That Damned 'Mosque' Issue Won't Go Away

It feels like an eternity since I posted a "Debate of the Week" item on the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque." (It's not on Ground Zero, and it's more of a community center with a mosque component.) Yet, as the midterm congressional elections approach, the issue has re-emerged as THE political hot button of the season.

So, again, I'm going to ask you: what are your thoughts on this? Do you think the planners should build Cordoba House, or Park51, at its proposed site, a former Burlington Coat Factory two blocks away from Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan?  Please weigh in below in the comments section. Also, please avoid ad hominem attacks on people you may disagree with. If you disagree with their reasoning, however, point out why and please cite facts that support your case.

Before the commenting begins, I want to point out two opinions on the topic that haven't really been addressed in the media:

First, here's leading atheist thinker Sam Harris (The Daily Beast via The Daily Dish):

The claim that the events of September 11, 2001, had “nothing to do with Islam” is an abject and destabilizing lie. This murder of 3,000 innocents was viewed as a victory for the One True Faith by millions of Muslims throughout the world (even, idiotically, by those who think it was perpetrated by the Mossad). And the erection of a mosque upon the ashes of this atrocity will also be viewed by many millions of Muslims as a victory—and as a sign that the liberal values of the West are synonymous with decadence and cowardice. This may not be reason enough for the supporters of this mosque to reconsider their project. And perhaps they shouldn’t. Perhaps there is some form of Islam that could issue from this site that would be better, all things considered, than simply not building another mosque in the first place. But this leads me to a somewhat paradoxical conclusion: American Muslims should be absolutely free to build a mosque two blocks from ground zero; but the ones who should do it probably wouldn’t want to.

Now, here's former Bush administration solicitor general Ted Olson*, whose wife died in the Sept. 11 attack on the Pentagon (Talking Points Memo):

Well it may not make me hap- popular with some people, but I think probably the president was right about this. I do believe that people of all religions have a right to build edifices, or structures, or places of religious worship or study, where the community allows them to do it under zoning laws and that sort of thing, and that we don't want to turn an act of hate against us by extremists into an act of intolerance for people of religious faith. And I don't think it should be a political issue. It shouldn't be a Republican or Democratic issue, either. 

*Interesting, sad note: Olson's birthday is Sept. 11.

My Five Stages of Oil Spill Grief

A friend of mine remarked on Facebook the other day that she is now officially depressed over the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. I expect this feeling is hitting a lot of people right about now, 52 days into the disaster, as attempt after attempt by BP to cap the spill has failed or has had minimal success and more and more horrifying pictures of oil-soaked wildlife pop up on the news. I understand this because I reached the point of depression over the spill weeks ago.

No, I don't claim to be more empathetic or sensitive to these matters than everybody else. It's just that my job involves watching financial news networks for seven hours a day. For seven hours a day. FOR SEVEN HOURS A DAY. For seven hours every work day for much of the past seven weeks or so I have listened to a legion of pampered and puffy doyens and doyennes of the "free market" bloviate and blather about what the spill means to BP's bottom line or whether it's right for the government to pressure BP to pay claims and clean up the mess or whether the disaster is because of regulators instead of the company's error. Absolutely, the regulators deserve a good deal of the blame, but mainly because they've been bought over the years by the oil industry. In the wake of this catastrophe, the notion that doing away with any regulation of the oil industry instead of improving it is insanity.

Hearing this market-fundamentalist bullshit for seven hours a day while reading sober and depressing news stories from a variety of sources, seeing the latest horrific pictures of oil-soaked marshes and wildlife and watching the live feed of BP's spill cam is enough to make a man want to tattoo the entire "Communist Manifesto" on his body using only heated paperclips and the ink from a Bic pen. As if the spill weren't depressing enough, there are still people with power and influence who absolutely refuse to acknowledge the reality of this disaster, that it is not just another thing to spin.

Debate of the Week: A 'Mosque' Near Ground Zero?

Please comment below. Remember to keep it civil. Don't assume anything about the people you disagree with. I will delete any comments that are offensive or veer too far off topic. Thank you in advance.

About 1,000 people on Sunday protested plans for a 15-story Muslim community center two blocks away from Ground Zero in lower Manhattan. Critics of the plan say the center would be an insult to the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center by Muslim terrorists. Several family members of 9-11 victims have come out against the center, with some saying it would remind them too much of the pain of losing a loved one. Others, like Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams, who called Allah a "monkey god" and Muslims the "animals of Allah," have been less civil in their opposition. Here's an argument against the center from conservative newspaper The Washington Times.

The facility, called the Cordoba House, would be more than just a space for prayer, however. It would also house classrooms, a fitness center and a swimming pool. The project also has the support of a community board and local politicians. Its leading proponent, a local imam named Feisal Abdul Rauf, says it's intended to help "bridge and heal a divide" and combat radicalism. Rauf's rebuttal to critics of the proposed center can be found here.

So, what do you think?  Are the protesters right, or should the community center proceed as planned? Where do you stand, and why?

Let the debate begin!

Thought for the day.

The Palin family is the Fox broadcasting ethos become flesh.

Anchor 1: "Look at that. Isn't it horrible?"


Guest: "Repugnant!"


Anchor 2: "Disgusting!"


Guest: "Won't somebody please think of the children? How can parents let their kids do that?"


Anchor 1: "Let's see that video again."

Another reason to root for 'Los Suns.'

A fantastic development. The Phoenix Suns will wear their "Los Suns" jerseys tomorrow night against the Spurs in honor of Cinco de Mayo and in solidarity with the Hispanic community.

Here's the Suns' point guard, the great Steve Nash, on the controversial immigration law:

I think the law is very misguided. I think it is unfortunately to the determinate detriment to our society and our civil liberties and I think it is very important for us to stand up for things we believe in. ... I think the law obviously can target opportunities for racial profiling. Things we don't want to see and don't need to see in 2010.

Way to go. Now top it all off with another whuppin' of the Spurs' asses.

Debate of the Week: Should the U.S. Allow Offshore Oil Drilling? (Updated 2x)

Please comment below. Remember to keep it civil. Don't assume anything about the people you disagree with. I will delete any comments that are offensive or veer too far off topic. Thank you in advance.

This week's topic seems like a no-brainer, considering the massive oil spill in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon rig's explosion and sinking in the Gulf of Mexico.  The rig in question was leased by BP Plc and owned by Transocean Ltd., and its drill was cemented into place by Halliburton just 20 hours before the rig's blowout. BP says it will pay for all "necessary and appropriate" costs for the cleanup of the spill, which President Obama called a "potentially unprecedented environmental disaster."

Speaking of President Obama, just about a month ago he upset fellow Democrats and environmentalists by calling for an expansion of U.S. offshore drilling. He has since decided that the government would delay any new offshore drilling until causes of the explosion and spill in the Gulf have been reviewed.

Supporters of offshore drilling have said it should be part of an all-of-the-above approach to the U.S. gaining energy independence, while opponents, often citing environmental concerns, would rather the country focus time and resources on renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar.

So, where do you stand? As the oil spill spreads in the Gulf, do you think the U.S. should continue to allow offshore oil drilling? Is it worth the risk to the environment and the economy? Do you even think there's much of a risk? Will consumers even see much of a price impact from expanded drilling? What do you think?

Let the debate begin!

UPDATE: Oh, and courtesy of Dick Cheney, here's something else to chew on. Make of it what you will. 

2nd UPDATE: The Governator changes his mind on offshore drilling!

(Photo from the U.S. Department of Energy, via Talking Points Memo) 

WTF, Arizona? Part II

Okay, so Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed the immigration law. She's facing a pretty hard primary in August (19 challengers!) from the far right of the Republican Party, which, in Arizona, is just slightly left of Pinochet, so she couldn't afford to look "soft."

She's not the only Arizona Republican under attack from the far right, though. Sen. John McCain, our favorite former maverick (that's right Jim Jackson fans!) and the man responsible for putting Sarah Palin on the national stage, is under attack on his right flank by the whackaloon former congressman J.D. Hayworth. McCain is perceived as "soft" on illegal aliens, simply because he reached out to Democrats in an earlier, failed attempt to reform immigration laws. This Hayworth character, however, is a hardcore supporter of the new immigration law. (AND he thinks the so-called "birther bill" doesn't go far enough!) So, of course, McCain, ever the maverick flip-flopper, is now in favor of harsher immigration laws. He's even saying that it's the Obama administration's fault that Arizona had to -- just HAD TO -- pass this law:

"This law is a response to the president's and the administration's failure to secure our borders," McCain said. "Our borders are broken. It's worse than I have ever seen it."

Oh yeah, and you know how Republicans are always complaining about frivolous lawsuits and the need for tort reform? Well the new immigration law says police departments can be sued if citizens don't think the law's being enforced properly. So Arizona could well see departments leery of lawsuits diverting time and resources from preventing and solving actual crimes in order to comply with this ridiculous law.

But there's at least one law enforcement official in Arizona who's willing to risk a lawsuit. Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, whose jurisdiction includes Tuscon, says he doesn't intend to enforce the law, which he calls "racist," "stupid," "disgusting" and "unnecessary." Dupnik told KGUN9 (Ha! Gun!) in Tuscon: "If I tell my people to go out and look for A, B, and C, they're going to do it. They'll find some flimsy excuse like a tail light that's not working  as a basis for a stop, which is a bunch of baloney."

Don't let the terrorists (or spineless corporations) win.

UPDATE: Well, Comedy Central parent company Viacom finally hunted down the video and removed it from YouTube, which is owned by Google. Score another one for the spineless corporations and the terrorists.

I'm responding to Andrew Sullivan's call to arms for free speech. If you have a blog, please embed this video:

WTF, Arizona?

UPDATE: Well, it's official. Arizona's governor has signed the immigration bill into law. Congratulations, Arizona. You're the South Carolina of the American Southwest.

Oh, man. Arizona. Jiminy Christmas.

Sometimes I forget that you resisted recognizing Martin Luther King Jr. Day for so long. Then you go ahead do something like this:

Passage of the law, which would, among other things, allow the authorities to demand proof of legal entry into the United States from anyone suspected of being in the country illegally, testified to the relative lack of political power of Arizona Latinos, and to the hardened views toward illegal immigration among Republican politicians both here and nationally.

Oh, but cops will be able to act only if there's "reasonable suspicion." So if "Existing While Hispanic"  wasn't a crime in Arizona before, it sure could be really soon.

Oh, and then there's this bullshit:

The Arizona "birther bill" would require Arizona's secretary of state to review a presidential candidate's birth certificate before that candidate could get on the ballot in the state. It was attached as an amendment to a larger bill modifying the way candidates' names appear on the state ballot. That bill passed by a vote of 31 to 29 and received only the support of Republicans. It now moves to the state Senate before the governor can sign it into law.

Haha! Well, isn't that pleasant?

Nature doesn't care, but you should.

Nature doesn't love us. It doesn't hate us, either. It is an indifferent force that destroys with no regard for religion, skin color, wealth, social status or politics.

Look at this Icelandic volcano, for instance (I'm not going to bother spelling it, so here). Its gaping maw vomits smoke, ash and lava because that's what volcanoes do. Its ash cloud is thick, dark and so hazardous that, with the help of the wind, it has disrupted most air traffic in Europe for the better part of a week. Neither volcanoes nor the wind care about you and your vacation plans, or that package you're expecting from England, or whether President Obama makes it to the Polish president's funeral.

"The Earth has destroyed every living thing on the planet more than once, no reason to think it won't happen again," my friend Marty remarked to me in an email a few days ago. Of course he's right. Whether you're a environmentalist or a global warming denier or a believer in the Rapture/Apocalypse (just substitute "God" for "Earth"), you probably don't see the point in denying it.

Debate of the Week: Should the U.S. Legalize Marijuana?

Debate of the Week is a weekly feature. Please comment below. Remember to keep it civil. Don't assume anything about the people you disagree with. I will delete any comments that are offensive or veer too far off topic. Thank you in advance.


This November, California voters will decide whether the state will legalize the general sale and use of up to an ounce of marijuana for adults 21 and older. Currently, it's only legal for medical purposes there and in 13 other states, including my own New Jersey. On the federal level, marijuana sales and usage is still illegal, however, despite the Justice Department's decision to go easier on marijuana suppliers and users as long as they stick to state laws. 


The proposed California law's opponents include law enforcement groups and California's chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, which says the law will lead to more impaired-driving accidents and fatalities. Supporters of legalization say it'll cut down on crime and increase revenue for the cash-strapped state.


So what do you think about legalization? Forget California, should the U.S. legalize marijuana? What effect, if any, would legalization have? Do you oppose legalization? Why?


Let the debate begin!

Quote of the Week

From President Obama:

The last I checked, Sarah Palin's not much of an expert on nuclear issues.

It narrowly beat out this:

I knew that we’d be buddies when I met her when she said, "Drill here, drill now." And then I replied, "Drill, baby, drill" and then we both said, "You betcha!"

Debate of the Week: Gov. Christie vs. the NJEA

Debate of the Week will be a weekly feature, hopefully. It all depends on the participation of you, the reader. Please comment below. Remember to keep it civil. Don't assume anything about the people you disagree with. I will delete any comments that are offensive or veer too far off topic. Thank you in advance.

This week I'm offering up the war between New Jersey's new Republican governor, Chris Christie, and the state teachers union, the New Jersey Education Association. Christie has proposed cutting school aid and is taking on the NJEA, pushing a salary freeze and cuts in benefits to help reduce the state's budget deficit. The NJEA is standing firm and claims Christie is scapegoating it, and its president, Barbara Keshishian, has called for Christie to reinstate the so-called millionaire's tax, which actually targets annual incomes of $400,000 and more.

Where do you stand? With Christie? With the NJEA? Somewhere in between? What reforms, if any, are needed?

Let the debate begin.

UPDATE: Thanks to Eddie for this link. Seriously, Bergen County Education Association?

Not funny.

This "joke" has been circulating around Facebook:

Dear Lord, this past year you have taken my favorite actor, Patrick Swayze, my favorite actress, Farrah Fawcett, my favorite singer, Michael Jackson and my favorite salesman, Billy Mays. I just want you to know that Chris Christie is my favorite governor.

Now I'm no Republican, and I certainly didn't vote for Chris Christie. Nor do I agree with the governor's mostly draconian proposed cuts to state agencies and services, particularly for schools. However, I really can't abide this kind of humor.

Go ahead, tease Christie about his weight or how he used the U.S. Attorney's Office for political gain. That's fine. But wishing death on someone (other than, you know, the true monsters out there), now matter how much you disagree with or oppose him, is not acceptable, even if you're doing it in a wisecrack. This joke was appalling when I first heard it with President Obama as the punch line, and it's no less awful now.

Hilarity.

From a recent NY Times article, "With No Jobs, Plenty of Time for Tea Party":

“If you quit giving people that stuff (government assistance), they would figure out how to do it on their own.” -- Unemployed teabagger and Social Security recipient Tom Grimes, who, according to the article, once asked his Democratic congressman for help getting government health care.