Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Judson Phillips, a tea party leader, urged voters in an e-mail to vote against Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn) in part because of Ellison's religious affiliation. Politics Daily reports:
A prominent leader of the Tea Party movement has reiterated his view that voters should cast their ballots against Rep. Keith Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, in part because he is a Muslim.
Judson Phillips, founder of the Nashville-based Tea Party Nation, had sent out an e-mail Monday calling on voters to elect Ellison's independent challenger, Lynn Torgerson, because "Ellison is one of the most radical members of congress. He has a ZERO rating from the American Conservative Union. He is the only Muslim member of congress."...
Ellison--regardless of his religious affiliation--is the worst type of politician imaginable, so I have a hard time defending him on this one. Scott Johnson at Powerline recently chronicled the hypocrisy of Ellison:
Incidentally, Ellison used to hang with the gangbanging Minneapolis cop killer Sharif Willis. Now he hangs with the likes of Schultz, an altogether better class of thug. In his conversation with Schultz, Ellison announced he felt like taking Williams's books (referred to in in the singular as "that stuff") off the shelf "and putting it in the garbage."
Schultz elicited from Ellison the fevered charge that "Juan Williams contributes to profiling and harassing Americans." He doubts Williams's integrity -- this from a guy who predicated his first congressional campaign on three easily demonstrable lies.
Ellison responded to Phillips in the Washington Post two days ago, invoking the typical boilerplate:
I issue a call to civility, and urge Americans to reject the divisive rhetoric of Republican Tea Party leaders like Judson Phillips; including calls for my defeat solely because of my religion.
Usually, I would agree, but Ellison himself has brought his religion into the political arena, which doesn't help his case.
Nor, as far as I'm concerned, does his predictably liberal voting record.
- Comment (33)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
In context it looks to me like the reference to him being Muslim realted to his support for CAIR, for whom I myself don't CARE for.
It was sloppy wording (defined as wording easily distorted by your adversaries).
Nothing more.
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Tommy De Seno: In context it looks to me like the reference to him being Muslim realted to his support for CAIR, for whom I myself don't CARE for.
It was sloppy wording (defined as wording easily distorted by your adversaries).
Nothing more. · Oct 29 at 7:57am
There are legitimate political reasons to worry about Ellisons' affiliation with Islam, but Phillips does not mention them, as far I see. Rather, he disparages Islam as a whole:
Aug '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
There are plenty of legit reasons to go after Ellison - his religion is not one of them. Maybe I'm a little sensitive to this issue becasue of the whole Romney/Mormon thing but unless someone's religion is overtly political like Rev Wright's it should be off limits.
Besides, Just how many liberal Minneapolis residents did Mr Phillips expect to drop their support for Ellison because of this line of attack?
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Frozen Chosen: There are plenty of legit reasons to go after Ellison - his religion is not one of them. Maybe I'm a little sensitive to this issue becasue of the whole Romney/Mormon thing but unless someone's religion is overtly political like Rev Wright's it should be off limits.
Besides, Just how many liberal Minneapolis residents did Mr Phillips expect to drop their support for Ellison because of this line of attack? · Oct 29 at 8:15am
I think Ellison's religion is fair game in this case. However, you have to do it better than this. You should say *why* his being Muslim is bad, and it's things like his association with CAIR and all that.
To just say "vote against him because he's a Muslim" is terrible.
And I agree, Frozen. I can't see him peeling away any Ellison votes with this kind of rhetoric.
It may even make some undecideds move toward Ellison.
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Emily Esfahani Smith, Ed. :
Usually, I would agree, but Ellison himself has brought his religion into the political arena, which doesn't help his case.
I actually agree with Ellison on this.
What is the purpose of taking an oath of office on the Bible? I for one do not see it as purely symbolic, but something sacred meant to bind the oath taker to fulfilling the oath. Doesn't it make more sense then to swear on a sacred book that binds him to a higher power that he actually believes in and fears? I know that you can argue that then you will have people taking oaths on coloring books next, but that seems absurd, particularly when the Koran is a holy book recognized by over a billion people.
That being said, it is completely unjustified for Phillips to resort to this tactic and really does give the tea party a bad name.
Edited on Oct 29, 2010 at 8:23amRe: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
You can probably guess my opinion on this. To bring up his association with CAIR would be perfectly fair. To simply say "He's a Muslim" as if that's an argument tells us that Phillips is one seriously low-class candidate.
Aug '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Regardless of how bad the candidate is, I don't think attacking him simply because he is a muslim is good for the Tea Party's reputation.
It would be MUCH better to actually do some research on the mosque the man attends and the muslim leaders he associates with. If that research turns up anti-american speech and attitudes, then by all means promote the heck out of THAT.
Saying people shouldn't vote for him because he's a muslim leaves you way too open to attack if you didn't do your research. For example, what if he happens to be an Ismaili muslim who follows the leadership of the Aga Khan? The Ismailis are one of the most open-minded and Western-oriented of muslim branches.
Now, I don't know anything about the flavour of Ellison's muslim beliefs, or what branch he belongs to, or what his mosque is like. My point is simply that this is the sort of information you HAVE to be CLEAR about if you're going to use an opponent's religion against them.
Aug '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Of course it's wrong to use a tool we refuse to use. But, as a faithful Powerline reader, Keith Ellison (if that is one of his real names) is a really bad actor.
Whatever tools can be used to rid the Congress of him would probably be justified. He is probably one of the worst from a state that thinks it's funny to elect people like Jesse Ventura and Al Franken.
Gee, I hope they think it's funny ! If not, the DFL doesn't mean the same thing anymore.
And I hope everyone saw what the NFL did today with their PAC . Enough to make you yearn for a soccer ball, some crisps and a shandy.
May '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Tone is important, which is why I fairly consistently criticize the "primarily TEA Party" people, as well as the one-issue anti-immigration groups. These goofballs consistently offer all the ammunition swing voters need to vote for the Left.
With Ellison's own public positions- "Ellison is one of the most radical members of congress. He has a ZERO rating from the American Conservative Union"- we have all we need to oppose him; no religious bias baiting required.
I don't live in Minneapolis, so I don't vote his contest, but my mom did vote against Mr. Ellison.
Jul '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Just a quick question or two: Is there a conservative or Tea Party candidate that Emily likes? Is there a liberal or leftist candidate that Emily finds that does the wrong thing? I'm just noticing a trend in her postings...
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Go after his religion!
Religion is supposed to dictate a person's values and actions while political identification indicates at best only inclinations. A Catholic politician should be Pro-Life. If you aren't Pro-Life, you shouldn't be Catholic, and you should oppose Catholic politicians because of their religion which is the ultimate source of their policy beliefs.
A muslim likewise should believe in the overthrow of Western Civilization because, whatever they may say publicly, attempting to overthrow Western Civilization has been the actual, habitual practice of Islam since the beginning.
As Hilaire Belloc said in "The Great Heresies" :
"The last effort [Mohammedans] made to destroy Christendom... failed during the last years of the seventeenth century, only just over two hundred years ago... on a date that ought to be among the most famous in history-September 11, 1683."
And...
"It has always seemed to me possible, and even probable, that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent."
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
I wish there were an easily-accessed archive of previous posts related to Mark's comment. Mark, suffice to say I've discussed that position a lot on Ricochet; if you have the time and inclination, you could do a search under the term "Moderate Muslim Watch."
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Mark Nanneman:
A Catholic politician should be Pro-Life. If you aren't Pro-Life, you shouldn't be Catholic, and you should oppose Catholic politicians because of their religion which is the ultimate source of their policy beliefs.
A muslim likewise should believe in the overthrow of Western Civilization because, whatever they may say publicly, attempting to overthrow Western Civilization has been the actual, habitual practice of Islam since the beginning.
Its telling that you would choose to compare Catholics and Muslims rather than Christians and Muslims.
Catholicism is a specific branch of Christianity and assumes a certain interpretation and perspective. Christianity as a whole includes multiple branches, some widely differing in views, most differing subtly. Islam as a whole also includes multiple such branches just like Christianity. Saying that because person X is a Muslim and thus holds certain views is as fallacious as saying person Y is a Christian and thus believes in the social teachings of the Catholic Church. Never mind that person Y is a Baptist. This is the fallacy of composition. Just because person X is a Muslim does not mean that you can generalize their believes on those of a radical subset.
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Claire, I have followed your discussion of religious moderation and I appreciate your perpective.
What Mark is pointing out is that those who are epistomologicallly self conscious in their religious beliefs would tend to act upon them in such a way as to create conflict between believers of these differing worldviews.
I believe that "moderates" within any religion are those who are inconsistant in their worldview, and have been influenced by religious syncretism, primarily humanistic syncretism, and thus more "tolerant' of values more consistant with humanism or "worldliness". Thus "moderate" islamists have much in common with "moderate" (liberal) christians.
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Claire I certainly will do. I'm new to Ricochet as of today--should have done some research before jumping into commenting.
May '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Good Berean
Claire, I have followed your discussion of religious moderation and I appreciate your perpective.
What Mark is pointing out is that those who are epistomologicallly self conscious in their religious beliefs would tend to act upon them in such a way as to create conflict between believers of these differing worldviews.
I believe that "moderates" within any religion are those who are inconsistant in their worldview, and have been influenced by religious syncretism, primarily humanistic syncretism, and thus more "tolerant' of values more consistant with humanism or "worldliness". Thus "moderate" islamists have much in common with "moderate" (liberal) christians. · Oct 29 at 10:36am
GB, why is "humanistic syncretism" in a religious context more of a virtue than simple educated evangelicalism? To me humanism suggests a human-centered, rather than God-centered view.
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Duane Oyen
Good Berean
I believe that "moderates" within any religion are those who are inconsistant in their worldview, and have been influenced by religious syncretism, primarily humanistic syncretism, and thus more "tolerant' of values more consistant with humanism or "worldliness". Thus "moderate" islamists have much in common with "moderate" (liberal) christians. · Oct 29 at 10:36am
GB, why is "humanistic syncretism" in a religious context more of a virtue than simple educated evangelicalism? To me humanism suggests a human-centered, rather than God-centered view. · Oct 29 at 11:06am
Yes, humanism is a religion with man as god. There is no transcendant god, therefor there is only immanant man. A society based on humanistic religious beleifs will not long sustain a republican form of government which depends upon transcendant Law ('Lex Rex") for its legal base. The best this type of society can do is to develop a democracy wherein "vox populi, vox dei". This society, like the one we have become, is a nation of laws, not a nation of Law.
In a theistic religious system, humanistic syncretism is a vice not a virtue.
Edited on Oct 29, 2010 at 11:38amAug '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Can I suggest a moratorium on allowing Minnesota to send anyone to Washington until the end of Al (Stewart Smalley) Franken's term,arrest or institutionalization, whichever comes first .
With full apologies to Michelle Bachman, who we would welcome in any number of serious states.
Edited on Oct 29, 2010 at 11:30amOct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Good Berean
I believe that "moderates" within any religion are those who are inconsistant in their worldview, and have been influenced by religious syncretism, primarily humanistic syncretism, and thus more "tolerant' of values more consistant with humanism or "worldliness". Thus "moderate" islamists have much in common with "moderate" (liberal) christians.
In other words, any interpretation other than that of a fundamentalist is obviously a wrong interpretation? Am I missing something there?
Why not the other possibility? That a more moderate position is the intended and God-centered stance while a fundamentalist position is the skewed point of view? I give to you as example, Jesus. Many of Christ's harshest criticisms were for the Pharisees who were the fundamentalists of Judaism in their day. His approach in eating with those designated as sinners was considered worldly by the Pharisees.
So forgive me, I think your criticism of what is considered "moderate" not being "God-centered" is wrong. Of course we have not fully discussed what is meant by "moderate" as this could mean many different things.
Oct '10
Re: Don't Vote for Him, He's Muslim
Fundamentalist is one of those polarizing words commonly used as an epithet by those who do not agree with orthodox doctrinal standards. It is not really very useful in friendly conversation. I do see your point however. The point I was trying to make was regarding Mark's comments about acting on firmly held religious beliefs. I am not offering a criticism but an opinion.
Moderate, as used in Claire's response to Mark, was in the context of "moderate muslims". This was the context of my use of moderate.
Edited on Oct 29, 2010 at 12:36pm