RUSH: So Obama is out there in Los Angeles, in Hollywood. He’s causing a giant traffic jam out there at a $30,000-a-plate fundraiser. Wasn’t it in California that Obama talked about bitter clingers? When things don’t go their way they hang onto their guns and their what? Their religion, right. Now, who is it that is sounding like a bitter clinger here? Is it not Imam Obama?
It did strike me as a little ironic out there, folks. The same Barack ‘Hoover’ Obama who called people bitter for clinging to their guns and religion who feels like he can lecture us on the constitutional right to freedom of religion when he’s previously denigrated the whole concept of hanging onto religion. Now, here’s this guy who called all of us bitter clingers dividing his own party once again. Dingy Harry, who is in a tough reelection battle in Nevada, yesterday in Reno at a campaign event said this…
REID: The Constitution gives us freedom of religion. I think that it’s very obvious that the mosque should be built someplace else.
RUSH: ‘[T]he mosque should be built someplace else.’ Dingy Harry said ‘it’s very obvious.’ Mayor Bloomberg is not happy about all of this, yesterday afternoon in New York City.
BLOOMBERG: 9/11 did leave a permanent hole in our hearts in this city, but it did, I think, make us believe more strongly than ever in what this country stands for. We came together as a city back then, and we united as a country, and we took great pride back then in our freedoms and our men and women in uniform have fought and died to defend them — and if we shout down a mosque and community center because it is two blocks away from the site where freedom was attacked, I think it would be a sad day for America.
RUSH: The man clearly doesn’t get it. Not in the slightest. This is in the Washington Post today: ‘New York Gov. David Paterson (D) plans to meet later this week with the Islamic prayer leader and the developer of a planned mosque near Ground Zero to discuss the possibility of moving it to an alternate site, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) said Tuesday. King said he was informed of Paterson’s plan in a telephone conversation with the governor Tuesday morning.’ Now, I don’t know that we should expect much from this. Paterson hasn’t even been able to persuade most of the Democrats that he ought to be governor, much less persuade most of the Democrats they ought to move the mosque.
Meanwhile, there is an interesting entry here from a guy by the name Abdul Rahman al-Rashed. He is the director of al-Arabiya TV. He is the former editor of London’s Arab daily, al-Shark a la-swat, or Al-sot. And this has been excerpted on Memri. Now, it is interesting. Abdul Rahman al-Rashed is a left-leaning director of Al-Arabiya TV, former editor of London’s big Arab newspaper. ‘I cannot imagine that Muslims want a mosque on this particular site, because it will be turned into an arena for promoters of hatred, and a symbol of those who committed the crime.’ We don’t want that. ‘At the same time, there are no practicing Muslims in the district who need a place of worship, because it is indeed a commercial district.’ He’s saying no Muslims live there. ‘The last thing Muslims want today is to build just a religious center out of defiance to the others, or a symbolic mosque that people visit as a museum next to a cemetery. … [T]he battle against the 11 September terrorists is a Muslim battle … and this battle still is ablaze in more than 20 Muslim countries.
‘Some Muslims will consider that building a mosque on this site immortalizes and commemorates what was done by the terrorists who committed their crime in the name of Islam. I do not think that the majority of Muslims want to build a symbol or a worship place that tomorrow might become a place about which the terrorists and their Muslim followers boast, and which will become a shrine for Islam haters whose aim is to turn the public opinion against Islam.’ So here you have a left-leaning Islamist making the case for not putting a mosque at Ground Zero on the basis that Muslims don’t want it and it doesn’t help them; it would only make a mess for everybody. So the picture gets clouded. So if this is accurate — and I don’t doubt that it is — there have been other such hints. There was a piece in Haaretz recently that was refuted, by the way, by Islam. So we’ll have to wait and see just exactly if this is accurate and if it carries any weight.
In the meantime the Democrats are running for the hills on this as fast as they have run away from anything. CNN today: ‘Critics Say Obama’s Message Becoming ‘Incoherent’ — President Obama’s comments on a plan to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero are not only giving opponents an opportunity to attack him but also reveal a messaging problem from the White House, a communications expert said. ‘The danger here is an incoherent presidency,’ said David Morey, vice chairman of the Core Strategy Group, who provided communications advice to Obama’s 2008 campaign. … Obama has faced a torrent of criticism for what was called mixed messages on the controversial plan. … But Obama has the ability to sharpen his messaging skills by being less of a law professor and more of a communicator in chief.’ Wait a minute, now. I thought he was the best communicator we’ve ever had. I thought he was the most ‘articulate,’ the ‘cleanest.’ This guy was special. There was nobody better. In fact, as they all told us during the campaign 2007-2008, ‘We’ve never had a politician like this! We never had a human being trod the earth who had these remarkable characteristics, talents, and skills.’
And now all of a sudden the guy is incoherent and his message is muddled and he needs to turn into more of a communicator rather than a professor? The word is not ‘incoherent.’ He means exactly what he’s doing. We understand everything he’s saying, Mr. Morey. We understand everything he says when he first says what he means and then tries to walk it back and then says it again. We know exactly what Obama means. We have no doubt who Obama is. What you mean to say, Mr. Morey (again, this is David Morey, vice-chairman of a communications advisory group that worked with Obama in the 2008 campaign). The word here is ‘incompetent.’ It is incompetence, not incoherence.
‘Critics Say Obama’s Message Becoming Incompetent.’