THE Left Supports Ground Zero Mosque but Protests Glenn Beck Rally

[Danno 1,228]

[THE Left Supports Ground Zero Mosque but Protests Glenn Beck Rally?

Posted by Warner Todd Huston Aug 18th 2010 at 5:59 am in Politics | Comments (19)

The intellectual dishonesty of the left is simply breathtaking. To show exactly how out of whack their ideology is, they are protesting the site and date of a Glenn Beck rally over his perceived “insensitivity” but on the other hand seem wholly unbothered by the mosque planned on being built at Ground Zero.

Purported civil rights leaders on the Democrat side of the aisle are all upset over the fact that Glenn Beck has planned a rally to be held in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. 47 years to the day after Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech.

Beck said that he has no plans on turning his rally into a partisan political rally but intends it to be a rally to, “honor the troops, unite the American people under the principles of integrity and truth, and make a pledge to restore honor within ourselves and our country.” Beck further says that the date was not a conscious choice but just fit his schedule.

But these “civil rights leaders” are up in arms because Beck dared to pick the exact date of King’s speech.

Beck’s choice of day and place for the rally “is insulting, is what it is,” Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League, said in an interview Monday. “August 28 is something special. It is a day that means something in American history because it was the demonstration in the United States in support of civil rights.”

Beck’s plans are “an effort to embarrass and poke a finger in the eye of the civil rights community because Glenn Beck and his public utterances don’t necessarily demonstrate a consistency with the vision of King.”

Race pusher Al Sharpton has also said that Beck’s rally “contradicts King’s legacy.”

“For Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin to have a march, they have the right to do so. Many of us suspect they are using the symbolism of that day in a way that does not reflect what the day is about,” Sharpton said.

I see. So these purported civil rights leaders stand against Beck’s civil right to organize a rally, they stand against King’s premise of the color blind society by desiring to organize black only rallies in response to Beck, and they wish to protest Americans that wish to celebrate America’s armed forces.

On the other hand, these same sort of people, left-wingers, are falling all over themselves to follow their president by agreeing that a mosque should be built at Ground Zero? On one hand Democrats like Al Sharpton and NAACP President Ben Jealous want us to think that Glenn Beck is being “insensitive” to the feelings of African Americans by holding his rally on the same spot and the anniversary of King’s most famous speech yet they don’t see any reason at all why Americans that oppose the GZ mosque would find the mosque to be similarly insensitive?

In Democrat’s opinion we should refuse to allow Beck, an American who wants to support his country’s military, to hold a rally because it falls on a certain day and is held at a certain location, but we should not oppose people that sport a foreign ideology antithetical to American principles to build at a place that will promulgate that ideology near the same spot where their fellows killed thousands of Americans.

The pretzel logic the left employs is a wonder, indeed.

[^_^ 5,021]

This is the first I've heard about Glenn Beck and the Lincoln Memorial.

That said, opposition to Corboda can only be based on the bigoted assumption that Islam is indistinguishable from terror. That, jack, is a fact.

[Danno 1,228]

This is the first I've heard about Glenn Beck and the Lincoln Memorial.

That said, opposition to Corboda can only be based on the bigoted assumption that Islam is indistinguishable from terror. That, jack, is a fact.

No doubt for you it is.

[^_^ 5,021]

No doubt for you it is.

If one does not equate Islam with terror, then there is no reason to believe this mosque is in any way associated with the events of 9/11/01. In fact, there already is a mosque in the area - Masjid Manhattan - which has been there since before the Towers ever went up and is there today. If Cordoba is a problem, perhaps we should go get rid of Masjid Manhattan as well.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

If one does not equate Islam with terror, then there is no reason to believe this mosque is in any way associated with the events of 9/11/01. In fact, there already is a mosque in the area - Masjid Manhattan - which has been there since before the Towers ever went up and is there today. If Cordoba is a problem, perhaps we should go get rid of Masjid Manhattan as well.

9/11/11. - I think that's really all that needs to be said (and seems to be an ignored point) about this Mosque. I can almost guarantee you more people would have less of a problem with it, if it weren't for that part.

[TyandAllie 17]

No doubt for you it is.

Threre is no monolithic 'Left' but all the liberals I've spoken to about this consider both the 'mosque' location and the Glenn Beck thing to be in dubious taste at best, but at the same time support the rights of both of them under The Constitution.

Conservatives love to wave The Constitution, but many of them are awfully quick to cherry pick it.

[Danno 1,228]

Threre is no monolithic 'Left' but all the liberals I've spoken to about this consider both the 'mosque' location and the Glenn Beck thing to be in dubious taste at best, but at the same time support the rights of both of them under The Constitution.

Conservatives love to wave The Constitution, but many of them are awfully quick to cherry pick it.

actually, neither side has a monopoly on the tendency to cherry pick principles.

[TyandAllie 17]

actually, neither side has a monopoly on the tendency to cherry pick principles.

True, but it's conservatives of late that seem to be loudly calling for a return to The Constitution. I have no problem with that, but they need to practice what they so vociferously preach.

[evli1966 88]

Threre is no monolithic 'Left' but all the liberals I've spoken to about this consider both the 'mosque' location and the Glenn Beck thing to be in dubious taste at best, but at the same time support the rights of both of them under The Constitution.

Conservatives love to wave The Constitution, but many of them are awfully quick to cherry pick it.

Your statement is true in regards to the left and the view of the issues.

But the reality of the embolden staement is actually opposite. Please go back and read the constitution and see were the left is hacking it up bending the meaning of the words etc. to meet their agenda.

The right tends to be to the point of the meaning of the language and allow no variance or enact strict values which were not intended, to meet their agenda.

Not to say it hasn't happened before but the left are hacks and the right are overly strict and often pass knee jerk laws which does not help the people

Balance is needed.

As for the existing Mosque was it not there prior to 9/11? so why would peopel scream for the removal of ti or the bad taste of it being there.

The left ignores the fact the new mosque is being built to be compleetd on a day of enfamy that was caused by islamist extremists.

The right is ignoring the rights of the US citizens to build a new mosque using the day of infamy to sensationalize their point.

Has the money being used been tracked to see if it comes form any of the extremist groups?

Edited August 18, 2010 by evli1966

[TyandAllie 17]

But the reality of the embolden staement is actually opposite. Please go back and read the constitution and see were the left is hacking it up bending the meaning of the words etc. to meet their agenda.

The right tends to be to the point of the meaning of the language and allow no variance or enact strict values which were not intended, to meet their agenda.

Not to say it hasn't happened before but the left are hacks and the right are overly strict and often pass knee jerk laws which does not help the people

Balance is needed.

I don't disagree with you, but the difference to me seems to be that many liberals consider The USC to be a 'living, breathing document' open to interpretation. One can agree or disagree with this, but at least they are open about it.

The 'right' disagrees with this, and that is perfectly fine, but it makes it seem particularity disingenuous when they appear to pick and choose what suits them.

Edited August 18, 2010 by TyandAllie

[Danno 1,228]

True, but it's conservatives of late that seem to be loudly calling for a return to The Constitution. I have no problem with that, but they need to practice what they so vociferously preach.

I think one of the areas of disconnect is: THE LEFT REJECTS THAT THIS IS A CHRISTIAN NATION, A CHRISTIAN NATION THAT WELCOMES OTHERS TO A POINT BUT WILL NOT ALLOW ITS SELF TO DOMINATED BY OTHERS.

Those on the left have no problem granting other countries the right to be a "muslim country" ...or whatever

but they insist our Christian culture must go.

Personally, I do not care one way or the other about this issue, but I do see both sides of it.

Edited August 18, 2010 by Danno

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Islam is not a foreign ideology antithetical to American principles, as the article states. Well, it is if you're an idiot who doesn't do his research before writing provacative articles.

I have to say that I am proud of fellow VJ members who oppose and speak out against the ignorance of the Right re this issue. It's been stirred up to sell newspapers and raise ratings for tv and radio talk shows.

CNN had a very interesting segment on AC360 about the chronology of the mosque PR and how the hysteria was built. One part showed Laura Ingraham interviewing Imam Rauf's wife, Daisy Khan, about the mosque back in December 2009, and commenting on how there were no objections to it being built near the sacred hole. It seems they had to manufacture outrage that didn't exist just a few months ago. Some are so easily manipulated by negativity, but, happily, not all.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think one of the areas of disconnect is: THE LEFT REJECTS THAT THIS IS A CHRISTIAN NATION, A CHRISTIAN NATION THAT WELCOMES OTHERS TO A POINT BUT WILL NOT ALLOW ITS SELF TO DOMINATED BY OTHERS.

Those on the left have no problem granting other countries the right to be a "muslim country" ...or whatever

but they insist our Christian culture must go.

Personally, I do not care one way or the other about this issue, but I do see both sides of it.

The US isn't a Christian nation. It may have been founded by Christians, but the US is a diverse nation of many faiths and beliefs. Surely the role of the State should be to tolerate all but elevate none. That's the principle behind the separation of State from Religion.

What do you mean by "Christian culture" anyway? That's a nebulous term to say the least. Is it the same as "American Culture", "Western Culture". Just what do these terms actually mean in real terms?

[THE Left Supports Ground Zero Mosque but Protests Glenn Beck Rally?

Posted by Warner Todd Huston Aug 18th 2010 at 5:59 am in Politics | Comments (19)

The intellectual dishonesty of the left is simply breathtaking. To show exactly how out of whack their ideology is, they are protesting the site and date of a Glenn Beck rally over his perceived “insensitivity” but on the other hand seem wholly unbothered by the mosque planned on being built at Ground Zero.

Purported civil rights leaders on the Democrat side of the aisle are all upset over the fact that Glenn Beck has planned a rally to be held in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. 47 years to the day after Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech.

Beck said that he has no plans on turning his rally into a partisan political rally but intends it to be a rally to, “honor the troops, unite the American people under the principles of integrity and truth, and make a pledge to restore honor within ourselves and our country.” Beck further says that the date was not a conscious choice but just fit his schedule.

But these “civil rights leaders” are up in arms because Beck dared to pick the exact date of King’s speech.

Beck’s choice of day and place for the rally “is insulting, is what it is,” Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League, said in an interview Monday. “August 28 is something special. It is a day that means something in American history because it was the demonstration in the United States in support of civil rights.”

Beck’s plans are “an effort to embarrass and poke a finger in the eye of the civil rights community because Glenn Beck and his public utterances don’t necessarily demonstrate a consistency with the vision of King.”

Race pusher Al Sharpton has also said that Beck’s rally “contradicts King’s legacy.”

“For Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin to have a march, they have the right to do so. Many of us suspect they are using the symbolism of that day in a way that does not reflect what the day is about,” Sharpton said.

I see. So these purported civil rights leaders stand against Beck’s civil right to organize a rally, they stand against King’s premise of the color blind society by desiring to organize black only rallies in response to Beck, and they wish to protest Americans that wish to celebrate America’s armed forces.

On the other hand, these same sort of people, left-wingers, are falling all over themselves to follow their president by agreeing that a mosque should be built at Ground Zero? On one hand Democrats like Al Sharpton and NAACP President Ben Jealous want us to think that Glenn Beck is being “insensitive” to the feelings of African Americans by holding his rally on the same spot and the anniversary of King’s most famous speech yet they don’t see any reason at all why Americans that oppose the GZ mosque would find the mosque to be similarly insensitive?

In Democrat’s opinion we should refuse to allow Beck, an American who wants to support his country’s military, to hold a rally because it falls on a certain day and is held at a certain location, but we should not oppose people that sport a foreign ideology antithetical to American principles to build at a place that will promulgate that ideology near the same spot where their fellows killed thousands of Americans.

The pretzel logic the left employs is a wonder, indeed.

This article is yellow journalism. It attempts to connect disparate strands to advance a false premise.

opposition to Corboda can only be based on the bigoted assumption that Islam is indistinguishable from terror. That, jack, is a fact.

Exactly right.

[Dan J 277]

I think one of the areas of disconnect is: THE LEFT REJECTS THAT THIS IS A CHRISTIAN NATION, A CHRISTIAN NATION THAT WELCOMES OTHERS TO A POINT BUT WILL NOT ALLOW ITS SELF TO DOMINATED BY OTHERS.

Those on the left have no problem granting other countries the right to be a "muslim country" ...or whatever

but they insist our Christian culture must go.

Personally, I do not care one way or the other about this issue, but I do see both sides of it.

Lets see here. Government interfering in economy = bad. Government interfering in a personal choice of relgion = good?

Edited August 18, 2010 by Dan + Gemvita

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

We will just see how peaceful the far left is on 8/28. I wonder how many buses the unions have reserved?