How did President "nationalize" an issue driven by national politicians and covered 24/7 by national

[Empowerer]

media?

For the past few days, pundits and commentators have been criticizing the President for "nationalizing" the cultural center issue, as if it only gained national prominence last Friday when he said something about it. Excuse me? National politicians have been harping on this for weeks and the MSM has been beating the drum right along with them.

This long ago ceased being a local issue. And had the President not said anything, he would have been bombarded with demands that he speak up on this issue since it now had overwhelming national interest.

Jeez!

[dkf]

1. Sestak called it a local issue and left it at that.

Smart.

[karynnj]

27. The President has a very different responsibility than Sestak has

What Sestak said was appropriate for a Congressman running for the Senate in another state. I will bet though that his opponent and maybe parts of the PA media will push for more of an answer.

[Lord Magus]

49. Sestak is running to represent Pennsylvania. Obama is President of the United States.

The entire United States, including Muslim Americans.

[customerserviceguy]

2. Just because Faux Noise can't shut up about something

Is no reason for the President to take the bait.

Barack Obama has shown a bit less of the caution that he displayed on the campaign trail two years ago. He was able to get out of saying that the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" with a beer summit, but this one's going to be somewhat harder to shake.

Just because the chattering heads on reich-wing media and their adoring masses of tea partiers choose to go on and on about the NYC mosque, is no reason to give them an, "Aha!!!" moment to show the folks in the mushy middle.

[Uzybone]

3. the bait????

He was speaking to Muslims at the WH for a Ramadan celebration. Should he have pretended this issue didn't exist?

The cowardice of some on the "left" is astounding.

[JuniperLea]

6. Well said...

:eyes:

It's very much a national issue... and that particular setting called out for his comment, no question.

[customerserviceguy]

9. Well, it is a national issue now

And I'd bet there are dozens, if not hundreds, of Democratic candidates for Congress wishing the President hadn't said anything about it.

[Empowerer]

11. You are making my point for me

This was a national issue long before the President said a word about it. Suggesting that it only became a national issue because the President said something about it just doesn't comport with the facts.

[customerserviceguy]

15. It was a national issue only for those

who would never vote for our side, anyway. It's the folks in the middle who have to listen to a Democratic candidate stammer and stutter over this who I worry about. The President brought this front and center, and he could have chosen not to.

[Empowerer]

24. Any Democratic candidate who finds themselves "stammering and stuttering" in trying to answer

a question about an issue that is this much in the news is not ready for prime time and doesn't need to be running for public office.

And, no matter how many times people try to blame the President for this "controversy," he did NOT bring this issue "front and center." It was already there. And anyone who believes that it is appropriate for a President to run away from any controversial topic in order to make it easier for Democratic candidates just doesn't understand or appreciate what leadership is.

In fact, I think this flows exactly the other way - it would be much more desireable for Democratic candidates to stop being such punks and stand by the President for a change - especially when it comes to an issue of constitutional rights, simple decency and just plain common sense such as this.

[customerserviceguy]

39. You'll get your wish

In the purple, and even red districts where incumbent Democratic candidates are trying feverishly to hold on to their seats won in the last three elections, not matching the Rethug candidate in opposing the mosque will most likely lead to defeat.

The only Democratic candidates that I've heard in favor of it are those with super-safe seats, the kind that gerrymandering Repukes create when they want to eliminate progressive voters from the suburbs where they have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Congressional seat when the tide is turning their way.

[Empowerer]

40. If failure to out-bigot Republican candidates results in defeat

so be it. The last thing we need is for Democrats to curry political favor by turning into what we should be fighting the hardest against.

[customerserviceguy]

41. You may not realize this

but the mosque, or whatever people want to call it, is not favored by about two-thirds of New Yorkers. These are the people who live and work with Muslims every day, and know that not everyone with a Koran in hand is a Johnny Jihad.

Islam is even less popular out in flyover country. The folks in the boondocks may not identify too often with NYC, but they see 9/11 as an attack on all America, and they have the same stubbornness about it that my father's generation had about Japan and Pearl Harbor.

[Empowerer]

43. Yes, I do realize that

But the answer is to educate the ignorant, not encourage their bigotry.

[customerserviceguy]

44. Good luck with that

Especially during an election year...

[Lord Magus]

54. The people who ACTUALLY live in the area are not opposed.

Check out the polling figures for Manhattan.

Isn't it funny how the further you live from Ground Zero, the more likely you are to oppose the "mosque"?

[Hekate]

45. Anybody remember George Wallace? Lost an election to a bigot & swore he'd never be "out-n**d" again

Ah, the good old days when white people could be as vile as they wanted to when running for office -- and in places like Alabama, it worked pretty well. He became governor.

Those must be the good old days Dr Laura is pining for.

You are absolutely right -- as Democrats, let's not even go there.

Hekate

[Empowerer]

46. You are very wise, Grasshooper - that was exactly what my terminology alluded to . . .

[Lord Magus]

55. Fux and talk radio had already made it a national issue.

And the rest of the media, as usual, followed their far-right lead.

[customerserviceguy]

8. Yes, he should have done what politicians do

and sidestep this issue. Now, it's a legitimate question for every candidate for Congress: "Do you feel the President is correct in what he's said on the mosque issue?"

Gotta be really tough on Democratic candidates who are in districts that are going to be iffy enough as it is to answer that one without looking like some sort of weasel. Repukes have a ready-made answer to appease their base.

[Empowerer]

13. If a candidate can't effectively answer a simple question about a topic such as this, maybe they

don't need to be seeking public office.

It's not the President's job to avoid difficult topics in case some political cowards in his party might not know how to deal with it . . .

[customerserviceguy]

16. Oh, they're going to be answering it, all right

And the President's remarks last weekend guarantee that. The only question is, will it be the answer the reich wing wants to hear, the progressives want to hear, or something that manages to offend just about everybody?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Especially amazing

considering that some people repeatedly call him a coward.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

18. I guess some people have to find the fly in the ointment

Seriously, is there any reason to denigrate what he DOES do by reminding us what he isn't doing (or hasn't done) yet?

[customerserviceguy]

19. A President has a limited amount of political capital

Fortunately, our President used it first on the stimulus package, but found that it was running short when HCR came up. Since Congress won't do a damned thing until after the election, he can only spend what he has left on the bully pulpit.

He didn't have to comment on the NYC matter, period. He could have just come out and said, "Happy Ramadan" or whatever the appropriate greeting is, and just demurred on this local issue. The Faux Noise talking heads were just trying to goad him into looking pro-Muslim on this, and they succeeded.

Out there in flyover country, they still haven't gotten over 9/11 yet. It takes decades for that to happen. My father guarded Japanese prisoners of war after WWII, and it took until the 1990's before he could bring himself to buy a Japanese car.

[Empowerer]

25. Interesting . . .

How would you feel if there the President spoke to a group of gay Americans on Gay Pride Day but didn't mention gay marriage or DADT but just limited his remarks to a simple "Happy Gay Pride Day!?"

I have a feeling that some folks might have been a wee bit miffed at such a wimpy copout.

[customerserviceguy]

35. I'm certain there are many instances where the President has addressed

groups of gay and lesbian Americans, and simply not mentioned equal marriage.

It's about choices, and this President has picked mosque builders to praise, while staying silent on equality for Americans who are part of the fabric of everyday American life.

[POAS]

51. Muslims are as much a part of

the fabric of American life as any other group.

[Uzybone]

20. so you are throwing Muslims under the bus

Are GLBT rights more important than religious rights?

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karynnj]

29. Shouldn't you agree with Pelosi's call to investigate the claim of foreign funding?

You are completely buying the RW lie that this is a project of a group of extremists - when that really has not been proven in any way.

What does this have to do with the GBLT issue?

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hekate]

48. "Until I know, reich-wing speculation is just as valid as any other." Bullshit.

[Hekate]

47. Oooo, throwing *Americans* under the bus. You mean upstanding Christians & Jews?Aren't there Muslim-

Aren't there Muslim-Americans too? No?! :wow:

This project is "no doubt" to be financed by foreign interests. Really? :scared:

The president was asked a direct question about the non-mosque at not-Ground Zero. What was he supposed to answer? "After due deliberation with my consultant Customerserviceguy, my answer to your question about the Islamic community center is: We need to respect our LGBT citizens more, and now I'm going to wave my magic wand and repeal DADT!"

Yeah, right. Then you would have slammed him for avoiding the question.

There are 310 million Americans. Approximately 1.5 million adults are Muslim, a threefold increase from 1990 to 2008.

In 2004, Muslims were one half of one percent (0.5%) of the US population. It sounds small, but other recognized groups in that fractional category are Buddhists and Agnostics. Hindus are 0.4%, as are Atheists. Unitarian Universalists are 0.3%, 10 times as many as Sikhs. Jews weigh in at a whopping 1.3%, but they loom large in the American consciousness for many reasons, including volumes of literature written and movies made.

Christians are losing ground as immigrant groups move in, become Americans, and have kids, but they still self-identify as 76.5% of the population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions

So there you have it. We have Muslims here. They're Americans, too. Just check Arlington National Cemetery for the Crescent and Star on the gravestones.

Hekate

[JuniperLea]

22. It's not a mosque...

Human rights are human rights. I don't make a distinction between them; they are all equal in my eyes. Some people feel very strongly about their religion, and that's their right. Some people feel very strongly about their sexuality, that too, is their right. These are human and civil rights; no one right is greater than the other. All citizens have equal rights.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[POAS]

52. Would you include the minority of

Americans who hate Gays when you say "all American minorities".

[karynnj]

30. Shouldn't he do both?

[customerserviceguy]

37. I'd be more than happy with that

I have yet to see his courage when it comes to marriage equality. Even Schwartzenegger has given up on denying marriage to gay and lesbian people. Is it asking too much for the President to do the same?

[Political Tiger]

50. Ridiculous! The president hasn't denied anyone "marriage."

Please name just one single instance where the President has "{denied} marriage to gay and lesbian people!"

[karynnj]

28. I would not put the two in the same category

Obama was wrong to speak without all the facts on the Cambridge police. Here, this was a civil rights issue that was caused by right wingers frame this in a way that many who otherwise would have no problem, have a problem.

I have a problem with the right's sense that they "own" anything 911 related. It brings back memories of one right winger ranting that NYC had obviously "forgotten" what happened on 911 - when it was clear that Manhattan gave something like 80% of their vote to Kerry.

This should have remained a local issue - and what made it NOT an issue was the concerted effort to demonize it - that is ONE of the two things Pelosi thinks should be investigated. I have listened to some of talk radio - they have demonized the Iman, as radical, called it a center for Sharia law (which they say the Iman wants instituted as the law of the land here) and they have outright said that it would shelter terrorists. All of these things are stated as FACT. This is the same level of outright dishonesty as was seen with the SBVT, the Birthers, and the "climategate" liars. The right wing echo chamber is a pernicious cancer on our democracy.

[Karenina]

31. I wonder if the Imam has a case for SLANDER.

[karynnj]

32. Good point

I guess he is a public figure, but only to a very limited degree.

[customerserviceguy]

38. The only reason I put them in the same category

is that they were both things the President said without giving it the usual thought that he does before deciding to speak.

Now, we have a rise in the number of underinformed Americans who think he's Muslim, and his advocacy of this mosque is part of the fuel of the fires of stupid.

[POAS]

53. Stupid doesn't need fuel, it is self perpetuating

and anything a target of hate might say or do is fodder to the stupid.

[JuniperLea]

4. It is very much a national issue...

It touches the Constitution... it touches ideals about tolerance and the lack thereof we are seeing in the world today, as well as our own country. I'm sick of the hypocrisy.

[Empowerer]

14. Exactly!

Since when is the President supposed to duck difficult issues?

[ProSense]

5. Glad he spoke up

No one, in particular the President, should hide from defending the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Everyone is also entitled to their opinion, including their opinion of the President weighing in.

Still, glad to know he defended this group when the noise was to drown them out and deny them their Constitutional rights.

[JuniperLea]

7. Hear, hear!

:applause:

[rufus dog]

12. Heads Reps wins, Tails Dems lose

If he hadn't responded the story would have been, what is he afraid of?

[Hansel]

23. Exactly. Apparently some people haven't been paying attention

for, say, the last 3 decades.

It doesn't matter what he would have said or not said. The media smelled a controversy to drive their ratings and they weren't going to let it go. They needed a catalyst to really make it take off and a scapegoat to make it appear as though they weren't the ones driving the story so tag, Obama's it.

This is a dangerous game the media is playing. They are ginning up emotions hour after hour, day in and day out, and implicating every Muslim in this country the worst terrorist attack since Pearl Harbor.

Obama should not only have said something, he needs to take leadership on the issue even further and call on Americans to stop the hysteria. America has been cowering on her knees since 911 and this would be the perfect opportunity to inspire the whole country to stand up and stop acting like cowards.

I won't hold my breath though.

[Empowerer]

26. Had the President not said anything, the media would have whipped out their Countdown Clock

"WHEN IS THE PRESIDENT GOING TO SPEAK UP ABOUT THIS MAJOR ISSUE OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE?!?!?!"

Of course, since he DID say something, their drumbeat is now:

"WHY DID THE PRESIDENT TURN THIS LOCAL MATTER INTO A MAJOR NATIONAL ISSUE?!?!?!"

[nxylas]

33. And in my community (Greek Orthodox), it's "Why doesn't he do the same for us?"

As you may or may not be aware, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church was the only place of worship to be destroyed on 9/11, and has been struggling to rebuild ever since. I wish them well in their attempt to rebuild the church, but it has been hijacked by Fox Noise and co as an excuse to bash the President. Their narrative goes something like this: "He intervened in the case of the "Mosque", but not the Greek Orthodox Church See, we told you he was a secret Muslin who wants to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids".

[boppers]

42. Not only was I aware, I was wondering why it wasn't being mentioned.

An Abrahamic church was destroyed by zealots of that branch of world religion, should we "allow" it to be rebuilt?

[nxylas]

56. Not sure what you're referring to here

What's an "Abrahamic church"? And which church destruction do you mean?

[boppers]

57. The 9/11 attackers worshiped the same god as those of the destroyed church, the god of Abraham.

Abraham had two sons, and his descendants are those who founded Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It's all from the same group of religion, with similar tenets, foundation stories, and history.

Thus, the Orthodox church destroyed at "Ground Zero" was destroyed by people of the same kind of zealotry and style of worship as the church itself professed.

Does that clarify it?

[nxylas]

58. Yeah, that's clear. Bonkers, but clear

Not only do you want to punish all Muslims for the actions of a few extremists, but you want to extend the punishment to Christians and Jews as well.

[polmaven]

59. What is the reason

the church is struggling? Is the rebuilding being called inapparopriate or is it monetary?

[nxylas]

60. Deadlock with the Port Authority

The official statement from the Greek Archdiocese is here: http://www.goarch.org/news/rebuildsaintnicholaschurch

I have been unable to find a recent press release on the Port Authority's website to give their side of the story, and it is hard to know where to look for unbiased information. The only media outlet that has really been reporting it is Fox Noise, which has been using it to push its anti-Obama agenda.

[mwooldri]

61. If you believe Wiki, then it's a matter between the church and the Port Authority.

Also from this NY Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/nyregion/03trade.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bagli,%20Charles%20V

Basically, it is a mess between the church and the NY Port Authority over land and cash. It's not necessarily about money the church would have to contribute to rebuild (though they are seeking donations) but more about what the Port Authority will pay the church towards rebuilding costs and the cost for trading land.

There is no such problem with the proposed cultural center quite a distance away from the WTC site.