Fox News Ignores Ken Mehlman’s Coming Out, Runs Zero Segments On Story

By Igor Volsky

When Judge Vaughn Walker struck down Proposition 8, Fox News barely mentioned the story and its most prominent conservative commentators ignored it entirely. Yesterday, after the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder reported that former RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman — who had orchestrated President Bush’s gay-bating 2004 re-election campaign — was coming out as gay, Fox News remained similarly mum and as of this posting has yet to run a single segment on the story.

A Wonk Room review of Critical Mention reveals that CNN mentioned the name “Mehlman” 19 times, MSNBC reported on it 12 times (searches for “gay” and “Ken” produced similar results, with Fox News stuck at 0):

It’s unclear why Fox News ignored the story, since some Republicans have embraced Mehlman’s coming out. The Wonk Room argues that Fox has a history of ignoring stories that undermine conservative causes.

Behind Obama Muslim myth stands the right wing

From media matters research:

Two recently released polls show that an increasing number of Americans believe the falsehood that President Obama is a Muslim. According to the Pew Research Center, 60 percent of people who believe this false claim cite the media as the source of that information -- and, indeed, the right-wing media have incessantly promoted this lie.

Pew, Time polls find that an increasing number of Americans believe Obama is a Muslim

Pew: Nearly "one-in-five Americans" now say Obama is a Muslim. On August 18, the Pew Research Center released a survey on Obama and religion, conducted in early August. The poll found that "nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009," while "[o]nly about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009." The survey also found that "43% say they do not know what Obama's religion is." Pew went on to state: "The view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among his political opponents than among his backers." It also added:

When asked how they learned about Obama's religion in an open-ended question, 60% of those who say Obama is a Muslim cite the media. Among specific media sources, television (at 16%) is mentioned most frequently. About one-in-ten (11%) of those who say Obama is a Muslim say they learned of this through Obama's own words and behavior.

Time: 24 percent of Americans believe Obama is a Muslim. In a poll also released on August 18, Time magazine, in conjunction with polling firm ABT/SRBI, found that 24 percent of Americans believe Obama is a Muslim. Time stated that "just 47% of respondents believe Obama is a Christian; 24% declined to respond to the question or said they were unsure, and 5% believe he is neither Christian nor Muslim."

Right wing media relentlessly drive Obama-Muslim falsehood

Right-wing media have relentlessly pushed the myth that Obama is a Muslim. In the past two years, the conservative media has continued to lie about Obama's personal history, dishonestly distorting his faith to claim that he is in fact a Muslim and not a Christian. Those untruths have run the gamut -- from outright claiming that Obama is a Muslim to alleging that he "is a Christian that Christians don't recognize"; from using his family and upbringing in Indonesia to portray him as an "Islamist" to claiming he has an agenda that shows he has a "preference of Islam over Christianity"; and from distorting comments Obama or his administration has made to picking out symbols associated with his administration to perpetuate the lie about his faith. Conservatives have even used the Pew and Time polls today to further rehash these falsehoods.

Right-wing rhetoric: Obama is a Muslim

Limbaugh: "There might be reasons why some people think" Obama is a Muslim. On his August 19 radio show, Rush Limbaugh, who lately has taken to calling Obama "Imam Obama", said: "Has Obama ever called Muslims 'bitter clingers'? Well, he's called Christians 'bitter clingers.' He did that in San Francisco. I'm just throwing these things out here, folks, because people are questioning his Christianity. Some think he's a Muslim. I'm just saying there might be reasons why some people think this." Limbaugh also said during the same show, "If it was OK, and even laudatory, to call Bill Clinton America's first black president, why can't we call Imam Obama America's first Muslim president?"

Right-wing runs with dubious claim that Obama admitted "I am a Muslim." Conservatives pushed an unsubstantiated claim that Obama admitted to Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit that he is a Muslim, with G. Gordon Liddy stating that it comes under the heading "suspicions confirmed." Right-wing commentator Pamela Geller went even further and put the words "I am a Muslim" in quotation marks and attributed the statement to Obama in the title of a blog post hyping the rumor.

Wash. Times' Kuhner: Obama is a "cultural Muslim." In a July 8 Washington Times op-ed, Jeffrey Kuhner wrote that Obama is "betraying the Jews" and that he "is a cultural Muslim whose sympathies lie with the Islamic world in its life-death struggle against Israel."

Geller: Obama's Pearl comments were "spoken like an" "antisemitic Muslim terrorist." In a May 18 post, Geller wrote of Obama's comments on the signing of the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act: "The Daniel Pearl beheading 'captured the world's imagination' -- spoken like an ..........antisemitic Muslim terrorist. Pearl was beheaded (GRAPHIC VIDEO) because of Islamic anti-semitism and violent jihadi doctrine. Freedom of the press had nothing to do with it. And this coming from a plant who is attempting to restrict these freedoms ..............press and speech." In fact, Obama was honoring Pearl in his comments.

Quinn on Obama: "I think he's a Muslim." Seizing on reports that Obama had gone golfing on Christmas Day 2009, Jim Quinn said on his radio show: "I know that it's very impolitic to bring this up but I think he's a Muslim. Sorry, I do." Quinn, who has also repeatedly suggested Obama is Muslim, said of Obama on his February 26 radio show, "You've got a nexus here of angry black nationalism" and "whose entire family is Muslim."

Geller calls Obama "the Muslim president." Geller's blog contains 267 posts tagged, "Muslim in the White House?" In a June 2, 2009, post, Geller called Obama "The Muslim president." Calling it a "critical issue," Geller wrote in January 2008 that "Obama went to a madrassa in Jakarta," that "he practiced Islam," and that "if Obama makes it to the big house, Israel is screwed. Finished." On May 30, 2009, Geller wrote that with his Cairo speech, Obama "proved everything I said to be true." In fact, CNN debunked the "madrassa" falsehood in January of 2007, and as Newsweek stated, "Barack Obama has never been Muslim and never practiced Islam."

Fox News' Special Report asks of Obama: "Islam or Isn't He?" During a June 4, 2009, segment, Fox News' Special Report aired a quote by Obama national security official Denis McDonough, in which he talked about how Obama "experienced Islam on three continents" and grew up in Indonesia with a Muslim father, and asked: "Islam or Isn't He?"

Savage: Obama is "an unknown stealth candidate" who "in fact, was a Muslim." Michael Savage falsely asserted that Obama was a Muslim and attended a madrassa, saying: "Look who we inherited in this country, from Dwight D. Eisenhower to Barack Hussein Obama, in one generation. A war hero to -- a war hero who commanded the Allied operations against Nazi Germany was running for the presidency then. Now we have an unknown stealth candidate who went to a madrassas in Indonesia and, in fact, was a Muslim."

KSFO's Rodgers: Obama "admits in one of his own books" that he would "stand with the Muslims" against "the Western world." Repeating a false allegation from a chain email, Lee Rodgers falsely claimed Obama "admits in one of his own books" that "in case of a confrontation between the Western world and the Islamic world, he will stand with the Muslims." In fact, what Obama wrote in his 2006 book, The Audacity of Hope, according to FactCheck.org, "is that he would stand with American immigrants from Pakistan or Arab countries should they be faced with something like the forced detention of Japanese-American families in World War II."

Conservative radio hosts seize on Obama comment to revive false rumors about his faith. During the 2008 campaign, numerous conservative talk-radio hosts selectively highlighted Obama's assertion, which he immediately clarified, that "John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith" to revive rumors that he is a Muslim, not a Christian. For example, Chris Baker claimed that Obama's comment was "obviously a Freudian slip" and stated, "He confessed. It's over." Savage described Obama as a "Muslim stealth candidate" and stated: "I have nothing against moderate Muslims. ... The question is, why is he covering up his Muslim faith?"

Right-wing rhetoric: Obama's Christian faith is not Christianity

Limbaugh: "Obama says he's a Christian but where's the evidence?" On his August 19 radio show, Limbaugh used Pew's findings to repeat the claim that NASA administrator Charles Bolden's recent comments on Muslim outreach show Obama "turned NASA over to a Muslim outreach program." Limbaugh went on to say: "The guy holds an Easter egg roll -- the White House website promoting the Easter egg roll does not mention Jesus or Christ. It talks about environmentalism. Obama says he's a Christian but where's the evidence?" Limbaugh also brought up Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church to cast doubt on Obama's Christian faith, saying, "Reverend Wright's church is a weird brand of Christianity. The Reverend Wright's church -- black theology is what comes out of that pulpit, which is not exactly mainstream Christianity."

Beck on Obama: "I think he is a Christian that Christians don't recognize." On his August 19 radio show, Glenn Beck addressed the findings of the Time poll, saying, "Here's the problem with this. I find that a disturbing poll because I don't think -- I think that is the easy answer for people who are like, 'Well, it doesn't make sense. Nothing makes sense.' And I think the easy thing is to say, 'I think he's a Muslim.' I don't -- I really don't. I think he is a Christian that Christians don't recognize." Beck went on to claim that because "social justice activists" in the media have so distorted Christianity, "no one is explaining why Barack Obama doesn't feel right." Beck also used the fact that Obama attended Wright's church to further confuse the issue, saying of Obama: "When he did get Jesus, he got it from Jeremiah Wright. This is liberation theology. ... So the story of Jesus takes on a whole different light."

Beck: Obama's comments show "contempt for the Scriptures." On his August 19 show, Beck and his co-hosts attacked Obama for comments he made about the Bible that they said show "a lack of understanding" and that are "not Christianity." Beck went on to claim that Obama's comments are "such a distortion" and "shows contempt for the Scriptures." Beck added that Obama's Christianity "is again liberation theology," and his comments were "his understanding of distorted Christianity."

Tennent: "You can't vote for [Obama] and be a Christian. ... You're going to be held accountable for this vote." On the radio show she co-hosts with Jim Quinn, Rose Tennent read an email from a listener who criticized her statement that "I don't think you can be a Christian and vote for Barack Obama," replying: "I've said it on this show, too. I really don't believe you can be. You can't vote for him and be a Christian at the same time. You can't." Tennent went on to say: "I'm not judging; I'm laying out the facts. ... You know, you're going to be held accountable for this vote. If you voted for Barack Obama and you call yourself a person of faith, you will be held accountable for that vote. I believe that with all of my heart."

Quinn: Obama "says he's a Christian but I've never seen him in a Christian church." After saying that he believed Obama is a Muslim, Quinn stated: "What am I to think when he says to George Stephanopoulos, 'Nobody has criticized my Muslim faith,' and Stephanopoulos says, 'You mean, Christian.' And he, 'Oh, yeah, yeah, Christian faith.' What am I to make of a guy who says he's a Christian but I've never seen him in a Christian church?" Quinn continued: "And don't give me the Reverend Wright, because the Reverend Wright's church isn't Christian. The Reverend Wright's church is black liberation theology and that is a conveyor belt for Marxism. And by the way, wasn't the Reverend Wright a follower of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam?" He concluded: "I mean, if I got questions here, does that make me a bad guy?"

Right-wing rhetoric: Obama is an "Islamist" and prefers Islam over Christianity

McCarthy's book a collection of recycled Obama "Islamist" smears. In his book The Grand Jihad, Andrew McCarthy invokes numerous smears, myths, and falsehoods to portray Obama as an "Islamist." Among the claims included were that Obama is not a Muslim, but has "Islamist sympathies," which "run deep"; that Obama "seem[s] ... disposed" to "advance the cause of Islam in the world"; that he does not like "America as it is"; and that his agenda "jibes perfectly with the Islamist scheme to destroy America from within."

WorldNetDaily" Obama has a "fealty toward Islam." In a WorldNetDaily.com column, contributor Pieder Beeli purported to do "an inferential or forensic analysis" of Obama by analyzing "what is implied rather than what is explicitly stated." Using a litany of lies and attacks, including the claim that "I have not heard Obama affirm the central Christian tenet, 'The love of God was revealed to us on the cross of Jesus Christ.' " Beeli came to the conclusion that Obama has a "preference of Islam over Christianity," adding that "his fealty toward Islam and multiculturalism far exceed his fealty toward Christianity.

Geller: Obama "wants jihad to win. That's what he is doing." In an April 1 blog post titled, "President Jihad: Obama Encouraged Violent Palestinian Muslim protests against Israel," Geller claimed Obama "is agitating Muslims against Jews" and stated, "The President of the United States is advancing jihad against the oath of office that he took." Geller also stated in an April 11 post, "President Sarkozy called [Obama] 'a madman,' 'a lunatic.' Perhaps, I don't know -- but one thing is for sure: Hussein is a muhammadan. He's not insane ...........he wants jihad to win. That's what he is doing. Of course, to the western mind, the rational mind, the logical mind, the American mind, that is insane." Responding to reports that Guantánamo Bay detainees may be housed at the Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois, Geller wrote: "Obama is bringing his jihad to Illinois."

Gaffney in Wash. Times: "[I]t increasingly appears" Obama "will be embracing the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood." In a Washington Times column, Frank Gaffney criticized Obama's "Respect Islam" campaign, writing: "President Obama on Friday reiterated for the umpteenth time his determination to develop a 'new relationship' with the Muslim world. On this occasion, the audience were the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and the Philippines. Unfortunately, it increasingly appears that, in so doing, he will be embracing the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood -- an organization dedicated to promoting the theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls Shariah and that has the self-described mission of 'destroying Western civilization from within.' "

Hinderaker on Obama: "We're not sure who he is, exactly, but he certainly isn't one of us." In an August 19 post on his Powerline blog, John Hinderaker criticized the Associated Press for its article on the Pew poll, which stated that "Americans increasingly are convinced -- incorrectly -- that President Barack Obama is a Muslim, and a growing number are thoroughly confused about his religion." Hinderaker suggested the AP was editorializing in pointing out Obama is not a Muslim, writing: "I love that 'incorrectly.' The AP has evolved into an opinion machine, so it's rare and a little startling to see it stand up so boldly for a 'fact.' He's not a Muslim, dammit!" He added: "We're not sure who he is, exactly, but he certainly isn't one of us. Given the currents that swirl through world events these days, being a Muslim is one interpretation of Obama's exoticism."

Right-wing rhetoric: Symbols associated with Obama admin look "Islamic"

Conservatives see Islamic symbols in Obama administration logos. Fox News and the conservative media seized on the official logo of the Nuclear Security Summit to claim its image "looks like" an Islamic crescent. However, as Comedy Central's Jon Stewart noted, "the inspiration for the logo is actually the Rutherford-Bohr Model of the atom that we all learned about in high school."

NY Post's Goodwin: "[N]ot a coincidence" nuclear summit logo features "[t]he kind of crescent moon you see on the flags of Muslim countries." In his April 14 New York Post column, Michael Goodwin wrote that the logo "reminded" him of "a crescent moon," the "kind of crescent moon you see on the flags of Muslim countries." He added: "Indeed, the crescent, often with a single or multiple stars, is the main symbol of Islam. So now there is something like it at an official presidential event, prominently displayed in photographs being beamed around the world." While Goodwin claimed that he was "not suggesting President Obama is a secret Muslim," he wrote: "But I am certain the crescent-like design of the logo is not a coincidence, especially at an event where Iran's nuclear ambition and al Qaeda's search for a bomb are prime topics."

Fox & Friends sees "Muslim image" in summit logo. On the April 14 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-hosts Brian Kilmeade and Gretchen Carlson discussed Goodwin's column, with Kilmeade saying: "When I first saw this logo, I wasn't really thinking this, but upon further review, perhaps I should have been. And that is, if you look at the Nuclear Security Summit logo, what does that have in common with all those other flags there representing Muslim nations?" Showing images of flags, Carlson replied: "That's the same thing that you see on the flags of Turkey, Algeria, Tunisia, and Pakistan, and what do they all have in common? They're all Muslim nations." Carlson then stated that Goodwin's claim is that Obama "deliberately put this as a logo to try and continue his outreach to Muslim nations in a positive way," adding that at "the same time, he points out in his article that we're not going to say terms like 'Jihad' anymore or 'Islamic extremists' anymore. So you be the judge." During the segment, Fox featured text that read: "Curious Crescent Logo: Summit Symbol Similar to Muslim Image" and "Islamic Image? Summit Design Looks Like Crescent Moon."

Jim Hoft: "That's weird?... Obama's nuclear summit logo is an Islamic crest." In an April 14 post on his Gateway Pundit blog titled, "That's Weird?... Obama's Nuclear Summit Logo Is an Islamic Crest," Jim Hoft repeatedly asserted that it's "weird" that "Obama's nuclear summit logo is an Islamic crest." Other right-wing blogs, including Evil Conservative and Right Side News, also claimed that "the Nuclear Security Summit logo looks an awful lot like an Islamic crescent."

Error Theory: "Nuclear Summit logo uses an Islamic-shaped crescent." In an April 13 post on the Error Theory blog, also featured at Free Republic, Alec Rawls claimed that it "is hard to believe that the State Department" could use "an Islamic-shaped crescent" for the Nuclear Security Summit "by accident," asserting: "Maybe our State Department really is this ignorant, but more likely, as in the case of Fort Hood mass murderer Nidal Hasan, nobody was willing to make an issue of anything connected to Islam, no matter how disturbing, for fear of committing. career suicide. After all, Obama has commanded all of his underlings to be as oblivious to Islam as possible."

Gaffney: "Can This Possibly Be True? New Obama Missile Defense Logo Includes A Crescent." In February, after the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) redesigned its logo, media conservatives compared the new design to the Islamic crescent. In a February 24 BigGovernment post, Frank Gaffney called the "symbolic action" "nefarious," writing that "the new MDA shield appears ominously to reflect a morphing of the Islamic crescent and star with the Obama campaign logo," and that "Team Obama is behaving in a way that -- as the new MDA logo suggests -- is all about accommodating that 'Islamic Republic' and its ever-more aggressive stance." Gaffney concluded: "Watch this space as we identify and consider various, ominous and far more clear-cut acts of submission to Shariah by President Obama and his team." Gaffney later issued a correction.

FoxNews.com: "Others have noted that [missile defense logo] has a crescent and star design, evoking a common symbol for Islam." In a February 24 article, FoxNews.com acknowledged that the MDA logo "first appeared" on the MDA website "in the fall," nonetheless reported claims that the logo was "strikingly" and "scarily" similar to Obama's 2008 campaign logo, adding that "[o]thers have noted that it has a crescent and star design, evoking a common symbol for Islam." In a Special Report segment, anchor Bret Baier cited an MDA statement calling the claims "ridiculous," and that the new logo is "for recruiting in the public website and was developed almost three years ago" and "has no link to any political campaign." Baier also noted: "The Washington Times points out that the red, white, and blue symbol looks strangely similar to Barack Obama's campaign 'O' from 2008."

Voter turnout key to Detroit's revival, Rev. Jackson says at Ford plant Read more: Voter turnout key to Detroit's revival, Rev. Jackson says at Ford

BY BRENT SNAVELY Rev. Jesse Jackson and UAW President Bob King greeted about 800 Ford workers this morning at the Dearborn Truck Plant in an effort to drum up support for a march in Detroit on Saturday.

Called “Rebuild America,” the campaign’s goal is to convince Congress to provide stronger support for the creation of manufacturing and middle class jobs in America rather than on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Detroit will determine the outcome of the course of Michigan and maybe even industrial America,” Jackson said. “We intend to go door to door and church to church and to bring the spirit of Detroit back alive.”

Jackson, a Democrat, said his goal is to increase voter turnout in Detroit and other cities in Michigan in the general election in November when Virg Bernero takes on Republican Rick Snyder.

“We can’t win with 12% turnout. If Detroit moves from 12% to 60%, we will determine the course of the state,” said Jackson, who is leading a 10-city, statewide bus tour.

The march on Saturday also commemorates Martin Luther King’s march in Detroit in 1963 and builds towards a larger march scheduled for Oct. 2 in Washington, D.C., to commemorate King’s “I Have a Dream,” speech in Washington D.C.

The UAW’s King said the union is stronger when it is marching not just for better wages and benefits for its own members, but for all working people.

“We want working people treated like Wall Street bankers,” King said. “We want them to get a bailout on their homes. They want to pay for their homes, but they need a job to pay for their homes. So we’ve got to get back people back to work.”

While workers were surprised to see Jackson and King on their way to work, and many declined to comment, others said they support the cause.

Qi Beamon, 37, of Wayne said she was leaving work at 5 a.m. but decided to remain at the Dearborn Truck Plant when she learned that Jackson and King were at the plant.

With America’s economy still struggling to emerge from a recession, Beamon said the country needs to invest more resources in the state.

“I think if you can’t take care of yourself, you can’t take care of anybody else,” Beamon said.

M.C.L comment: That's what the Michigan White Power party and Rick Snyder fear if the city turns out and vote the tough nerd will be in for a long night.

Biden fires back at Boehner

Mark Murray At an event promoting the economic stimulus this morning, Vice President Biden fired back at House Minority Leader John Boehner's speech today.

Mr. Boehner, after months of promising a look at his party's agenda for his plans for America -- their economic agenda -- he made what was billed this morning as a major economic address. And his chief proposal, when you look at it, was apparently that the president should fire his economic team. Very constructive advice, and we thank the leader for that. (Laughter.)

But let's take a look at the rest of his advice... Let's review a little bit of history here. For eight years before we arrived in the West Wing, Mr. Boehner and his party ran the economy, and the middle class literally into the ground. They took a $237 billion operating surplus, inherited from the Clinton administration, and left us with a $1.3 trillion deficit -- and in the process quadrupled the national debt, all before we literally turned on the lights in the West Wing, before we did one single solitary thing. They gave free rein to the special interests to write their own rules at the expense of everybody else, not just the middle class. And the sum total was the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression -- a crisis that wreaked havoc upon American families and businesses all across this country, a crisis from which we are still digging out.

Glenn Beck’s ‘Non-Political’ Rally — Sponsored By The Right Wing

By George Zornick This weekend, Glenn Beck will hold a rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial that is being billed as a “non-political event that pays tribute to America’s service personnel and other upstanding citizens who embody our nation’s founding principles of integrity, truth and honor.” The “Restoring Honor” rally will feature speeches from Beck and Sarah Palin, but Beck has repeatedly stressed that it’s “not a political event.” Last Thursday, Beck told Bill O’Reilly — who openly questioned how an event featuring Sarah Palin couldn’t be political — that “[t]his isn’t political. This is about restoring honor in our own selves. We will never fix our country unless we stand in the shadows of Abraham Lincoln and George Washington.”

Despite Beck’s claims, however, it is clear that right-wing groups and politicians are helping organize, promote and subsidize the event. Adele Stan at Alternet reported last week that the Koch-funded front group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), which advocates for a number of conservative causes, is subsidizing bus and hotel packages for attendees of Beck’s rally, though not specifically advertising the rates as being for Beck’s event.

A search of the Restoring Honor website, however, shows that AFP is organizing buses for the event. A section on the website allows potential attendees to see if a bus is leaving from their area, and displays contact information for the bus organizer. In Georgia, there are three different buses with the contact Joel Foster, who is the grassroots organizer for AFP’s Georgia chapter. (He even lists his AFP e-mail address). A bus leaving from Raleigh, NC, and another in Baltimore County, Maryland, both appear to be organized by local AFP chapters.

In addition, several other right-wing groups are promoting the event and organizing travel. Among them:

– Grassfire.org, a conservative “grassroots” group with ties to the powerful Republican public relations firm Shirley & Banister, is an approved travel coordinator for the event, and has agreements with 30 area hotels.

– The American Family Association, Kentucky Chapter is running a bus to the event.

– Americans Against Immigration Amnesty advertises a bus, hotel, and event transportation package.

The map of bus organizers also belies Beck’s claim that “[t]he Restoring Honor Rally is neither a 9/12 nor a Tea Party rally.” A vast majority of the buses heading to DC appear to have been organized by local Tea Party chapters; for example, of the 51 bus pickups in Pennsylvania, over 30 are organized by either a Tea Party or 9/12 group. In Georgia, every bus stop but one is organized by either AFP or a local tea party group.

Beck’s insistence that “Restoring Honor” isn’t political is not simply a public relations effort. Funding for the event is provided by an organization called the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, which is a 501 (c)(3) tax-exempt, federally registered charity. In order for that charity to preserve its tax-exempt status, the “Restoring Honor” rally must be non-political. Perhaps Beck’s message this weekend will not be political — but the right-wing is clearly coordinating the rally.

Danger: Bus Parking For Beck’s 8/28 Rally Is Outside The Recommended ‘Safe Zone’

By Alex Seitz-Wald

Yesterday, a Maine tea party blog posted some handy advice for activists coming to Washington Saturday to attend Fox News host Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally. Among warnings about how to deal with “African immigrants” — do not “assume they are African Americans” and “especially do not…guess they are from a neighboring country” — the guide advised rally-goers to stay out of the vast majority of the city, and cautioned which portions of Metrorail system are safe. While the entire Green and Yellow lines are off limits, the guide allowed for travel on the Blue and Orange lines, as long as attendees do not stray West of the Eastern Market stop. As for areas outside this tiny safety zone: “you should not explore them.”

Unfortunately, the only official parking location for group buses is two stops beyond the last safe stop on the Blue and Orange line at RFK stadium, deep in the forbidden zone:

Buses will not be permitted to drop anywhere near the Lincoln Memorial.[...]

Bus parking is available at RFK Stadium for groups. RFK Stadium is adjacent to the Stadium Armory Metro Rail station on the Orange & Blue Rail lines. Walking distance from the bus parking area to this Metro is approximately 0.7 miles. The RFK Stadium Armory station connects to the Smithsonian Metro Rail Station, approximately 1 mile from the Lincoln Memorial event site.

DCist created a map illustrating the guide’s recommendations, which ThinkProgress has modified to demonstrate the danger facing the rally’s attendees when they unload from their buses to find themselves far in the unsafe zone:

Tea Party Leaders Criticize Beck’s 8/28 Rally: ‘All He’s Doing Is Trying To Use Us To Promote Himself’

By Ben Armbruster This Saturday in Washington, DC, Fox News host Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally will take place at the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream” speech. Beck has claimed that the rally — meant “to recognize our First Amendment rights and honor the service members who fight to protect those freedoms” — is “going to be one for the history books” and will be “a turning point in America.”

Beck has been a fervent supporter of the Tea Party, having previously promoted its events and rallies and even provided a forum for various Tea Party factions to work out their differences. While many local Tea Party chapters are helping to turn out attendees for the rally, some Tea Party leaders aren’t interested in helping Beck:

At least one tea party group rejected Beck’s entreaties to assist with the march, concluding he was offering little in return for its organizational know-how and credibility, while giving preferential treatment to FreedomWorks, which is paying to sponsor Beck’s radio show. The group’s leader, who requested anonymity to avoid antagonizing Beck, said, “All he’s doing is trying to use us to promote himself.” [...]

“I call it ‘Beckaplooza,’ because it seems to be all about Beck,” said Andrew Ian Dodge, the Maine state coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, a coalition of local groups that has helped stage several big rallies. … [W]hen the Patriots were deciding whether to help with Saturday’s rally, Dodge said there was internal queasiness over the M.L.K. link and Beck’s inflammatory rhetoric, including his blasting of Obama as a racist. … “Beck takes it outside of the realm of fiscal conservatism into issues that are more emotional and make you wonder if we really want to be associated with this guy,” [Dodge said].

RedState.com’s Erick Erickson said Beck is going to have to “be careful” or his gimmicks are “going to start becoming a punchline.”

Fox executive Bill Shine told Politico that “there is no organized promotion planned for the rally on Fox News and the network has nothing to do with it.” But as Media Matters notes, Fox has in fact been the “unofficial corporate sponsor” of Beck’s event. Perhaps that’s why Beck is expecting such a high turnout, recently suggesting that it will be similar in size to President Obama’s inauguration. “This will be a thing that your children will remember,” he has said. “I expect a miracle on 8/28.” Organizers are anticipating 300,000 participants. The country anxiously awaits.

FLASHBACK: In 2006 joint appearance, Beck appeared to call Imam Rauf a "good Muslim"

by Ben Dimiero

One of the main lines of attack in the never-ending conservative freak-out over the plan to build an Islamic community center in downtown Manhattan has been attempting to smear the developers of the center -- Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf in particular -- as "radical." In their usual despicable fashion, conservative media figures have worked hard to blur the line between the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 and the moderate Muslims who are behind the planned center.

One of the loudest voices in conservatives' fight against the center has been Glenn Beck, who has specifically targeted Imam Rauf with blatant falsehoods and hypocritical attacks in a desperate attempt to smear him as a radical.

Additionally, among other offensive comments, Beck has asked, "after you've killed 3,000 people you're going to now build your mosque?" He's also absurdly labeled the center an "actual danger" and suggested it is an "Allah-tells-me-to-blow-up-America mosque." Though we -- and many other outlets -- have repeatedly pointed out that Rauf is widely viewed as a moderate and has often denounced the extremists who carry out violent attacks in the name of Islam, Beck and his fellow demagogues continue to push the dishonest attack.

But Beck does not need to take our word for it that Imam Rauf is a moderate who distances himself from radicals -- Rauf told Beck as much while sitting at the same table with him during a 2006 discussion on ABC's Good Morning America.

During the ABC segment, Rauf condemned the extremists who issued death threats against the Pope and political cartoonists, specifically saying that "these reactions are not at all called for by Islamic teaching. The teachings of Islam are very similar to the teachings of Christianity, of loving the one God and loving thy neighbor. These are the two common principles."

When Diane Sawyer mentioned that Imam Rauf says the radicals are just a "group of people" and "not him," Beck seemed to agree, saying "sure, sure." He added, "I believe it's a small portion of Islam that is acting in these ways."

Beck, for his part, even appeared to gesture to Imam Rauf when he invoked the idea of "good Muslims." (At about 2:45.)

Watch:

Beck's response to this -- if he bothers to respond at all -- will likely be that when this segment was filmed, he was unaware of the supposed "radical" beliefs of Rauf. However as we (and Jon Stewart) have pointed out, Rauf's statements about 9-11 that Beck and others have pointed to as evidence of his hatred of America and sympathy for terrorism track very closely with things many conservatives -- including Glenn Beck himself - have said.

Republicans hot, cold on Constitution, depending on what’s at stake

By The Associated Press

Republican Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia won his seat in Congress campaigning as a strict defender of the Constitution. He carries a copy in his pocket and is particularly fond of invoking the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

But it turns out there are parts of the document he doesn't care for — lots of them. He wants to get rid of the language about birthright citizenship, federal income taxes and direct election of senators, among others. He would add plenty of stuff, including explicitly authorizing castration as punishment for child rapists.

This hot-and-cold take on the Constitution is surprisingly common within the GOP, particularly among those like Broun who portray themselves as strict Constitutionalists and who frequently accuse Democrats of twisting the document to serve political aims.

Republicans have proposed at least 42 Constitutional amendments in the current Congress, including one that has gained favor recently to eliminate the automatic grant of citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Democrats — who typically take a more liberal view of the Constitution as an evolving document — have proposed 27 amendments, and fully one-third of those are part of a package from a single member, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill. Jackson's package encapsulates a liberal agenda in which everyone has new rights to quality housing and education, but most of the Democratic proposals deal with less ideological issues such as congressional succession in a national disaster or voting rights in U.S. territories.

The Republican proposals, by contrast, tend to be social and political statements, such as the growing movement to repeal the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship. Republicans like Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the lead Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, argue that immigrants are abusing the right to gain citizenship for their children, something he says the amendment's authors didn't intend.

Sessions, who routinely accuses Democrats of trying to subvert the Constitution and calls for respecting the document's "plain language," is taking a different approach with the 14th Amendment. "I'm not sure exactly what the drafters of the amendment had in mind," he said, "but I doubt it was that somebody could fly in from Brazil and have a child and fly back home with that child, and that child is forever an American citizen."

Other widely supported Republican amendments would prohibit government ownership of private companies, bar same-sex marriage, require a two-thirds vote in Congress to raise taxes, and — an old favorite — prohibit desecration of the American flag.

During the health care debate, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, D-Mich., introduced an amendment that would allow voters to directly repeal laws passed by Congress — a move that would radically alter the Founding Fathers' system of checks and balances.

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who founded a tea party caucus in Congress honoring the growing conservative movement that focuses on Constitutional governance, wants to restrict the president's ability to sign international treaties because she fears the Obama administration might replace the dollar with some sort of global currency.

Broun, who is among the most conservative members of Congress, said he sees no contradiction in his devotion to the Constitution and his desire to rewrite parts of it. He said the Founding Fathers never imagined the size and scope of today's federal government and that he's simply resurrecting their vision by trying to amend it.

"It's not picking and choosing," he said. "We need to do a lot of tweaking to make the Constitution as it was originally intended, instead of some perverse idea of what the Constitution says and does."

The problem with such a view, says constitutional law scholar Mark Kende, is that divining what the framers intended involves subjective judgments shaded with politics. Holding up the 2nd Amendment as sacrosanct, for example, while dismissing other parts of the Constitution is "cherry picking," said Kende, director of Drake University's Constitutional Law Center.

Virginia Sloan, an attorney who directs the nonpartisan Constitution Project, agreed.

"There are a lot of people who obviously don't like income taxes. That's a political position," she said of criticism of the 16th Amendment, which authorized the modern federal income tax more than a century ago. "But it's in the Constitution ... and I don't think you can go around saying something is unconstitutional just because you don't like it."

Sloan said that while some proposals to alter the Constitution have merit, most are little more than posturing by politicians trying to connect with voters.

"People are responding to the politics of the day, and that's not what the framers intended," she said. "They intended exactly the opposite — that the Constitution not be used as a political tool."

The good news, Sloan and Kende said, is that such proposals rarely go anywhere.

Since the nation's founding, just 27 have survived the arduous amendment process, and 10 of those came in the initial Bill of Rights.

Only two have come in the past 40 years, and both avoided ideology. One, ratified in 1971, lowered the voting age to 18; the other, ratified in 1992, limited Congress' ability to raise lawmakers' salaries.

At Ground Zero anti-Islam rally, man harassed for looking vaguely Muslim.

By Matt Duss

At an anti-Islam rally yesterday at Ground Zero, a person of color wearing a skull cap and wandering through the crowd was targeted with insults and nearly attacked by protesters for the offense of looking vaguely Muslim. The videographer summarized the episode this way:

A man walks through the crowd at the Ground Zero protest and is mistaken as a Muslim. The crowd turns on him and confronts him. The man in the blue hard hat calls him a coward and tries to fight him. The tall man who I think was one of the organizers tried to get between the two men. Later I caught up with the man who’s name is Kenny. He is a Union carpenter who works at Ground Zero. We discussed what a scary moment that was for him.

Glenn Greenwald observes that the video “shows some extremely ugly stuff that’s been unleashed.” Watch it:

Interesting way to “honor” Ground Zero, no?

Update While there was much hate at yesterday’s rally, there were also many people who turned out to support the construction of the Islamic center. See pictures here, here, here, here, and here.

Charles And David Koch Exposed For Insidious Role In Crafting The Modern Right

By Lee Fang This morning, the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer published an explosive investigative piece detailing the role of the Koch family in orchestrating not only the Tea Party movement, but much of the modern right-wing infrastructure. The brothers David and Charles Koch, heirs to the oil and chemical conglomerate Koch Industries, have founded or funded dozens of conservative or libertarian publications, think tanks, and attack groups. Their father, Fred Koch, similarly fueled the paranoid right-wing movements of the fifties and sixties through his financing of the John Birch Society. Mayer’s piece builds off the original reporting conducted by ThinkProgress since the very beginning of the Tea Party movement. Here’s a review of what we’ve reported: – In April 2009, ThinkProgress revealed that Americans for Prosperity, a group founded by David Koch, was helping to plan dozens of the first national Tea Party rallies. Americans for Prosperity staffers organized events, from making reservations, to providing talking points and signs, to calling activists to encourage them to participate. – In August 2009, ThinkProgress obtained an exclusive memo from a Tea Party group supported by Koch’s Americans for Prosperity. The memo outlined various ways for Tea Party activists to intimidate Democratic lawmakers and disrupt their town hall meetings on health reform. ThinkProgress published half a dozen articles exposing the role of Koch-funded groups like “Patients United” in encouraging opposition to health reform. For instance, in Virginia, a Koch-funded operative Ben Marchi assisted a birther who followed Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) around, yelling at him at town hall meetings. – In May 2009, the Wonk Room published a detailed history of Tim Phillips, an astroturf lobbyist Koch appointed to run his Americans for Prosperity front. Phillips had served as a business partner to Jack Abramoff and Ralph Reed. – Writing in the Boston Globe, ThinkProgress commented on the similarities between David and Charles’ Tea Party movement to their father’s efforts to attack President John Kennedy through the John Birch Society. – The Wonk Room reported on thirty years of Koch Industry environmental front groups. The timeline showed how Koch tried desperately to smear the cap and trade system set up to address acid rain with a “grassroots” group without a single grassroots member. – At Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-MN) “House Call” rally, ThinkProgress produced a video report exposing Koch for paying for dozens of buses for anti-health reform activists to reach DC. We also captured the picture of a large banner comparing health reform to the Holocaust. – The Wonk Room investigated Koch Industries’ role in the effort to repeal AB 32, the landmark California climate change clean energy law. The Wonk Room’s video report revealed how Koch Industries’ reliance on high-carbon Canadian crude would become less profitable if similar laws like AB 32 are enacted around the country. – ThinkProgress reported how a variety of right-wing fronts supported by the Koch family and its political deputies not only helped overturn nearly a hundred years in campaign finance law in the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, but also is lobbying aggressively against the DISCLOSE Act, which would provide transparency into the campaign spending for plutocrats like the Koch family. – The Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson reported extensively on the multiple climate-denying campaigns orchestrated by the Koch family. Johnson has lampooned some of the Koch family’s more ridiculous attempts at billionaire populism. – ThinkProgress partnered with Climate Progress to investigate David Koch’s funding of the Smithsonian Institute. We spoke to the Smithsonian director, who continued to express gratitude to Koch, and whitewashed Koch’s role in distorting public knowledge of climate science. Similarly, we have long chronicled the “Swift Boat” style attack campaign conducted by Koch’s various anti-science fronts. – The Wonk Room reported on how Koch-backed groups and media outlets spread the myth that the so-called “Climategate” e-mails showed that scientists had concealed climate data from the public. Mayer’s article sheds light on many other ways in which the Koch family has intertwined its business interests with its investment in right-wing groups. She also exposes a serious conflict of interest with David Koch’s position as a board member to the National Cancer Institute, an honor granted to him by President Bush. Mayer notes that while David Koch has been “casting himself as a champion in the fight against cancer, Koch Industries has been lobbying to prevent the E.P.A. from classifying formaldehyde, which the company produces in great quantities, as a ‘known carcinogen’ in humans.”

Cover-up: Conservatives now pretending they never attacked Muslims' religious freedom

From Media Matters

Right-wing media have responded to President Obama's comments that he "believe[s] that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country" by falsely claiming that opponents of the proposed Islamic community center in Lower Manhattan have not talked about restricting Muslims' religious freedom. In fact, opponents have advocated using government intervention to restrict construction of the center or have asserted that the planners don't have a right to build it at the proposed location.

&gapro.accountid=UA-10384441-1"> &gapro.accountid=UA-10384441-1">

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Embed this video:

">

Conservative media: Mosque opponents not talking about restricting religious freedom

Fox's Johnson: "I don't think anyone is talking about" restricting "the free exercise and practice of religion." On the August 16 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Peter Johnson Jr. discussed Obama's comments and stated of opposition to the planned Islamic cultural center in Lower Manhattan: "Clearly, there's an unassailable, black-letter, red-line rule in American thought and American constitutional history about the free exercise and practice of religion. I don't think anyone is talking about that. But now the president is talking about the wisdom of putting the mosque at that particular site."

NRO: "[N]o reasonable opponent of the project contests the right of Muslims to worship as they please in this country." In an August 16 editorial, National Review Online stated that "no reasonable opponent of the project contests the right of Muslims to worship as they please in this country -- the First Amendment religious rights of Muslims never have been in question, at all." NRO further wrote: "The critics insist only that this particular location for a project led by these particular people -- including an imam who cannot bring himself to condemn Hamas -- is unseemly and ill-considered. That position in no way implies a disregard for the First Amendment."

Geller: "No one has suggested abridging the first amendment to stop the mosque." In an August 13 blog post, Pamela Geller wrote: "Obama knows this is not about religious liberty. No one has suggested abridging the first amendment to stop the mosque. There are hundreds of mosques in New York, thousands in America. This is not a religious issue. This is a national security issue."

WSJ: "Even opponents of the mosque concede" that government does not have right to stop construction of the community center. In an August 15 editorial responding to Obama's comments, The Wall Street Journal wrote: "The government has no right to stop imam Feisal Abdul Rauf from developing the abandoned Burlington Coat Factory at 51 Park Place into a 13-story complex of classrooms, auditoriums and a mosque under the name of Cordoba House. Even opponents of the mosque concede this point."

Beck: "There is no constitutional argument over whether Muslims have the right to practice their religion." On the August 16 edition of his Fox News show, Beck criticized President Obama's statement in favor of the "right that people have" to build a mosque where they choose, claiming that "there is no constitutional argument over whether Muslims have the right to practice their religion." Beck continued:

That's ridiculous. It's America. We all have a right to follow God and build our houses of worship. All Americans are clear on that, and if they're not, those are the dummies. What is at issue is the wisdom of this mosque, in the place of this mosque, and with the imam of this -- and the funding of this mosque.

Krauthammer: "We all agree on the legality" of building the center. On the August 16 edition of Fox News' Special Report, contributor Charles Krauthammer commented on President Obama's statement "addressing the legality of" building the Islamic cultural center. Krauthammer claimed that in fact, Obama was "not addressing anything" because "[w]e all agree on the legality. It's the propriety, the decency of this" that matters.

O'Reilly: "President Obama is framing this as a freedom of religion deal, but that's not what this is about." On the August 16 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly claimed that "President Obama is framing this as a freedom of religion deal, but that's not what it's about." O'Reilly added, "this is not about legalisms, it's about sensitivity towards thousands of Americans who lost loved ones in the 9-11 attack."

Palin: "Nobody argues that freedom of religion that the Muslims have to build that mosque somewhere." On the August 16 edition of On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, Fox News contributor Sarah Palin claimed that "[n]obody argues that freedom of religion that the Muslims have to build that mosque somewhere." Palin then argued that "there are a hundred mosques already in New York" and that "to chose and be so adamant about this exact location, just a block or two away from 9-11, again, is that knife" in the heart of Americans. Palin also asked "if the purpose of this mosque is to create this tolerant environment ... you have to ask, why didn't one of those one hundred mosques already accomplish such a thing?"

Santorum: "This has nothing to do with someone's right to build a mosque." Also on the August 16 edition of On the Record, Fox News contributor Rick Santorum suggested that the debate over the proposed Islamic center "has nothing to do with someone's right to build a mosque." Santorum continued by saying that "we have religious freedom in this country, and as long as you comport with the zoning laws, you can build a mosque." He later claimed that "if this was an affront to our unshakable belief in religious freedom, his [Obama's] position would be, they should build it." Santorum added that "people aren't saying that they can't build it. They're saying that the prudence would say that they shouldn't build it."

But mosque opponents have advocated for government intervention to stop construction of the center

NY gubernatorial candidate said he would appoint commission members who oppose plan to build the community center. As NRO's Josh Barro noted, "[C]onservative figures have continued to push creative ideas to throw red tape at the mosque." Barro highlighted New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio's pledge to appoint members to New York's Public Service Commission who oppose the community center and would block the sale of the property to the center's organizers.

Mosque opponents wanted landmarks commission to prevent mosque project from advancing. The New York Times reported on August 3 that "the project received its final city approval when the landmarks commission voted 9 to 0 to deny granting historic protection to the building in Lower Manhattan where the $100 million center would be constructed." The report noted:

Opponents, who have turned out in large numbers to speak out against the plan at public hearings this summer, seemed resigned to losing the vote, and few showed up to protest. After the commission voted, scattered members of the audience shouted "Shame on you!" and "Disgrace!" One woman carried a sign reading, "Don't Glorify Murders of 3,000; No 9/11 Victory Mosque."

The New York Observer reported that Lazio appeared at the hearing to "urge the commission to grant landmark status" to the building currently at the site and "he acknowledged that this discussion must take place in the context of the proposed mosque."

ACLJ filed lawsuit to block construction of center. After the New York City Landmarks Commission voted that the building at which organizers plan to construct the community center did not qualify for landmark status, Newsday reported that the conservative American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) "argued in papers filed in New York State Supreme Court that the commission's decision was invalid because it violated its own rules and procedures in part by failing to allow sufficient public input."

Wash. Examiner: "Can there be a higher civic purpose than preventing construction of a Muslim propaganda and recruiting center so close to the murder site of 3,000 Americans?" In an August 13 editorial, The Washington Examiner asked, "Can there be a higher civic purpose than preventing construction of a Muslim propaganda and recruiting center so close to the murder site of 3,000 Americans?" The Examiner further stated:

Local governments everywhere in America routinely regulate location and construction of religious facilities without impinging on the First Amendment right to worship. There are also volumes of federal, state and local historic preservation laws that could be invoked to force GZM to a different site. We hope Bloomberg accepts Newt Gingrich's invitation to debate this issue. Maybe then the mayor will explain why he disdains historic preservation of the area immediately around the site of the worst domestic attack in American history.

Wash. Examiner op-ed: "The federal government has at its disposal dozens of land preservation methods that could delay or even halt development of the Islamic center." In an August 11 Washington Examiner op-ed opposing the community center, Cheryl K. Chumley wrote that "[t]he federal government has at its disposal dozens of land preservation methods that could delay or even halt development of the Islamic center." From the op-ed:

Instead of decrying, condemning and reproving, politicians like Rep. Peter King, D-N.Y., who called the mosque project "particularly offensive," have opportunity to take action.

The federal government has at its disposal dozens of land preservation methods that could delay or even halt development of the Islamic center.

King, for instance, could introduce legislation extending the National Memorial designation currently affixed to the World Trade Center Site and in so doing, have a say in future development. Congress and the interior secretary could set the wheels in motion to preserve the property under the Historic Sites Act of 1935, a federal code that allows the National Park Service to "restore, reconstruct, rehabilitate, preserve and maintain" properties of historical significance.

Or, Congress could introduce legislation to expand the boundaries of the coincidentally close-by Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area, or NHA, a preservation tag that runs from New York City to Albany.

Opponents have also claimed that community center organizers don't have a right to build it at planned location

Gingrich: "Nazis don't have a right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum" ... "There's no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center." On the August 16 edition of Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich said that "[p]eople have the right to free religion if they want it. I've said it openly, if they want to build this mosque in the South Bronx, I'm all for it." He later stated: "Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There's no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center."

Sekulow: "[Y]ou don't get to build a mosque on a site that's part of Ground Zero." On the July 22 edition of Fox News' Hannity (accessed via Nexis), the ACLJ's Jay Sekulow stated his opposition to the Islamic community center and said, "[Y]ou don't get to build a mosque on a site that's part of ground zero."

Limbaugh: "[T]he Constitution does not guarantee you can put your church anywhere you want it." On his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh stated: "If you're going to bring the First Amendment into it, that's where your argument's going to fall apart. There are 23 mosques in New York. The government -- the Constitution does not guarantee you can put your church anywhere you want it. It just says you cannot be denied the practice of worship."

Richard Land: People "have the right to have these mosques" but "don't have the right to have them any particular place they want them." On Public Radio International's To the Point, the Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land stated that people "do have the right to have these mosques. Now, they don't have the right to have them any particular place they want them. You know, the Supreme Court in the [City of] Boerne [v. Flores] decision said that a Catholic church couldn't expand because of the objections of the historical district that it would bother the historical nature of the town square in Boerne."

Team Beck not laughing: Stewart’s act has grown ‘tired’

By David Edwards and Ron Brynaert

Stewart calls out Beck's inconsistent rhetoric about NYC Islamic center; Beck and crew complain it was only "mildly similar in a different context"

"That joke isn't funny anymore," Morrissey once sang for The Smiths. But that's because it hit "too near the bone."

Just a few months ago, Glenn Beck called a Jon Stewart impersonation of himself "hilarious," but on his Tuesday morning radio show, the pundit who used to call himself a "clown" ripped into the Comedy Central host for letting his act grow "tired."

Referring to Monday's Daily Show, Huffington Post's Katla McGlynn blogs that "the best part of the segment was when Stewart caught Glenn Beck in a huge contradiction."

The first clip showed Beck doubting Rauf's "moderate" stance due to statements he made after 9/11 saying America didn't "deserve" the attacks, but that American policies were "accessories to the crime.

"What kind of scheming, America-hating, extremist monster would say something so evil?" Stewart asked, before cutting to a clip of Beck saying LITERALLY the same thing as Rauf, just three months earlier. "What will he think tomorrow?"

Media Matters noted Beck's radio show response:

After playing Stewart's recent skewering of Beck's hypocrisy for attacking Rauf over comments strikingly similar to comments Beck himself made in April, Beck asked, "Does Jon Stewart not understand the difference between that last statement and the statement from the imam that happened two days after 9-11?" Beck gave no indication what actually distinguished Rauf's comments from Beck's, aside from their temporal proximity to September 11, 2001.

And it truly is difficult to find any difference beyond the semantic.

* Beck: "When people said they hate us, well, did we deserve 9-11? No. But were we minding our business? No. Were we in bed with dictators and abandoned our values and principles? Yes. That causes problems."

* Rauf: "I wouldn't say the United States deserved what happened on 9-11, but the United States' policies were an accessory to the crime that happened."

After not explaining the "difference" between his statement and "the statement from the imam" that Beck apparently sill finds appalling, Beck asked, "Does [Stewart] understand that I didn't hire someone to work for me that also went out and made statements like, 'The Jews are responsible," and 'If the - if Americans knew the Jews, they would do what Hitler tried to do to the Jews?'"

Jeremy Holden at Media Matters adds, "Beck's sidekick Stu Burguiere went on to say that Stewart 'has become dull,' and characterized Stewart's criticism as a 'boring, lazy, tired effort.'"

At worst, the statements were "mildly similar in a different context," Team Beck agreed.

This video is from Comedy Central's The Daily Show, broadcast Aug. 16, 2010.

The following audio clip from Beck's radio show is from Media Matters: