero isn’t appropriate,” said Rep. Charlie Melancon (La.), who is trying to unseat Sen. David Vitter (R-La.).
Reid was the most prominent Democrat to break with the president on the mosque, but he was not alone. Billionaire real estate investor Jeff Greene, who is running in a Senate primary against Rep. Kendrick B. Meek (Fla.), spoke against the mosque over the weekend: “Common sense and respect for those who lost their lives and loved ones gives sensible reason to build the mosque someplace else,” Greene said. Greene and Meek will compete for the Democratic nomination Aug. 24.
Florida Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink, the party’s nominee for governor, sided with Reid and Greene — saying that she opposes the construction of the mosque because the families of those killed Sept. 11 oppose it.
Apparently September 11 families run community land use deliberations now. Actually, if they did, there would be a Cordoba House in the vicinity of Ground Zero, possibly, since opposition to the Islamic community center is not monolithic among those families.
Cillizza dismisses the strong defenses of the Cordoba House project, like Jerrold Nadler (who represents the area) and Keith Ellison (the first Muslim in Congress), by saying that those two Democrats represent safe seats in November. Because they couldn’t possibly believe in religious freedom!
Today’s cable news fodder in this vein will occur in Philadelphia within the hour, as Joe Sestak campaigns with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has managed to burnish his reputation with his bold yet lonely stand in full support of Cordoba House. When Sestak got Bloomberg’s endorsement and decided to hold a press event today, he probably didn’t think he’d need to have a fully-formed opinion of what type of project should fill the former Burlington Coat Factory at 45-51 Park Place, but now he does:
“Joe believes there is a Constitutional right to religious freedom and separation of church and state that applies equally to all Americans,” Sestak spokesman Jonathon Dworkin said. “But he is not looking to say what is best for New York – as long as that right is respected – he is focused on Pennsylvania.”
Expect this dodge for the next several days, as Democrats hope this August, silly-season issue peters out. But a couple things strike me. First, it’s remarkable that Republicans have managed to figure out a way to run on 9-11 again, seemingly with as much vigor as the campaigns of 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008. Maybe when the grandson of a victim runs for President in 2076 he or she won’t be able to go to that well, but for now, they can still make bacon off it.
Also, this is a situation where Democrats control the White House, both houses of Congress, and are nonetheless directed by events, completely reactive, and unable to cut through the media clutter. It’s just not a competent political operation.
Ultimately, I agree with many commentators that the true worth of an unequivocal stand will come not in this election (and I really don’t think this will matter much in anyone’s race), but a decade or two down the road, when the minorities watching this spectacle understand who stood up for their rights and who didn’t. Right now, they’re not seeing a lot of bravery anywhere.




45 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Might be nice to make a list of the bed-wetters so we can call up their offices to ask them why they’re such bed-wetters. (Oh, and how come the Murdoch Post didn’t demagogue the actual mosque that’s in the Pentagon?)
I love how Cillizza ranks the word of DINOs like Melancon and dorks like Greene over that of Nadler, the guy who actually represents Ground Zero!
I’ve heard Episcopal priests refer to Islam as a ‘creeping cult’. So much for tolerance.
It never occurs to the right wing that Osama Bin Laden and his henchmen are fundamentalists and social conservatives. Perhaps it does. But that doesn’t really matter in the calculus of how to regain power.
This ‘tempest in a teapot’ is about creating a wedge issue and it is nothing short of amazing how easily Democrats fall into it. ‘All politics is local’ and that is the explanation, at least on the surface, of Reid’s capitulation. Obama may well believe it is his responsibility to assert a founding principle of this country. He may also believe it has pull for the left.
But, in the end, it is Muslims who have to step up. Moderate Muslims have no more in common with Osama Bin Laden than I have with Warren Jeffs. That has to be demonstrated by moderate Muslims.
It is up to the rest of us to suppress those who would stop them from doing so.
1/3 of the US population thinks that Muslims do not have the right to build near Ground Zero. Only Obama has the megaphone and the platform to insist persistently that Muslims unquestionably have the right to build.
congrats on the jeffs overturn guy. I’m sure those moderate muslims will “start speaking out” as soon as you spill the beans on the magic plates.
http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm
“First, it’s remarkable that Republicans have managed to figure out a way to run on 9-11 again.”
really? i thought that was the whole idea. not making an egg to chicken case here- i just keep coming back to some phrase like “permanent majority,” (of the emotional/ideological political mind.)
thank joe smith for happy accidents like 9/11 i guess.
Why aren’t the people who are objecting to this community center (stop calling it a mosque!) equally or more irate about the fact that congress didn’t pass legislation to help the 9/11 responders financially with their medical problems? The disconnect outrages ME!
Obama right on the substance???
What substance? All he said was, “they have a right to build it, but I express no opinion about the wisdom of it.” or words to the same effect.
Everyone knows they have the right to build it. So, there is no brave position there.
The substance is SHOULD they build it. And Obama said nothing on that. As least some Democrats have the balls to come down one way or another.
And, without taking any position himself, Obama put all Democrats in the spot of having to state a position themselves.
Here’s another way of stating the question:
You have the perfect right to tell your wife she looks fat. But, is it wise?
Not only from the point that you might get a left hook, but in regard to her feelings. A telling point for many people is that the first thing they think of when you ask that question is the left hook–what’t going to happen to them. Very few think of the other person’s feelings first.
Lots of people going around trumpeting they have rights and other’s feelings be damned.
Republican tactics: Yell “9/11″ and watch the Dems run for cover. Amazing that it still works. Especially because the 9/11 attacks might never have happened if the Supreme Court had let Al Gore be president after he won the 2000 election.
This whole issue is bigotry in full view of the world. Of course politicians should be made to take a position so that we can see if they have any morals and backbone or if they are just spineless, like we all suspect. The Rs are totally predictable but the Dems need to step up and stand for the rights of people.
Actually, most everyone I’ve heard agree that they do have the “right” to build near ground zero, but most just think it’s not a good idea.
Similarly, once the center is built, protesters will have the “right” to hand out cartoons of the prophet on the sidewalk out front, but that doesn’t make it a good idea.
Interesting how these Ds have learned to speak the lingo of the Rs so well, while at the same time wanting us to believe they stand for something different than the other party. All families of all the victims of 9/11 oppose a mosque at ground zero. Ignoring the multiple falsehoods in the previous sentence, there have been any number of times when the unfounded fears of a large group have harmed a minority. Our history is filled with examples and these sad followers do not want to stand for what is right. They simply mouth the innocuous sounding words that show that they support low-grade oppression so long as they can show that someone else is for it as well. Whether the community center goes forward or not, these politicians are showing the lack of conviction that has pushed the mainstream dialog so far to the right. Better they keep their mouths closed and be taken for fools.
Dear Dems,
Fuck you.
Very truly yours…
So when does the outcry start over the hallowed “Ground Zero” being “desecrated” by a building devoted to nothing but making money?
Oh, sorry – that’s “capitalism” and we are all supposed to fall to our knees in worship over it!
Maybe in some other town, but NYC generally assumes that the sidewalks and streets belong to the city. If the city doesn’t sell them a license to protest then the confrontation will be with the police. If it does sell them a license then they will have to conform to the rules.
As for how insulting the prophet deals with the questions of 9/11 in a constructive manner I guess that is an exercise for the reader.
Well that’s a big leap from one thing that’s somewhat factual (although not completely) to something that you just made up in your head. Utterly false equivalency and straw man argument. Thanks for nothing.
You make a good point.
To answer: the conservatives who are making this cravenly bogus & bigoted claim about the alleged perfidiousness of a not-Mosque not-at-ground-zero would tell that giving first responders the health care that they need and deserve is tantamount to endorsing the “nanny state” and giving them welfare.
What are you? A commie or something???? /s
It’s those dagnabbed Muslims who found a way to get Reps elected in spite of themselves – recruiting tool!
There, I fixed it for you.
If they have protest permits I guess they have building permits too. Religious rights are right there next to speach rights.
Hipo
I am so inspired to see the aspiring Minority Leader, Harry Reid, take his cues from certifiable third-tier blogger Pamela “Atlas Juggs” Gellar. Really, Harry, look to your own faith for how people get treated when they can’t worship in America, why don’t you?
I just sent Alex Sink a burner. One less vote she’ll get for governor.
false equivalency
True. One group might protest the insensitivity of another, quite different from what happens to people dealing in cartoons.
I am sure Bin Laden is high fiving American conservatives for helping their recruitment efforts for 10 years straight. Heckuva job.
Cordoba House is an organization dedicated to bringing about better understanding among muslims and non muslims so how can one object to that. I object to Obama wanting to use tax dollars for the project.
What???
Funny, a lot of the pot stirring is coming out of Republican Party Headquarters – Faux News. Which incidentally is partially owned by a good friend of Rupert Murdoch, Saudia Arabian Royal Family member Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal a follower of the Wahabi Sect of Islam to which Osama bin Ladan belongs as did the 15 of 19 Saudi Arabian terrorists on 9/11.
These people don’t care about the WTC as hallowed ground. Unless you consider constructing a skyscraper there which will contain banks, financial institutions, investment houses, commercial offices, retail space, fine dining restaurants and a subway station a fitting manner in which to memorialize the 3500 dead.
Hell, it may even contain a 9/11 souvenir shop with authentic memorial momentos made in Communist China imported by Republican entrepreneurs who contribute heavily to the Republican Party.
And you have a source for this assertion?
No, I didn’t think so. I figure you pulled out from beside your head.
Just as you do so many of your “facts”
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/
At this link you should be able to watch the roundtable discussion from 8/15. Amanpour explicitly says 61% think Muslims have the right and 34% do not. She is referring to some poll which she does not identify. I don’t believe a written transcript is available to read. The numbers are written on the screen. These comments are at the very front of the roundtable discussion.
Do you believe that 100% of Americans understand the Free Exercise clause?
The reason 2/3 or so are opposed is because fully 1/2 of those do not believe Muslims have the right to build.
why do you keep arguing on that false narrative that the mormons were denied their rights to worship teddy?
They weren’t. They were welcomed (in some cases tolerated) until they helped themselves to their neighbors property.
No. Everyone does not know the Muslims have the right to build. I refer you to “This Week” from 8/15, the roundtable discussion. Fully 1/3 of Americans do not believe the Muslims have the right to build. Do you, also, think 100% of Americans understand the Free Exercise clause?
I replied to you yesterday, you may have missed it.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/08/16/reid-comes-out-against-cordoba-house-project-near-ground-zero/#comment-47218
They think they are victims and they should be relieved of that burden with the truth.
Another reason why progressives should pick up their marbles and just abandon the Democratic party to the de facto Republicans who now dominate the party.
What the Democrats should be telling these Dixiecrats and Republicans to shut up and mind their own business! This is an issue for the people of Manhattan to decide — NOT by a bunch of red-neck hicks half-way across the country! People in NY city are overwhelmingly ok with this mosque. So the rest of us should BUTT OUT!
Harken to the Eleventh Commandment which states, “Mind your own business.”
My sainted Granny used to tell us kids that alllll the time! It is apt for this situation as well. (:>
PLEASE read the NY TIMES OP-ED in today’s paper: “The Muslims in the Middle.” This is an excellent informative piece about how the the organization behind the center — the Cordoba Initiative are not “radical” Muslims, but members of a VERY moderate Sufi sect that is despised by radical Muslims.
It is sad to see so-called “patriotic” Americans calling for the censorship and limitations of other Americans freedoms. If we are at war to fight for “freedom”, are we only fighting for the rights of Christians?
God, grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
And wisdom to know the difference.
This, dear politicians is one of those things you cannot change. These are private individuals who are using their own money to purchase private property to put it to a legal use. You can either accept it or give yourself an ulcer over it. 2 months from now, nobody will be talking about this.
Amen
“everyone” as in all politicians. Let’s say 95% of Federal office holders know they have the right. Might be 99%.
So, Obama said nothing really. I actually had heard many, many Republicans say–before the Ramadan dinner–that the Iman completely had the right to build there. That under our Constitution they had the total right. Same as Obama.
They questioned the wisdom of it.
Obama said nothing different, except he would not express whether he questioned the wisdom. Real world, if he didn’t question the wisdom, he would not have even mentioned the “wisdom” point.
The only difference between Obama and the GOP is that they will say what they think of the wisdom and Obama only implies he doesn’t think it is wise.
Plain statement versus implication of the same thing. Not exactly much of a difference.
OH, this will continue right up until the mosque moves or is built.
Remember this not-act of terror from earlier this year? I wonder what his favorite show was on Fox which Joe Stack used for inspiration or his personal jihad against the corrupt US Government.
Muslims Say Texas Plane Attack Is Terrorism
A major US Muslim group is complaining that US officials are exercising double standards in refusing to label a Texas suicide plane crash terrorism. The group is saying government officials would not have hesitated to do so if the pilot was a Muslim. http://www.newslook.com/videos/190299-muslims-say-texas-plane-attack-is-terrorism?autoplay=true
When I mean “all politicians,” I say “all politicians.” When I mean “everyone,” I say “everyone.” Much (most) of your comment is a straw man or shouldn’t be directed to me, since I haven’t made any comment on what Obama has said or done.
I believe I understand your position regarding the Muslim center: You believe in free speech as long as it is uncontroversial; you believe in freedom of religion as long as it is uncontroversial; and you believe in a free press as long as it is uncontroversial. You believe controversy is unwise. You thrive on unanimity and homogeneity. You are scrupulously attentive lest anyone, anywhere take offense at what you say, what you write, or how you worship.
Am I correct?
Verbal inflation, thy name is DDAy. For a guy who mixes metaphors like a cement maker (making bacon off going to a well? WTF?), you sure like to toss around grandiose phrases.
Would we say, the true worth of an altruistic act, to save a stranger’s life, is in how that stranger votes later?
No, of course not. The true worth of taking an unequivocal stand, in defense of religious freedom, is in the act itself.
Whatever happened to doing the right thing because it’s the freakin’ right thing to do, as a moral human being, rather than as a political calculating machine?
Everybody’s talking
And no one says a word
[...]
Most peculiar, mama
–John Lennon, Nobody Told Me (there’d be days like this), Milk and Honey (1984)
I called Reid’s office this morning and scorched the ears of the munchkin who answered the phone. I said I was from New York, which I am, and Jewish, which I am, and that I found Reid’s cowardice so appalling that I was thinking of contributing to the right-wing crackpot who’s running against him.
The Democrats think there’s no downside to their moral cowardice, but there is.
Moral cowardice, now that’s more like it! And word to Twain, the only other person to use the ‘m’ word in this thread (according to the search I just did).
Senatores boni viri, senatus autem mala bestia. (“Senators are good men, but the Senate is a malicious animal.” )
Et tu, Senator Reid? On which end of this phrase do you and your cowardly, calculating, conniving colleagues spend most of your time?
Has craven political consultant-driven calculation induced a runaway Gresham’s Dynamic in our political system, or what?
Fuck the partisans, and the parties in which they ride roughshod over us and into office!
I have a legitimate question to pose to this group—the only folks who have ever given this outlier straight answers: We seem to have a pattern here. Over and over Obama takes a principled stand (the kind I thot we’d be getting consistently when I voted for him) then pulls back, goes all mealy-mouthed and negates himself—i.e. EXACTLY what we have seen on the Lower Manhattan Islamic Center issue. As Maureen Dowd accurately describes it, this football fumbling is killing him and us.
As disgruntled as I am, rather than see the WH take us all down in flames, why doesn’t Obama either shut the hell up OR, if he’s going to say anything, say something banal and political that won’t drive him down in the polls two points. Question:
Why is does this WH act so gracelessly and tone deaf so to appear to cave on issues thus alienating EVERYONE. Surely, they see the numbers and surely they care. Honestly do they sit around scratching their heads wondering what they are doing wrong?
http://www.salon.com/wires/us/2010/08/18/D9HLU9380_us_ground_zero_mosque_poll/index.html
Here is an AP article about a poll of New York state voters taken by Siena College Aug 9 thru Aug 16. It shows 64% of all voters opposed to building the mosque. 28% of all voters think Muslims do not have the right to build.
It’s inconceivable to me that somebody would favor building the mosque but think the developer doesn’t have the constitutional right to do so. So I think the article has an error when it says 28% of mosque opponents think the developer has no constitutional right. I think 28/64 = 43.75% of opponents think there is no constitutional right to build. I’m saying I believe all of those who think there is no constitutional right are opposed.