A couple weeks ago at the Iowa State Fair, I asked Congressman Braley if he supported the mosque, or the “learning center” as the liberals now call it, at Ground Zero.  Braley avoided giving a direct answer.  He said that it’s a local issue that the people of New York have to deal with.  He then argued that the proposed mosque really isn’t at Ground Zero, and finally, he defended the placement of the mosque based on freedom of religion.

Two of the three arguments that Braley gave that day clearly show that he supports the mosque.  That is why the title of the article that I wrote was, “Braley Supports Ground Zero Mosque, Says it’s Just a Local Zoning Issue.”  If he opposes the mosque, he should have just said so.  Like too many politicians these days, Congressman Braley wants to have it both ways.

Braley is upset with a television ad that the American Future Fund is currently running that talks about his support of the mosque.  The TV ad cites TheIowaRepublican.com as its source.  Braley is now responding with a TV ad of his own.  You can watch both ads below.

Braley slanders his opponent, Ben Lange, in his ad by saying that the people behind the sleaziest ad in history are now backing his campaign.  He also tries to set the record straight by citing the very same article from TheIowaRepublican.com that the American Future Fund cited in its ad, which seems a little strange.

Once again, Congressman Braley is trying to be elusive.  Braley didn’t need to cite TheIowaRepublican.com article in his TV ad at all.  Instead he could have chosen to look straight into the camera give his constituents a straight answer.  Obviously, that would have been too simple, so Braley continues his effort to confuse people on this subject.

The mosque is one of those issues that deserve a yes or no answer.  Any married man who’s wife asks him who the woman was that he was just talking to, knows that it is in his best interest to answer his wife with a simple, direct answer.  Something like, “Her?  We worked together ten years ago, man she really got on my nerves.”

The rules are simple.  First, tell how you know her.  Second, tell her when you knew her.  Third, and most importantly, tell her that she’s not your type.  It would be wise for Braley to adopt this approach.  Instead, Braley is getting cute, and if he answered his wife like he answered the question on the mosque, he might get a knee to the groin or a drink thrown in his face.

While the TV ads duke it out over the airwaves, the American Future Fund has also been calling voters in the District.  AFF representatives have told TheIowaRepublican.com that they have placed two phone calls to voters in the district.  Each phone call went to 160,000 households, which means they are calling Republicans, Independents, and Democrats.

Braley is spending $44,000 in the Cedar Rapids and Davenport TV markets. Braley’s quick response to the AFF TV ad with one of his own indicates that he might not be as safe this fall as many people think he is.

Pollsters and political analysts around the country are getting more and more bullish on the Republicans’ chances to make huge gains in the U.S. House and Senate.  Braley won his seat in 2006, a great year for Democrats across the county, and was re-elected in 2008, a year which was even better for Democrats, and he didn’t face a tough opponent in either race.

The 1^st Congressional District is a seat that Republicans had held for decades before Braley won it in 2006. While Leonard Boswell is the top congressional target for Republicans in Iowa, Braley might just find himself in trouble this fall if Lange runs a disciplined campaign and has the resources to build his name ID across the district.

AFF Braley Call

AFF Braley 2nd Call

I’ll just let you know who it is, it’s Ed Rendell – Now Give Me My Tickets!

Please join me in entering this contest.

This year’s JJ speaker was born in New York City in the mid 20th century

Answer: Born January 5, 1944

This year’s speaker has never attended or spoken at our Jefferson Jackson Dinner

Answer: Yep

This person made a cameo appearance on-screen in a blockbuster hit of the 90s.

Answer: Well of course it’s a film about homosexuals. Rendell was in the movie Philadelphia.

This person has never worked for Saturday Night Live and is not Rudy Giuliani (Al Franken, though born in NYC, had already been eliminated as a past JJ speaker.)

Answer: OK, it’s not Alec Baldwin, who was and born in New York, damn.

This person is an avid sports fan.

Answer: Rendell is a big Philly’s fan.

This person served six years in the U.S. Army Reserve.

Answer: 1968-1974

This person is married with one son.

Wife: Marjorie Rendell

Son: Jesse

This person has held local, statewide and national office in their public career.

Local – District Attorney and Mayor
Statewide – Governor
National – DNC Chair, kinda weak don’t you think?

This person endorsed Hillary Clinton in her bid for President in 2008.

Answer: Rendell Endorsed Hillary

This person is married to a federal judge.

Answer: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. – Nominated by Bill Clinton.

Rees was also classified as a moderate, and as the campaign drew on, it became more and more apparent  that Rees’ views on everything from cap and trade to gay marriage were out of step with most Republican voters.

Still, Rees was respected by his primary voters for the way that he presented himself out to the voters.  While most Republicans disagreed with his positions on the issues, they appreciated Rees’ honesty and the way he approached his campaign.  Unfortunately, Mark Rees’s honesty is now being questioned after he endorsed Congressman Leonard Boswell, the incumbent Democrat, over Brad Zaun yesterday.

Rees was one of six candidates who participated in a candidate forum sponsored by IowaPolitics.com.  In the forum, all of the candidates were asked if they would support the eventual nominee.  Rees said, “In terms of who I will support should I will not receive the nomination, I will support the nominee.”

At the March forum, Rees also said, “I believe that Leonard Boswell has become quite ineffectual and that he doesn’t represent the Third District anymore.”

Obviously Rees has changed his tune on Boswell.

In endorsing Boswell yesterday, Rees said, “Boswell’s lifelong record of service to this state and our country is rarely seen in politics today.  His character, judgment, and integrity are without question. I trust Congressmen Boswell. I trust him to listen to his constituents and place our interests above his Party. I trust him to make sound, solid decisions void of any self-interest. And above all else, I trust him to always represent this state with honor and integrity.”

The Zaun campaign was also quick to call out Rees’ hypocrisy.  Zaun’s campaign spokesperson, Robert Haus said, “When he announced his bid for Congress, Mark Rees said, ‘I am proud to say these [nominating] signatures were collected one door and one handshake at a time.  The people I met were eager to share their opinions and ideas, but most of all their frustration with career politicians and business as usual in Washington.’ –theiowarepublican.com, March 18, 2010.”

“Mark has now thrown his support behind a 14-year, career politician who embodies ‘business as usual’ in Washington, DC.  Apparently the frustrations Mark heard at the door have been forgotten for political expediency,” Haus concluded.

Rees’ flip-flop will probably bring previous party registration back the forefront in future primary campaigns.  Rees had been a registered Democrat before launching his bid for Congress.

Given the timing, Rees’ endorsement is little more than a simple press release supporting Boswell, who is trying to do everything he can to shift the focus away from his liberal voting record.  In recent polls, Boswell has been shown to be trailing Brad Zaun by as much as 10 points.  Only 31 percent of those surveyed believe that Boswell deserves to be re-elected, while 62 percent want to give someone else a shot.

The visit would be Palin’s first visit to Iowa since making a brief stop in the state in December of 2009 for a book signing.  The visit to the First-In-The-Nation Caucus state is certain to create buzz about a potential run for president in 2012.

Palin’s visit comes on the heels of her appearance at Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor rally in Washington D.C.    It also comes a week after TheIowaRepublican.com released polling results that showed Palin trailing Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich in a 2012 caucus poll.

Bringing Palin to the state is a big deal for the Republican Party of Iowa.  Most people have strong opinions of Palin following the 2008 presidential campaign, and she is sure to be a tremendous draw for the state party.

Photo by Dave Davidson

Throughout the 2008 campaign, the news media was obsessed with the crowds that came to Obama’s campaign rallies.  We all remember the awesome photographs of his crowds in St. Louis, Missouri, Portland, Oregon, and Berlin, Germany.  Even if one wasn’t paying attention to the campaign, it was nearly impossible to escape the media’s coverage of Obama’s rallies.

Of course, our friends in the news media also went out of their way to educate the American public on what these large crowds meant.  For the most part, the news media was correct in covering Obama’s huge crowds.  He did soundly defeat Sen. John McCain in November, but let’s not forget, he only received 53 percent of the vote.

While justified to an extent, the news media also made a significant impact on the 2008 presidential campaign that wasn’t necessary.  They helped propel a mere candidate running for president into some sort of cultural icon that rivaled some of the most recognizable brands in the world.  Obama’s “O” logo is as well know as the Nike swoosh, or the Pepsi or Coke logos.

For reasons unknown, the news media seems to be unwilling to cover the huge crowds generated by the Tea Party activists in the same way they covered the Obama crowds of 2008.  The turnout at Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C. was simply amazing.  While it’s impossible to know exactly how many people attended, we do know that it was similar to the size of crowds Obama was able to generate just two years ago.

NBC News estimated the size of the crowd to be 300,000 people, which is pretty impressive.  Just like Obama’s huge crowds foreshadowing his victory in 2008, the Tea Party rallies are foreshadowing big things in 2010.

Unlike their coverage of Obama, most of the traditional news media outlets spend their time trying to either attack or understand what the Tea Party movement really is.  It seems like every few months, someone in the national media ponders the question about whether or not the Tea Party movement is a positive thing for the Republican Party.

In many cases, these stories usually follow negative stories that claim racial epithets were being shouted at members of the Congressional Black Caucus, for which there is no proof whatsoever.  More negative publicity occurred when the NACCP adopted a resolution condemning the “racist elements” of the Tea Party.  Very rarely does the news media write articles that comptemplate how the Tea Party movement may help the GOP in this fall’s elections.

It’s ironic that, after hundreds of thousands of people turned out to attend the Restoring Honor rally on Saturday, some members of the national media are still finding ways to make it a negative story for the GOP.  There are even some sportswriters are worried about what Albert Pujols’ attendance at the rally will do to his popularity.   Unbelievable.

So what drives the negative obsession with some in the news media?  Fear.

As we all know by now, most members of the traditional media in this county endorse the Obama administration’s leftward lurch.  They celebrate the government’s takeover of the healthcare industry, the student loan industry, and numerous businesses that looked to the federal government to survive.  They see no problem with the ever-increasing size and scope of our government.

The news media also doesn’t understand that the Tea Party’s strength and numbers are not spurred by the presence of one political figure.  There is no doubt that Glenn Beck has done a lot to get the Tea Party off the ground.  His media presence lets him promote events like the rally this past Saturday.  While Beck is a popular media personality, he’s not out there promising the things that every presidential candidate does.

Instead, Beck and millions of Tea Party members across the county only want to take their country back to the basics on which it was founded.  While the media will cover these large events, they underestimate the importance of the Tea Party groups that are meeting in our own communities, some meet as often as once a week.  It is this type of activity that separates the Tea Party from previous political movement.  It’s real because it’s local.

The answer to the question about whether or not the Tea Party will help the GOP this fall is simple.  Without any doubt, the Tea Party will absolutely help the GOP.  While the movement isn’t a Republican movement, it sure isn’t going to be helpful to the Democratic Party, which holds the strings of power of all three branches of government, nationally and in Iowa.

The most encouraging part of the Tea Party movement is not that they will help Republicans win elections this fall, it’s that they have shown no signs of being satisfied with the results of any election.  It is likely that the Tea Party movement will continue to influence the GOP and politics in general.  If that is the case, this country will be better off for it.

Beck’s Restoring Honor rally is the latest sign that the Tea Party movement is alive and well in America.  Obviously many in the media don’t quite understand it, but they will probably figure it out on November 3rd.

Once again, Leonard Boswell is in for another tough race this fall, but this time, his opponent has something none of Boswell’s previous challengers had at their disposal – an outstanding political environment that could make 1994 look like a mediocre year for Republicans.

The other benefit that none of Boswell’s previous opponents have had is numerous polls that show Boswell trailing in the race.  A recent poll conducted by Ayres, McHenry, & Associates shows Boswell trailing his Republican challenger, Brad Zaun, by 10 points.  Zaun leads Boswell 51 percent to 41 percent.

The results of the poll give us some insight as to why the Boswell campaign felt compelled to attack Zaun on his position on ethanol a week and a half ago.  Typically, incumbents begin their ad campaigns with a strong positive message, so when the Boswell campaign attacked Zaun out of the gate, it raised some eyebrows.

The polling results that were released yesterday paint a much worse picture for Boswell than just being down ten points to Zaun.  Besides Zaun’s lead over Boswell, here are the important things you need to know about this poll.

1. The poll was taken between August 16^th and August 18^th, the same time that Boswell unleashed his attack ad on Zaun.  While the attack wouldn’t have had time to penetrate, it could have had some impact on the results.

2. The poll shows us how much trouble Boswell is really in.  Only 31 percent believe that Boswell deserves to be re-elected, while 62 percent want to give someone else a shot.

3. The generic ballot is horrible for Democrats in the district.  When asked whether or not they would prefer their next congressman to be a Republican or Democrat, 43 percent said Republican, while 30% said Democrat.  Nineteen percent said it would depend on who the candidates are.  A 13 percent advantage for the Republicans in the District is a huge swing from previous contests.  In 2006, the generic ballot favored Democrats by six to seven points.

4.  Zaun is ten points ahead of Boswell, and almost 30 percent of those surveyed don’t even know who Zaun is.  Seventeen percent have no opinion of Zaun.  That’s bad news for Boswell and a sign that voters have had enough and want someone new to represent them.

5. Boswell’s favorable and unfavorable numbers are poor for a 14-year incumbent.  Forty-six percent have a favorable opinion of him, while 45 percent have an unfavorable opinion of him.  Boswell’s high unfavorable numbers signal that voters disapprove of the job that he’s done as their congressman.

6. When you look at the crosstabs of the poll, a couple of things really jump out.  First, Zaun leads Boswell 53 percent to 40 percent with people who are absolutely going to vote this fall.  While Boswell narrows the gap with likely voters, Zaun clearly has the support of people who are revved up for this fall’s election.  That kind of voter enthusiasm is like gold to political campaigns.

7. Zaun leads Boswell in a number demographics.  He leads Boswell by 20 percent with men and has a one-point lead over him with women.  More importantly, Zaun has a 12-point lead over Boswell with independent voters.

This third party poll is fantastic news for Zaun’s campaign, but it also means that Boswell will continue to attack him throughout the fall.  Boswell’s first attack was aimed at cutting into Zaun’s lead over Boswell in the rural parts of the district.  With the disclosure of Zaun’s personal issues, Boswell is now obviously trying to gain support of female voters.  Zaun should expect these types of attacks to continue.

It’s becoming clear that the only way Leonard Boswell can win re-election is if he makes the entire race about Zaun.  While he has already landed a couple of blows on Zaun, the polling numbers suggest that it will take a prolonged attack to move the race back into his favor.

The problem that Boswell faces is that Zaun is not going to be a sitting target.  Boswell’s voting record gives Zaun ample ammunition for the fall campaign.  Unlike Boswell, Zaun’s chances of winning will improve if the focus of the race is on Boswell’s record and current issues.

Any incumbent who has to come out of the gate with an attack ad is in serious trouble, but these polling numbers show just how bad of shape Boswell is really in.  While Governor Culver gets most of the media attention for being the Iowa Democrat with the most to lose, Congressman Boswell finds himself in a similar situation.

If you then said that this former presidential candidate, who is 63 years old, is out touting his book entitled, “How Capitalism Will Save Us,” you would probably think this former candidate is Mitt Romney. However, it wasn’t Mitt Romney barnstorming the state and headlining events for the Iowa Christian Alliance and Polk County GOP. It was Steve Forbes.

Steve Forbes is the candidate who inspired me to get involved in politics. While I became a fan of his in 1996 when I was a freshman in college, I didn’t figure out what the caucuses were, or when they were held, until after the 1996 primary was over. Determined not to miss them again in 1999, I went to work on Forbes’ 2000 caucus campaign in June of 1999, just a few months before the Ames Straw Poll.

Having seen Forbes give his stump speech four or five times a day while campaigning in Iowa back in 1999, as part of his campaign staff, I got to know his speech really well. One of the experiences I remember best was watching his youngest daughter, who was ten at the time, stand in the entryway of Dave Heaton’s Iris Restaurant in Mt. Pleasant, and basically mouth her father’s speech word for word for the staff, while he was in the other room delivering the speech to potential supporters.

The point of that little story is that Steve Forbes was always on message. What has impressed me the most in the ten years since his presidential campaign ended is that he is still out there promoting free markets, a strong dollar, privatization of social security, and of course, the flat tax.

Yesterday, Forbes described our anemic economy as being like a case of the flu that you can’t shake. You’re not bed ridden and you can function, but you’re not operating at full capacity. He said that more often than not, free markets are unfairly blamed when the economy gets in trouble. He noted that, throughout our history, the major recessions were all caused by government intervention. For the current recession, he cited Freddie and Fanny, two government created entities that created the housing crash in the fall of 2008.

Forbes also wasn’t shy about laying the blame for our economic woes at the feet of both the Bush and Obama administrations. He criticized them both for keeping interest rates low. Forbes said, “A weak dollar means a weak recovery. You can not have these ultra low interest rates that punish savers and distorts the markets.”

After spending some time talking about the Federal Reserve, Forbes then cautioned people not to compare the dollar to other currencies across the world, but instead to look at the price of gold.

“Gold has been the best economic barometer for over 4000 years. In 2003, the price of gold was $300 to $350 dollars an ounce and had been that way for a decade and a half. The suddenly it shot up, and up and up. Today it’s over $1200. That tells you what you need to know. If you don’t know what the value of the dollar is, you don’t realize it inhibits productive investment,” Forbes said.

He also warned that, in addition to stopping the binge spending in Washington, Congress must not raise tax rates. Forbes then insisted that Congress should do the opposite and cut taxes. He then reminded people that the taxes you pay on income is the price you pay for working, the tax on profit is the price you pay for being successful, and the tax on capital gains is the price you pay for taking risks that work out. He argued that, if you lower price of work, risk-taking and success, you would get more of it.

The motto for Forbes’ 2000 campaign was “He wants you to win.” While it has now been over ten years since Forbes crisscrossed the state looking for support in the Iowa caucuses, he continues to hold true to his beliefs, and those beliefs are more relevant today than they have ever been.

Polk County GOP Continues to Impress

I would be remiss if I didn’t congratulate the Polk County GOP for another outstanding event. Yesterday’s luncheon with Forbes drew a crowd of about 200 people, making this the third major fundraiser for them this year. For years, the Polk County GOP laid dormant, and it’s great to see the enthusiasm that has returned under the leadership of Chairman John Bloom, Co-Chair Will Rogers, and Darrell Kearney as Finance Director.

“This insensitive and crass opinion by an Iowan Congressman does not reflect the views of hardworking people of Eastern Iowa.  Not only is the suggested mosque tactless, it is offensive to those families whose loved ones died in those horrible terrorist attacks,” said Nick Ryan, a spokesman for the American Future Fund. “Braley’s extreme views clearly are not in-line with Iowa values, and he is out-of-touch with the American People.  It is obvious that as DCCC Vice Chair, Braley is too wrapped up in siding with Pelosi than doing what is right.”

The 30-second TV ad is currently running in the Cedar Rapids and Davenport media markets.

Any candidate who is considering a presidential run for the first time would gladly start off in double-digits in Iowa. However, Sarah Palin isn’t just another is a long list of potential presidential candidates.  She’s the former Vice Presidential nominee, a Fox News Contributor, and the darling of the Tea Party Movement in America.

Of all the potential 2012 presidential candidates, Palin might also be the best known. However, TheIowaRepublican.com poll shows that she would bring a considerable amount of baggage to the race.

Palin’s favorable/unfavorable numbers are toxic for any candidate, but especially so for a candidate who was on the national ticket less than four years ago.  Of all the politicians that were polled, Palin’s unfavorable numbers were the highest.  Only 37 percent of the Iowans polled had a favorable opinion of her, while 57 percent had an unfavorable opinion of the former Alaska governor.

Palin’s unfavorable number is six percent higher than Governor Chet Culver’s.  Culver, an incumbent Democrat, trails his Republican challenger Terry Branstad by 18 points.  Palin’s unfavorable numbers are also 11 points worse in Iowa than President Obama’s.

Making matter worse for Palin is that the poll shows that, of the 57 percent who have an unfavorable view of her, 41 percent of them strongly hold that position. The entire breakdown of her numbers is 16 percent strongly favorable, 21 percent somewhat favorable, 17 percent somewhat unfavorable, and 41 percent strongly unfavorable.

When compared to other potential 2012 Republican candidates, you can see just how much work Palin will have to do to be competitive in the Iowa.  Mike Huckabee, who won the Iowa Caucuses in 2008, has a 48 percent favorable and 26 percent unfavorable rating.  Mitt Romney, who finished second in Iowa, has a 44 percent favorable and 32 percent unfavorable rating.

The poll also discovered more bad news for Palin when it tested how some of the potential Republican candidates would fair against President Obama in a head-to-head match up.  In the generic head-to-head question, the Republican candidate beat President Obama 45 percent to 38 percent.  Out of the six candidates that were included in our head-to-head poll verses Obama, only two of them, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, came out on top.

In addition to Huckabee and Romney, the poll also tested Palin, Haley Barbour, Rick Santorum, and Tim Pawlenty.  Of the six, Palin performed the worst.  In a hypothetical matchup between Palin and Obama, Obama garnered 53 percent compared to Palin’s 36 percent.  It’s also important to note that President Obama only crossed the 50% threshold when he was matched up against Palin.

Palin’s troubles in Iowa can be attributed to a number of things.  The first of which is overexposure.  No matter what Palin does, it makes news.  One would be hard-pressed to find another political figure besides the President himself who is so closely scrutinized.  Living under that kind of microscope means that people know everything from who she is endorsing, to the never-ending saga of her daughter’s relationship with Levi Johnston.

She is also at a disadvantage when it comes to being perceived as a serious thinker on a number of issues.  Palin’s strength lies in her ability to communicate to everyday Americans, but the traditional news media is fixated on blowing any misstep she might make out of proportion.  Ever since being nominated by John McCain in 2008, Palin has failed to be convincing on a number of serious issues.

The other factor that may be at work here is the foul reaction that her endorsement of Terry Branstad received when she endorsed his campaign just days before the June 8th primary.  A number of Vander Plaats supporters thought that she went out of her way to get involved in the race, which has caused some hard feelings.  Still, while there are a number of vocal Vander Plaats supporters who are upset with her, it’s hard to believe that her poor numbers in Iowa can be solely attributed to them.

Palin’s poor numbers in Iowa create a serious obstacle for her if she wants to run for president.  If she wants to turn those numbers around and leave open the possibility of a 2012 run, she ought to give Iowa a try.  Iowans expect to see the candidates early and often, but Palin has basically ignored the home of the First-in-the-Nation Caucuses since the 2008 campaign ended.

Iowa is a state in which Palin will have to perform well if she runs for president.  Her common-sense conservative approach and her folksy style should play well here in Iowa.   Her brand of politics would also play well with likely caucus goers who tend to be strong social and fiscal conservatives.

The problem for Palin is that if she can’t make it here, she’s not going to make it anywhere.  With Newt Gingrich already performing better than her in the polls,  Palin needs to make a decision on 2012 sooner than later.  Even if she’s not sure what she wants to do, a swing through Iowa might not hurt and would allow her to keep her options open.

About the poll:

TheIowaRepublican.com commissioned the poll in conjunction with Concordia Group LLC, an Iowa based public affairs company.   The poll was conducted by Voter/Consumer Research, a highly respected polling firm based in Washington D.C.  All interviews were conducted via telephone with trained interviewers at Voter/Consumer Research’s phone center in Houston, Texas, between July 25th and July 28th.  All interviews were conducted via telephone with trained interviewers at Voter/Consumer Research’s phone center in Houston, Texas, between July 25th and July 28th. The poll has a sample size of 500, and a margin of error of 4.39%. For further details click here.

Photo by Dave Davidson

When asked for his thoughts on the mosque, Braley said, “Well, there are a couple of thoughts.  One is that local zoning decisions are made locally.  Just as Iowans don’t want people from outside of Iowa telling them how to make zoning decisions, this is an decision that the people of New York are going to have to deal with.”

“The other one is that we have always been a country that has been based and founded on religious diversity.  So, these are delicate issues because they are the types of issues that people are really passionate about, and at the same time, it’s our religious diversity that has made this country great,” Braley added.

When asked directly whether or not there should be a mosque built at Ground Zero.  Braley said, “Well, I don’t know what you are talking about, because Ground Zero is a very specific area.  The mosque you are talking about is in the general area of Ground Zero.”

When pressed further, Braley said, “Well, I can tell you that people should be promoting religious worship as a place where people can get their spiritual needs met, and that’s a local zoning issues.”  He added, “It bothers me when people make statements that are outrageous and inconsistent with our American values, but those are also issues that come up all over, and it’s part of our religious diversity.”

Hundreds of New Yorkers protested the proposed $100 million mosque yesterday.  One of them, Herb London of the Hudson Institute, disagrees with Braley’s notion that the Ground Zero mosque is simply a zoning issue.

London told TheIowaRepublican.com, “The mosque issue is most certainly not merely a zoning issue.  It is a symbolic matter of having a mosque two blocks from the hallowed ground, where 3000 New Yorkers lost their lives nine years ago.”

London also took issue with Braley’s argument that the proposed Ground Zero mosque should be allowed because of religious freedom.

“No one I know is opposed to another mosque, in fact there are 31 in NYC alone.    The issue is location and the adamant view of the progenitors that it must be this site.  By any stretch, this unwillingness to compromise is a sign of provocation, and if Sunday’s rally is any indication, New Yorkers are united in opposition, despite the sentiments of the mayor and the Community Board,” London added.

The religious freedom that Braley so proudly defends has nothing to do with freedom at all.  Instead, what people like Braley and Pelosi support is a dangerous form of religious appeasement.  America is at war with radical Islam, yet people like Congressman Braley and Speaker Pelosi are not even suspicious of, or willing to question those who want to build the Ground Zero mosque.

Earlier this month, London wrote an article that should make every American suspicious of the proposed mosque.  London wrote, “In the case of the downtown mosque, several questions remain unanswered.  If a mosque can be built anywhere, why is it being constructed adjacent to the former World Trade Center?  Although denials abound, the title of the mosque, Cordoba House, reveals a great deal.  In Cordoba, Muslims built a mosque on a Catholic church as a symbol of their triumph in Spain.  That symbolism may be evident at the New York site as well.”

London also included a statement on religious freedom that Congressman Braley would be well served to understand and adopt. “Freedom of religion, like any freedom, is not absolute; freedom is defined by limitations. Indians are not free to use peyote indiscriminately in religious services as drug use violates the law of the land.  And religion that promotes hate, or is an incitement to violence, should be, and can be, curbed.”

Braley’s position on the mosque mirrors that of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and pits him against Democrats like Nevada Senator Harry Reid and Governor David Paterson of New York, who both feel that building a mosque at Ground Zero is completely insensitive.  This is just another sad example of how Bruce Braley is out of step with his constituents and a majority of Americans.