TPMDC
Rand vs. Ron? Cordoba House Drives Wedge Through The Paul Family
Rand and Ron Paul.
Share
Send to a friend!
Are Ron and Rand Paul on opposite sides of the Cordoba House debate? Rand, running for Senate in Kentucky, has taken the standard GOP line on the project -- namely, it's up to New York officials to decide the project's fate, but personally he's against it. And now, in an extremely strongly-worded statement posted to his movement's website Friday, father Ron ripped into opponents of the Cordoba House project, saying that the rhetoric taking on the plan is clearly "all about hate and Islamaphobia."
Neither Paul immediately responded to a request for comment on their difference in language. But the Cordoba House appears to be an issue where Rand is very publicly breaking from this father's dyed-in-the-wool libertarianism, which often leaves the elder Paul standing alone against the GOP establishment.
Last week, Rand's campaign told TPMDC that that he was among the many politicians on both sides of the aisle who think that building an Islamic cultural center in the old Burlington Coat Factory two blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks on New York is bad idea. Rand even offered his own suggestion about what American Muslims should do with the millions they'd need to spend building the project -- namely, not use it to build the Cordoba House.
"While this is a local matter that should be decided by the people of New York, Dr. Paul does not support a mosque being built two blocks from Ground Zero," Paul spokesperson Gary Howard told me. "In Dr. Paul's opinion, the Muslim community would better serve the healing process by making a donation to the memorial fund for the victims of September 11th."
The elder Dr. Paul has harsh words for views like that.
"The outcry over the building of the mosque, near ground zero, implies that Islam alone was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to those who are condemning the building of the mosque, the nineteen suicide terrorists on 9/11 spoke for all Muslims," Ron wrote in a statement to RonPaul.com "This is like blaming all Christians for the wars of aggression and occupation because some Christians supported the neo-conservative's aggressive wars."
It is repeatedly said that 64% of the people, after listening to the political demagogues, don't want the mosque to be built. What would we do if 75% of the people insist that no more Catholic churches be built in New York City? The point being is that majorities can become oppressors of minority rights as well as individual dictators. Statistics of support is irrelevant when it comes to the purpose of government in a free society--protecting liberty.
In a Wednesday interview with the Daily Caller, Rand himself seemed to suggest that the public opposition to the Cordoba House should be heeded by Muslims.
"I think reconciliation is best promoted by -- instead of having a multi-million dollar mosque -- maybe having a multi-million dollar donation to the memorial site, would be better for all," Paul told the website.
Ironically, Ron Paul writes that all the opposition to the Cordoba House has been ginned up by the very establishment GOP types Rand took on in the GOP primary. Like his father, Rand has been a vocal opponent of his party's leadership on issues like the Iraq War and the Patriot Act. (Rand has bailed on plenty of other stuff his father supports on libertarian grounds like, for example, closing Gitmo.)
In his post, Ron suggests that by coming out in opposition to Cordoba House, politicians -- including his son? -- have chosen to side with the kind of Republicans the Pauls promise to take on when it comes to most other issues.
"The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate, raises the question of just why and driven by whom?" Paul writes, adding:
In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.They never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars. A select quote from soldiers from in Afghanistan and Iraq expressing concern over the mosque is pure propaganda and an affront to their bravery and sacrifice.
Late Update:
Ron Paul's congressional spokesperson, Rachel Mills, sends in a brief and to-the-point reply to my questions about the split between Rand and his father over Cordoba House.
"Rand Paul is his own man," she writes.
Comments (82) | Join the Conversation!
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
vasu
August 23, 2010 1:01 PM
You know as much as I hate his son, Ron speaks more sense most of the time and I can see myself agreeing with his opinions. Especially in regards to this issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tamim
August 23, 2010 1:29 PM in reply to vasu
This is why I have great respect for Dr. Ron Paul, for his principled political views that is courageous than many stinkin' Dems who lack moral clarity and base.
How hard must it be for him, I imagine to have defended Muslims and the Constitution which such strong language when even our President is put on the defensive by many in HIS OWN PARTY let alone the opposition? How hard to speak up when he knows he is putting his son's electoral chances in jeopardy in hicksville Kentucky?
I wish every Dem who opposed this cultural center for political advantage goes down in flames in the fall election. They don't deserve to represent anyone if they can't defend the Constitution amidst a deluded majoritarian onslaught.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eb123
August 23, 2010 2:16 PM in reply to Tamim
I feel that way in many situations and then I wonder: "Hum, if this guy goes down in flames, who do we get to replace him/her?". And that is when it gets scary. I don't have the solution for this dilemma. Some will say "3rd party!", but that doesn't seem realistic because there is no 3rd party. Perhaps the key is in the primary. I don't know.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
storm
August 23, 2010 2:23 PM in reply to eb123
irv, majority rules.
get rid of spoiler system, then we can have 3rd parties.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eb123
August 23, 2010 2:34 PM in reply to storm
maybe. But what is your theory for why there are only 2 parties?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 23, 2010 2:52 PM in reply to eb123
i'm guessing by 'spoiler system' storm is referring to plurality rule elections. and storm would be correct according to duverger's law.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hank
August 23, 2010 2:49 PM in reply to eb123
If you figure it out you will have done what no one in recorded history has done. Politics is, has always been, and will forever be about the lesser of two evils. No matter how many Naderites wish it weren't so, it is. And I blame them for the current situation more than the legions of peabrains that voted for Bush because they are smart enough to know better.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tamim
August 23, 2010 3:41 PM in reply to Hank
Not true. I really despise blame the 3rd party candidate mantra. It is their right to run for office and to think they 'leech' away votes, then they don't understand democracy. 2 party rule hasn't always been ingrained in America.
In countries where there are many candidates who run like Britain or Canada, the 3rd party can have a moderating effect esp. when coalitions are formed.
Take another example right here in the US, in Florida, when polled showed Crist losing to the radical Rubio, even when Crist ran as a Dem, however when Crist ran as an independent giving 3 parties with 3 candidates the chance to compete, Crist leads.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hunter
August 23, 2010 4:09 PM in reply to Tamim
None of this changes the fact that first-past-the-post voting makes a two-party system basically inevitable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John M
August 23, 2010 7:44 PM in reply to hunter
Canada has four major parties, Conservatives and Liberals (more aligned politically with middle of the road Democrats), New Democratic Party (more like liberal Democrats) and Bloc Quebecois (originally seperatists). In addition to that, the Green Party usually runs candidates in most constituencies but elected none last election.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 25, 2010 10:22 AM in reply to John M
canada merely presents some interesting twists on duverger's law. bloc quebecois presents a counterexample because it is a strong regional party. NDP has hung on as a minority party mostly because it failed to supplant the liberal party - as such it is still largely a spoiler party. (the green party is no more relevant in canada than it is in the US.) moreover, canada's parliamentary system has a moderating effect on spoiling (and thus duverger's law) because it allows for coalition governments and minority governments.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eb123
August 23, 2010 2:18 PM in reply to Tamim
My point above is that you don't throw away something because you don't like it, but you throw away something because you have something better to replace it with.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
donquijoterocket
August 23, 2010 3:19 PM in reply to Tamim
"Moral clarity" meaning see everything precisely as you see them, correct?And what would be either of the rand's "moral base"?If you say christianity I might track you down and puke on your shoes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ron Jeremy
August 23, 2010 5:24 PM in reply to Tamim
Ron Paul, the guy who thinks it would be a good idea to dump Bretton Woods and return to the gold standard?
Yeah, he has a moral consistency, and sometimes he says smart things. Many times he says crazy, stupid, ridiculous things, too. Sorry, being right sometimes and wildly wrong sometimes doesn't add up to earning my respect.
And he's the most useless member of Congress I've ever seen. Have you ever seen any bill he introduced even make it out of committee? I think the only idea of the many, many (many!) he's floated that ever got *any* traction was to audit the federal reserve - which would end up, if it happened, accomplishing nothing. "Oh, look, this is how much they spent on travel, hmmm!"
He's an egotistical ivory tower little snit who is a waste of space in Congress. Go join some libertarian think tank and sell books to fellow cranks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
alkfuiwueiu
August 23, 2010 9:14 PM in reply to Tamim
Everything is true!
Go in look look: http://www.bizboysell.com
Believe that you may need.
^#^$^#$^#$^#$&#&$**^%*^%%^*%^^^^^^^)*&)&*
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thepoliticalcat
August 23, 2010 9:15 PM in reply to Tamim
Rather a disingenuous argument. Ron Paul has never been accused of being a Muslim. The President cannot take a stronger position on this issue because the flames of Islamophobia are being fanned (and we know quite well by who) and he is a (half) Black man whose father was born a Muslim (although the fact that his step-grandmother was born a Christian and continues to practice her faith apparently does not win him any points in this debate).
I have a lot of respect for Ron Paul, despite the fact that I disagree with most of his political positions. He's a damn sight more honest than most of the Republipuds. And, unlike his precious man-child, at least he's consistent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
August 23, 2010 1:04 PM
This is fascinating and oddly unsurprising in retrospect.
Dr. Paul's statement here is actually pretty fantastic, and maybe counts as courageous since one of the biggest counts against Paul's claims to be a defender of liberty has always been his Christian dominionist leanings. He is or course incorrect in his statement about Speaker Pelosi calling for Congressional investigations etc, but I've seen a number of people including some progressive blogs make a similar mistake in the last week.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
August 23, 2010 1:09 PM in reply to mcc
She did say it in an interview, but my personal theory is that she was just playing turn-about-is-fair-play. There's nothing to suggest the Cordoba House project merits an "investigation into its financing" but the fucking morons we have to deal with on a daily basis are screaming for one...so she somewhat flippantly suggested we conduct a baseless investigation of where the protesters are getting their money. I don't think anyone who isn't trying to dig for a political toe-hold would take her statement seriously if they've seen the footage.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
August 23, 2010 1:24 PM in reply to Sniffit
Last week Pelosi made separate statements in which she called for public disclosure and investigation into both who is funding cordoba house, and who is driving it's opposition. On neither of these two points, of you look at her actual original quotes, did she say anything calling for *congressional* investigations. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
August 23, 2010 1:49 PM in reply to mcc
You're focused on the word "congressional"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not the operative word (and semantic games are for the Speak & Spell crowd). I tend to think that if she was seriously calling for investigations, she'd be really pushing it and it wouldn't matter who is doing the investigating...it would still be wrong (taking the obvious implication in this context to mean investigation by the authorities, not meaning "journalists"...as if those exist anymore). And when I say wrong, I mean wrong on both counts...the mosque financiers and those funding the public displays of stupid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
August 23, 2010 2:48 PM in reply to Sniffit
It's what Ron Paul is focused on, so yes. I'm responding to the point in Paul's statement where he refers to Pelosi's calls for "a Congressional investigation to find out just who is funding the mosque" and suggests this is an abuse of power by the Speaker. The detail of Congressional probing is specifically what Dr. Paul is objecting to and that's the detail I'm trying to point out is incorrect.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
August 23, 2010 2:57 PM in reply to Sniffit
Are we supposed to be shocked and appalled if supporters of an Islamic community center include . . . Muslims?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 23, 2010 3:49 PM in reply to mcc
That was my take, too, that she was calling for transparency and disclosure, not for any official investigations.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JosephP
August 23, 2010 2:09 PM in reply to Sniffit
Whether or not Pelosi specifically indicated "Congressional Investigations," I think in light of the packing of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom with right wingers from the Hudson Institute and the Federalist Society, some sort of investigation is indeed called for.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
donquijoterocket
August 23, 2010 3:09 PM in reply to mcc
You'd think a constitution-supporting libertarian would have no doubt where they stood on this issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
August 23, 2010 1:04 PM
Well (a) Randroid's running for office and Ron's not this year and (b) Ron actually believes in the libertarian philosphies, whersas Randroid is yoru typical conservative nihilist running on the "say anything" demogoguery strategery they've been masturbating with since 2006.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Economides
August 23, 2010 1:28 PM in reply to Sniffit
Ron Paul is a congressman and runs for re-election every two years. So, they are both running this year.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
farnsworth
August 23, 2010 1:29 PM in reply to Sniffit
Ron Paul is running for Congress this year. He is in the House, and runs every two years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
August 23, 2010 1:40 PM in reply to farnsworth
I hope he wins.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
August 23, 2010 1:55 PM in reply to farnsworth
I stand corrected...you're right...brainfart
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
farnsworth
August 23, 2010 2:11 PM in reply to Sniffit
No worries.
I actually voted for Ron Paul for president back in 1988. It was more about my lack of respect for Bush and Dukakis than support for Libertarianism.
But I do have a measure of respect for Paul the Elder, at least in comparison with Paul the Lesser. The Elder isn't willing to totally sell out his principals in order to get elected.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thepoliticalcat
August 23, 2010 9:22 PM in reply to Sniffit
I do believe you nailed it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richard L. Adlof
August 23, 2010 1:12 PM
Are we getting the vibe that Ron sad that the vasectomy did not take?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thepoliticalcat
August 23, 2010 9:24 PM in reply to Richard L. Adlof
Funny. But wicked.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EnnuiDivine
August 23, 2010 1:18 PM
At least the elder Paul has been consistent throughout the years. With very few exceptions, he's actually a diehard libertarian...and not just using libertarian rhetoric to score votes.
Let's face it: if this was 2002, Rand Paul would be demanding we invade Iraq. Something no "true" libertarian could ever support.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tamim
August 23, 2010 1:23 PM in reply to EnnuiDivine
Excellent point about Rand taking the political expedient route in Kentucky to invade Iraq, had he been in Senate, to sell out his libertarian principles.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
August 23, 2010 1:24 PM in reply to EnnuiDivine
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 23, 2010 3:57 PM in reply to EnnuiDivine
Right; Rand is just a libertarian-of-convenience.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tamim
August 23, 2010 1:21 PM
I honestly can say this is why Ron Paul attracts some Democratic youths, he is consistent, principled, and defends the Constitution to the T.
Unlike many Dems who are always politicians, slithering aways to whichever side the polls show a majority.
Even President Obama hasn't been forceful enough with his aides and staffers worried if he takes a stronger stance, i.e. speaking in a mosque to calm the nation's Islamophobia run amok (great video posted on Glenn Greenwald's NYC on mosque protestors) then he'd be accused of yet more evidence of his closet 'Muslim-ness.' Why does the President let his detractors define what he does? As Jed Lewiston on DailyKos opined if someone tries to slime with with the new-N word, "Muslim" he just reply forcefully, "I don't have that honor."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
August 23, 2010 1:27 PM
"I honestly can say this is why Ron Paul attracts some Democratic youths, he is consistent, principled, and defends the Constitution to the T."
More properly, it's because Internet news sources have done a poor enough job reporting on Ron Paul's actual beliefs that there are people who actually believe this.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sailingaway
August 23, 2010 1:36 PM in reply to mcc
I call bullshit on that. The internet has ALL the news and Ron Paul supporters are the type who research it, and don't listen to nonsense from commentators such as yourself.
I think Rand is pissed that Obama made this such a touchstone. Rand's campaign's first response was that KY doesn't want NY messing in their local issues and he wasn't going to mess in NY's either. After that a LOT of people jumped onto the local issue bandwagon. When asked how he felt about it, he answered, still stressing it wasn't an issue he should be involved in as a matter of government force. Libertarians don't say you aren't allowed your own opinions, even bad opinions, only that government should exist to protect the rights of all, against the bad opinions of all, if you like.
I am more represented by Ron than Rand, but Ron also is in offict to champion liberty. Rand wants to do the best he can to impact issues, even when that requires compromise. Their purposes for running are different.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tamim
August 23, 2010 1:53 PM in reply to sailingaway
I completely agree.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kenneth Thomas
August 23, 2010 2:02 PM in reply to sailingaway
You are forgetting that libertarian economic policies (gold standard, anti-minimum wage, etc.) are deflationary and bad for middle-class families.
I'm glad he opposes the War on Drugs and what he correctly calls "preventive" (not "preemptive," as Bush put it and the MSM continues to follow along) war, but I'd never vote for him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
August 23, 2010 6:47 PM in reply to Kenneth Thomas
Exactly. They research that he's against the war and lax about drugs, and that's enough for them to support him. The absurd economics, conspiracy theories, and racist crap doesn't register.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 26, 2010 9:09 AM in reply to midnight rambler
Ahem... Maybe you should try doing some research yourself. Ron was 1 of 5 republicans to vote infavor of repealing don't ask, don't tell'. What a homophobe!
Ron Paul: Constituents changed my mind on 'don't ask, don't tell'
So why did Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.), after supporting "don't ask, don't tell" since its introduction in 1993, vote to begin the process to repeal it?
"I have received several calls and visits from constituents who, in spite of the heavy investment in their training, have been forced out of the military simply because they were discovered to be homosexual," Paul said Friday. "To me, this seems like an awful waste. Personal behavior that is disruptive should be subject to military discipline regardless of whether the individual is heterosexual or homosexual. But to discharge an otherwise well-trained, professional, and highly skilled member of the military for these reasons is unfortunate and makes no financial sense."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
August 26, 2010 3:25 PM in reply to Rob
Keep working on your reading comprehension, guy. Where exactly did I say he was a homophobe? I see you didn't address the things I did point out - the obsession with the Fed, one world government, and the racist stuff in his newsletter that he claimed to know nothing about (yeah right).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 23, 2010 2:33 PM in reply to sailingaway
"...Obama made this such a touchstone..."
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
August 23, 2010 1:37 PM
Rand, listen to your daddy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rubyxyz
August 23, 2010 1:37 PM
Ron Paul is consistently libertarian, a term I've come to use interchangeably with selfish, stingy, and indifferent to the suffering of others.
He's also racist, homophobic and rabidly anti-choice.
I'm tired of seeing these pricks given any praise just because they happen to say the right thing once in a while. They're not children who will improve given the right encouragement, they're simply those proverbial stopped clocks that happen to be right twice a day. Both these men can go fuck themselves.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JosephP
August 23, 2010 2:19 PM in reply to rubyxyz
It's true that, while there is much to admire in Ron Paul, he supports causes that are anathema to Progressives.
It is a trait of we Progressives to find points of agreement in our opponents, something that has become impossible with the current Republican trend towards extremism and intolerance. So when we see signs of moderation in someone like Ron Paul, we may go overboard in our feelings.
However, I don't think Ron Paul is as bad as a stopped clock that is right only twice a day. And I wonder if he is as bad as the extremists that dominate the Republicans today. He does show signs of independent thought, and may be rational enough to be persuaded on certain issues like gay rights and pro-choice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rubyxyz
August 23, 2010 3:13 PM in reply to JosephP
Ron Paul is an old man. Speaking as an old woman, I assure you that the views and beliefs of the old are not so much calcified as they are the bedrock that is exposed when time has worn away the fertile loam where new ideas take root. Ron Paul is no more likely to change his views than I am likely to believe that he will, or can.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tamim
August 23, 2010 3:58 PM in reply to rubyxyz
You're funny, but I remain an optimist that even the old can be persuaded to shift their views if the views are grounded in facts and truth is on its side.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aq
August 23, 2010 3:55 PM in reply to JosephP
He's what we'd call a coalition partner... On many views, he shares many democratic sentiments, on others, he's far away as possible
More coalitions inside of coalitions... Everything here is too black and white. You're a Democrat or a Republican. You can't be anything but a talking-stick of the 'views', without being called a RINO or a Blue-Dog-DINO. Once we move further away from that ideal of absolute solidarity, and actually encourage differences in views intraparty through discourse and coalition...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ironcomments
August 23, 2010 2:12 PM
American Conservatism = Christian fascism
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
August 23, 2010 3:08 PM
This whole uproar over Cordoba House is Terri Schiavo; revisited.
Its disgusting.
It never ceases to amaze me how far over the line into immoral and unethical behavior people will go to advance their bankrupt agenda and/or consolidate their power, influence, or wealth.
We are witnessing yet another national disgrace playing out right before out eyes.
Unreal. I'm beginning to think Glenn Beck is right.
Its the damn Planet of the Apes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Commie Dearest
August 23, 2010 6:42 PM in reply to willia451
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Commie Dearest
August 23, 2010 6:45 PM in reply to willia451
We should call them "designer issues," as they are designed to create these false controversies to foment rage on the right they hope to harness for their political ends. The designers don't believe they are real issues themselves, but they are extremely willing to promote them and exploit them to increase voter turn out for their side
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ironcomments
August 23, 2010 4:34 PM
American Conservatism=Christian Fascism
Hall marks of Fascism
*** Nationalism and super-patriotism with a sense of historic mission. “We need to take our country back…” a popular line among the Christian fascist.
*** Aggressive militarism even to the extent of glorifying war as good for the national or individual spirit. “Christian fascist undying support for 2 useless wars that has cost the lives and mental health of a generation of Americans.”
*** Use of violence or threats of violence to impose views on others (fascism and Nazism both employed street violence and state violence at different moments in their development). “Second amendment remedies should sound familiar.”
*** Authoritarian reliance on a leader or elite not constitutionally responsible to an electorate. Tea-baggers and corporations
*** Cult of personality around a charismatic leader. “Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, Laura, etc”
*** Reaction against the values of Modernism, usually with emotional attacks against both liberalism and communism. “Texas school board attempts to change history and do away with evolution.”
*** Exhortations for the homogeneous masses of common folk (Volkish in German, Populist in the U.S.) to join voluntarily in a heroic mission_often metaphysical and romanticized in character. “When the Tea-party needs to hold a Unity rally to deflect from its racism, something is wrong.”
*** Dehumanization and scapegoating of the enemy_seeing the enemy as an inferior or subhuman force, perhaps involved in a conspiracy that justifies eradicating them. “Muslims are the enemy du jour.”
*** The self image of being a superior form of social organization beyond socialism, capitalism and democracy. “Taking American exceptionalism to the point it glorifies stupidity”.
*** Elements of national socialist ideological roots, for example, ostensible support for the industrial working class or farmers; but ultimately, the forging of an alliance with an elite sector of society. “Think demonizing wall street and big corporations for bailouts yet were the main supporters for it.
*** Abandonment of any consistent ideology in a drive for state power. “See the above and news.”
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
August 23, 2010 5:16 PM
From Juan Cole:
Those Americans who insist on seeing Obama as a Muslim are ‘othering’ him, and probably are using religion as a proxy for race. Since the Civil Rights movement, it has been unacceptable in the United States for a public figure to engage openly in racist discourse, as shock jocks Dr. Laura and Don Imus discovered. But apparently it is still all right to be a religious bigot, so Islam is being scapegoated by the Republican Party, as its ability openly to play on racial fears is being increasingly constrained. (Even if a majority of Republicans in Louisiana once voted for Klan figure David Duke, in most of the country sounding like Duke is a distinct political liability). But what I observed was that the Republican presidential candidates in 2007-2008 who most stridently played the Islam card– Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee — crashed and burned. I can’t imagine that most Americans are really afraid of their Muslim neighbors (who are disproportionately likely to be physicians or businessmen and pillars of the local community). So I think the GOP is mistakenly playing to a lunatic fringe of proto-Klan elements in their party, and I think it will backfire on them, even with their own constituents. Big time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
amber
August 23, 2010 5:18 PM
Ron Paul can apparently teach Howard Dean and Harry Reid a thing or two.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Commie Dearest
August 23, 2010 6:41 PM in reply to amber
Sometimes having principles is an awesome thing. Ron may have some misguided ones, but at least he sticks by them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Commie Dearest
August 23, 2010 6:40 PM
1, 2, 3, 4, I declare a Fundie war!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MediaCzech
August 23, 2010 6:56 PM
original stuff, Evan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
August 23, 2010 7:23 PM
Let's see. "Tim McVeigh was raised Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church wants to build a parish hall near the Oklahoma City Memorial. Of course, they have the right to do so but can't they see that since they are CATHOLICS this will be very trying to the feelings of the victims' families? They are claiming that it is not a church but they are clearly lying since we all know there will be praying going on there. I know, let's have a compromise: they can send the money for the parish hall to a fund for the children of the victim!"
Quite some 'compromise', wouldn't you say? And much less persuasive because we are no longer as prejudiced against Catholics as we now are against Muslims. And because we are not all wrought up about Catholics anymore (See Guy Fawkes), the illogical use of sweeping over-generalizations just jumps out at you.
Rand Paul lacks the brains, guts and principles that his father has. He has shown that he is a hypocrite willing to say whatever it takes to get elected.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Max
August 23, 2010 7:47 PM
Ron is always act as gurdian of American value, even when it is not popular. In these insane time I hope we have more sane elders like him.
Other wise our nation will slowly descend from the shining light on the hill to the valley of shadow.
We all should remember how Hitlar drag Germany to gutter.
Ron, protect our constitution. silent majority are with you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thepoliticalcat
August 24, 2010 1:00 AM in reply to Max
I begin to see why you remain silent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
uggboot
August 23, 2010 9:23 PM
╭⌒╮WELCOME
----- http://www.pointingtrade.com ~ ¤ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╮
╭⌒╭⌒╮╭⌒╮～╭⌒╮
,））））,''）~~ ,''~）
╱◥█◣ ╱◥█◣
｜田｜田｜｜田｜田｜
╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬ http://www.pointingtrade.com
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35
Tshirts (ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Jean(True Religion,VERSACE,coogi) $30
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $16
New era cap $15
╬╬╬ ╬╬╬
╰═══════╯
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 23, 2010 11:47 PM
Hal Lindsey brings up some points of thought that might bring son and father back together again, maybe?
http://www.hallindsey.com/
Play video entitled from 8/20/2010
We the People . . .
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
betty
August 24, 2010 3:32 AM
http://www.pickmbts.com
╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬
mbt shoes(lami shoes, walking shoes, chapa shoes, changa shoes)
the illogical use of sweeping over-generalizations just jumps out at you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rachelrachel
August 24, 2010 3:59 AM
The old man has some principles, and he sticks to them. Some of them might be kind of wacky, but at least he sticks to his principles. The boy, not so much.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ChristyH
August 24, 2010 10:07 AM
When Ron Paul is THE ONLY VOICE OF REASON within the GOP, you know how crazy the rest of them are...
Islam is NOT the issue - its a religion... I could probably come up with 20 things I don't like about ANY religion AND I BELIEVE IN GOD.... But, throughout history, groups have USED a religion or a group of people to support their own bigotry.... Hitler used Jews.... Americans used American Indians.... Americans used Japanese/Americans after Pearl Harbor..... McCarthy used anyone durig the "Red Scare"...Bigots used Blacks....
One day we will look back with horror and shame and say, "What were they thinking"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 24, 2010 2:36 PM
The current Islamophobia is precisely analogous to the dastardly generalization Christians used throughout history to justify the persecution of Jews: every one of them individually was held personally responsible for "killing Christ." Lumping all Muslims in with the 9/11 attackers is not different and, if this insanity is not nipped in the bud, it will lead inexorably to the horrendous wrongs of the past. Jews have every reason to be alarmed themselves and to rise up in support of the Muslims' religious freedom. As they were prominent in the Civil Rights struggles of the 1960's, they should now be in the forefront of defending a beleaguered segment of a supposedly "free" American citizenry.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Red XIV
August 24, 2010 5:23 PM
I disagree with Ron Paul on many things, but he seems to have actual integrity that his son lacks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
August 24, 2010 10:43 PM
Cordoba House is a house of cards. The teabagging, repubelican, neo-cons will keep building it until the whole thing collapses. Further damaging America in the process. These short-sighted power hungry tyrants don't want to help, work with or govern all of America, just somewhere near half & possibly a few well placed Governors & operatives. If they shit on the working man & the bonehead teabaggers in the meantine or forever that they've used to get back in power, so be it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MarsAmbassador
August 25, 2010 12:53 AM
""I think reconciliation is best promoted by -- instead of having a multi-million dollar mosque -- maybe having a multi-million dollar donation to the memorial site, would be better for all," Paul told the website."
So Rand Paul is saying he's in support of reparation payments to African-Americans? Same thing. Pay up and forgiveness will be considered.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MarsAmbassador
August 25, 2010 12:58 AM
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”.
- George Orwell
Ron Paul reminds me of that quote. Every day he is reminding conservatives how they SHOULD be viewing an issue. He is a lone voice of reason and bases most of his logic directly on the Constitution and ACTUAL conservative values, something the rest of the GOP has forgotten about. He speaks truth to power and has my respect as a result. I don't agree with everything he says, but I can ALWAYS figure out where he's coming from and why. What's so conservative about the largest military empire the world has ever seen, taking up 57% of our discretionary budget while we spend almost as much on the military as every other country in the world combined?
Pie-chart which shows our military budget compared to the world:
http://static.globalissues.org/i/military/09/country-distribution-2008.png
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sottovoce
August 26, 2010 12:15 AM
Say what you will about Ron Paul, he's got far more integrity and common sense than most Republicans and his own son.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kilowat
August 27, 2010 8:56 AM
Rand has a handler now Mitch McConnell, the GOP ,why all his talking points have changed
http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t283/kilowat1946/Fancy%20Farm%20Picnic%202010/IMG_8707.jpg
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?