Salon Jumps in the Fire To Defend the Democratic Senators RANDPAC Has Targeted

[AuH20]

Muslim baiting?? More like billions of dollars given to despots and radicals, in the name of 'National Security'? These type of venomous articles reinforce the notion that Rand is hovering right over the 'target' with the bomb doors open, so to speak.

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/why_...ng_attack_ads/

[radiofriendly]

{These type of venomous articles reinforce the notion that Rand is hovering right over the 'target' with the bomb doors open, so to speak.}

Yep!

[cajuncocoa]

Is there anything in this article that is untrue?

[AuH20]

Is there anything in this article that is untrue?

The notion that Rand is somehow anti-Muslim. It's a laughable assertion, especially when you examine his legislative approach towards the Middle East, as well as his objections to the ever-growing defense budget. The author is trying to blur the lines of his attack by focusing on common sense security concerns brought up by Paul.

[angelatc]

Sure. This ad is looking like sheer genius to me. It forces everybody to look at something they don't really want to see.

[specsaregood]

Is there anything in this article that is untrue?

Yes.

But there seems to be a pattern here: When Muslims come into the picture, Paul’s laissez-faire politics go out the window. Paul — whose championship of private-property rights has led him to oppose even the Americans With Disability Act — didn’t support the right of Muslims to build an Islamic community center in lower Manhattan near ground zero. Instead, he said Muslims should contribute the money that would have been used to build the mosque to the 9/11 victims’ memorial fund.

Rand's position on property rights did not conflict with his position on the community center. He did not support the government making it illegal to build their mosque, just suggested an alternative that they were free to accept or disagree with.

[AuH20]

Yes.

Rand's position on property rights did not conflict with his position on the community center. He did not support the government making it illegal to build their mosque, just suggested an alternative that they were free to accept or disagree with.

But that would conflict with the narrative....... Rand Paul is a regular Pamela Geller. ROFL

[cajuncocoa]

The notion that Rand is somehow anti-Muslim. It's a laughable assertion, especially when you examine his legislative approach towards the Middle East, as well as his objections to the ever-growing defense budget. The author is trying to blur the lines of his attack by focusing on common sense security concerns brought up by Paul.

I don't think he's anti-Muslim either, but why give them ammo to make that claim? There are non-Muslim countries receiving enormous amounts of foreign aid from us, too. Chief among them: Israel.

By neglect it sounds like he's pandering to the Israel-first crowd.

[AuH20]

I don't think he's anti-Muslim either, but why give them ammo to make that claim? There are non-Muslim countries receiving enormous amounts of foreign aid from us, too. Chief among them: Israel.

By neglect it sounds like he's pandering to the Israel-first crowd.

This is step 1 in the foreign aid drawdown. He's attempting to build a public consensus by displaying the most outrageous actors receiving foreign aid. Once that consensus is assembled and the public becomes attentive, he can go after more intimidating targets.

[radiofriendly]

If you can't have a bit of fun when leftists freak out, you simply don't know how to have fun!

Don't forget, it's not like these liberals have any moral integrity when it comes to war mongering--Rand is the most anti-war member of the Senate.

[jkr]

demoncrats fighting peace...

*PRICELESS*

[acptulsa]

If you can't have a bit of fun when leftists freak out, you simply don't know how to have fun!

Don't forget, it's not like these liberals have any moral integrity when it comes to war mongering--Rand is the most anti-war member of the Senate...

...while Obama has taken us into more foreign countries (Yemen, Somalia, Libya) than Dubya did.

[AlexAmore]

I read the thread first wondering the whole time why a salon would make news fighting Rand Paul. Then I clicked the link.

[Rudeman]

Rand being anti-muslim is really a ludicrous assertion, just goes to show how desperate the extreme left must be.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Yes.

Rand's position on property rights did not conflict with his position on the community center. He did not support the government making it illegal to build their mosque, just suggested an alternative that they were free to accept or disagree with.

Many fellow conservatives say they understand the property rights and 1st Amendment issues and don’t want a legal ban on building the mosque. They just want everybody to be “sensitive” and force, through public pressure, cancellation of the mosque construction.

This sentiment seems to confirm that Islam itself is to be made the issue, and radical religious Islamic views were the only reasons for 9/11. If it became known that 9/11 resulted in part from a desire to retaliate against what many Muslims saw as American aggression and occupation, the need to demonize Islam would be difficult if not impossible.

There is no doubt that a small portion of radical, angry Islamists do want to kill us but the question remains, what exactly motivates this hatred?

If Islam is further discredited by making the building of the mosque the issue, then the false justification for our wars in the Middle East will continue to be acceptable.

...

Conservatives are once again, unfortunately, failing to defend private property rights, a policy we claim to cherish. In addition conservatives missed a chance to challenge the hypocrisy of the left which now claims they defend property rights of Muslims, yet rarely if ever, the property rights of American private businesses.

...

The outcry over the building of the mosque, near ground zero, implies that Islam alone was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to those who are condemning the building of the mosque, the nineteen suicide terrorists on 9/11 spoke for all Muslims. This is like blaming all Christians for the wars of aggression and occupation because some Christians supported the neo-conservatives’ aggressive wars.

There's Ron's rejection of that idea.

Also, this line:

While this is a local matter that will be decided by the people of New York

Is complete garbage, and is an implicit endorsement of the city of New York's authority to ban the mosque.