***
Adding to the collection of posts about Obama’s approval of the GZM being written by the best in the blogosphere, here’s Big Fur Hat at I Own The World…
Long Tubular Heads Leave Little Room For Brain Capacity
Home – by BigFurHat – August 14, 2010 – 09:09 UTC – 15 Comments
This is Steve Benen. Why, yes, his head does look like a Thermos.
Benen is another Journolister (do we really need 400 of them? They are pretty much the same beast in varying degrees of fugly) who supports the right for a mosque to be built 600 feet from Ground Zero. He took issue yesterday with a piece by Charles Krauthammer, calling his anti-mosque piece “all the errors of fact rolled up into one column.”
Benen’s contention? That the mosque zone isn’t part of Ground Zero.
I think when the building is condemned because the landing gear from one of the planes crashes into it, it’s part of Ground Zero. But that’s just me being wing-nutty, and Benen being, well, a guy with a misshapen tubular head.
Thermos, in an effort to project that he is a reasonable chap, agrees that no mosque should be built at Ground Zero. He writes this only as a set up so he can smugly play his genius “gotcha” where he points out that Park 51 is 2 blocks away! (This point has been made since day one, Benen. It’s specious.) He then goes on to cite his formidable expertise on the constitution. One would be a fool to try and match wit and wisdom with a Benen, certainly not a pedestrian like me. But I’ll try.
Benen. Question for you. On what basis would you stop the mosque being built, like you implied you would, if the mosque was being built squarely atop Ground Zero?
Careful.
(Oh, I fully expect you to say that you never said you’d try to stop a mosque being built ON Ground Zero, but would be strongly against it as you reluctantly allowed it be built (hey, our hands are absolutely tied!) on the premise of religious freedom in America. So let’s move on.)
Next question. If Islam were to build a mosque directly on Ground Zero, would you ever begin to question whether a religious organization that could commit such a morally and ethically contemptible act should continue to be recognized as a protected group under our constitution? At what point would you declare that this group not have the constitutional protections of a religious group?
You’ve already decreed the physical boundary of what is considered Ground Zero, now I want you to establish the moral boundary of what you are willing to put up with. Would there ever be a point where you say enough is enough? Does that day ever come? My guess is no. History has taught us this.
Hypothetically, would the Muslims building a mosque directly on Ground Zero be moderate Islam or radical Islam? The professives – I mean- progressives are always cautious and make this distinction.
Certainly they can point to radical Christianity – it’s all of it. Christians are radicals for being anti-abortion, homophobes and traditionalists. In short, Christians are radicals for being a moderate version of Islam! (Ironic, eh?)
Let’s face it, the distance the mosque is from Ground Zero is meaningless. It’s a red herring. It would matter little to a progressive what, where and when Islam would seek to do anything. They are too busy pretending to be constitutionalists while they simultaneously seek to block ads on city buses that speak out against the morally wrong structure. (Ironic, eh?)
Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are the radicals. Don’t you see how progressivism works?
When will progressives stand shoulder to shoulder with the majority of Americans who can plainly see what Islam is attempting to do?
When will progressives be consistent when waving around the constitution as if it’s a document they respect? It’s as malleable as they need it to be in their quest to take down the real problem in America. Americans.
