McMahon: Mosque’s Location ‘Salt In The Wounds’
| Aug 17, 2010 6:24 pm
(15) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author
Posted to: Shelton
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon said she’s all for religious freedom, but still not keen about the idea of Muslims praying near Ground Zero.
“For me, the location of the mosque in this particular area kind of rubs salt in the wounds . . . of a horrific day in our history,” she said Tuesday.
Click the video to see her full response. The question about the mosque is posed to her at about 47 seconds in.
The campaign of McMahon’s opponent, Democratic candidate Richard Blumenthal, issued the following comment Wednesday morning:
“This issue is highly sensitive and deeply personal for many people in Connecticut, New York and around the country. While Dick believes this issue should be decided at the local level, he hopes that local leaders will make the decision after reviewing all factors, and that they will give serious consideration to the wishes of those who were directly affected by the 9-11 tragedy.”
McMahon, fresh off her victory in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, toured Howe Avenue Tuesday afternoon, chatting up small business owners and employees.
McMahon took questions from the Valley Independent Sentinel. The questions — with the exception of one about a proposed mosque in lower Manhattan — were submitted by Valley Indy Facebook readers.
Thomas Harbinson asked “What is your definition of leadership?” and “Summarize your campaign in three words.”
Eddie Tatro asked what McMahon would do to alleviate the tax burden on “the middle class and working poor.”
Danielle Ann Michaud-Elwood asked what is McMahon is going to do “for our children, their services, and education?”
Click the video to watch McMahon’s answers.
Meanwhile, Shelton workers who talked to McMahon Tuesday described how the recession has affected business.
Mark Dynerski, owner of the Dunkin’ Donuts on Howe Avenue, said the drop in the construction industry had a direct affect on coffee sales.
“Those are the guys that are going to stop and get a Box of Joe, and a dozen donuts. They’re spending thirty, forty dollars a day, bringing it to the job site, and that’s
what’s missing from my business,” Dynerski said.
At Liquid Lunch, Alexis Gulas told McMahon that the shop has tried many sale tactics, but is still losing customers. They have cut back most employees to part-time. Their once-thriving business has seen a drop in catering, carry-out and in-house dining.
“It used to be nonstop. It used to be crazy, from here to here, for about a good two hours,” she said, gesturing from the counter to the end of the display case. “Now, we
have that kind of business . . . for a half hour.”
posted by: Watchman on August 18, 2010 9:26am
Linda McMahon, is not an advocate for the mosque at Ground Zero, however, I do not believe Richard Blumenthal, will take the same stand, as he would not want to offend Pres. Barack Obama’s liberal stance on the location of the mosque.
posted by: Jonathan Hopkins on August 18, 2010 12:10pm
I do not equate contemporary Islam practicing American citizens with cave dwelling militant extremist who happen to be Muslim. The terrorists we’re fighting are not motivated by Islam, they are motivated by decades of US military presence in their country. If The Iraqi army set up military bases in Tennessee, we wouldn’t blame Christianity for a sudden up rise of radical shotgun wielding hillbillies who happen to be Christian, would we?
Unfortunately, instead of attacking the source of decades of aggressive US military occupations-the military and political leaders-these now organized extremists decided to attack civilians. The response from us has done little but further destabilize the region and create more hatred of our government and therefore the people that elect it.
We should be supporting this moderate Islamic community in lower Manhattan as we would with any Christian or Jewish group; we should not equate them with radicals who happen to be Muslim that first got organized in direct response to US foreign policy.
posted by: citizen on August 18, 2010 1:09pm
Nice political non-answer Blumey. I wonder if they played music while you were dancing around that question.
posted by: juli on August 18, 2010 2:09pm
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise thereof.”
love, the first amendment
posted by: Watchman on August 18, 2010 2:10pm
You are completely INCORRECT. The Moslem terrorists, who flew into the World Trade Center buildings, said the were completely motivated by Allah, and were assured by their teachings, that they would immediately GO TO HEAVEN, once they concluded their fatal, murderous, mass genocide.
You, like Pres. Barack Obama are wrong, for approving. to build a mosque next to this tragic site. Then again, you sxound like a person with radical views…..............
posted by: sheltontrails on August 18, 2010 5:31pm
There are really two separate questions that people are confusing:
1. Is it a good idea to put a mosque near Ground Zero?
2. Should we grant our government and politicians the right to determine which religions are acceptable for a particular piece of private property?
It’s quite possible to believe it’s a bad idea for the mosque to be located there near Ground Zero, but defend the right of Muslims to do so.
posted by: GregL on August 18, 2010 8:57pm
I feel particularly bad for the cave-dwelling militant extremists that Jonathan Hopkins mentioned.
They don’t even have the internet, so they can’t do a simple Google search and discover that there are already two mosques near the World Trade Center site. In fact, one of the mosques was founded the same year that the North Tower was completed (1970). I guess the terrorists already won.
Also, “Summarize your campaign in three words” is not a question. Sorry, but that irked me.
posted by: Morris Cove Mom on August 18, 2010 8:57pm
I want the next person tempted to post about NOT BUILDING THE MOSQUE to really think about what they are asking. Stop the hate. If you don’t allow the mosque, then you can’t allow the next church or temple being built. It’s like saying all Germans were Nazis. They weren’t. And not all Muslims are violent. Most are silent about being Muslim, ashamed and scared after 9/11. Build the mosque. Please stop the hate. Now.
posted by: Jonathan Hopkins on August 18, 2010 9:56pm
C’mon bro, you can’t be serious.
I could easily find scripture from the Old Testament that seems to condone violent and heinous acts, and I, as an individual, could use that to excuse a violent act that I commit, but just because I’m crazy that doesn’t mean all of Christianity is.
By your logic, no Churches should go up near the Olympic site in Atlanta because the fundamentalist Christian Eric Rudolph did a bombing there.
posted by: Watchman on August 19, 2010 8:55am
Not building the mosque, is not hate ... just not appropriate,at this time as fanatic Muslims were responsible for the fiery death of 3,000 innocent victims, near the suggested site, for the mosque, and the wounds have not yet healed. It’s too early, to build the mosque there. Besides, there are already two mosques, located near the deadly site. Pres. Obama, by approving the site for a mosque, merely “added salt to the wounds,” that have not yet healed. A political blunder, on the part of Obama.
Patience is a virtue!
posted by: Jonathan Hopkins on August 19, 2010 12:27pm
Characterizing them as fanatic Muslims is misleading. A more accurate description would be that they are militant extremists who were agitated by decades of US military occupation in their country, which over time lead to an organization of these groups. They happen to be Muslim simply because that is the part of the world that the US military happened to be setting up bases. The Qur’on is not their motivation, their culture and civilization is thousands of years old and did not go through an industrial period or a period of enlightenment or renaissance like many of the culturally progressive countries in Europe and the Americas and therefore their traditions and the rule of law are archaic. When they slaughter goats, they pray, but that doesn’t mean they’re motivated by Islam to kill goats, they do it to eat.
The contemporary American citizens who are looking to open an Islamic center in New York are perfectly modern people with family structures and customs compatible with American society. You and many other people are being ridiculous.
posted by: Watchman on August 19, 2010 12:56pm
The Muslims have been fighting each other there, for a thousand years, before our military arrived, in the past decade.
We should have stayed out of this Muslim killing ground. In recent years, there was an Iran-Iraq Muslim War, that killed millions of people.
Apparently, history, was not your best subject?
posted by: Jonathan Hopkins on August 19, 2010 4:28pm
I never said US foreign policy made otherwise peaceful people in the middle east suddenly become violent. I said that they became violent TOWARDS US because of our military occupation of their land prior to 2001. That doesn’t mean that they weren’t violent towards others prior to 2001, in fact I know they have been warring amongst themselves for a thousand years. If we just stayed in our own country, I doubt anyone else in the world would care what we do, but we insist on having military presence in hundred of countries. We still have bases in Vietnam and Russia!
posted by: Watchman on August 19, 2010 7:58pm
Never look back, unless it helps you look ahead!
I question your allegation that we have a military presence in dbases in 100 countries.
You also say, we have bases in VietNam and Russia, when Obama would not allow us to install, a missille defense system in Poland?
Where did you get, this grossly inaccurate information?
posted by: Single Dad on August 19, 2010 10:35pm
You flip burgers with a spatula made in China enjoy fireworks and savor the food made in Japan even after Pearl Harbor? Anyone have any Japanese people living near them? THINK PEOPLE.