

A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
What the editorial cartoonist FAILS to realize (top photo of Sarah Palin) is that in America, he can make the cartoon. If he did that on Mohammad, he would have fatwa on him so fast, his head would explode.
It’s only religious intolerance if it’s against Islam. If he took a shot against the Pope, he would get kudos from the LSM.
Exceptionally comprehensive collection, but I’m not sure I get the Palin as Mohamed one… huh?
I’m proud of her for speaking out, Cuda’s twice the man Bloomberg is.
Here’s my weekly dozen toons for a Gran Finale…
Reaganite’s Sunday Funnies
Have a great weekend, Wordsmith-
-RR-
Tsk, tsk, tsk… Imam Wordsmith is even politicizing the SUNDAY FUNNIES! 😥
As for Sarah and the Mosque at Ground Zero, a monument to Mohammed, built with funds from Allah knows where, Sarah is in good company.
She’s joined by Newt Gingrich, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) and former Cong. Rick Lazio among MANY others.
On the other side you have NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Andrew Cuomo.
Whose side would readers rather be on?
Andrew Cuomo was a lynchpin in the fiscal meltdown. Now he wants to finish off the country.
Something for everyone I guess, Mike.
@Mike’s America:
Oh, please…and the one (and all the others following it) below it isn’t politicized? 🙄
Beeler’s a conservative cartoonist who doesn’t appear to be a big Palin fan. Is that ok, or does there have to be uniform, lockstep agreement?
Do you think I agree with the 2nd cartoon? Yet, there it sits published…
Do you only find humor when it’s the left that’s poked fun of?
I knew putting it at the top would get some Islamophobic panties tied up in a wad, so yeah, I am pushing some buttons on purpose, Mike.
I am not sure where the “Sarah as Muhammad” imagery is coming from, but the gist of the thing is to take a shot at Sarah for her invention of the word “reFudiate”. You all know the leftist tactics. If they can’t call you a racist, they will jump on any slips of the tongue and trumpet them. As several of the other ‘toons pointed out, playground politics.
WORDSMITH: YOU are in one of your evil day, to do that to us all angels of good,
shame on you. like you said before,”I haffto DO it sometimes”.
http://gopbriefingroom.com/index.php?topic=32491.0
http://www.gopachy.com/gp2/index.php?topic=4909.0
http://www.therightreasons.net/index.php?/topic/22762-todays-toons-72310/
we threw newt under the bus a long time ago Mike…
try to keep up.
Wordshith, Sunday funnies Palin…. you are one brave person. The risk of portraying a strong woman as MO, the risk of placing a turban on a woman,
the risk of implying that a woman can be a nut job jihadist, never mind on that one, the risk of criticizing Bloomberg and Cuomo for being morons in their Ground Zero terrorists sanctuary support. Good work.@Buffalobob: Nice refudiation.
Word, the cartoon you’ve posted and your posts to those responding are beneath you.
You have come to a conclusion contrary to the facts out of pure ego. You have smeared those that disagree with you as bigots and anti-Constitutionalists. You are not defending religious freedom. You are not defending the Constitution. You are not morally or intellectually superior to those who disagree with you.You are defending your vanity. In short, you are behaving like a saul alinskey liberal.
Can’t disagree more, HR. Look back on the other 2 or 3 threads. Mata and I laid out our case and stick by them not out of “vanity”. In fact, I’ve been pretty flexible in regards to the possibility that Rauf might not be a so-called “moderate”. But your side of the argument has been pretty entrenched even before any supposed “new information” has come to light in regards to trying to tie him to radicals and terrorist funding. Islamophobes want to see what they want to see.
And it really has nothing to do with whether or not Rauf is a moderate or a radical. Most of the vocal Pam Geller opposition brigade couldn’t care one iota about that. They are simply against the religion itself and cannot distinguish the difference between the global jihad movement, radicals who aren’t takfiri terrorists but merely fundamentalists, and the rest who practice Islam that is non-uniform.
And how am I not defending the Constitution when there are those on your side of the aisle on this issue who want to make a special case when it comes to Islam? (Actually, you must be confusing me with Mata, since I’ve never brought this side of the argument up).
@Hard Right:
Makes no sense to me, when the cartoon directly beneath it is vile, misguided, and disgusting as far as I’m concerned. Yet I posted it irregardless of my personal opinion of it.
They’re political cartoons. Meant to offend in some cases. Sometimes, our side deserves the slap in the head to knock some sense into us before the Gellers and Lazios try and lead us off a cliff before November.
@wordsmith: So do you now consider me an Islamophobe?
Your stubbornness is getting the better of you.
I wonder also… is Dr. Jasser an Islamophobe too?
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/mosque_unbecoming_QmXgG4QyGgz4ATF9v7cBDM
Not all the arguments, and certainly not the best ones, against this mosque are based on Islamophobia. That straw dog won’t hunt any more.
The more I learn about this mosque and it’s backers the more this thing smells.
This isn’t about religious freedom, tolerance or any of the politically correct crapola that has been strewn about.
This is about right and wrong. And this mosque, in that place, opening on the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks as a monument to Mohammed is WRONG!
I look forward to your coming to that same conclusion even if I have to wait years to hear you admit it.
I don’t expect you to agree. People in denial usually continue to go deeper into it as you are doing. BTW, I read them. I suggest you re-read them and take a hard look at your behavior.
As I posted before, yes I agree there have been some who screeched before any info had come out about who was behind the mosque. I was actually neutral until I started to see that there are definite connections to radicals and they are supporting this mosque. You can latch onto those that are not radicals that support the mosque, but it doesn’t erase that the main drivers are radicals. You have wrongly smeared all those that oppose the mosque as anti-Islamic bigots. Your emotional behavior further supports my conclusion that your position is not based on reason.
You are defending religious freedom and the Constitution? There is the ego and elitism I was talking about. Regardless of what you said specifically, I have a decent idea of your values and the possible reasons why you have them.
Religious freedom has limitations. There is nothing wrong with recognizing that. You however are doing the same thing as liberals when they whine about freedom of speech–even when it isn’t a matter of freedom of speech. This is not an issue of religious freedom. This is about radicals who want America destroyed trying to get a mosque built to celebrate their “conquest”.
Once more, not all that are involved are radicals, but major players are. You seem content to ignore that so you can tell yourself how morally superior you are to those of us who won’t ignore such facts.
When I previously mentioned in another thread the funding from extremists you said you had faith in the govt. to track that down. Really? You don’t seem to have much faith in them to do most other things. More irrationality and denial.
Word, I understand you have unfairly been called some names over your stance, but the cartoon is utterly dishonest and dispicable as is your painting those that are against the mosque as bigots.
This is very unlike you. The fact that someone like myself is saying this, someone who has had to work on not flaming certain people out of emotion, should cause you pause.
If you still disgaree about who is behind the mosque, fine. Just don’t attack everyone who is against it as bigots. That is the tactic of a leftist and something you yourself have decried.
@Mike’s America:
It just floors me how you and HR can chalk this up to “vanity”, “ego”, “stubbornness” simply because Mata and I hold opinions divergent from y’alls opinion.
We’ve already discussed Jasser’s opinion and what I think of it. Pam Geller the Islamophobe doesn’t seem to think very highly of him. Even he is apparently not “un-Islamic” enough for her:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/05/zuhdi-jassers-own-private-islam.html
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/05/jassers-jihad.html
Then lay it out for me oncemore, what the non-Islamophobic arguments are, Mike.
Isn’t dancing in circles so much fun?
Because like any good partisan political pundit, you smell the cooking you want to smell.
Ok.
It’s not a “monument to Mohammed” just because you prefer to look at it through those tinted lenses.
My question to you again is: Who attacked us on 9/11? Islam itself or takfiri terrorists and their brand of Islam?
You’ve already admitted that even if Jasser himself were sponsoring the so-called “mosque”, you’d oppose it (although “less vocally so”). So, what was that again about distinguishing radical Islam and Islam? And if you make a distinction, you’re still ignoring the many on your side of the aisle on this issue, who say “radical” Islam is the norm; it’s the “moderates” like Jasser who are the radicals and the apostates from “the religion of hate” (Oh, excuse me, a “political system”). I have never once heard you slap down and distance yourself from your allies who are Islamophobes and make no apologies about it (even if they dislike the label itself).
Opposition can only make sense that opening the non-Mosque 2 blocks away from Ground Zero (how far away must it be in order to be acceptable to you, anyway?) on the anniversary is a “slap in the face” (exact words I keep hearing) to the victims and the nation can only be perceived as such if you think Islam itself attacked us on that day. I reject that perceived view, Mike. And that is the real source of my difference with so many Americans, of all political stripes and persuasion, who disapprove of the Islamic Center being built.
Who’s the stubborn one, Mike? When have you ever relinquished a position, admitted you were mistaken/wrong about something? I certainly have.
Another strawman Word.
You want to ignore facts, fine. The problem is you have to spin and ignore so much, then label us Islamophobes and partisans to feel right about your opinion and avoid real debate.
If my post hadn’t wound up in the filter you’d see why I’m right about your stance being pure ego on your part. You’ll have to wait until tomorrow to see it. And no I don’t expect you to admit I’m right.
http://www.thefort2.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14343
AT LAST, we are seeing the UGE DIVISION between thoses who beleive in the religion
they belong to; AND if only one of thoses 2 is telling of his disaproval for putting up that
building, I like his arguments more than the other who is like more dictating his own arguments for building it,more also because he is the one who is in charge of millions of moneys,that talk by itself
and supported more heavily by thoses who provided thoses millions,and giving him the pressure to deliver: It’s telling me more about scoring points toward the end of the project would be to show supperiority of the muslims or call it ISLAM over AMERICANS in AMERICA who since thoses last CENTURYS have obeyed to their laws, WHICH WHERE FRAMED under THE ALMIGHTY GOD .
PLEASE dont CHANGE AMERICA, PLEASE DONT LET IT HAPPEN.
I AM FINISH, and I AM SHAKING WITH EMOTIONS.
@wordsmith pleaded: “Then lay it out for me oncemore, what the non-Islamophobic arguments are, Mike.”
Do you think it’s Islamophobic to want to know where the funding of this mosque comes from? Especially considering the controversy over funding of other projects Rauf and co. have become involved in?
Do you think it’s Islamophobic to believe that opening a monument to Mohammed at Ground Zero on the 1oth anniversary of 9/11 sends the wrong message to Muslim radicals?
Do you think it’s Islamophobic to be concerned about Rauf’s intentions considering how even REAL Muslim moderates like Dr. Jasser think this project is wrong?
There is MUCH more I could say about this, but apparently it is falling on deaf ears (or blind eyeballs).
Simply saying that Mata and you have already pronounced the last word on this doesn’t mean you have won the argument. Quite the contrary.
I notice you failed to answer my question: Am I or Dr. Jasser Islamophobes? The House of Cards you have built collapses if you have to admit that not all the opposition to this mosque is based on Islamophobia.
@Hard Right:
I did. I suggest you go back and reread the comments….again.
You don’t see any Islamophobic sentiments expressed by commenters in this thread? Or in so many past threads on FA, let alone in the entire conservative blogosphere?
The “main drivers are radicals”? And the evidence for this is what exactly? Dubious, tenuous connections? Stretching the associations?
There are no “definite connections” that have anything to do with funding or other tangible support… which is why Lazio is calling for an investigation into the mosque finances. If you have physical proof and documented evidence, you should provide that “proof” to Lazio and save NY some investigative costs. But knowing someone, even having common opinions, is not “proof” of criminal activity.
Sure I have emotions over the issue; but wtf on your high horse, like an intellectual elitist, acting as if reason and facts are solely on your side while it’s all emotionalism on the opposition side?
Which side is behaving emotionally here:
The opposition to this project is all about emotionalism from those who think this will be a “monument to Mohammed” in Mike’s own words, and who confuse Islam itself for al Qaeda and affiliates.
Of course, if you are speaking of it acting outside of our laws. They can’t have human sacrifices, stoning, decapitation, dismemberment, etal. However there is nothing about this Islamic community center that is outside of our laws. Who’s acting on emotionalism, again? Which side do you suppose wishes they could circumvent property rights?
That’s emotional speculation and a view I don’t share.
The opposition that’s been engaged in has all but ensured victory for those radicals you so claim to oppose. We’ve made this a win-win situation for the jihadis. If it’s built now, they win because they know so many Americans have the (misguided perception) of what the Islamic Center would represent. If it’s successfully stopped, they still win because they can now point out to the non-radicals that they were right all along in their propaganda claims about the West’s persecution of Muslims.
Daisy Khan was absolutely right that acceptance of this Islamic Center would be a “blow to the extremists”. Because it counters the smears al Qaeda has tried to promulgate against the U.S.
Khan and Rauf have said more things “right” than “wrong”; yet anything positive they say gets dismissed as taqiyya while the conservative Islamophobes focus their all-knowing magnifying glass on a couple of “gotcha” statements to be distorted to fulfill an agenda.
Actually, that says more about you than me. That you somehow are perceiving my opposition to y’all as “moral superiority” as if somehow y’all don’t think your position is “morally superior” to mine. Example:
Ahhh…gotta love the smug smell of moral superiority.
So what is it that you know that they do not, HR? Why not forward to the feds your superior information gleened from Geller and company?
The name-calling’s been tame. Least of my concerns. When have you ever seen me censor anyone’s comment or cry foul for personal insults? Have I ever banned anyone from FA? C’mon, guy….my skin’s tougher than that.
When you guys are allowing your side to be spearheaded by someone waving the banner, “Stop the Islamization of America”; when those on your side can’t seem to distinguish the difference between Islam and the global jihad movement, then yeah, maybe I do see an inordinate amount of religious bigotry in all of this. The question is, why can’t you see it?
And why so defensive from you and Mike on the label when in so many comments I’ve so often said “some in the movement”….and have not singled either of you two out as part of the Islamophobia gone wild.
Nowhere have you guys ever called out other commenters when they’ve made Islamophobic comments here. You turn the other way and let it slip by, unchallenged. Distance yourselves from the Islamophobes, and I might give you some credibility on this point.
Not sure why you feel like I’ve been personally attacking you. If I have, I’m sorry because I don’t recall it.
Ok, if YOU or Mike feel you aren’t bigots, then don’t defend the ones who are bigots. Don’t act as if my slings and arrows are aimed at you two, personally.
Yes, however, I am aiming some of the barbs at the movement you are associating yourselves with.
@Mike’s America:
Funding concerns are fine. But the scrutiny is being driven by an Islamophobic agenda that desperately wants to see what it wants to believe; and only hears what it wishes to hear. Where is evidence of the terrorist funding? Basically, what Mata said.
The very premise of your question is flawed.
Opening an Islamic Center- a community center that is open to everyone of all faiths and which will have a memorial to the victims of that day– 2 blocks away from Ground Zero (how many blocks away would be acceptable to you, Mike?), and tolerated by the American people, would be a blow to the global jihad movement, which is at war with the vast majority of Muslims in the world.
You mean the, “THIS MOSQUE TO MOHAMMED IS WRONG WRONG WRONG! BEING BUILT IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME!” refrain? 😉
This merry-go-round is of your own creation. Funny how in the last thread you basically said, “forgive me if you’ve already addressed this….”
There’s nothing new here, Mike, that hasn’t already been addressed over and over again and again.
Mata and myself never said it was the “last word”, just another word and viewpoint. Suggest you go back and reread your own comments, since that is what you have pronounced with your repeated, “the bottomline is, this MOSQUE IS WRONG WRONG WRONG”
And where have I ever said ALL the opposition is based on Islamophobia?
There’s that one-size-fits-all mentality you persist in demonstrating. Jasser thinks it’s an unwise locale, as all of us do… including Mata and myself. However the difference between Jasser, Mata and myself and Geller and the Islamophobes is that the latter wages war against all of Islam. We do not, and understand there is a difference between Islam and the global jihad movement.
Let’s just republish the National Republican Trust ad that Mike thought fit to publish in a post, endorsing the ad:
Now how is this ad NOT Islamophobic?
How does it make the distinction between the global jihad movement and Islam itself?
Answer: It doesn’t.
Re-addressing HR’s comment:
That’s how I feel about the cartoon directly under it…yet there it sits published. Wonder why is that?
Oh, that’s right: I’m the one “politicizing” Sunday Funnies.
http://www.qubetv.tv/photos/detail/86227
It’s PC idiots like you that are as great a danger as the Jihadists.
WTF! Trashing Palin and her views on the WTC? Next you’ll be promoting sharia law.