Mark my words - the real purpose for the right's anti-Muslim fervor is the 2012 election

[Matariki]

Watch Gingrich especially. He's the guy who used to send out lists of words for Republicans to use or to avoid. Words designed to create specific emotional responses in the public. The man who was promoting the use of NLP to the Republican party.

What they are up to is laying the groundwork of anti-Muslim sentiment, and mark my words they will shift that sentiment more and more toward Obama. I believe that this is the PRIMARY purpose of promoting this fear and hatred. If we can't figure a way to derail this, the closer we get to the next presidential election the more they will create a situation where the Democrats have to publicly defend Obama's Christianity and citizenship. They will push an idea of Obama's "otherness", using their base's racism in an indirect and coded way. Instead of real issues, the whole election will be focused on this.

People have been asking 'why now'? Why suddenly the anti-Muslim rhetoric so long after 9/11? And this is the answer.

Gingrich and Rove, they aren't so stupid as the people they're inciting that they actually believe their anti-Muslim rhetoric. They've got a very clear agenda. Just today Gingrich has used these words referring to Obama: "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior". Obama, The Other. African. Foreign. Muslim. Do you see what Gingrich doing?

And what are WE going to do about it?

[otohara]

1. How Easily Manipulated We Are

with gobs of help from our "balloon boy" media.

[DCKit]

2. The use of dog-whistles is far less effective when you know they're being used.

I don't know that they'll ever make gains above the gullible 23% as long as we continue to call them out when they project, dog-whistle and lie.

[Matariki]

3. I hope you are right.

I hope those fuckers have become dinosaurs who are using old tricks that no longer work.

[libtodeath]

4. Many are dark skinned

The new "N" word is Muslim.
Thya have to hate

[Matariki]

10. That's exactly it.

Gingrich doesn't choose his words accidently. That "Kenyan anti-colonialism" is very telling of where he's heading with all this.

[w8liftinglady]

5. which is why I continue to refer you all to this local paper

http://www.elliscountypress.com/editorials/index.1.html

If you think that your comment doesn't matter...for some this is the only paper they have access to.For others,it is their paper of choice.If we can change one mind by correcting facts,then maybe that will spread to others.Please try to vote and comment at site.feedback IS important.Also,comments to advertisers help,too.
if we keep quiet,then these bastards WILL win.

[w8liftinglady]

6. especially THIS one..and yes,the guy is a paid editor

http://www.elliscountypress.com/editorials/9889-simply-speaking-traitors-to-america.html

Home | Editorials | Simply Speaking: Traitors to America!
Simply Speaking: Traitors to America!
By Jimmie Simmons ([e-mail]) 08/26/2010 10:29:00
Font size:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Most of us recognize the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, also known as the first of 10 parts making up the Bill of Rights, ratified effective on Dec. 15, 1791.

And, most of us know the ratification part was accomplished by a vote of 11 of 1791’s 14 sovereign colonies (often referred to as states), fulfilling the three-fourths requirement for passage.

What most of us probably also know, subconsciously at least, is that the word "religion" found in the 1st Amendment was not an all-inclusive reference by the framers of the constitution to the way we think of the word "religion" these days.

Nope, by simply looking at the constitutions and founding documents of those fourteen colonies, we should quickly pick up on the fact they were based on Christianity, more specifically, protestant Christianity.

Oh, I realize our "modern" interpretation is quick to include every ungodly religion found in the world today, even other-worldly religions, if we knew of any.

Modern thought would, if it could, omit Christianity from the 1st Amendment mix…if it could. And, it is trying to do so.

A current example is found in America’s largest city, New York.

The Muslim mosque proposed for construction at the site of the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center…by Muslim terrorists, is being hailed as a constitutional 1st Amendment right by too many Americans…who should know better.

At the same time, the small Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church (Christian), which was crushed when the South Tower fell on it, has not been able to garner the New York, White House, Washington, American, or World support needed to rebuild in the nine years since the Muslim terrorist attack.

So much for the 1st Amendment to the Bill of Rights; simply turn it on its head, you traitors to America!

What about the New York of, say, 1777? Well, per the New York Charter of Liberties and Privileges (1683) Or: "THAT Noe person or persons which professe faith in God by Jesus Christ Shall at any time be any wayes molested punished disquieted or called in Question for any Difference in opinion or Matter of Religious Concernment."

The Dutch Colony (New York) of the seventeenth century was officially intolerantly Protestant but was, as has been noted, in practice tolerant and fair to people of other faiths who dwelt within New Netherland (Dutch New York). from New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, thus the "intolerant" verbiage is probably in reference to Catholics of the time…

More from the Catholic encyclopedia on New York: "In 1697, although the Anglican Church was never formally established in the Province of New York, Trinity Church was founded in the city of New York by royal charter and received many civil privileges and the munificent grants of land which are the source of its present great wealth."

The previous paragraph from the Catholic encyclopedia was evidently written prior to New York’s governmental spending extravaganza of recent years, the wealth part anyway.

So, you tell me, have we allowed our constitution to be stood on its head or not?

Shall we work on getting it back in an upright position.

If we the people work together, we can do it. YES WE CAN!

May Yahweh bless through Yeshua the Christ.

[Matariki]

11. This guy is honestly arguing that the First Amendment *really* means freedom to be Protestant???

And he's paid to say that shite?!? Oy.

Yeah, that deserves letters to the editor for sure.

[Matariki]

12. Where is Ellis County?

Do you live there? Is that typical of opinion in that area?

[BBbats]

7. The Repukes are masters of mud slinging.

They know Damn well that a lot of people hear the issues as
soundbites.
Keep on repeating the buzzwords over and over. Don't
underestimate these scumbags. They are pretty good at getting
the American people to go against their best intrests.  

[starroute]

8. That could be one by-product, but I don't this it's the main cause

I suspect we're in a perfect storm situation:

- Bush kept the lid on anti-Muslim sentiment in the GOP because of both foreign policy concerns and his family's own Mideast interests. That constraint has been removed.

- The current strain of know-nothing populism within the GOP demands foreign enemies to demonize. Illegal immigrants as a group are a bit too amorphous and under-the-radar to quite fulfill that role. But Muslims, with their scary "ideology" and terrorist associations, fit perfectly into the old anti-Communist scenario.

- Though it's always impossible to tell just how deeply the Israeli's are involved in this sort of thing, I suspect that since Netanyahu became prime minister again in February 2009, there's been a ramping up of support for groups like Pamela Geller's that have been trying for years to foment anti-Muslim hatred.

In short, I think that even if a Democrat other than Obama had been elected in 2008, we'd still be pretty much where the are now. Obama being president just adds one more reason for them to keep things stirred up.

[Matariki]

9. I'm thinking specifically about that snake Gingrich & Republican leadership

who issue talking points.

I don't believe they actually hold those views as much as they are using them to whip up their base. They can't come out and blatantly say racist things but they can paint Obama as 'other' - as Kenyan - i.e. African, Muslim and so forth. And in tandem they are making sure to paint those things as somehow bad. As witnessed by Gingrich's choice of words today about Obama's "Kenyan anti-colonialism". Those words weren't accidentally chosen. Gingrich doesn't chose words accidentlly.

And they are certainly whipping up their base, playing to the most base instincts of that base, to get them worked up for the mid-terms as well.

[Matariki]

13. lol

I think I need to work on my subject line writing skills. Maybe should have included the word Burka or Olive Garden so this post wouldn't sink like a rock. ;-)

[Matariki]

14. Just heard Thom Hartmann talking about this idea

How the right is trying to link anti-Muslim sentiment to Obama as a tactic to win the 2012 Presidency. I'm glad to hear someone in the news discussing it.

I've been shamelessly kicking my own thread because I believe that exposing these sort of dirty tactics head on are the best way to deal with them. I believe it's far more effective to explain exactly what Gingrich is doing (and mock him for it) than to go on the defensive and deny the nonsensical things the right is saying.