Uh, this is weird and sort of timely given the worries about the imposition of Sharia law vis a vis the Ground Zero Mosque:

KIRYAS JOEL, N.Y. (CBS 2) – You may never see a more unusual “Welcome” sign in Orange County. A sign in Kiryas Joel, the Hasidic Jewish enclave, is evoking mixed reaction.

Monroe resident Jessica Pantalemon stopped to cash a check in Kiryas Joel wearing a bright pink tank top and white shorts. She said she noticed scowling faces. “Just from the women, mostly,” she said.

“The guys let me walk by, the women stop and stare, start whispering to each other…I just ignore them.” The tradition in the village of Satmar Hasidic Jews is modesty.

Even on the hottest of days, most residents cover up from head to toe. But visitors don’t necessarily follow that tradition, and now the main synagogue is asking them to comply.

Congregation Yetev Lev posted signs at the village’s entrance – in both English and Spanish – asking outsiders to cover their legs and arms, use appropriate language and maintain gender separation in public.

To be fair, the article goes on to say that this is simply a polite request by a local synagogue to respect their culture.  There aren't any actual consequences to a lack of modesty other than getting the old stink eye from some Hasidic babes in the supermarket. 

The requests made on this sign are essentially the same requests made by Islamic culture or Sharia law regarding the separation of sexes and dressing modestly.  The only difference is that this town is Jewish, not Muslim.  I don't know if there are any signs like this hanging in Dearborn, MI, which is an area with the largest Muslim population in America, but I can certainly imagine the public outcry that would ensue if there were. 

I know the two religions in their present form are not analogous in their outward effect on the world around them (see:  jihadism). This sign also doesn't call to mind honor killings and other perversions that exist in Islamic culture.  The reactions of Americans to Jewish prudism verses the visceral reaction of Americans towards Islamic prudism are going to be different because of the public perceptions of both religions and the general understanding that Jews aren't actively looking to expand by force. 

Are Americans being intellectually dishonest by not having a visceral reaction to this sign in a Hasidic town?  I don't know, but it is certainly worth thinking about.

...is a comment from this story where a golfer hits a rock with his club and starts a wildfire.

Something tells me that the Colonel's "senile vanities" aren't that effective:

Ms Evans attended the event at the Libyan Academy in Rome wearing a gold chain and a 'Gaddafi' medallion which he gave her following a visit to the north African country earlier this year.

The British actress, who lives in Rome, said: 'Colonel Gaddafi was very polite and also very humorous. He is a funny man.

This is the third lecture he has given that I have been to. 'I haven't converted, I am staying Christian but I have been to Libya three times to visit him and we have become very good friends. He gave me a gold chain with his picture as a present.

'Today he said that he wanted to invite people to convert to Islam and that women were treated much better in Libya than they were anywhere else in the world.

'He said that Islam was the one true religion and that if Christ returned to Earth he would be a Muslim. I can see that some of the girls may have been shocked by what he said as Italy is a Catholic country.

'We were all given a drink but there was no alcohol and he lectured to us from the Koran. It was basically the same speech as last November when I went the first time and on Sunday.'

What is with these tin-horn dictators?  The guy invites a bunch of really hot Italian chicks to some creepy Islam conversion party, gives them non-alcoholic drinks and gets up and reads from the Koran? 

What is he trying to accomplish here?  What makes him think these hot westernized strumpets are going to convert to a religion that would have them cloaked like The Predator? 

These chicks are probably going on topless Mediterranean sailboat trips with George Clooney and Matt Damon.  Why the hell would they want to go to Libya?

I know this guy is completely bonkers and all, but I can't believe he wants to do anything other than run his lecherous blood stained hands up and down the sinews of their bodies.  Why the farcical "Islam conversion party"?

Quite some polling numbers in a reliably blue state:

In the latest sign that President Barack Obama's Democrats could struggle at the November 2 midterm vote, 47 percent of likely voters said they would back Toomey and 37 percent said they favored Democrat Joe Sestak.

This isn't surprising given the national mood.  I was at a meeting in Philadelphia back in the spring with other grassroots activists and Pat Toomey.  It became obvious to me at the meeting that Toomey is really able to capture the fiscal mood of the country rhetorically speaking.  This will serve him well in the general election.

I'm sure the race will tighten up a little bit in the fall, but I predict Toomey will win by 5-6%.

Oh No!

I love OBX.  If it does get battered by Earl, I hope there isn't much damage.  I've been down there about a zillion times with my family.  We haven't gone back in a year or two.  I hope there is something to go back to.

Roughly 500,000 people peacefully gathered around the Lincoln Memorial on the 47 year anniversary of the "I Have A Dream" speech to listen to Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Tony La Russa, Dr. Martin Luther King's neice, Albert Pujols and some other guests.  The message was "restoring honor in America" and the focus was on supporting the troops and turning back to god.  5.5 million dollars were raised to support American soldiers.

Seems non-controversial to me.  But if you paid any attention to the coverage in the MSM, you would think Beck was holding a KKK rally. 

What should one take away from this event?  The left cannot bring itself to put politics aside and support the troops because Glenn Beck organized the event and Sarah Palin spoke at it.

Macho Man Vlad Putin is at it again:

MOSCOW – Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin fired darts from a crossbow at a gray whale off Russia's Far Eastern coast on Wednesday in the latest in a series of man-versus-nature stunts designed to cultivate the image of a macho leader.

Putin held his balance in a rubber boat that was being tossed around in choppy waters off the Kamchatka Peninsula, and eventually hit the whale with a special arrow designed to collect skin samples. "I hit it at the fourth try!" a beaming Putin, kitted out in black-and-orange waterproof suit and black beanie, yelled to a camera crew from the boat.

A biologist with him displayed the skin sample and said it would allow experts to determine where the whale came from. When the boat skidded onto the beach, a bouyant Putin hopped off and made a beeline for waiting reporters.

Clearly in his element, Putin replied jovially to a question as to whether the endeavor was dangerous. "Living in general is dangerous," he quipped. Asked why he got involved, he simply said, "Because I like it. I love the nature."

As a character study, I love Putin.  He's everything you want in a Russian puppet tyrant.

On President Obama:

“He can take the black base for granted because he assumes we have nowhere else to go,” West said. “But we just won’t put up with it. He has got to respect us.”

What in the past 50 years of the United States of America makes Cornell West think that blacks won't put up with being exploited by the Democratic Party? 

If you pay any attention to politics in America, it is plainly evident that the Democrats pander to and exploit the black voting base to hold onto their power.  Without the monolithic black vote, Democrats wouldn't stand a chance of winning an election.  That is a fact.  The black vote is more important than the union vote in my estimation.

How the hell is West billed as a race relations super-scholar?  He's an idiot.  He also needs a haircut and a personal stylist, but thems is just cheap shots...

  His rhetorical fart doesn't pass the smell test.  Pun not intended.  Or maybe it was.  Whatever.

If it fits the narrative, run with it!

@ Holeman and Finch's Public House, Atlanta GA

This burger makes me want to fly down to Hotlanta and "have at it".  The fried peach pie cobbler doesn't look to shabby either.

Jesse Jackson writes a column begging people to come together and stop being divisive and opens it up with this:

American politics isn't beanbag. It is rough, bare-knuckled and often dirty. In today's 24/7 media environment, attack ads are remembered, and the truth has a hard time catching up with a lie. We now have entire TV networks that are essentially ideological propaganda outlets. With Republicans consolidated as the party of white sanctuary, anchored in the South, and Democrats championing diversity and inclusion, the politics of race is accentuated.

Forgive me.  I stopped reading after this paragraph.  I figured that any message of "unity" wasn't going to hold water if the first paragraph started out this way.  Thanks, but I'm all set.

CATO Institute's Gene Healy thinks so:

All this posturing is getting tiresome. The "mosque" controversy isn't about property rights or religious freedom. It's a bogus issue seized by the GOP establishment to distract the rank-and-file from the party's reluctance to shrink government.

Healy continues:

You see, cutting government is hard, and often unpopular. No surprise, then, that Boehner would rather play urban planner than embrace Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan's "road map" for shrinking middle-class entitlements.

Faced with difficult choices, the alleged party of small government always retreats to the lazy politics of Kulturkampf. Hey, that guy's a "card-carrying member" of the ACLU! Ask me about my flag-burning amendment!

John Cornyn, R-Texas, head of GOP efforts to take back the Senate this fall, plans to make the Park51 "mosque" a major campaign issue. It's all too typical: Feed the rubes conservative identity politics, and, with luck, they'll be too distracted to notice you've grafted a Republican "K Street Project" atop the same old edifice of Big Government.

The establishment Right wants to play the Tea Party movement for suckers. It remains to be seen whether they'll play along.

I am inclined to agree with Healy on this issue.  I think the debate should be had, but not at the level that it is at right now.  Chris Christie was right in saying that both sides of the aisle are politicizing this issue.  It is sad.  The real issue here is the economy and the ballooning debt.  Anything else is just...uncivilized.

CATO Institute's Gene Healy thinks so:

All this posturing is getting tiresome. The "mosque" controversy isn't about property rights or religious freedom. It's a bogus issue seized by the GOP establishment to distract the rank-and-file from the party's reluctance to shrink government.

Healy continues:

You see, cutting government is hard, and often unpopular. No surprise, then, that Boehner would rather play urban planner than embrace Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan's "road map" for shrinking middle-class entitlements.

Faced with difficult choices, the alleged party of small government always retreats to the lazy politics of Kulturkampf. Hey, that guy's a "card-carrying member" of the ACLU! Ask me about my flag-burning amendment!

John Cornyn, R-Texas, head of GOP efforts to take back the Senate this fall, plans to make the Park51 "mosque" a major campaign issue. It's all too typical: Feed the rubes conservative identity politics, and, with luck, they'll be too distracted to notice you've grafted a Republican "K Street Project" atop the same old edifice of Big Government.

The establishment Right wants to play the Tea Party movement for suckers. It remains to be seen whether they'll play along.

I am inclined to agree with Healy on this issue.  I think the debate should be had, but not at the level that it is at right now.  Chris Christie was right in saying that both sides of the aisle are politicizing this issue.  It is sad.  The real issue here is the economy and the ballooning debt.  Anything else is just...uncivilized.

Public Policy Polling, a left of center polling outfit, has some not so good news for Lil' Joey Sestak:

With Joe Sestak's victory in the Democratic primary and the poll bump that came with it now three months in the rear view mirror, Pat Toomey has taken a 45-36 lead in the Pennsylvania Senate race.

That's a big change from the tie PPP saw in a June survey of the race but pretty similar to the solid Toomey lead our April survey showed. Toomey's winning for the same reasons most Republican candidates across the country are doing well in key races right now:

-He has a 50-23 lead with independent voters.

Yes ladies and gentleman, that is a 27 point lead with independents in Pennsylvania.  That is more than a 2-1.  Joe Sestak needs to start running against his own record, principles and ideas if he wants to have a chance in one of the most captivating Senate races in the country. 

Something tells me that Arlen Specter would have done better with independents in Pennsylvania than Lil' Joey.  That's just a hunch.  Sure, Toomey could have pointed toward Specter's lack of principle and his votes for Obama's agenda, but Specter is slimy enough to seem in the middle of the road on alot of issues.  Sestak isn't.  He's a far left guy. 

It is no wonder why the Obama adminstration offered him a job to get out of the race.

On the mosque that is two blocks from Ground Zero:

"Given my last position, that I was the first U.S attorney post 9/11 in New Jersey, I understand acutely the pain and sorrow and upset of the family members who lost loved ones that day at the hands of radical Muslim extremists. And their sensitivities and concerns have to be taken into account. Just because it’s nearly nine years later, those sensitivities cannot and should not be ignored. On the other hand, we cannot paint all of Islam with that brush. ...We have to bring people together. And what offends me the most about all this, is that it’s being used as a political football by both parties. And what disturbs me about the president's remarks is that he is now using it as a political football as well. I think the president of the United State should rise above that. And should not be using this as a political football, and I don’t believe that it would be responsible of me to get involved and comment on this any further because it just put me in the same political arena as all of them.

"My principles on this are two-fold. One, that we have to acknowledge, respect and give some measure of deference to the feelings of the family members who lost their loved ones there that day. But it would be wrong to so overreact to that, that we paint Islam with a brush of radical Muslim extremists that just want to kill Americans because we are Americans. But beyond that ... I am not going to get into it, because I would be guilty of candidly what I think some Republicans are guilty of, and the president is now, the president is guilty of, of playing politics with this issue, and I simply am not going to do it."

Chris Christie just saw an opportunity to show a little "above the fray" leadership on this issue and took it.  His response is measured.  He could be accused of "not taking sides", but one must concede that there are valid arguments on both sides of the issue.  That is why I called for actual dialogue in a post yesterday.  A resolution can be reached in this situation.  The problem is that there are not alot people who want a solution yet.  There are many more scoring opportunities in the game and people want to take advantage of them.

I am happy that Chris Christie has taken this stand.  I might go a little further than him because I suspect the imam who is supposed to run the Cordoba house isn't very moderate at all, as I explained in the post that I linked to in the above paragraph. 

Additionally, I was listening to Bill Bennett's Morning In America today and he had a guest on the show from The Investigative Project On Terrorism named Steve Emerson.  They have been conducting an investigation of the imam and they said they will release explosive tapes and other documentary evidence showing that the imam is a wolf in sheep's clothing.  The information should be released later this week or early next week.  It should be interesting.

Allahpundit adds:

So (1) let’s respect public sensitivities about Ground Zero and (2) let’s respect the distinction between Muslims and radical Muslims and (3) let’s not divide people. What that means in terms of resolving this dispute, I have no idea. But I do agree with him that big-name pols weighing in on this does more harm than good. Even if they’re doing it for sincere reasons rather than for cynical political advantage, there’s no way to avoid the perception that they’re doing it for cynical political advantage, which adds a whole new dimension of clamminess to the discussion. It reminds me of Beltway honchos trying to coopt the tea-party label: Grassroots types on both sides are capable of hashing this out without establishment interference. What does Newt Gingrich add to the debate by railing against the mosque in one breath and chatting with reporters about whether he’ll run for president in another?

NRO's Daniel Foster thinks the issue is a political Rorschach test and that Chris Christie sounds the most grownup in his "on the one hand, on the other hand" equivocations. 

I just got off the phone with Diana Reimer, coordinator for the Philadelphia Tea Party patriots.  She had spent the last week or so in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania challenging the thousands of phony ballots submitted by the camp for John Krupa. 

Mr. Krupa attempted to claim the mantle of the "Tea Party" candidate for the Pennslvania Governor's seat.  Rumor has it that Mr. Krupa is associated with the Onorato campaign.  His erstwhile candidacy was presumed to have been orhcestrated by associates of the Onorato campaign.  There is a fairly strong Tea Party presence in Pennsylvania and this seems to have been an attempt to confuse voters who identify with the tea party.

Reimer and Republican Party officials worked very hard to get Krupa off the ballot and it seems that they have accomplished that goal. I Googled Krupa and found this short statement on CBS 3.

More here.  And here.  It seems Onorato and his union allies were circulating ballots for him:

Members of unions that endorsed Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato, as well as one of his campaign workers, helped get Tea Party candidate John Krupa onto Pennsylvania's gubernatorial ballot for November's election, state records show. Krupa, 59, of Clinton County filed petitions Aug. 2 with more than 24,000 signatures to get his name on the ballot.

Among those who gathered signatures are officers of building trades unions, whose statewide organization unanimously endorsed Onorato on June 9 — including several officers from a Pittsburgh union hall where Onorato announced his candidacy and celebrated his primary victory. Another Krupa petition circulator, Heather Damron of Lehigh County, was paid $1,000 by Onorato's campaign for his petition drive four months earlier.

The Philadelphia Tea Party Patriots have issued a press release:

Dan Onorato’s Fake Tea Party Candidate, John Krupa, Is Thrown Off The Ballot

Lansdale, PA  – Diana Reimer, Pennsylvania State Coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, released the following statement regarding the outcome of her objection to Dan Onorato’s “Tea Party” candidate John Krupa’s nomination papers:

“I am very satisfied with the outcome of our challenge and pleased that this perversion of the electoral system was not allowed to stand,” said Diana Reimer.  “Having personally sat in Harrisburg the last three days reviewing petitions at Commonwealth Court, I was extremely irritated that John Krupa and the Onorato Campaign forced a lot of good people to waste their time combing through petitions rife with fraud.

“Judging by the individuals supporting John Krupa, there was no doubt that the Democratic Party and Dan Onorato orchestrated this entire effort.  They tried to steal this election, and I and the many people that worked along side of me all weekend was not going to let that happen! 

“After this weekend it is clear that FRADULENT is the best way to describe John Krupa, his nomination papers and Dan Onorato.  I would urge Mr. Onorato to stop trying to deceive the voters!  This was such nonsense and showed a blatant disregard to the democratic process that so many of us work so hard to preserve.” 

Teacher's Union calls for boycott of LA Times:

Based on test score data covering seven years, The Times analyzed the effects of more than 6,000 elementary school teachers on their students' learning. Among other things, it found huge disparities among teachers, some of whom work just down the hall from one another.

After a single year with teachers who ranked in the top 10% in effectiveness, students scored an average of 17 percentile points higher in English and 25 points higher in math than students whose teachers ranked in the bottom 10%.

Students often backslid significantly in the classrooms of ineffective teachers, and thousands of students in the study had two or more ineffective teachers in a row. The district has had the ability to analyze the differences among teachers for years but opted not to do so, in large part because of anticipated union resistance, The Times found.

The newspaper plans to publish an online database with ratings for the more than 6,000 elementary school instructors later this month. After learning of the analysis and the database last week, union leaders began making automated calls to teachers objecting to publication. In the Friday evening call, Duffy said the database was "an irresponsible, offensive intrusion into your professional life that will do nothing to improve student learning. "Our attorneys are looking into the legalities of this database," he said in the recorded message. "This is part of the continuing attack on our profession, and we must continue to fight back on all fronts."

They mock the idea that teachers can be measured by "testing".  I know, crazy, right?

I find it interesting that a group of people whose entire profession is rooted in administering tests an assessments to their subjects object to a taste of their own medicine.  If I were a student in this school district, I'd have a little "what's good for the goose" talk with my teachers. 

I have yet to weigh in on the Ground Zero Mosque, but here goes.

I believe they have the constitutional right to build their mosque wherever they see fit.  This cannot be argued.  Many liberals are saying that conservatives are making "unconstitutional" statements regarding the mosque.  I don't know of any serious conservative who doesn't believe the construction of this mosque is constitutionally protected behavior.  Most of the arguments that I've read recognize this fact.  Texas Republican John Cornyn is an example:

This is not about the freedom of religion,” said Cornyn, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, on Fox News Sunday. “It is unwise to build a mosque at the site where 3,000 Americans lost their lives as the result of a terrorist attack.”

I'd go a little further here.  I think that the Cordoba project represents alot more than a "fundamental" lack of wisdom on the part of the Imam.

Imam Faisal is not a stupid man.  He must have been conscious of the potential (if not likely) reaction of New Yorkers and many Americans to the planned construction of a Muslim house of worship in close proximity to Ground Zero. 

In defense of his plans, Faisal has cited his desire to build a "dialogue" between faiths and cultures and to establish an enclave for moderate muslims.  I guess this is sort of a "Field of Dreams" argument.  If you build a "moderate" mosque, the moderates will come.  Whether Islamic moderates actually exist in any meaningful way is a matter for another time.

So, how "moderate" is the leader of the proposed mosque?  Imam Faisal refused to say that HAMAS was a terrorist organization.  In fact, HAMAS just voiced support for the mosque. 

Where is the moderation in refusing to label HAMAS a terrosist organization?  Excuse me if I don't think the good imam is operating in good faith regarding Cordoba and the moderation of Islam worldwide.

Dialogues involve two or more parties and require an open and honest exchange of ideas and concessions on both sides.  A good example of this have been the offer by NY Governor David Patterson to aide Imam Faisal in finding another site for the mosque.  What was the response of Faisal to this generous offer (you know, in the spirit of interfaith dialogue!)?  Crickets chirping. 

The Cordoba plan is easily one of the most one sided "dialogues" that I've ever witnessed. There is no consideration of the other party in this "dialogue". 

The only consideration here is what the imam wants to do and how he wants to do it.  If you disagree, you are a religious bigot who wants to shred the constitution.  This myopic and narrow minded narrative is insulting to the intelligence of every American who is capable of recognizing constituional rights while considering cultural and societal sensitivities and decency.  It ain't patting your head and rubbing your belly, folks. 

There are roughly 50 mosques in New York City.  The argument that any opposition to the Cordoba is rooted in bigotry and Islamophobia falls flat on its face.  I'm not suggesting there isn't Islamophobia or bigotry in America, I'm saying it is greatly exaggerated. 

Wouldn't this supposed gaggle of mouth breathing bigots be picketing mosques city wide?  If 9/11 happened in any other country, I'd argue that the reaction of the citizens to Muslims in the country would be much more intense than what was experienced in America.  We aren't throwing pork sausages at them in the streets. 

When the opening salvo in a dialogue or negotiation is the refusal to recognize the other side's concerns, there isn't much hope for the dialogue.  The vast majority of the opponents of this mosque recognize the rights of muslims to worship as they see fit and they recognize their right to build the mosque.  This is an opening concession in a good faith attempt at dialogue with the Muslim community.  There are no concessions or consideration offered in return.  Mayor Bloomberg is indirectly aiding the Cordoba house in this "dialogue".

This is not a negotiation or a dialogue.  The whole "dialogue" meme is a ruse.  Supporters of the mosque understand that the dime store phsycho-babble about "dialogue" and "understanding" are the most effective way to appeal to Americans in our society. 

Even the name of the mosque is provacative.  Cordoba was the name of the Spanish caliphate.  You know, when they had those infidels conquered for a while in Europe?

Put yourself in the shoes of Imam Faisal.  Assume your intentions are 100% pure in your desire to build a new mosque in New York City.  Would you first chose a site two blocks away from a graveyard where Muslims killed 3,000 innocent people (or little Eichmans, as Ward Churchill called them) in the name of Allah?  Secondly, would you choose to name this proposed mosque in a nod to Islamo-imperialism and triumphalism?

Both of my answers to these questions are no.  I'm trying to look at this situation as a rational human being.  For the life of me, I cannot understand how a man who professes a desire to propagate Islamic moderation would choose a site such as this and choose a name such as Cordoba for his mosque.  I cannot confidently say that this man has ill motives.  I also cannot confidently say that his motives are pure.  Other than the "dialogue" argument Imam Faisal is putting out there, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that this project is being done in good faith.

Victor Davis Hanson says it best:

A self-professed ecumenical Islamic organization picks a spot next to the site of the mass murder of 2,700 New Yorkers by radical Islamic terrorists — a deliberately provocative act designed to, at best, bother millions and, at worst, provide the sorts of visuals and optics that will shortly appear in DVDs and on the internet throughout radical Islamic enclaves in the Middle East, as a mosque is juxtaposed to the memorial shell of the World Trade Center. (We know what’s next: “O blessed Holy Warrior Atta, you took down the looming tower of the infidels and raised a mosque in its place!”)

 NRO's Josh Barro for the defense:

Meanwhile, the Washington Examiner has run a couple of pieces promoting the idea that the federal government should act to prevent construction of the mosque, for example by “legislation to make Ground Zero a historic preservation site.”

It’s not clear to me exactly what this means. First of all, Ground Zero is a construction site. Four huge office towers are in development there. The general sentiment across the political spectrum seems to be that it’s taken too long to rebuild, not that the area should somehow be “preserved” (other than by construction of a memorial.) Indeed, the government has thrown a ton of money at financing the redevelopment, which had been stalled in part by weak demand for office space Downtown.

Second, the proposed mosque would not be located “at” Ground Zero, but two blocks north of it. So, any federal overlay that restricts development would have to cover not just Ground Zero but an area around it. Again, it is hard to come up with a policy rationale: this area is part of one of America’s busiest office districts, characterized by over a century of high-rise development and redevelopment, which we hope to see continue.

It’s hard to see a justification for “preservation” other than as a pretext to interfere with the mosque. But the use of allegedly broad zoning restrictions to prevent a single project is inconsistent with the rule of law. (Besides which, when zoning or similar restrictions are used as a pretext to block a religious institution, that violates the First Amendment.)

Conservatives rightly bristle at the federal government’s micromanagement of land in the American West, with the highest profile example being the closure of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. So why should we invite the feds into land use review in Manhattan? What New York allows to be built in its Financial District is not the federal government’s business.

What I find bizarre about some of the conservative response to Cordoba House is not just the objection to the construction of the mosque, but the conviction that it should be stopped by any means necessary—even if that means violating conservative principles about property rights, rule of law, and federalism.

Barro continues:

That said, I would be more open to location-specific objections to the mosque if I believed they were actually location-specific. But opposition to mosque development this year has not been contained to Lower Manhattan.

Neighborhood activists in Staten Island were riled this June when they found out the local Catholic diocese planned to sell a vacant convent to a mosque developer. While some protesters raised the usual pretextual concerns about parking and traffic, others were not so politic. “We just want to leave our neighborhood the way it is—Christian, Catholic,” declared one protester. Another alleged that “mosques breed terrorism” and a third that “the city has had enough terrorism and everything else.” The protest wrapped up with chants of “USA! USA!”

The protesters were successful in convincing the Catholic Church to cancel the sale. The expansion of a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee became an animating issue in primary elections in that state. The Lieutenant Governor of Tennessee declared that he was unsure whether the First Amendment applies to Islam, which might be a cult or a nationality rather than a religion.

Lower-profile mosque controversies have also been seen in California and Wisconsin. If it were generally the case that Muslims are being welcomed into our communities, and allowed to build their houses of worship without public hostility, then it would be possible to condemn the Cordoba House’s site without worrying about alienating and excluding Muslims generally. But unfortunately the complaints about Cordoba House are just the highest-profile example of a wish that Muslims would stay out of our neighborhoods—the trouble being that everywhere is somebody’s neighborhood. In addition to being morally objectionable, undermining the integration and acceptance of Muslims in American society is a huge strategic error.

Newt Gingrich doesn’t want mosques in Lower Manhattan until churches are allowed in Mecca—making the bizarre case that our level of religious liberty is fine so long as it is no worse than in Saudi Arabia. But Cordoba House presents an opportunity to show how we are better than Saudis—and that it is no skin off our back when mosques are built in America, even in the Financial District of Manhattan.

I think Barro makes some good points here.  I think my arguments for an actual dialogue in this post were pretty narrow in scope, so I don't think much of what I said was eroded.  I think he probably does the most damage to my argument that Islamophobia isn't that prevalent in America by citing the Staten Island case and the Tennessee case.  But my argument was that Islamophobia is greatly exaggerated and other countries are much less tolerant of Islam than America is.  We aren't banning burqas.  Europe is.

...Blame Bush!

At least that is what the brilliant political strategist Maxine Waters has done:

Embattled Rep. Maxine Waters on Friday blamed the Bush administration for her ethics problems -- saying she had to intervene with the Treasury Department on behalf of minority-owned banks seeking federal bailout funds -- including one tied to her husband -- because the Treasury Department wouldn't schedule its own appointments.

The California Democrat said in a Capitol Hill news conference -- an event rarely held during a congressional recess -- that she reached out to then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson in late 2008 when his department failed to respond to the National Bank Association's request for a meeting.

"The question at this point should not be why I called Secretary Paulson, but why I had to," she said. "The question at this point should be why a trade association representing over 100 minority banks could not get a meeting at the height of the crisis."

I wonder if they leveraged their maxed-out race card debt by creating a new financial instrument:  The Bush Card.  Never leave Congress without it.

No wonder he's talking about how he can't understand why a Hispanic would vote Republican! 

From the Washington Times:

For all the brouhaha over Republicans wanting to review the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, the citizenship/birthright clause, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, once supported revising the current interpretation of the birthright citizenship clause in 1993. Mr. Reid introduced a bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee as the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993. The bill, which died in committee after it was referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs, includes tough immigration provisions that would make many wonder where Mr. Reid truly stands on the immigration and border debate. Title X of the Reid introduced bill shows the Nevada Democrat took Senator Lindsey Graham's, South Carolina Republican, idea on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment and documented it into legislation

What was it that Mr. Reid said about Republicans who considered the same thing a few weeks ago?

“They've either taken leave of their senses or their principles,” said Senator Reid of Republicans recently when asked about what he thought about the GOP push to clarify the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

Heh.

Has the empty slogan of "Yes We Can" turned into "No we can't, or whatever..."?

This is one of the more refreshing videos that I've seen in a long time.  I'm also excited that it took place in Philadelphia.

These guys are awesome.  I agree with virtually everything that they said. 

I wonder what Harry Reid has to say about these two gentleman?

Harry Reid, the whitest dork in American politics today (apologies to John Kerry), thinks that he is the arbiter of who should and shouldnt vote Republican.  His beliefs are completely rooted in skin color and language:

This guy amazes me.  These are prepared remarks from the Senate majority leader of the United States of America.  His words reveal a few things. 

First, everyone with a darker pigment in their skin must think alike.  Their views are to be monolithic.  If they are not, they are not genuine. It is unfathomable to Mr. Reid that a Hispanic American could think independently. 

He is unable to understand how a Hispanic American could disagree with the views of a milquetoast geek from Nevada.  In Harry Reid's America, Hispanics don't (or should not) have the mental capacity to not do as they are told.

Secondly, he reveals that minorities are used as electoral tools of the Democratic party in America. 

And we are supposed to believe that Sharon Angle is the extremist.

Welcome to America, circa 2010!  The Atlanta Urinal Constipation reports:

A crowd of people hoping to get federal housing assistance became unruly Wednesday morning with reports of fights breaking out in the crowd.

Thousands of people were lined up at the Tri-Cities Plaza shopping center, hoping to apply for a voucher from the East Point Housing Authority that will give them a discount on their rent. People began lining up at the shopping center two days ago, and by Wednesday morning the crowd had grown to over several thousand people. East Point police, some wearing riot helmets, were patrolling the area.

Firefighters and EMTs were attending to people who were overheating in the sun. Police from College Park, Hapeville, Fulton County and MARTA assisted in crowd control. Felecia McGhee told the AJC she arrived around 6:30 a.m. Wednesday. She said the major problem began when people started breaking into the line and officials started moving the areas where they were handing out applications. She said she saw at least two small children trampled when the crowd rushed the building where the applications were to be handed out. "It's a real mess out here," she said. East Point Police Sgt. Cliff Chandler said most of those treated were suffering from heat-related illnesses. He did not have a total number of people treated but knew of at least a half-dozen cases. He said a toddler was treated earlier in the morning for "some type of seizure." He estimated the crowd at 8,000 to 10,000. Channel 2 Action News reporter Mike Petchenik said fights were breaking out and police had to stop people who were storming the door. Channel 2 reporter Tom Jones said, “There are thousands, I mean, thousands of people here. I’ve seen people fall out from the heat.”

No injuries were reported but an East Point police officer was treated for heat-related problems. By late morning the crowd had thinned considerably and people were walking up and getting their applications without delay. But just before the 1 p.m. deadline, a line of about 200 people had formed. Shortly after 1 p.m., several people ran across the parking lot to get in line but were told by police that the line was closed.

Emergency personnel brought in a pickup truck full of bottled water and were handing it out to the crowd. A sign on the door of the office explained that only applications were being handed out. "The housing authority will be issuing applications Wednesday, August 11, starting at 9 a.m. Everyone in line by 1 p.m. on the 11th will receive an application. ... No Section 8 vouchers are available at this time. There are no public housing units available at this time. You're applying for the waiting list only."

There seems to be a bit of cognitive dissonance in this crowd.  Barack Obama has been a net financial negative for Black America.  Black unemployment completely dwarfs white unemployment figures.  90% of African Americans support Barack Obama's efforts thus far as president of the United States. 

President Obama might have made them feel proud for a few months, but what is a little injection of pride worth when you don't have a job and can't support your family?  What good is this pride when you are herded like cattle into a line by government workers in order to apply, not for a housing voucher, but for a spot on a waiting list for a housing voucher? 

The black community needs to start getting more results-oriented in terms of their political orientations.  They need to start basing their presidential approval opinions on whether or not they have a job, not whether or not the politician has the same colored skin.  I understand the reasons for the skin-color preference given the history of black America, but how is this going to advance a community that has been dismantled and destroyed by the welfare culture foisted upon them by the Democrats?

One could make the argument that Barack Obama is helping blacks by extending welfare benefits, unemployment and other forms of government cheese.  I think this argument misses the point.  Black Americans and other poor Americans are not helped in the long term by becoming more dependent on the government, they are hurt.  The only group that sees any benefits from the continued government dependency experienced by poor blacks is the Democratic Party.  If the Democratic Party lost the black vote, they wouldn't win another national election for 100 years.

If more private sector jobs were created, black Americans could apply for them and support themselves.  I'm not saying they'd immediatley start voting Republican, but I think there's a chance they might step off of the Democratic plantation that they've been toiling on for the last 50 years.

From the Insurance Journal:

A U.S. judge Monday refused to dismiss the state of Virginia's challenge to President Barack Obama's landmark healthcare law, a setback that will force his administration to mount a lengthy legal defense of the overhaul effort.

U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson refused to dismiss the state's lawsuit which argues the law's requirement that its residents have health insurance was unconstitutional, allowing the challenge to go forward.

This will be very interesting.  I wonder if there will be a ripple effect in other federal district courts around the country.