Ron v. Rand, My ThoughtsSubmitted by paulpaul21 on Tue, 08/24/2010 - 13:26
On the Ground Zero mosque issue, Rand Paul is taking the mainstream conservative approach: of course it shouldn't be built.
On the piece of property owned by a private enterprise issue, Ron Paul is taking the Ron Paul approach: of course they should be able to do whatever they want with it.
Ron makes the important point that he doesn't care if it's built or not. He cares about the tenor of the national debate (thanks, mostly, to the early-stage 2012 campaigns of Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, but this goes unmentioned in detail by Paul), which is quite literally 'ginning up Islamophobia' and 'blaming Islam, not al-Qaeda.'
While there are many opposed to the mosque who are demonstrably not Islamophobic, and who sincerely don't "blame all of Islam" for 9/11, Gingrich, et al.'s motivations and insinuations are crystal-clear. Of course they will pay lip service to property rights and not blaming all of Islam, but is that what the living room lounger hears? Is that what "Stop Islamization of America" members hear? Is that what mainstream America hears? Is that even what they want anyone to hear?
(Ron) Paul's is a hard position to take, but the purpose of government (thus, our elected representatives) is specifically to not be riled up by popular outrage, especially in cases like this. So he says, at least.
Show me endless blogs showing the "connections" Imam Rauf has or the "extremist" things he's said; so? Unless the feds or local agents find criminal wrongdoing, the best position an opponent can take is Eric Cantor's "come on." When we put all our stock in Sean Hannity and opinion polling, what are we? A Republic? That's a laugh.