TPMDC
9/11 Widower Ted Olson: Obama Was Right On Cordoba House (VIDEO)
Share
Send to a friend!
President Obama's position in support of the right of a Muslim organization to build a community center near Ground Zero in New York is now picking up the endorsement of a very prominent 9/11 widower: Former Bush administration Solicitor General Ted Olson.
Olson's wife, the late conservative author and activist Barbara Olson, was a passenger aboard the plane that was hijacked and flown into the Pentagon. This afternoon, Olson appeared on Andrea Mitchell's MSNBC show to discuss his current high-profile legal work on behalf of gay marriage. Mitchell then also asked Olson for his opinion about the Cordoba House issue.
"Well it may not make me hap-- popular with some people, but I think probably the president was right about this," Olson responded. "I do believe that people of all religions have a right to build edifices, or structures, or places of religious worship or study, where the community allows them to do it under zoning laws and that sort of thing, and that we don't want to turn an act of hate against us by extremists into an act of intolerance for people of religious faith. And I don't think it should be a political issue. It shouldn't be a Republican or Democratic issue, either. I believe Gov. Christie from New Jersey said it well -- that this should not be in that political, partisan marketplace."
Comments (98) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Bill From PA
August 18, 2010 2:16 PM
Getting hard to continue to hate this guy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bibimimi
August 18, 2010 2:34 PM in reply to Bill From PA
Same here. Go Ted.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
alfkuewoiuoaaa
August 18, 2010 9:17 PM in reply to bibimimi
Welcome to visit
http://www.bizboysell.com
Buy these fashionable products
Buy gifts and send
We accept paypal payments
and delivery is free.
+()+()+()+()(|_)|_)|)_|_+()+)((+)|(|)_|)_|)_
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
August 18, 2010 2:59 PM in reply to Bill From PA
Har har har. Ugg once see mammoth walk on hind legs and whistle, but this -- a Repug rejecting rubbish -- is a sight to behold. Har har har.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tytester
August 18, 2010 4:36 PM in reply to Bill From PA
I think Ted Olson now understands that the Bush presidency was a disaster for the country, and for this reason he is desperately trying to make amends (in all sorts and shapes) for arguing Bush-vs-Gore in the Supreme Court.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
August 18, 2010 5:14 PM in reply to Bill From PA
I demand to know what kind of countertops this guy has in his kitchen.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tim
August 19, 2010 2:27 AM in reply to Bill From PA
Look, it's an election year. The filthy rich need to find an emotionally charged cultural issue to get the riff-raff to surrender their votes against their own interests.
This would seem to be harder to do during a recession where the Rich were made hole by a government bail out while 30% of the riff-raff are either unemeployed, underemployed, or on a bubble some place.
Fortunately they own most of the big message machines, and the average American is dumb as a stump and takes the bate every time.
The fact that we're talking about this at all shows P.T. Barnum was right.
The real response to this should be, Americans are strong enough and brave enough to enshrine freedom of Religions into the constitution.
This ranting and raving is all about "piddle-in-their-pants republican-fraidy cats" who don't understand another religion. Buck up some corrage and grow a pair, and while your at it Pick up a book and you'll find that Sufi's are the buddhist of the islamic religion.
You know, it say's in the national anthem, you can't be the land of the free unless you are the home of the brave.
Every time there's a whiff of anything new, the Republicans piddle all over themselves and throw their constitutional principles under the bus. Enough all ready. Pick up a book, read a paragraph, and grow a pair.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cool Blue Reason
August 19, 2010 12:23 PM in reply to Tim
I don't disagree with you, but I'm going to rise to the "bait" anyway.
When you're on a high horse and bashing others' intelligence, you should take care to watch your spelling...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
El Jefe Rey
August 19, 2010 5:18 PM in reply to Cool Blue Reason
Yeah, at least 8 mistakes in that post. Find them all for a prize!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RVGrandpa
August 19, 2010 10:15 AM in reply to Bill From PA
Next Supreme Court Justice??? This guy represents everything that bi-partisan means. He is a genuine Patriot in my opinion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mimi katz
August 18, 2010 2:18 PM
He redeems my faith in humanity. People can grow.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
August 18, 2010 2:42 PM in reply to Mimi katz
Based on the other stuff he's said from time to time over the last few years, I see no evidence of actual growth. But he has consistently shown more intellectual integrity, and hence willingness to accept and espouse the conclusions his convictions lead him to, than your average wingnut. Or, for that matter, a lot of "progressives."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hotspur
August 18, 2010 2:48 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Agreed. He hasn't made any kind of about-face -- he just actually sticks to conservative principles, unlike Gingrich and Palin and all those other circus freaks who think principles are only good as long as they are popular.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ogliberal
August 18, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to hotspur
I was just going to say the same thing. He hasn't changed at all. He's still a conservative with whom progressives would disagree on many issues. But on gay marriage and on this mosque controversy he is actually making a constitutional and conservative argument in support of both. Most of the politicians in the party he belongs to are not real conservatives - they're firebreathing cynical opportunists who use fear and bigotry for electoral advantage. Ted's the type of conservative who could maybe win over some folks to his side with his intelligent arguments. He's the type of guy who could turn an independent or a moderate Democrat into a Republican. The assholes running the show today just play to their shrinking base - Southern racists and angry old white people. It'll work for them this Fall but it's not good for the party or the conservative movement at all in the long run (ask Grover Norquist). Not that I care about their long-term future.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 18, 2010 4:37 PM in reply to ogliberal
#1s up the thread
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
punkdavid
August 18, 2010 7:00 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I may be biased as an attorney, but I tend to find that most conservative lawyers have a lot of intellectual integrity when it comes to matters of law and the Constitution. My differences with them tend to be on the bases of tax policy and the role of government in promoting economic justice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EddyKilowatt
August 18, 2010 2:19 PM
"...we don't want to turn an act of hate against us by extremists into an act of intolerance for people of religious faith."
That, in two words less than 25, perfectly summarizes the broader issue here.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
August 18, 2010 2:20 PM
Truly a bad sign for the GOP (and the country) that we're longing for the rationality of George W "Crusade" Bush on issues of religious freedom...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bill From PA
August 18, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to Matt Jones
I wouldn't piss on W's chest if his heart was on fire, but he did, repeatedly, defend Islam and distinguish it from Al Qaeda.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
August 18, 2010 3:01 PM in reply to Bill From PA
Ugg would. But Ugg chew much tarballs. Piss kerosene. Har har har.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
windowpane
August 18, 2010 4:02 PM in reply to Bill From PA
Bush family is BFF with Saudis.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
August 18, 2010 8:24 PM in reply to Bill From PA
Wouldn't get too carried away with this: when asked yesterday about the issue, all W could come up with was "no comment". "W" and "principles" don't really fit in the same sentence.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hotspur
August 18, 2010 2:54 PM in reply to Matt Jones
I didn't like W but I always did like how clear he was in keeping the radicals Islamists distinct from Muslims generally. That made it hard for any kind of "religious crusade" rhetoric to stick to the US. I respected that a lot.
I wish he would come out now and do that again. I guess it would be pissing all over the current GOP mob and leadership, but for the good of the country both morally and in terms of security, they need to be pissed on. It would be the statesman thing to do, and a lasting credit to W in the history books.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
August 18, 2010 3:41 PM in reply to hotspur
I don't think it was as much as George W Bush being clear as it was Fox News and the media following along and not whipping the base into a frenzy. When Bush was in office, their objective was to make him look good and to always promote his agenda. Thus, the stenographer news stayed away from this issue, because it helped his Muslim outreach which meant more GOP donors and voters.
President Obama does not have that luxury and they use any news against him. In fact., I'm sure they will find a way to spin Olson agreeing with Obama as something negative, maybe suggesting there is some nefarious reason Olson is siding with Obama on this. When you have a network that constantly promotes propoganda and creates outrage, this is the result. And the other lazy news outlets just follow along.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stehova
August 18, 2010 2:22 PM
Thanks for going with Cordoba House and not "Ground Zero Mosque!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
August 18, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to stehova
Better I agree, but it is no longer going to be called that so it is gone from biased to inaccurate headlines.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shrubbit
August 18, 2010 2:41 PM in reply to stehova
The conservative news lists that I'm on have taken to calling it:
The Obama Victory Mosque™
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 18, 2010 4:00 PM in reply to stehova
And yet, the actual name for the project is no longer "Cordoba House," but "Park 51".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 18, 2010 4:41 PM in reply to slb
yep.
Park51, actually, i think.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DrToast
August 18, 2010 5:55 PM in reply to stehova
I prefer the Burlington Coat Factory Mosque.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
August 18, 2010 2:23 PM
Har har har. Who make it political issue? Palin Newt Angle McCain Paul Vitter just speak up on behalf of good Americans like ... Palin Newt Angle McCain Paul Vitter. Har har har.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeaton
August 18, 2010 2:42 PM in reply to Ugg the Repug
Ugg hit nail on head!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
August 18, 2010 3:02 PM in reply to jeaton
Har har. Ugg thank Jeaton. Call me Ug for short.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rick Jones
August 18, 2010 2:25 PM
Yagottaloveit. When do Rush Limpbough and FauxNews start going after Ted Olson?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
August 18, 2010 2:51 PM in reply to Rick Jones
Start? "Ted Olson" + "traitor" already brings up 44,000 hits on Google thanks to his Prop 8 stuff.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Donald from Hawaii
August 18, 2010 3:25 PM in reply to Rick Jones
That's the ultimate connundrum, isn't it? We're going to see exactly how far the GOP's white, God-fearing people of Rock Ridge are willing to take the crazy. "Golly, Brother Newt, but this here tree limb we're on's comin' to shake somethin' awful ..."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
August 18, 2010 6:22 PM in reply to Rick Jones
Any moment now, I would expect. Ted Olsen has given me hope that sanity and genuine respect for the Constitution of United States can return to what was once the Grand Old Party but which has now been undermined and taken over by the Tea Party mentality. Dick Armey for President!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
August 18, 2010 2:26 PM
Good solid statement, but not sure why some are calling it "powerful stuff". When basic stuff is spoken by a conservative stuff, perhaps in this day and age it is "powerful stuff" given how low they have sunk in the past few decades.
But Olsen's statement is a low-key, basic principle stuff which anyone with even a modicum of understanding of the bill of rights already knows (or should know).
Not taking anything away from Olsen (how has shown himself to be a solid old school conservative, in the good sense of that term), but more a sad commentary about the state of public discourse these days.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Phoebe Fay
August 18, 2010 2:40 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
True. It shouldn't require bravery to talk Civics 101. The fact that this is a brave statement for a Republican to make just goes to show how screwed we are.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DwH
August 18, 2010 3:33 PM in reply to Phoebe Fay
Yes, it does. The same goes for Bush. Didn't he push the idea of "Islamofascism"?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 18, 2010 4:11 PM in reply to Phoebe Fay
The fact that this is a brave statement for a Republican to make...
Not just Republicans; Democratic politicians are not exactly covering themselves in glory on this issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pbuchberg
August 18, 2010 7:55 PM in reply to Phoebe Fay
Olson's bravery is not so much in his defense of Muslim-Americans' First Amendment rights, but in his statement: "I think the President was probably right on this." Listen carefully to the video tape and you will detect Olson's fear (which he bravely overcame) in saying something positive about Obama--the ultimate heresy in the Republican hate-and-slander culture.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
1fingerwillie
August 18, 2010 3:02 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
His wife was killed in 9/11. Thats why it is "powerful stuff." I am pretty sure this is obvious.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
August 18, 2010 3:16 PM in reply to 1fingerwillie
Well aware of that. Still not seeing it as "powerful" that, as Phoebe noted above, a highly notable constitutional lawyer reiterates civics 101.
That he is more than immune against stupid hyperbole from numb-nuts screaming about the sensitivities of 9/11 victim family members given that Olsen is one himself, is all to the good. But this is basic stuff.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
1fingerwillie
August 18, 2010 4:44 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
Josh was not saying it was a brave statement for a republican to make...he was noting how remarkable it is that someone who lost their wife on 9/11 made the statement.
I won't debate whether it is powerful stuff or not...i frankly don't care. You asking "but not sure why some are calling it "powerful stuff"" is just stupid. The answer is obvious.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
August 18, 2010 6:19 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
The public -- at least in New York State -- is doing better than the pundits. While a majority in that state oppose building the center there, they also recognize that there is a Constitutional right to build it:
A follow-up question asked: "Regardless of whether you personally support or oppose the proposal to build the Cordoba House, do you believe the developers of the Cordoba House have a Constitutional right to proceed with the construction of the mosque and Muslim cultural center or not?" Here the answer is 64% yes, to only 28% no.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
August 18, 2010 2:29 PM
Bleh. Should have read:
Mea culpa.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EnnuiDivine
August 18, 2010 2:30 PM
It's times like this that really make me wish Olson had gotten the nod instead of Roberts or Alito...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jack of All Tirades
August 18, 2010 2:33 PM
This guy is a real American and a real patriot - willing to stand up for the rights of the minority, even if it's unpopular.
Thank you, Ted Olson.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave
August 18, 2010 2:35 PM
I think that the issue is finally dead. Now we just have to wait for the next wave of artificial outrage over a completely distorted non-issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PorkBelly
August 18, 2010 2:37 PM
Credit where credit is due.
Kudos.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Phoebe Fay
August 18, 2010 2:37 PM
So, how long before Limbaugh or some other screeching harpy says Olson's views don't count because his wife died in D.C., not New York?
I hate being this cynical, but I'll bet I'm right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
indybend
August 18, 2010 2:43 PM in reply to Phoebe Fay
My first thought too. It's not cynical, it's an acknowledgement of reality.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
August 18, 2010 2:43 PM
Wow, do I get to say, "I told you so"?
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/pelosi-supports-probe-of-cordoba-house-opposition-audio.php#comment-4066119
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Subliminability
August 18, 2010 2:43 PM
This issue has a lot in common with the Terry Schiavo (sp?) situation: emotional resonance touching core "conservative" nerves (there, "life"; here, Christianity/xenophobia/antiterrorism); incredibly weak position on facts; and bizarre disregard of normal jurisdictional lines. If the sane party holds its ground, the takeaway will be the same.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
August 18, 2010 3:07 PM in reply to Subliminability
It's a good thing the Dems control Congress and the White House now. Otherwise, we might have seen a special session called to enact legislation specifically prohibiting Cordoba House, either that or an eminent domain seizure of the property. (I guess the attempt to landmark the property was a similar tact, but I don't know who was behind that.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
August 18, 2010 3:31 PM in reply to georgia99
That was half in jest, but the underdog in the Republican primary race for governor actually boasts that he'll use eminent domain in a radio political ad:
.
.
.
CARL: "This is Carl Paladino. As Governor I will use the power of eminent domain to stop this Mosque and make the site a war memorial instead of a monument to those who attacked our country."
ANNOUNCER: The Choice is clear - Paladino for Governor
-http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2010/07/carl-paladino-id-use-eminent-d.html
the radio ad is here:
http://www.paladinoforthepeople.com/mosque.php
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 18, 2010 4:29 PM in reply to georgia99
And to think that just a few years ago, conservatives were on the rampage about the abuse of eminent domain they saw in the Kelo case.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
August 18, 2010 2:47 PM
He helped stop the vote count for W in 2001 but he's right on this and Prop 8.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
August 18, 2010 2:52 PM
Well said, although I think Christie also made it a political issue by equating the reactions of Democrats and Republicans, when in fact there is no equivalency.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Demyankee
August 18, 2010 2:54 PM
+1
Really, can any of the fulminating jackasses on the other side of this match Olson's credentials? Not bloody likely. So to the braying lot of you: STFU!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr.E.
August 18, 2010 3:00 PM
Olson has said exactly what I am hoping more people will say, and psychology teaches us that the more leaders who stand up and say that anything said against the Muslim center is nothing more than intolerance, hate speech and disrespect for the Constitution, the more people are inclined to follow those leaders. Opinions in this country inexorably trend toward greater acceptance, although not as fast or as smoothly as many of us would like. Basic rights are now recognized for all citizens, where before the laws themselves discriminated against women and blacks. The country is much less anti-Jewish or anti-Catholic than it used to be. Gays are permitted to marry in several states and the general population is approaching a point where the majority approve gar marriage, compared to not too long ago when homosexual behavior was criminal and homosexuality was defined as a mental disorder.
Hopefully, this too shall pass.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Economides
August 18, 2010 3:01 PM
I suppose the irony is that his late wife Barbara Olson would have been demagoging this issue for all it's worth.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DwH
August 18, 2010 3:31 PM in reply to Economides
Can't answer your question, but having just seen one of the first Hollywood films to address Hitler's rise, I was alarmed to hear the exact rhetoric of today's rightwingers being spouted by a Nazi youth. And it was all about "our" religion and "our" politics being the "right" views, and anyone who wasn't "with us was against us." The next thing they did was beat up an old professor and begin to persecute "non-Aryans," the screenplay's euphemism for the Jews.
Bush said that, too, didn't he? "Not with us then you're against us." Unfortunately, the collective memory is trying to build him into a saint about this issue. It speaks volumes to me that he is keeping his mouth shut NOW when he could do some good.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pavvy
August 18, 2010 4:07 PM in reply to DwH
But don't ex-U.S. presidents (especially ones who have recently left office) generally make a point of laying low and staying out of the national political arena, as a courtesy to the guy currently in office? Seems like it would be inappropriate for a former prez (whether Bush, Clinton, or the others) to weigh in on any partisan/political issue, especially when the current present has spoken up about it (or could be expected to). I may be wrong, but I feel like that's a (maybe recent) "tradition."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RobbyLove
August 18, 2010 5:53 PM in reply to pavvy
Jimmy Carter?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
August 18, 2010 3:01 PM
Let's not kid ourselves. Republicans don't actually give a rat's ass about Cordoba House or whatever it's going to be called. Frank Luntz has told them it's a wedge issue that polls well. That's it. The Republican party only actually cares about one thing: more money and power for the wealthy and less for everyone else. But it's hard to win elections on that kind of platform, so they resort to wedge issues to try to divide the rest of the country.
This is a classic framing issue. As long as it's argued based on their frame of reference it's a loser. We need to change the framing. Why are Republicans persecuting people who have never done anything wrong just because of their religion?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benintn
August 18, 2010 3:27 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
You could say the same is true about Democrats. However, I think that this is really a question of our core values as a nation. Conservatives tend to focus on protectionism, and respond to fear. Liberals tend to focus on progress, and respond to anger. It is a classic framing issue. But the outrage from the left is just as predictable as the outrage from the right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
August 18, 2010 4:31 PM in reply to benintn
Hardly. Republicans go on and on about issues they only pretend to care about. Remember the Balanced Budget Amendment? Term limits? Abortion? School prayer? What did they actually deliver on any of those issues? Nada. What they delivered on was tax cuts mainly for the wealthy. All those other issues are just wedge issues that are purely a cynical ploy to win elections.
If they actually campaigned on what they wanted to do, they'd wind up with about 20% of the vote. They need to use wedge issues to try to pry away pieces of the remaining 80%. Their stock in trade is creating fear and then pandering to that fear and claiming they're the only ones that can protect "real Americans" from their fears. Fear of immigrants. Fear of "anchor babies". Fear of Muslims. Fear of Affirmative Action. Fear of civil rights. The list goes on and on.
Democrats deliver on issues that benefit a majority of people. They don't need wedge issues. What they need is to do a better job of reminding people that these things benefit everybody, not just a few. They're abysmally poor at doing that. If Democrats were as good at messaging as Republicans are (and as unscrupulous), there would be fewer than 20 Republicans in Congress.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 18, 2010 4:46 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
not much to disagree with there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
August 18, 2010 6:31 PM in reply to benintn
It's not the outrage that bothers me. It's how it's expressed. I haven't seen any Democratic outrage involving racism or talk of over-throwing duly elected officials, not even when W was in full flower, no Second Amendment justifications for an armed revolution. There's outrage and there's outrage.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
straleno
August 18, 2010 3:31 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
"Why are Republicans persecuting people who have never done anything wrong just because of their religion?"
Bingo.
And add in, why do Republicans only respect the Constitution when it suits them?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DaveZimny
August 18, 2010 4:38 PM in reply to straleno
straleno: Exactly! You express with admirable brevity the only logical response to the "Ground Zero Mosque" nonissue. Your post should be sent immediately to every wingnut opportunist from Sarah Palin to Newt Gingrich.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 18, 2010 4:49 PM in reply to straleno
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
August 18, 2010 6:28 PM in reply to fkaZk0sm0
+2
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pierre denerome
August 18, 2010 3:25 PM
Monsieur Olson, votre compassion et raisonnement est tres educatif et remarquable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ohyeathatsright
August 18, 2010 3:54 PM in reply to pierre denerome
Hey now! English is the language of the internet!
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/nh-sen-republican-english-is-the-language-of-america----and-even-the-internet.php
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RobertSeattle
August 18, 2010 3:27 PM
One of the purposes of terrorism is to make the victims of the terrorism overreact... Congratulations wingnuts you are doing exactly what Al Qaeda wants you to do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pavvy
August 18, 2010 4:11 PM in reply to RobertSeattle
I had the same thought... it's such a tired old joke/cliche - "if we do such and such, the terrorists win..." - but it applies so precisely here. Exposing and exploiting the fractures within a society, and pushing it off-balance and forcing it to abandon key values, are exactly the kind of things terrorists look to accomplish.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pavvy
August 18, 2010 4:18 PM in reply to pavvy
...also (to put it another way), when Newt says an un-American absurdity like - "We'll built a mosque near Ground Zero the day they build a church in Mecca" (or whatever it was) - it's as though he's reading directly from a script written for him (or any given American politician) by the Al Qaeda types.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnBTipton
August 19, 2010 10:58 AM in reply to pavvy
Who was the genius that coined the idea that 9/11 "Changes everything?"
A significant part of our population has a reasonably accurate mental map of the Middle East, a concept of the significance of Islam in human history, a recognition that many of the rich and powerful, the impoverished and suffering and the ordinary members of the middle class world-wide are Muslims and people much like us. Without getting into the details, I would have to say that we Americans may have made some progress, at the cost of a decade of truly horrific human suffering. Or at least I can hope.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ironcomments
August 18, 2010 3:40 PM
American conservatism = Christian fascism
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 18, 2010 3:45 PM
I willingly give Bush credit for keeping islam religion apart from middle east extremists; however, I believe his rationale is primarily based on continuing good relations with the oil producing islamic nations of Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc. rather than rule of law. I'll take it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
windowpane
August 18, 2010 4:00 PM
Ted has moral authority on this one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TheBigRagu
August 18, 2010 4:28 PM
It would have been helpful if he had corrected Andrea Mitchell (aka Mrs Greenspan) about using the word 'mosque'. "Andrea it's planned to be a cultural center with a 'prayer room' not a mosque. Muslims do pray 5 times a day and a quiet private reserved space for prayers is necessary for the faithful".
Something like that?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 18, 2010 5:01 PM in reply to TheBigRagu
nah. doesn't matter. downplaying the 'mosque' bit only concedes the core issue. even if it were a full blown mosque complete with minarets and minbars, the freedom of religion for ALL americans is still what this issue is about.
muslim americans are no less american than any christian american. and the freedom for muslims to practice their religion is no less important than the freedom enjoyed by christians in these united states.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kas300
August 18, 2010 4:37 PM
Now that we are "liking" Olsen, can we corner him and walk him through the 2000 election, please? I don't think his integrity was particularly on show back in that day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
HusseinTenaX
August 18, 2010 4:41 PM in reply to kas300
I agree with you. Bush v Gore was one of the worst things that ever happened to this country.
He's taking the moral highground here, and I do appreciate that considering he is actually entitled to an opinion on this - he's got a right to having personal feelings about it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 18, 2010 5:07 PM in reply to kas300
lawyers have an obligation to represent their clients' interests and secure through the courts whatever relief the courts determine is within the law.
way i see it, SCOTUS is to blame for giving bush v gore to olsen, not the other way around.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
de TOQUEville
August 18, 2010 5:39 PM
I really really wish W would come out and make a public statement... I'm assuming he'd be in favour of Cordoba House being built.
If he's not in favour, then OK he should keep silent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
August 18, 2010 6:36 PM
I doubt that W is giving any of this any thought. He's more likely hunkered down in a safe place hoping not to be served with any subpoenas, for anything.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
August 18, 2010 7:35 PM
*Sigh* Fox will be trashing this guy by Fux and Friends tomorrow. Republicans eat their own.*facepalm*
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
blackandtan
August 19, 2010 9:37 AM
A principled thinking conservative - He makes me wonder if maybe unicorns exist too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
August 19, 2010 10:03 AM in reply to blackandtan
Every time one shows up, the rest of the party takes a giant step to the right. (and they still don't believe in evolution)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnBTipton
August 19, 2010 10:33 AM
As long as he isn't going to run for office or the Supreme Court, I guess we can take him at face value -- a gunslinger with personal standards of fairness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chigger
August 19, 2010 10:45 AM
What this issue is bringing to the surface is the need to give the general WTC area a special zoning status which would exclude the establishment of any kind of religious OR political facility. I'm just imagining how some Dems might feel if that were a new Republican national headquarters being built, or say, a Scientology e-meter headquarters.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
August 19, 2010 11:22 AM in reply to chigger
That's just plain silly. Most of the people complaining about this will never set foot in the city, much less within two blocks of the site. Leave the zoning issues to NY.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 19, 2010 4:24 PM
What is right is not always popular, what is popular is not always right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?