Visual Week in Review: Mosque-Phobic Out-of-Towners; Obama Islam Poll; Meaner McCain

Karl Rove made sure anti-gay marriage amendments were on the ballot before the 2004 election to motivate Christians and get them to the polls. The mosque/Muslim issue is the same thing – they think it will get the base to the polls.

It might win them seats in the mid-term, but this issue is going to hurt them in the general. And it just might hurt them in the mid-terms. America just might have moved on.

The GOP has nothing to run on by this one last gasp at fear-mongering. But the timing might be off, and it might not truly help win seats in the mid-term. Then again, Obama does himself no favors by waffling on events that are clearly protected by the Constitution.

Sometimes what’s not in the picture tells a story in itself. It’s the dog that doesn’t bark. I went to look for myself at the site of the Islamic community center, and was surprised to see that right next door is the Dakota Roadhouse, a somewhat divey saloon whose motto – on its website – is “Too much is never enough.”Since then I’ve been noticing how the camera veers away from the Dakota Roadhouse every time we see a picture of the site. The camera looks up and down, sometimes to the left, but never to the right. Why is that? Is it out of fear of giving free publicity given to a saloon? Or is it that it clashes with the image of Ground Zero as a holy place where the martyrs should lie undisturbed? Google Dakota Roadhouse and there’s a Guide to New York website offering reviews of the place. The website locates the saloon in Tribeca – not “two blocks from Ground Zero that” like the Islamic Center next door. Here’s one review from an apparently dissatisfied patron: Welcome to the den of sketchiness made especially for you right here in Tribeca. This place is not for the faint-hearted nor for the priss. Ok, I am exaggerating, but really, this is not the place you want to stop by for drinks for pleasure or business or to enjoy eye candy, unless your version of people watching involves funky porn on a large screen and a rough crowd.

jmac wrote: “America just might have moved on”……..man, I would like to take that bet.

I think Dems and Progressives make a huge mistake if they think that all this controversy is about is “fear mongering to gain mid-term votes’, or the maneuvering of Karl Rove or what have you.

I think a part of the controversy is about that. However, I think a great deal of this is real anger. And it has been compounded by pious lectures/denouncements by would be elites about the masses ignorance.

“Real anger”? jonst? Real anger about what?

The anger is targeted at a lower Manhattan religious community that had nothing to do with 9/11, for exercising their Constitutional rights by building a community center on private property.

It may be “real anger” but it’s neither justified nor a legitimate platform for political activity.

G, I doubt this is the forum to explain some of the possible reasons for some people’s anger. Suffice to say, you acknowledge that it “may be real anger” albeit it, in your opinion, “neither justified nor a legitimate platform for political activity.”.

All I was trying to note in my post is the possibility that “some” of the “anger” may be “real anger”. No more or no less.

As to the notion that whatever the quality or cause of the anger it is targeted at a “lower Manhattan religious community”, let us say we disagree regards the target. But again, this is not the forum for such in depth discussions. Some things soundbites and posts are great for. Other things, not so good.

Nice. Salon also probes the geographic hypocrisy pursuing question of how far away the “mosque” needs to be from G0. (via @A_l)

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/27/mosque_exclusion_zone_defined

Answered and asked:
http://ironic.com/pix/safeway.jpg

–bks

Disagree regards the target in what sense? Disagree that the Muslim community of lower Manhattan is the target? Or disagree whether they are deserving of anger?

It almost seems that you, by your reasoning, are positing that the “real anger” that motivated assailants after 9/11 to kill a Sikh gas station owner because he wore a turban, is justifiable anger because it was “real.”

It is clear that the majority of Americans do not want this Islamic site near Ground Zero. This is a Democracy, where the people’s vote rules. Of course they have the right but it’s a golden opportunity for them to move the site in the name of friendship.