Greenwald: This is one of the most impressive and commendable things Obama has done...

[jefferson_dem]

Go Go Glenn Greenwald! Nice to see he's come 'round. :)

Obama defends "Ground Zero mosque"
By Glenn Greenwald (updated below)

This is one of the most impressive and commendable things Obama has done since being inaugurated:

President Obama delivered a strong defense on Friday night of a proposed Muslim community center and mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, using a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan to proclaim that "as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country" . . . .

"I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground," the president said in remarks prepared for the annual White House iftar, the sunset meal breaking the day’s fast.

But, he continued: "This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are" . . . .

What makes this particularly commendable is there is virtually no political gain to be had from doing it, and substantial political risk. Polls shows overwhelming opposition to the mosque nationwide (close to 70% opposed), and that's true even in New York, where an extraordinary "50% of Democrats, 74% of Republicans, and 52% of 'non-enrolled' voters, don't want to see the mosque built." The White House originally indicated it would refrain from involving itself in the dispute, and there was little pressure or controversy over that decision. There was little anger over the President's silence even among liberal critics. And given the standard attacks directed at Obama -- everything from being "soft on Terror" to being a hidden Muslim -- choosing this issue on which to take a very politically unpopular and controversial stand is commendable in the extreme.

The campaign against this mosque is one of the ugliest and most odious controversies in some time. It's based purely on appeals to base fear and bigotry. There are no reasonable arguments against it, and the precedent that would be set if its construction were prevented -- equating Islam with Terrorism, implying 9/11 guilt for Muslims generally, imposing serious restrictions on core religious liberty -- are quite serious. It was Michael Bloomberg who first stood up and eloquently condemned this anti-mosque campaign for what it is, but Obama's choice to lend his voice to a vital and noble cause is a rare demonstration of principled, politically risky leadership. It's not merely a symbolic gesture, but also an important substantive stand against something quite ugly and wrong. This is an act that deserves pure praise.

UPDATE: To anyone wanting to quibble with what was done here -- the timing, the wording, etc. -- I'll just pose this question: when is the last time a President voluntarily entered an inflammatory public controversy by taking a position opposed by 70% of the public?

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/13/mosque

[Lifelong Protester]

1. Happy to be the first rec for this.

Religious freedom is just that. Religious freedom. Doesn't always make for 'popular religion'. But we need to either stand totally beside the first ammendment, or suffer the consequences.

[TheKentuckian]

2. This is commendable though sad it isn't expected of even the craziest puke

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Happy to support Obama when he does the right thing.

[RufusTFirefly]

4. K & R. Reminds me of comments that the otherwise execrable Gen. Powell made

"Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

[awoke_in_2003]

32. General Mai Lai got one right. nt

[ProfessionalLeftist]

5. Very admirable. I just wish Obama would take such political chances when...

..he is *supported* by 70% of the public (ie: single-payer) rather than running with his tail tucked because big corps said "boo!".

Now that I've groused, YES - Obama is very brave to support this. The media has of course blown the idea of a Muslim community center out of proportion and this is a very titchy subject. I've sat here and watched the sparks fly for days now. The man has done a wise and brave thing here.

[havocmom]

6. The President stood tall against bigotry and intolerance. Commendable.

One hopes this standing up for what is just will catch on. It could be something that people can believe in again.

[R. P. McMurphy]

7. He really makes me proud sometimes. n/t

[eridani]

8. Agreed. Excellent news. n/t

[applegrove]

9. Great stuff. I'm glad Obama is getting pats on the back.

[laughingliberal]

10. Love this stand by the President and seeing Greenwald let out from under the bus for the night. nt

[impik]

11. Just another proof that Gibbs was right:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4503228

Check pout the comments.

[jefferson_dem]

12. I really only see two nay-sayers

...one who comes off as nothing more than trollish and the other is serial malcontent personified. So...not so bad.

[impik]

13. Yea, my mistake, i wanted to repeat

the link to Greenwald' article, go check the comments there.

On the other hand, it doesn't matter. I know why i love this president.

[tridim]

14. Amazing that ALL the pouters in that thread are now named "Ignored"

The purge took about 3 days of hard work, but it's worth it.

[rhett o rick]

24. This was a good thing. Shame you had to spoil it by trying to change the focus to Gibbs. nm

[BrklynLiberal]

15. Greenwald is right...

It is wonderful encourage someone who is being courageous and demonstrating that he has a spine.

[readmoreoften]

16. I don't think that this means Greenwald has "come 'round."

Commending a politician for doing something right for a change doesn't suddenly mean you're part of their fan base.

[jefferson_dem]

17. You do understand "tongue-in-cheek", right?

[Vincardog]

18. a position opposed by 70% of the public? Please prove that statistic!

[jefferson_dem]

19. That's legit. See CNN poll.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/11/overwhelming-majority-oppose-mosque-near-ground-zero/

[Vincardog]

20. then the over-whelming majority OF CNN viewers ares bigots

[fogonthelake]

30. it was a telephone survey, not necessarily cnn viewers.

[rhett o rick]

23. I dont trust CNN any farther than I can throw Faux. The wording of the poll question was terrible.

"a group of Muslims in the U.S." That wasnt necessary to ask the question. "plan to build a mosque". I believe it is a community center and the building currently exists. They are not building a mosque.

The President did a good thing here but let's keep it real.

[Cali_Democrat]

35. We are a country full of bigots. n/t

[NewJeffCT]

34. Poll results on this can vary wildly, depending on the wording

Asking if you favor building a mosque at Ground Zero is a loaded question. Phrased differently, the results are far less negative.

[indepat]

21. It's perhaps a shame that 50% of Democrats and 74% of Republicans did not urge their government to

identify and punish those funding radical Islam in the days following 9-11 rather than to bombard, invade, and occupy seemingly uninvolved countries for the better part of a decade (or more?). :shrug:

Edited to add seemingly

[Ignis]

22. K&R

[Hissyspit]

25. Glenn Greenwald Update:

UPDATE II: In the face of the controversy created by last night's remarks, Obama came out today and emphasized the very limited nature of the position he took:

- snip -

White House officials said earlier in the day that Mr. Obama was not trying to promote the project, but rather sought more broadly to make a statement about freedom of religion and American values. "In this country we treat everybody equally and in accordance with the law, regardless of race, regardless of religion," Mr. Obama said at the Coast Guard station. "I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about."

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/13/mosque/index.html

It's technically true, as Darren Hutchinson points out, that Obama isn't changing what he said, as his speech last night was devoted to a defense of "the right" of the mosque to be built, and it said nothing about whether it should be built near Ground Zero. But clearly, the tone and the emphasis of his speech -- and the absence of the fine distinctions he's drawing today -- made it obvious that it would be interpreted as siding with the mosque proponents and against those opposing the mosque, and that's exactly how it was interpreted by virtually everyone.

But by insisting now that he was merely commenting on the technical "rights" of the project developers -- as a way of responding to Republican criticism that he was advocating for the project itself -- he has diminished his remarks from a courageous and inspiring act into a non sequitur, somewhat of an irrelevancy. After all, the "right" of the mosque isn't really in question and didn't need a defense. As Ben Smith correctly explains:

Obama's new remarks, literally speaking, re-open the question of which side he's on. Most of the mosque's foes recognize the legal right to build, and have asked the builders to reconsider.

But the clarification is, in political terms, puzzling. The signal Obama sent with his rhetoric last night wasn't that he had chosen to make a trivial, legal point about the First Amendment. He chose to make headlines in support of the mosque project, and he won't be able to walk them back now with this sprinkling of doubt. All he'll do is frustrate some of the people who so eagerly welcomed his words yesterday as a return to form.

Indeed, with today's clarification, Obama is not really on any side of this controversy. What made Bloomberg's speech so inspiring was how unapologetic and emphatic it was in defense of the mosque itself -- not just some sort of "right" that very few people were even questioning. Even worse, the primary focus of my praise here -- that Obama was taking a politically unpopular position -- isn't even true in light of this clarification. As Nate Silver documents, the same polls which show that large majorities oppose the mosque also show that majorities affirm the "right" for it to be built. That means Obama was merely echoing what polls show is the majority view, while explicitly distancing himself today from any view that is unpopular. So even that praise of him now seems inapplicable.

On the whole, it's still preferable for Obama to say what he said rather than say nothing. The notion that Muslims enjoy the same religious freedom as everyone else and are not to blame for Terrorism are always nice to hear. But by parsing his remarks to be as inoffensive as possible, and retreating from what was the totally predictable way his speech would be understood, he has reduced his own commendable act into something which is, at best, rather pedestrian and even slightly irritating. See also: this excellent commentary on the "clarification" from the Palestinian-American journalist Ali Abunimah, quoted in the original NYT article praising Obama, on the strangeness of how these events developed.

[ProSense]

26. Frankly, Josh Marshall

makes a great point

More here.

[Hissyspit]

27. Will not disagree that this is deliberately blown up out of nothing.

As Greenwald said earlier today: "The 'Mosque' Opposition Is Like the New Black Panther Party 'Scandal...' You ignore it at first because you think it's too stupid to get traction - then it does"

[fogonthelake]

28. So, Obama is making sure that no one is saying which side

of the debate he is on as he said he was not talking whether or not it SHOULD be built.

[jefferson_dem]

29. Nevermind.

Carry on.

:hi:

[5X]

36. I totally agree with Greenwald here.

I too was applauding is initial statements, but it seems
he is again taking the cowardly way out.

[jgraz]

37. Sigh.

:banghead:

[TomClash]

31. I dissent

Too little, too late. It's the majority of New Yorkers - including Bloomberg, Stringer and many others - who fought the good fight, not Obama.

The poll numbers are bullshit.

[DeSwiss]

33. K&R! n/t

[Jakes Progress]

38. Hell's bells.

Here is a piece of stirring political bravery that I wanted to jump in and praise him for.

Then I read the mealy-mouth semi-retraction, but-I-still-get-credit-right follow up.

After Greenwald's initial post I was ready to cheer Obama and say that I wished this signaled that he was going to begin actually standing up for Democratic principles. Then I read the update about the "clarification" statement. What a wuss.

The lines: "he has diminished his remarks from a courageous and inspiring act into a non sequitur" could be seen as a statement about his whole presidency since the primaries. He has diminished from courageous and inspiring.