Reply With Quote
der Kraut Hammer?
a very credible guy to be cririquing liberalism, esp all the straw men and false claims he throws at it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082605233.html
Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the "bitter" people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging "to guns or religion or" -- this part is less remembered -- "antipathy toward people who aren't like them."
That's a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.
-- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.
-- Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.
-- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? phobia.
-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.
Now we know why the country has become "ungovernable," last year's excuse for the Democrats' failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, phobic Islamophobes?
Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities -- often lopsided majorities -- oppose President Obama's social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero.
What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card. When the Tea Party arose, a spontaneous, leaderless and perfectly natural (and traditionally American) reaction to the vast expansion of government intrinsic to the president's proudly proclaimed transformational agenda, the liberal commentariat cast it as a mob of angry white yahoos disguising their antipathy to a black president by cleverly speaking in economic terms.
Then came Arizona and S.B. 1070. It seems impossible for the left to believe that people of good will could hold that: (a) illegal immigration should be illegal, (b) the federal government should not hold border enforcement hostage to comprehensive reform, i.e., amnesty, (c) every country has the right to determine the composition of its immigrant population.
As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy? And that seeing merit in retaining the structure of the most ancient and fundamental of all social ins utions is something other than an alleged hatred of gays -- particularly since the opposite-gender requirement has characterized virtually every society in all the millennia until just a few years ago?
And now the mosque near Ground Zero. The intelligentsia is near unanimous that the only possible grounds for opposition is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration's pretense that we are at war with nothing more than "violent extremists" of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct (an admitted redundancy) are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour.
It is a measure of the corruption of liberal thought and the collapse of its self-confidence that, finding itself so widely repudiated, it resorts reflexively to the cheapest race-baiting (in a colorful variety of forms). Indeed, how can one reason with a nation of pitchfork-wielding mobs brimming with "antipathy toward people who aren't like them" -- blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims -- a nation that is, as Mic e Obama once put it succinctly, "just downright mean"?
The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing. And not just because Obama over-read his mandate in governing too far left. But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modi of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.
der Kraut Hammer?
If it's not islamophobia, then what is it?-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.
If the majority of people want to reject a mosque being built near Ground Zero, what does he propose to do about disallowing it?
Oh, the irony of this post.der Kraut Hammer?
I thought you would applaud him. He's using your M.O. afterall.der Kraut Hammer?
Why do you guys insist on making Krauthammer's point?
I'm not making his point.
He's crying that people against the mosque are being called islamophobes.
If they aren't being islamophobic about the mosque, then what is the reason they are crying about it?
"Liberalism" has been hijacked and it's amazing people don't know what it means. The idiots that call themselves liberal and the idiots following the idiots tha make policy that are liberal. Liberal means to liberate. "To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control". Each and everyday our lawmakers take more and more of our God given freedom and liberty and try to make our minds up for us. Just wait til our economy goes up.
Explain to me how it is NOT Islamophobia? After all, any rational person can deduce that 9/11 wasn't the work of the Islam religion but rather extremism. So, if you CAN'T hold Islam responsible and you still insist in doing so, what do you attribute the opposition to the mosque to?
Another dumbass DarrinS topic.
you know what's truly sad is that this isn't supposed to be a partisan issue. This is not a liberal vs conservative problem. I think we can all understand that people are still hurt about 9/11, but that still doesn't give them carte blanche to be irrational specially with regards to others people's right to practice their religion.
After all, it IS irrational, isn't it? Islam wasn't the culprit of 9/11 so why are these people so intent on blaming them? its a purely emotional response to a very traumatic event, and though I think everyone can empathize, it doesn't make what they are demanding, right.
There is no other word for it. The more relevant question would be if it is justified. Our country has evolved into this big glob of goo with all of its political correctness. Too many feel a certain way but don't voice it because of fear of being labeled racist. Virtually every major terrorist threat whether attempted or successfully completed with the exception of Oklahoma City had one thing in common--- Attackers faith rooted in Islam. Unfortunately Muslims don't where signs that say I want to kill you. I have friends that are Muslim and I think they are good people. If any of them were to become radicalized I am fairly certain they wouldn't give me a heads up.
That being said the mosque should be allowed for no other reason than it is what we stand for.
Is it your contention that every Muslim out there is a racial extremist waiting to happen and in the mean time they masquerade as "good people"?
I'm not certain about this, but I think that could be the very definition of Islamophobia.
That's all well and good, but without understanding why that is what you stand for, that sentence holds no meaning whatsoever.That being said the mosque should be allowed for no other reason than it is what we stand for.
Freedom of religion--- Freedom of speech--- living tolerantly
The other reply's ended up in your post somehow
Is opposition to the Ground Zero mosque Islamophobia if those opposed wouldn't mind it being built 2 miles further away?
I think it is the proximity and scale of the project that has many opposed.
I also think those in charge of development around Ground Zero can share some of the blame for taking so long to develop an appropriate site to commemorate that tragedy.
so you disregard the fact that it isn't Muslim religion that is the culprit but extremists and choose to let your irrational fear dictate actions you know are morally reprehensible, just so you feel better?Not sure how you reach that. There is no mechanism to separate a radical from a non-radical muslim so the question becomes what level of violence on US soil is acceptable in the name of freedom of religion. A WTC attack every 10 years? Does your opinion change if a major city is wiped out? What if it was just your family? In all of the examples your argument would still be valid. These acts are by only a few while the majority are peaceful. Is there any level of violence or destruction that changes your view?
are you joking?
to answer your question, no amount of violence and destruction should excuse your trampling of another person's freedom of religion. Specially when that person isn't guilty of doing what 'caused you to be afraid in the first place.
Its not Muslim's fault that people are too stupid to tell the difference between Islam the religion and its extremists. Can you tell the difference between Catholic religion and their extremists? If so, why can't you do it with Muslims?
But they still mind it being built where it is supposed to be built?
If it's not Islamophobia, then what is the reason for being opposed to it?
You are trying to pass the blame along to someone else for other people's Islamophobia?I also think those in charge of development around Ground Zero can share some of the blame for taking so long to develop an appropriate site to commemorate that tragedy.
BingoBut they still mind it being built where it is supposed to be built?
If it's not Islamophobia, then what is the reason for being opposed to it?
You are trying to pass the blame along to someone else for other people's Islamophobia?
It's too close and too big.
No , that still doesn't change things. People are willfully holding Islam responsible for what extremism did. Either because they don't understand there's a difference or because they just don't give a . Either way, its not right.
I don't care if its the distance, the scale or the ing colour. People had no right to demand anything from the builders of this mosque under the guise of fragile sensibilities since it wasn't Islam the religion the culprit of the 9/11 attacks.
funny how people want to drive them underground and out of sight, instead of being able to see them.
knuckledragger logic.
Right, people have been Islamophobic because it's too close and too big to Ground Zero for their personal tastes.
Now what do these people propose to do about getting it shut down because of their own insecurities?
DarrinS is the very embodiment of "doth protest too much."
Translation muslims struck on 911 and darrins doesn't want a muslim worship center near ground zero
You mean, like Brooklyn?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
