64-68% of the country is opposed to the mosque at ground zero. This is not because people do not like Muslims. What people object to is Islamic supremacy. They do not like Islamism, a political movement. Last I heard, it is not bigotry to be against a political movement.

Just because people have brown skin does not mean they can't also be promoting a supremacist, theocratic political movement that everyone should be against. Liberals need to get over their infatuation of the exotic and take an objective look at Islamic supremacy.

These folks have every right to build their mosque.

First Amendment and all.

What utter hypocrites and bigots these right wingers are.

Yes, it's astonishingly hypocritical how these right-wingers will invoke the Constitution at the drop of a hat and then flagrantly ignore the First Amendment.

Call this what it is: a witch hunt.

Imam Faisal is an Islamist. Not all Muslims are Islamists, but he certainly is one. Islamism is a political movement that is highly supremacist. So you can stop comparing it with churches and start comparing it with supremacy movements.

Imam Faisal wants Sharia in the US--so does al Qaeda. They are "good cop-bad cop" with the same goal.

Evidently liberals have no problem with supremacy movements so long as the people involved have brown skin.

There are tons of Christians in this country with a "dominionist" (i.e., supremacist) mentality. Does that mean they shouldn't be able to build churches?

They're a way bigger threat here than this country's tiny Muslim community.

"Breitbart"

Say no more . . .

What would be great is if the crazy right-wingers of all persuasions would destroy each other and leave the rest of us in peace.

"longing to"

Ah, the thought police.

You impute desires to others and want to punish them before they act, even though they have demonstrated no tendency to act in this manner.

Sorry--not the way the law works here in America.

Besides, plenty of Christians have subjugated women, killed homosexuals or desired to do so in the name of Leviticus (including some groups currently active), burned apostates at the stake, and advocated Christian supremacy.

Therefore, by this logic, all Christian construction projects should obviously be banned too.

Of course they have every right to build the mosque.

And the builders of the mosque are themselves highly critical of the lunatic fringe of al-Qaeda-style Islam.

The campaign against this community center is feeble right-wing opportunism by the likes of racists such as Andrew Breitbart. It will be great when Shirley Sherrod sues him for all he's worth.

Yesterday Ed Rollins said Pres. Obama said the dumbest thing in presidential history. Calling the building of this center an emotional issue and then went on to say, Obama may be intellectually right, but this is emotional.

I wish someone on the panel had looked this cretin in the face and asked him: When Pres. Obama put his hand on the Bible did he swear to uphold the Constitution or uphold the emotions of people?

And as far as dumbest thing said, what about Bush calling the Constitution an old rag.

I'm tired of their nonsensical arguments and
I am offended that they take me for a fool.

19:49 says "And the builders of the mosque are themselves highly critical of the lunatic fringe of al-Qaeda-style Islam."

Of course they are. No one said otherwise. However, they are also in favor of Sharia in this country. That means they are Islamic Supremacists. And it means they have something in common with al-Qaeda, whether they say they like them or not. Remember, they are politicians.

Honestly, it's amazing how liberals cannot bring themselves to criticize religious supremacists who are brown skinned. Truly amazing.

Right now, about 64% of the country is against the mosque. That's about the same percentage that believes they have a legal right to build the mosque. This means about 30% of the country is both aware they have the right, and is offended that they would do such a thing. This 30% of the country must be singularly unimpressed with liberals right now, who seemingly have never met a (brown) religious supremacist they don't like.

00:34

I see no evidence whatsoever that liberals "reject and seek to dismantle religious absolutism" of Muslims. Where are the liberals denouncing Sharia? Where are the liberals criticizing this Sharia-promoting Imam? Few and far between, it would seem.

In addition, where are the liberals fighting for apostates' rights? Again, few and far between. Liberals tend to be very dismissive of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an ex-Muslim whose criticism of Islam has brought serious threats to her life. She is African. Every critic of Islamic supremacy that I know loves her. So much for the theory that critics of Islamic supremacy are motivated by racism.

Where were the liberals sticking up for the right of Rifqa Bary to leave Islam and seek safety? She converted to Christianity as a teenager and fled her home in fear of her life. Where were the liberals?

If liberals really want to stand up for the rights of persecuted minorities, they should be first in line to protect ex-Muslims, but they are strangely missing when someone wants to leave Islam and their life is threatened. Google "Former Muslims United".

04:09

So, out of the zillions of liberal commentators who have commented on the mosque, how many have pointed out the Imam is an Islamist, which is a supremacist ideology, and therefore just as evil as the KKK--or words to that effect? Liberals are quick to denounce Christian supremacy, why not Islamic supremacy? How many pages of liberal rantings are uttered in criticism of Evangelical Christianity for each liberal word criticizing Orthodox Islam?

Yes, there are some people trying to reform Islam. No sign they're having a whole lot of success, though.

One thing is clear: If Riqfa Bary is sent back to Sri Lanka, she will be a target for her apostasy. Where are the liberals attempting to secure her legal residency here? And, by the way, charges of "Islamophobia" carry no weight with me. Any honest critic of Islam is labeled Islamophobic. Why don't critics of Evangelical Christianity get labeled "Evangelophobic"?

In the context of American society, the Christian Dominionist Right is the menace. Not only to liberals but to American Muslims, as this mosque incident clearly illustrates. If Muslim Domioninists in the US ever attained such a level of power, with their own members of Congress and so forth, they'd equally be targets of criticism and resistance; but that's a fantasy scenario.

On a world stage things are, of course, different. Muslims, in pre-Enlightenment modes, obviously exert far greater control over a number of nations than Christians do over any. The gradual modernization and liberalization of the Islamic tradition is therefore absolutely in the interests of world peace. Much of it will correlate with a rise from poverty and oppression--which will take the desperate edge off much more effectively than anything else. Yes, a long-term project but certainly no less important for that. And the seeds are there, now and in the past history of Islamic civilization.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age#Other_achievements

Also: Riqfa Bary is now over 18 and so no longer a minor. Her parents and law enforcement officials dispute many of her claims. Further: Sri Lanka is 70% Theravada Buddhist and only 7.5% Muslim (the same as its Christian population). It is not Iran by any stretch. This story has been carefully distorted as a propaganda tool by the Christian Right.

It is becoming increasingly clear how the Republican right does not mind associating with extremists who are everything America is not about.

What is alarming is that many people have bought into their message of fear. Republicans have always counted on fear to rally support. They are doing it again and Americans have long lost sight of the real issue. Religious freedom and property rights. If you believe in it, then all of us are entitled to it, if you are an American citizen. If you want to choose which group of Americans are only entitled to it, then you do not really support the holy grail of this land, the United States Constitution.

What is sad is the Democrats are back peddling on this issue now? Take Harry Reid for example.

This is a typical Republican play.