Howard Dean Says Cordoba House Should Be Built Somewhere Else (AUDIO)

Never liked him. Still don't.

Just saying.

How disappointing. It's "met so many objections" because it was yet another phony right-wing controversy stirred up by Fox News. The "objections" don't come from the people where it's being built, and the only "families" group that opposes it is the one that is consistently allied with Liz Cheney's group, and doesn't have any information about its membership on its website.

Please tell me this is someone's idea of a joke. Not Howard!!
Come on - two blocks away - not in the "hallowed" hole in the ground. What is wrong with people - mass hysteria is taking hold.

Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean

Coward*

*Gawd, it pains me to say that

"And we have to understand that it is a real affront to people who've lost their lives -- including Muslims."

No, it isn't.

"That site doesn't belong to any particular religion, it belongs to all Americans and all faiths."

No, it doesn't. The site at 45–51 Park Place, New York City belongs to the developers of the Cordoba House project. Because they own it.

Meanwhile if somehow it is the case that lower manhattan or the chunk of lower manhattan containing the WTC site now belongs to "all Americans and all faiths" , then why are members of every religion allowed to build churches and such in that area except Muslims? (take a walk, in your mind, through the Google Maps street directions from the Park51 site to the WTC complex-- you will literally walk past the front door of a Catholic church, a church which incidentally is located on the opposite side of a block from a Methodist and an Episcopalian church). If Muslims can't or shouldn't build in that area, that sure sounds like we're saying the area belongs to all faiths except Islam and all Americans except Muslims.

Am I missing something? Will there be some super-secret shrine to Al Qaeda at the mosque within this community center, featuring a huge wax statue of Osama Bin Laden, while greatest hits from his famous "tapes" play in the background on a continuous loop? Will they hold big "We Hate the Great Satan" meetings there every Friday after prayers celebrating their 9/11 "victory" over the evil western non-believers (notwithstanding that some fellow Muslims were collateral damage)? AM I MISSING SOMETHING??? Didn't think so. DEMOCRATS GET A SPINE AND REMEMBER WHAT THIS COUNTRY STANDS FOR!

And to think that at one time I actually had some amount of respect for this clown. Oh well, at least you finally showed your true colors, Dean. Now please do me a favor and slink into the cesspool of irrelevance you belong in with your fellow travelers Palin and Schlessinger.

Et tu, Howard?

This isn't about the right of Muslims to have a worship center, or Jews or Christians or anybody else to have a place to worship, or any place around Ground Zero.

I'm sorry, that is exactly what it is about. There are already several Christian churches right at the edge of "Ground Zero," and the very people who oppose this community center are at the same time stumping for a Greek Orthodox church that was destroyed in 9/11 to be allowed to rebuild on its original site. (And nobody is saying they cannot, only that the Port Authority claims the rights to the ground underneath the building for a bomb screening center if they build there.)

If it is an "affront" to Muslims who lost their lives on 9/11 for the Muslim congregation that has been in the area for decades to be able to expand its facilities without having to move out of the neighborhood, then why isn't it an "affront" to allow other churches the same privilege?

God, I am so tired of unprincipled, lily-livered politicians, I could puke.

Shorter Howard Dean: "They ought to be able to worship any way and anywhere they want, so long as they only want to worship in the way and in the places that the Christianists approve of."

In order to run a nation as complex as ours, you need some courage.

The Democratic Pary leadership has too little.

Maybe it is really time for a change.

The only video for this I've heard of comes from Andrew Breitbart. Let's wait a little bit and see if there's any corroborating evidence, shall we?

My respect deepens further for all those progressives who fought through the ages against this type of crap and didn't use equivocal statements to express their views.

There is no compromise on the founding principles our this country. Constitutional rights are not subjugated by the feelings of others.

No matter how bad the dems are on this issue, the republicans are worse.

DON'T get discouraged.

DON'T say "a pox on both your houses".

DO come out and vote in November.

"And we have to understand that it is a real affront to people who've lost their lives -- including Muslims. That site doesn't belong to any particular religion, it belongs to all Americans and all faiths."

Um. It's ONE building dude. And way to go Dean for once again lumping all Muslims into the same pot as the extremists. Most Muslims aren't. And when the moderate ones try to build something to showcase moderation you tell them "not in my back yard".

Evidently, investing $100 million dollars into New York is the new strategy for Al Queda.

The really idiotic quality of this whole "discussion" is -- Why TF does Howard Dean have anything at all to say on this subject? Or Harry Reid, or Obama or anyone else who is not living and working in Manhattan? Holy Mackerel, what purpose was served by Howard Dean prating about this topic? Why couldn't he (or any of these others) just say, "None of my business."? This is a complete non-subject-of-importance.

Diarrhea of the mouth. And they're getting it all over their shoes.

Thanks.

mp

I am a fan of Howard Dean and generally agree with much of his explanation, but I strongly disagree with his conclusion. This controversy is as ginned up as the brouhaha over the Dean scream. Think, Howard, think.

Fuck Howard Dean and all who support Muslim-free zones.

What I want to know is why Dr. Dean thinks we should compromise with bigotry?
What I want to know is why Dr. Dean thinks property 2 blocks from ground zero belongs to all Americans and not just to the property owners?
What I want to know is why Dr. Dean is even offering his opinion on this? Perhaps he’s just trying to do away with the Republican’s symbolic campaign issue?

Guys, look. There's an important lesson to be had here, if anyone's willing to learn it and apply it even to people they don't like so much.

Howard Dean went on TV and said something stupid. Something he never would have said if his brain was fully engaged and had all the facts. I believe that. There's no discernible ulterior motive. He's not running for anything, at least no time soon enough for anyone to give a shit what he says about this today. He's not dependent on anyone who would find this pleasing for funding for whatever it is he's doing these days.

Given that, and the fact that he's done it before, all availible evidence indicates that he just had a moment of stupid where the gears between his brain and his mouth weren't fully engaged and said something that I truly don't think is reflective of who he really is, based on everything he's said and done since he entered onto the public stage.

The fact his, he's usually well informed when he goes on TV, he's usually well prepared and and very cogent and reasoned.

And this time he wasn't. And now everyone is rushing around opining about What it All Means.

Some are trying to reconcile how a guy who believes what he said with the guy they thought they knew and are either expressing disappointment or being more measured by saying, well, on balance in light of all the other stuff, I guess he's okay.

Some are cramming it into their Single Integrated Cynical Theory of How it All Really Works, even if it means putting someone they liked and respected yesterday on their personal "Dead to Me" lists. There's a certain integrity to that that I kind of respect, but they're still wrong, both factually and morally. (Again, IMO).

I'm very pleased, though a little surprised, to see that no one is doing the "We're at War With Eastasia" Ingsoc self-mindfuck on the issue as a result of this. (Though, to be perfectly honest, though a little ugly, about it, I suspect there'd be a few like that if it was Feingold instead of Dean.)

But no one seems to be able to accept the Occam's Razor answer: he opened up his mouth and something stupid came out. I defy any of you to tell me that there's never been a moment when, even though you knew what you were going to say, what you should say and what you shouldn't say, you've never once been surprised to realize, too late, that when the pressure was on, you up and just said something totally stupid that you didn't mean. Sure you have. And yet you refuse to concede the possibility that any of these guys, are mere humans--many of them real humans under a crushing, killing stress load greater than anything most of us can imagine dealing with for long without going bonkers--who, from time to time, being stressed out, say stupid shit.

And it's because here in the World of the One Minute News Cycle, it is taboo to even suggest that these people are mere humans who can say things they don't mean. No, here in the World of the One Minute News Cycle, every pronouncement of a public official is carefully thought out, laden with layer upon layer of meaning, and always rehearsed to a 'T' and stated for effect with all of the cold, dispassionate calculation of the Vulcan Planetary Chess Tournament.

And the reason is that if we dare admit that the people we like just had a moment of fail, we have to concede that sometimes the people we don't like get stressed out and have moments of fail, too. And if we did that, we wouldn't be able to work ourselves up into great big entertaining snitstorms whenever someone we already don't like says something dumb.

He's just a human. He said something dumb. Yeah, unfortunately, he said something dumb on cable news and now it's going to hang there like a fart in the shower. Whether he ducks and covers or or tries to walk it back, he's in a no win scenario, but the truth is he just had a moment of stupid, so cut him some damn slack. Like you would if it was, say, Joe Biden (who apparently sucks up all the :we know his heart is in the right place so give him the benefit of the doubt" oxygen from the rest of the Democratic Party.) And then the next time someone you don't like says something stupid too, consider giving them a slice of slack too.

Except Lieberman. Or Nelson. Or Blanche Lincoln or any of the wingnuts, paultards or neocons. Fuck those guys. No mercy.

But all the rest, consider the cut some slack and move along option.

Just a suggestion.

If the building cannot be built here, it shouldn't be built at all. The group building it simply cannot accept the notion that Muslims are lesser Americans and that they must abide by ad hoc zoning codes made up by those people who hate them.

BTW, if 2600 people dying at the WTC is grounds for kicking out Muslims from the area, what about Iraq where Americans have killed over 500,000? How about this for a fair trade: no mosque near the WTC, and in exchange America gets the fukc out of Iraq?

Consider Gingrich's statement that all American Muslims should be subjected to the same restrictions as Saudi Arabia applies to Christians. This is how half of Congress and occasionally the White House feels about Muslims. I really think all Muslim countries should reject US forces being stationed on their land. It's no wonder things like Abu Ghraib happens. No wonder the US invaded Iraq without a moment's thought.

Let's all remember where this fake outrage came from: Pamella Gellar, hater extraordinaire. And let's all remember that it IS about our rights, because she and others have tried to STOP them from building there (as they are in many other states in the country).

But let's take their latest arguement: It's insensitive. Why on earth would people be sensitive about a community center being built? Unless they have some fear of Muslims. It's not about sensitivity, it's about fear and ignorance.

Regardless of whether Muslims died that day or that Muslims were first responders, people who oppose this still see Muslims as those who attacked us that day.

It's so frustrating that our media can't even get it right. Obama was asked today whether he regrets his comment and he said no. I would have said this: Well, yes. I should have just kept my mouth shut because I knew the media would parse every word and use it to disort what I said, instead of what I actually said.

It's also frustrating when we have part of the left on the internet attack Obama and say he back-tracked on his comment. NO, he didn't. He clearly said this was about our constitutional rights and that he wasn't going to comment about whether it's the right thing to do.

So much for the 'liberal media', huh?

I just don't get it. Why did Dean feel the need to open his mouth on this subject at all?

I think we can pretty much all agree that it's just another Repuke weapon of mass distraction, why are so many Dems just unable to keep their mouths shut on this non-issue? NYC has a firm handle on deciding where community centers, gas stations, strip joints, and any other facility can be built and they're satisfied. Why the hell can't pols from hundreds or thousands of miles away find better things to do with their time? I guess it's just easier to bloviate than actually try to fix anything.

The only one who needed to say anything was Obama and he said what needed to be said.

Relevant roundtable discussion at Democracy Now.

South Carolina, Oklahoma, Arizona, North Dakota, or New Mexico... California or Texas, or somewhere else in New York... South Dakota, or Oregon, or Washington or Michigan -- or even to Washington, D.C. Yeah.

Ha. I love your snark, Eric. It would have been even better if it were Byeaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

The way this whole thing has developed really sucks. And Dean just piled on.

The difference between Howard Dean and Barack Obama is that Dean actually gives a &%$! about whether Democrats hold onto Congress. All Obama cares about is Obama.

I'm Jewish and this reminds me of a time when a non-Jewish man I was dating told me that in front of his friends I needed to not act so "jewish". I was supposed to be ashamed of who I was and I'm not sure how I was supposed to act because I never fully understood what he meant by his comment re specific behavior. The point is that Howard Dean wants this group to be ashamed of who they are and "be reasonable" and "compromise" because they only exist at the indulgence of the good Christian majority. Sheesh. Dean needs to be given a vacation and come back when he's figured out the Bill of Rights. George Washington had it figured out even pre-Bill of Rights when he wrote to the Jewish congregation at Newport, Rhode Island: "It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent national gifts."