OBAMA: Let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure.
Given the hyper-partisan tenor of our times, you might assume that the right-wing Obama haters at Fox News would seize on this statement as proof that the president is the Muslim, socialist Nazi they have long claimed him to be.
But in this particular case, the world has turned upside down. Here’s CNN pundit Erick Erickson, on his own blog, suggesting that because the president supports the rights of Muslims to build an Islamic center on private property, he therefore also endorses human sacrifice:
[What] about the Greater First Church of Satan wanting to do human sacrifice of a willing victim? I guess our founding principles demand the president support that too. After all, it is a religious belief and only willing participants.
But here’s the real upside down part. The talking heads on Fox News’ weekend morning chat show liked the president’s statement:
[The] Fox & Friends weekend hosts all agreed that Obama is performing the job that’s required of him. “Obama has to stand up for religious freedom,” said co-host Alisyn Camerota. “He has to stand up for our Constitution,” co-host Dave Briggs offered, to which co-host Clayton Morris added, “That’s the job he gets…defend the Constitution.”
What? Isn’t it Fox News’ strict practice to broadcast only propaganda that is 180-degrees in opposition to anything and everything Pres. Obama says? Plus, isn’t fear-mongering about the evils of Islam one of the Republicans’ best poll-tested tools for controlling their tea bagger base?
Under normal circumstances, Fox News Pres. Roger Ailes would have had those weekend hosts fired and frog-marched out of the News Corp building by now.
So what could have prompted this double back flip on the evils of Islam at the Republicans’ in-house news? Could it be the fact that a Muslim owns 25 percentof News Corp, Fox News’ parent company? He is Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, News Corp’s fourth largest voting shareholder, behind the Murdoch family, Liberty Media, and Fidelity Management & Research Co, a mutual fund.
Prince Alwaleed has donated huge sums to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, as did America’s late number-one enemy Saddam Hussein. But the prince is probably best remembered in the United States for his offer to donate $10 million to New York City after the 9/11 attacks — an offer that “America’s Mayor” Rudy Giuliani turned down, perhaps because Alwaleed had assigned blame for the attacks, not on his fellow Saudis like Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 hijackers, but on America’s support for Israel.
It would be a big scandal if a legitimate journalistic organization tailored its talking points to fit a political agenda of its owners, but as Rachel Maddow has said, this is just Fox being Fox. This is what Fox News does.
And one here’s one last bit of irony: As Roger Ebert posted to Twitter, “Why it is up to secular progressives to defend freedom of religion?”
Or, asked the other way, why is it the Republican religious right that is trying to suppress religious freedom?
Typical for Fuchs Noose. Think Progress revealed a while back that Prince Alwaleed has boasted publicly of the amount of influence he has on what the network reports. I find it ironic that many of the network’s viewers seem to hate anything to do with Islam but continue to be rabidly devoted to a network of which 25% is owned by a Saudi Arabian Muslim.
I think Rupert, Roger, or another Fuchs Noose executive might have received a long distance call from Saudi Arabia.
If I were a dedicated viewer of the network, I’d wonder why all of a sudden the network aligned itself with President Obama after weeks of hosting a majority of guests who spoke against the construction of Cordoba House. Just saying.
Maybe it’s because my brain is still functioning well, and I tend not to look to others to tell me what to think/do/say. I prefer reading various sources of information before taking a position on issues, or it could be that I know more about the Constitution than the average American because I taught about it for 30+ years. I am a firm believer in the old saying that knowledge is power.
I forget to comment on Erickson. No one should listen to anything he has to say. He is on the city council in my city. Thank goodness he has decided not to seek re-election to his seat in November. Even many of the conservatives in the city don’t like him because they say he promotes hatred and divisiveness.
Last year when our police officers wanted to join the Teamsters Union, Erickson took to the editorial pages of our newspaper and suggested that if the officers voted to join the union, they should all be fired immediately. He also called them keystone cops. Never mind that in GA no public employee can join a union and bargain collectively. The officers felt they could avail themselves of the legal services of the union to finally get a graduated pay scale in place. The majority of the council members felt the officers were right to want a pay scale in place. Many of our officers work here for a few years, then move on to cities where the pay is more lucrative and a graduated pay scale is in place.
One memorable moment occurred when the head of unions in Middle GA and union supporters spoke after a city council meeting. Not once did Erickson look up from the keyboard of his laptop during the speeches. The head of the unions reminded Erickson that the union would remember him should he ever seek a higher political office in the future, and that unions do know how to organize for political purposes. Maybe this is why Erickson chose CNN instead of running for a position in our state legislature.
As an American, I know and accept that the Muslims have a right to build a mosque in America as much as Presbyterians have a right to build churches in America. However, building the mosque in New York, two blocks from Ground Zero is not a very nice gesture to the American people. And like carrying guns in church…it is an explosive decision…it is like rubbing salt in a wound. That is why approximately 70% percent of Americans are against the building of this particular mosque. Now, all you people out there beating the drums and calling concerned Americans stupid and prejudice should stop and consider that these muslims are building a target and a magnet for trouble. We cannot stop them without breaking our own laws and I support their right to build. I do not support their religious practices and I am willing to predict there will be many woes brought about by this mosque in the future.
Jethro @ 11:47
I don’t see you whining about the mosque in the Pentagon! What’s the matter,you got SWD?
I did a little research and found that there are already mosques in the area near the site of Ground Zero.
I wonder how one can choose to trash one of our most important freedoms out of fear.
I never called anyone stupid or prejudiced, but I will call those Americans who are afraid to stand up for our Constitution cowards.
BTW, the rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution are not subject to change due to the results of any poll.
They DO have the right to build … and I support that.
*BUT*
This is a terrible way to win friends and influence people. This ‘unwise’ move does lowers my opinion of them a notch… considering they perhaps have unlimited funds and can go anywhere.
A peace Abby in that loc would be appropriate for them to win folks over.
2001 being The Second Time! … speaks volumes.
If religious institutions were taxed at the same property tax rates as other non-exempt entities, then maybe the religionists would choose to build in less expensive places.
But, with that being said, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. According to the Bill of Rights, the government has no basis for opposing this.
Jethrow: The folks who want this mosque built are Americans. too. And there were innocent Muslims killed on 9-11.
A “peace abby”? Would that be sponsored by the Protestants or Catholics?
lw