COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • GoldwaterWhereAreYou

    That acerbic cartoon and its absurd invective is against the tradition of American plurality. It is reductive, small-minded, and it conflates terrorism at-large w/ the totality of Islam itself. It is an embarrassment.

    I agree w/ Mayor Michael Bloomberg:

    • Achance

      than jihadis. Unfortunately, a couple of generations of “progressive” dominance of education in this Country have produced at least 52% of our population that is stupid enough to believe the crap you spout and to vote for someone like Comrade Obama.

    • http://www.hickpolitics.com Dave Poff (haystack)

      I’ll be neither vitriolic nor snarky.

      That you agree w.Bloomberg is telling. That the cartoon is unsettling to you is of little surprise…welcome to the free speech you just exercised in response to the free speech the Artist exercised.

      That’s how this game works.

      Oh-and I fundamentally disagree with your idea that “Government is attempting to deny private citizens” any thing. Government is comprised of we, the People and we, the People disagree with you about this Mosque being placed where it is being requested that it be placed.

      Get used to it…majorities work both ways.

      • aesthete

        I can run my business, live my life, and associate with others who do the same only at the discretion of the gibbering idiots who elected Obama in the first place? Sorry, but if conservatism is reduce-able to asking “We the People” for a by your leave before I do anything with my property, my children, and my life, it’s morally bankrupt and indistinguishable from progressivism.

        • JSobieski

          Ultimately we are a super-majoritarian country on some things and a majoritarian country on other things

          The First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights are in force because a super-majority of people continue to see their value, and refrain from amending them out of the Constitution.

          As you said yesterday, sovereignty and self-determination. Not eveyrthing is procedurally up for a direct vote, but ultimately the country is at the whim of the super-majority over time.

          • aesthete

            that we should use majorities or super-majorities to deprive people of liberty. For example, getting a super-majority to repeal the First Amendment would be permissible and Constitutional, but I’d fight like hell to keep it from happening. Democracy being the worst form of government besides the rest, I’d have it maximizing liberty and enforcing contracts, not leave its majoritarian impulses untrammeled. Conservatism is not mere confirmation of majoritarianism, and the second it becomes so is the second I stop being a conservative.

          • JSobieski

            is exposed by this Ground Zero Mosque issue. You can focus on the “rights” of people who won’t condemn HAMAS as a terrorist organization but others here are focusing on “what is right”—which is stopping a foreign funded monument the most successful attack on the US homeland.

            In both scenarios, you have people using their legal rights to thwart the source of those legal rights. Both scenarios should result in fighting like hell. After all, US citizens pushing for the repeal of the First Amendment are just private citizens exercising their free speech rights?

            I should point out that the hypothetical 1st Amendment repealers have no connection to violence, no foreign funding, and no blurry lines between pure advocacy of a really bad idea and violent groups utilizing complex networks of non-violent fundraisers, money laundering etc.

          • aesthete

            Concentrating on only one will have us lose track of the other. And you’re right, those pushing for free speech would be private citizens, so if I were to call for, say, their mass imprisonment, I would be in the wrong. I sure as hell would fight using my rights to prevent them from getting what they want, though, just as I would those who want to enact Sharia law.

          • JSobieski

            nt

          • aesthete

            Rhetorically supporting people who oppose Sharia law (Robert Spencer, Sarah Palin). Voting for people who won’t institute or recognize Sharia law. That’s a bit of a non-sequitur, really. What are you doing?

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      I’ll save you further embarrassment from making more stupid comments like this.

      • DonPMitchell

        You deleted him for being a moderate conservative and disagreeing with someone’s post?

        • Aaron Gardner

          Inferring that a FP contributor is a small minded bigot will get you banned pretty quick.

          Now, are you saying that you agree with GoldwaterWhereAreYou and Toby is a small minded bigot?

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          We value Toby’s contributions to the site. He’s a volunteer site editor, and he doesn’t give his time and effort drawing cartoons to us to be attacked like that in our own comments section.

          I’ll ban people who gun for him every day and twice on Sunday.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          And there are other factors you are not aware of that led to his ban.

          • DonPMitchell

            OK, I see your point, he was insulting. I’ve been on redstate for more than 5 years, and I hope that no one would ever be banned for expressing their opinions in a civil manner.

          • Bill S

            For example: civil discussions about Obama’s birth certificate.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            RS is not a debate club.

            RS is a site organizing conservative and Republican political activism.

            There’s a wide range of stuff, including birtherism, that will get you tossed even if you’re nice about it.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      You missed the other half of Goldwater’s quote.

      There is no justice in the Ground Zero mosque, and stopping it is what we pursue.

      Your moderation in that pursuit is no virtue.

    • JSobieski

      All nations are comprised of individuals. All groups are comprised of individuals. Using your logic, its pretty much impossible for a group like HAMAS to do anything, because after all, HAMAS is just a group of private citizens.

      You ignore the foreign influences in terms of money and connected individuals and groups. During the Cold War, I have little doubt you would have supported KGB supported buildings as well.

      You presume that no greater international effort is at play even though there is considerable evidence to that effect. This is NOT a grass roots compaign by US citizens. The money is certainly not originating from the US.

      This kind of suicidal thinking is exactly why I could never be a libertarian. People with connections to the Muslim Brotherhood do all sorts of things in the US, but since they aren’t wearing uniforms and carrying membership cards, you treat them as private individuals when infact they are agents of any enemy that want to burn our precious Constitution into ash.

      In most contexts, I find your desire to look at people as individuals to be both healthy and refreshing. But in some instances, there are greater forces at work. You seem totally determined never to see those forces of history.

      The runup to the loss of freedom is often preceeded by increasing street violence by “private citizens”.

    • streiff

      of the World Church of the Creator at Selma, aren’t you.

      I mean, who would deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property? Right?

    • NoDoze

      Proposing and or building this mosque alongside the very site of the radical Islamic attack on America is PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE!!!

      Don’t try to feed us that unity garbage. Everybody knows that is a lie. When a football player makes a touchdown, then does a derisive dance and demonstration in the end zone. Every sane person knows that it is a taunt. Nobody, friend or foe thinks that is an act of unity and understanding.

      Come on, Islamist apologists. Give us a little credit for intelligence.

    • finaljeopardy

      He has no problem telling private property owners whether they can allow smoking on their premises or guns in their home. But we have no right to use zoning laws to protect landmarks?

      This is not an issue of freedom of religion. It is purely political. The builders of this proposed mosque want to give Islam a PR makeover. It is entirely the responsibility of Muslims. Whether the mosque is there or elsewhere makes no difference whether they practice peacefully and therefore distinguish their faith from political extremism. But their insistence that the mosque be there, so close to Ground Zero, puts the onus of tolerance onto the victims and the other New Yorkers who are not Muslim. It is exactly as this cartoon portrays the situation, disrespectful and obnoxious.

      I agree with Pope John Paul II when he asked the Carmelite nuns to move from Auschwitz. The beloved Pope recognized that having the right to do something doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. I agree with Robert G. Sugarman, National Chairman of the Anti-Defamation League, who also called on the mosque builders to consider the sensitivities of the victims and find another location. I agree with Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the mayor during 911, who calls this a “desecration.”

      Bin Laden also says Muslims will always be at war with America, as long as Israel exists. “The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim.” Is Bin Laden calling the shots now?

      PS We know why you really like Goldwater; he’s dead.

  • angryred

    As a New Yorker it really bothers me that they are building this Mosque near Ground Zero??? It is still very raw for many of us.

    I dont think Bloomie’d get reelected after this.

    It’s just not OK. OK!

    • cactusjack

      I am using it to try to explain to myself, apparently crazy behavior. I am wondering if this Bloomberg-let’s-CoExist line is, in reality, a kind craven cowardice at a subliminal level – “they won’t hit us again if we put one of their own grand mosques right in the target zone. “– I didn’t say you have to like this thought, RS, I just posit maybe it’s in their thinking. Because building this Mosque right there really doesn’t make a lot of sense otherwise, not on any line of analysis. It’s not good, defensible reasoning and just about everybody outside NYC, and a bunch of people in NYC, don’t buy it.

    • finaljeopardy

      He sat on this with good reason. Remember how much money he spent on his reelection campaign this time? Bet his 30 pieces of silver were Persian.

  • antimony

    This is an idealogical war. You either believe that allowing this mosque to be built is somehow a demonstration of our strength as a nation – that we will NOT bend or break our principles in the face of terror, that we are, in fact, above and larger than the hate of the extremists, that this demonstrates how very different we are, and why America is a beacon of hope for millions, OR, that this is an unnecessary provocation. That just because they CAN do it does not mean that they SHOULD, and that we, as Americans, should be able to reject the expressions of certain freedoms if they fly in the face of all our values. That allowing this mosque to be built is capitulation to a hateful ideology, built from fear and political correctness, and actually shows weakness, not strength.

    Personally, I do not find the argument that the project leaders are extremists, or squabbles of how close it actually is to ground zero particularly compelling, at least not compared with the arguments above. As someone who grew up in and around NYC, I wanted us to build towers ASAP after 9/11 in the shape of a big middle finger pointing toward Saudi Arabia. But in the end, I agree with Mayor Bloomberg. And its important to understand that NYC is very different from where you live, and Manhattan even more different than the other boroughs. This was the right decision for New York City, and make no mistake, it WAS NY’s decision to make.

    • snowshooze

      There are many broken families. There are our Servicemen. And if you don’t think the Kansas boys have a stake in this, you are wrong again.
      If it were purely an issue for Manhattan…I might not care.
      But it ain’t.

  • snowshooze

    To say the least,. it is in less than poor tastes.
    We have rights and with them come responsibilities, and where they may have the right to build, it is irreponsible to do so.
    It is also far from prudent, as I am positive that if built, it will be a problem for the city which will draw extremest’s from both sides. A magnet for trouble.
    I am trying to imagine a good arguement to block them in court, and having a bit of trouble doing so…but my first point is that building in the immediate area amounts to incitement.
    Best would be if they realized the good and decent thing to do is pack up and build elsewhere, ( Iran ) but I don’t see that happening.
    I should not have to lose rights to do as I please in a responsible way in order to block this building.
    I won’t rule out dirty pool in this case, I do not feel a threat to my honor in doing so and investigating the organization and it’s ties… I have already heard there may be some issues there.
    I am very disturbed that they even would consider this and wish they could dismiss it as just completely out of hand and a really stupid idea, but I count on the fine folks of the ACLU and others of the same stripes to stick their noses in, and I have been told I cannot just shoot them.
    So…does anyone have anything solid to fight with? Short of implementing some legislation which would have unintended consequences?
    I like incitement, believe it fits as there will undoubtably be blood on the ground at this Mosque, and in short order. I doubt they would even be able to finish construction before it became a real headache.
    Could that be supported? Common sense says yes, it could…but that is not usually the battlefield we get to play on.
    Oh, and the cartoon is great and right on point.

    • NoDoze

      but I am so angry at the whole PC situation that I am scouring my brain for ideas (I know, not much there to scrape up).

      Is there anything that can be done to cut off funds for building this insult?

      Can someone get to the unions and construction workers and persuade them to refuse to work on it?

      How about zoning laws? Can objections be filed with the City to zoning?

      What about targeting all politicians who support this monstrosity for political destruction immediately and persistently?

      Just asking.

      • snowshooze

        Except the Union angle, and if they got on board it would be the first decent thing they have done in years and ruin a perfect record…so I will rule them out. Zoning laws, I will bet there is no conflict.
        Nothing here I can get my teeth into. Keep thinking.
        We gotta have a couple Attorneys here working on it, and I would love to hear their potential points of argument.
        Like I say, incitement is as best as I can come up with, and obviously there will be trouble at the Mosque if it moves forward.

        • NoDoze

          I almost wish we could adopt the methods of the environmentalists, for a while. Under that view, everything they build during the day would burn down at night. Nah, we can’t do that.

  • snowshooze

    http://www.humanevents.com/offers/offer.php?id=MSQ100&time=201008041001

  • http://www.tobytoons.com TobyToons

    GoldwaterWhereAreYou,

    “the tradition of American plurality” is not being violated by complaining about the building of the next, of over a hundred mosques in NY, on the graves of those Americans.

    It is an insult, and it is meant to be an insult. The people wanting to build it know how New Yorkers feel about it, and rather than respect their feelings, they want to go ahead with the project.

    The PROPONENTS of the project are the ones giving bin Laden what he wants, not the people on the receiving end of this provication.

    • antimony

      Manhattanites support the project.
      http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1302.xml?ReleaseID=1473
      That is their “feelings”. And look, I don’t pretend to propose that any other majority supports this, from Queens to NY State, to beyond. But New York City, and Manhattan, is not Kansas. that is important to note. I wonder if making a big stink about anything in lower Manhattan is keeping with the spirit of the City.

      I’m sorry, I don’t trust your opinion that this is meant to be an insult, or that even if its is, that we should react to it. Are we larger than this “provocation”, or are we not? I think that changing the spirit of New York and poking holes in America’s projection of inclusiveness are much more damaging then letting this mosque get built.

      • Achance

        level of ignorance and superstition. We have graphic evidence that at least 52% of you are fool enough to vote for Comrade Obama and you can come here spouting lefty drool.

      • Scope

        of the 9/11 terriorists, and, being the “financial capital of the world” and being a very crowded city, it will continue to be a major target of all the terriorists. Glad to know that the city’s residents would choose to move the terriorists right into their midst. It’s not possible to get any dumber than that.

        • NoDoze

          Next we will hear that 52% of New Yorkers are Muslim.

      • finaljeopardy

        Overwhelmingly opposes the mosque, and that is where most of the firemen, policemen and rescue workers lived. The other boroughs have a say in this matter, and many people who worked in the WTC were commuters. You’ve got no right to tell others how too grieve, even if you live on the island. And 911 was a national security issue. We have troops in Afghanistan risking their lives to protect us from Islamic terrorists, and their families have a say in this matter, as well.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    I laughed outloud, and (quite mysteriously) felt no pang of guilt, no inner voice crying out ‘but, but, but COEXIST!!!’.

    Nor do I fear for their First Amendment rights.

    • stephaniet

      …make me want to hit the person driving the car. You can’t coexist with people that want you dead!

      • Wine Country Dog

        usually have an 0bama 08 bumper sticker nearby. I expect they think all we have to do is sit around a campfire and sing ‘Kumbaya’ and all will be just dandy. Or send Jimmy Carter over.

        • Richard Mullins

          but that doesn’t mean much being so close to Houston. Obama stickers and Coexist stickers just show stupidity on the part of some.

          • acat

            but I’m also not insane enough to think my willingness means anything to the other guy…

            Mew

          • Richard Mullins

            so I’ll give you the right to be stupid, don’t force that stupidity on me. Back to the subject of the ground zero mosque that Micheal Berry on KHTH 740 here in Houston got badgered from a Muslim, since it seems to be a hot topic, the mosque shouldn’t be allowed to build. It’s not because I hate free speech but with all the evidence it violated the letter of the First amendment it’s self but infringing on another First amendments right. A Mosque on a very busy road fine but if enough people don’t want the mosque, it doesn’t need to be there.

          • acat

            I said I’m happy to coexist. It’s the lazy solution.

            I’m perfectly willing and able to defend my right to exist, but that takes effort – so it makes me less happy. Happier than dead, though.

            Mew

            p.s. The answer to my question is that by letting you go on your way, I risk making you more bold, thinking there are no consequences to pushing me around. Be aware, there are consequences, and they are sharp.

          • Richard Mullins

            and having it built flies in the face of these people. I have no problems with Mosques being built so long as they don’t give problems with non-Muslims. I drive down a very busy FM 1960 where there is a Mosque there but no problems in that location. It’s not the point of hating Muslims, it just the sensitivity problem of having it where it is. I guess that’s where we have to draw the line and if they want mosques, let them buy properties to build them.

          • acat

            The problem isn’t with building a mosque.
            The problem is with building *this* mosque.

            The problem isn’t just with the location, but also with the proposed names – having a mosque at the site of a “battlefield” (for certain values thereof) named to commemorate islams’ past victories over “the west” makes it rather clear to me that this is not about “outreach”, and that means it’s violating *my* right to live and let live, eh?

            Mew

  • antimony

    when I read this! Well done, and thank you for adding nothing to the discussion, comrade. You certainly like to throw around “idiot” and “ignorance” a lot for someone who is, at least today, a one-trick pony.

    • Scope

      Bye Bye Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

      I suspect the formal boot will be here very shortly.

    • E Pluribus Unum

      You can get back to your dishwashing job.

  • gekster

    someone else beat me to it.
    So will you be happy when they start calling for shria law to be imposed in thier area.

    • gekster
      • Scope

        He has been put out of his Redstate misery.

        • gekster

          2nd nt

  • aesthete
    • http://www.tobytoons.com TobyToons
  • msctex

    Many if not most of the people who actually need to be exposed to the thinking behind the COEXIST sticker don’t have cars. They are still living in the 16th century, watching the 21st as it progresses further and further every day, and can offer only hatred and envy in response. They are purely Reactionary, and tragically their demented religion may well deny them hope for change — and that is the true horror we face. Our enemy may be beyond salvation, no matter what we do.

  • cactusjack

    Let me epeat that for the benefit of any libs who just walked thru here and are horribly insensate-shocked by this historical fact: the US Marines in the Pacific did not take Japanese prisoners. Wounded, dazed, begging for mercy – they were dispatched. Cruelty?nev Prejudice? No, just Reality. We learned quickly, they did not take prisoners, and feigned surrender in order to stage glorious suicide for the Emperor with a grenade stashed in their underwear, and blow up two or three of the enemy with them. We paid in American blood the first few times on Guadalcanal, trying to honor fair ROEs and taking them prisoner. Didn’t work; we learned and never took more (in general) for the rest of the war. Acat I think this supports your point about relative CoExistence. It is relative despite our best intentions.

  • oblio

    were a legitimate religion. But it is no more legitimate than that practiced by Jones, Koresh, Manson. At some point you have to call a heretical cult a CULT and exorcise it from our country and culture.

    • NoDoze

      a first amendment issue here. We are not in any way advocating that they don’t have a right to say anything they want. However, your right to speak does not imply my obligation to listen. But, how does building a mosque impact the right to speak? I don’t get it.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
        • NoDoze

          n/t

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • mistmiles

    Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people. Proverbs 14:34.
    *********************************
    Apparently there are those that do not have the understanding that what happened on 9-11 is a sin perpetrated upon our nation.

    These that are without understanding would rather give into fear and not hear the facts about where the money is coming from to build the
    Ground Zero Mosque.

    It would be the sane thing to check first and make sure the money to build the Mosque is not coming from any group that was and or is affiliated with those that caused the following destruction seen in this video. . .

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5474006551011489413#