I have made fun of The View’s resident conservative, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, in private conversation, in public, in dreams, and in song many times over the years. Like many of her conservative compatriots, she tends to be wrong about Most Things.
But on marriage equality? Even Hasselbeck has come around:
“I actually support gay marriage,” said Hasselbeck. She added, “I think the gay marriage thing would definitely surprise people. I mean, for some people, it will surprise them to the point that they won’t want to hear it. ‘No, that can’t be, I really want to have this sort of idea of her in my head,’ so I sort of rain on their parade there.”
Dear Elected Democrats: I think it’s okay for you to stop being so politically homophobic now. Because at this point, for a Democrat to pussyfoot around the marriage equality issue is approximately as cowardly as a Democrat opposing the Park 51 Cordoba House community center project.
Cue Peter LaBarbera posting a crying plea to Hasselbeck to become a bigot again in 5, 4, 3, 2…
So now Elizabeth Hasselbeck, Laura Bush, Cindy McCain, Ted Olson, and Glenn Beck are all to the left of Barack Obama on marriage equality. Shame on him!
Why is it “cowardly” for a Democrat to oppose the Islamic Center near Ground Zero, especially if they live in New York city?
Because.
That being said, the community center is supported by those who live in Manhattan, who will be the most “affected,” by which I mean Not Affected by it.
So, in order to support the Constitution you have to not only agree that the project is legal, which all the opponents already do, you have to love it. You “hate the Constitution” for merely having an opinion that it is a bad idea and expressing it. The author forgets that the same Constitution protects the right to express an opinion regarding the wisdom of an action of another also protected by the Constitution.
“You have no understanding of the Constitution. If fact, you are in opposition to it. You have no respect for freedom of religion or speech. You are a coward who believes that the Constitution and the nation are too f*****g weak to handle such freedoms.”
No, you have to acknowledge that they have the same rights everybody else does, and honestly, unless you live on that block of Manhattan, you probably shouldn’t have much of an opinion about it at all.
He’s not saying we should take away the rights of people to express their beliefs…you would see that if you read all the way to the end:
“But because the Rude Pundit does believe in principles and rights, he thinks it’s nobody’s f*****g business (including the mythologized 9/11 families) where the damn thing’s built. What’s more, even though he thinks you’re a knuckle-dragging yahoo, he’d defend to the end your right to yowl your imbecility through your facehole.”
He’s called The Rude Pundit for a reason. ;-)
When you say it is “cowardly” for a Democrat to oppose the Islamic Center, by oppose did you mean legally oppose? I thought you meant pollitcal opposition which has no legal consequenses.
I have already said they have the same rights and that it is nobody’s business what they do or how they fund it unless or until a law is broken like anyone else.
The problem, Bob, is that this is a COMPLETELY manufactured “controversy,” ginned up by the usual suspects, from Bible Spice/Mooselini, to Newtie, etc.
This is not even a subject the American people should be weighing in on, because it doesn’t affect anyone except for the people who live in that neighborhood!
So, the Democrats, like Howard Dean and Harry Reid, who are going so far as to utter Word One about how this is “not a good idea,” really are being shockingly naive, stupid, and yes, cowardly, for saying anything other than “We have a Constitution, we have a first amendment, and they can build whatever the f**k they want on land they own.” Again, because they should know by now that this is a completely manufactured issue ginned up by the Right Wing Two Minutes Hate Noise Machine.
I am not surprised that you tell me that my point of view is manufactured by someone else and is therefore illegitimate. It’s a really neat trick. Just get Newt to comment on something and nobody else can have that opinion.
Bob, who said your viewpoint is manufactured?
No one said that, Bob.
I said it’s a manufactured controversy, which wouldn’t exist if Mooselini and Newt hadn’t opened their dumb traps in order to scare people.
Evan, maybe I misread you but it was my perception that the implication of my buying into a “manufactured” issue meant that my view was manipulated or “manufactured” by others. You say that is not the case so I accept that.
Well, if that’s the natural progression, then maybe I was saying something along those lines.
Indeed, many fall prey to manufactured controversies. Exhibit A: There are millions of people with no prior knowledge of science who believe that global warming isn’t real because people with ulterior motives have played them for the rubes they are. Those people have bought into a manufactured controversy which doesn’t actually exist among scientists.
The problem cuts two ways. I agree there are a lot of uninformed people who spout rhetoric denying the reality of Global Warming. That being said, it is virtually impossible for a real scientist to express actual scientific doubts (and there are a few) without being practically hounded out of the field or marginalized.
The planet is warming but what we do and how fast we do it should be open for debate. Some thinking people are concerned that policy changes are too fast or too drastic
or too expensive but these voices are denounced as ‘deniers” and drowned out. That is not good for science or truth.
OMG
Thank you, Ms. Hasselbeck! And on the other matter, freedom of religion belongs to all Americans, not just those promoting the counterfeit “religious belief” of homophobia.
I won’t swear to it but I think much of the ‘manufactured controversy’ about the ‘Ground Zero mosque’ (community center, basketball courts, swimming pool) started with the ACLJ the Jay Sekulow busybodies (bankrolled by Pat Robertson)who claimed to represent some of the early detractors of the ‘mosque’. They were whipping up the controversy back three weeks ago before the MSM got in on it. They are the ones who are bringing a law suit against the ‘mosque’ & claiming that the Iman involved & the financial backers are all terrorists.
The Park 51 proposal has no funding, architect, or builder.
Source: Politico
“OMG” Was that directed to me? If so, what are you trying to say?
Devin: Yes. Also: Shrieking bigot Pamela Geller, who is such a paranoid, batshit, racist woman that if she was exhibit A for the 1st Amendment, serious constitutional scholars might start looking for loopholes. And then Snowzilla and Newt started running their faceholes about it, and their risible rubes in, like, Kansas, started running their mouths about Their Opinion about a f*****g community center in a city that they hate, that they’ve never been to, except maybe that one time, when they went To See Ground Zero, at which point they kneeled and prayed, before buying lunch from that Nice Brown Man with the halal cart.
Morons.
And yes, Bob, the OMG was directed at you, because just like this, with global warming, there is NO ACTUAL CONTROVERSY among real scientists, and there is actually no “hounding out of the field” or “marginalizing” when an actual scientist has an actual, peer-reviewed argument. It’s just that the supposed “controversies” about global warming simply do not exist except in the national discourse, which is overrun by people who prey on the stupid for their own reasons.
In other words, the OMG was my reaction to the fact that I set a trap and you fell right into it.