I think he’s wrong.  The following is my response (which was also posted on the source site).

Mr. Hayes’ well-thought-out legal argument against Terry Jones’ shenanigans decries politicians and other “clueless onlookers” for not realizing that “Koran” burning is NOT protected under the 1st Amendment.

But there is a flaw that Mr. Hayes did not acknowledge. The pursuit of a legal solution that would acknowledge Jones’ actions as knowingly incendiary to Muslims the world over is, in effect, formally labeling Islam as a “violent religion.” The bottom line is that it’s simply a PR debacle to travel down this road. It’s much easier to issue warnings and public denouncements of Jones’ proposed actions than to go on record saying that there is a disproportionately large number of Muslims in the world who readily (eagerly) engage in violent acts against “infidels” over things that most civilized people may find distasteful, but would ultimately handle in a non-violent manner.

I blame the media for even giving Jones a forum to stir this up to begin with. Tell me, Mr. Hayes, why should they not also be held responsible for their part in this manufactured crisis? Do they get to hide behind the 1st Amendment? It seems to me there is a slippery slope here…

On 9/11/2001 a group of radicalized Muslim men attacked and killed thousands of U.S. citizens.  These men were not following the teachings of Muhammad any more than Eric Rudolph was following the teachings of Jesus Christ when he was bombing abortion clinics.  To vilify an entire group of citizens based on the actions of a few crackpots is an extremely divisive, counterproductive, and even dangerous mentality.

It’s more than a little suspicious how plans for the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” had been in the works for quite a long time, but now that there is an election looming it has become a convenient rallying point for many in the Republican Party.  The “Ground Zero Mosque” is nothing more than a red herring intended “rally the base” ahead of the November election.  Sure – there is validity to the argument that says, “just because you have the RIGHT to do something, doesn’t mean what you want to do is necessarily a good idea.”  Maybe Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has the purest intentions for his “Islamic Community Center” as a place to promote tolerance and inclusion.  He and his followers are absolutely within their rights as Americans to worship as they choose.  The employment of discretion and sensitivity in how they exercise that right given the proximity to the WTC site is the only thing that can be possibly open for debate, and in the end that is a matter of personal beliefs and bias.  It is not an argument that can be won or lost, and it certainly isn’t something that should be such a focal point that it detracts from arguably more pressing issues we need to discuss this election season.

The “Ground Zero Mosque” argument is similar to Terry Jones’ “flock” in Gainesville wanting to burn copies of the Koran.  Yes – they have the right to do so… but it’s a really daft and juvenile stunt that only fans the flames of bigotry that we so desperately need to move beyond.  We’re AMERICA people… don’t allow the light we show the world to be given off by a pile of burning books or by the torches held aloft by a frenzied mob out on a witch hunt.

So, the average clunker transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.

They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that’s 224 million gallons / year.

That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.

5 million barrels of oil is about ¼ of one day’s US consumption.

And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $75/bbl.

So, we all contributed to spending $3 billion to save $350 million.

How good a deal was that ???

Amen, Brother Keyes!

Throughout President-Elect Obama’s campaign for the White House, he paid a good deal of lip service to being a unifying person who would “reach across the aisle” to bring people together in order to compromise and best resolve the seemingly insurmountable issues that confront our nation without the interference of “partisan politics.”

Wow - how refreshing that sounded… and the message caught fire - igniting one of the most impressive campaigns in American history.

But with Obama’s selection of Rahm Emanuel as Chief-of-Staff, the reality of the Obama Administration is coming into focus; it’s Barack’s way or no way.

For the uninitiated, Rahm Emanuel once stood up and pounded a steak knife into a table screaming “DEAD! DEAD! DEAD!” while rattling off names of Clinton foes following the 1996 campaign (source).  He sent a dead fish to a former colleague who had pissed him off.  I mean, there are crazy people in Congress (you could easily drop about any Ted Stevens reference here to prove that point), but Rahm takes it to a whole new Godfather-esque level.  This guy is just off.

Couple that powder-keg demeanor with the fact that Rahm ran Freddie Mac from 2000-2001 during a period of constant scandal regarding campaign contributions (source).  Oh, and he’s a product of the Chicago political establishment - which should raise a red flag or at least an eyebrow.

Beady-eyed, five-headed Liberal pundit Paul Begala described Emanuel as having “a big old pair of brass balls,” and that he is “just what the Democrats need to fight back.” (source).

Fight?  Wow - that seems like **gasp** more of the same!

That’s right - while disparaging the current Administration’s strong-arm politics, (and for good reason), the reality is that the next one will be just as bad… only the Obama Administration will be so far to the left that we’ll think LBJ  is back in the White House.

And to add insult to injury, now President-Elect Obama has decided to deride former First Lady Nancy Reagan by making an offhanded remark about her rumored consultation with “spiritual advisers.”  (source)  Nice work there Hussein - take a shot at arguably one of the greatest Presidents in history via a rumor involving his wife.

I guess the high ground is a bit much to expect from you, Mr. President-Elect… after all, you spent more money on negative ads than any candidate in history, (source) so why should we expect that you’d have a change of heart now that you are mere weeks away from moving in to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

Pass the Hopium - I need a fix…

I sure hope I’m wrong, but that happens so rarely…

In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

                                                                                                                                    - Karl Marx

The only good thing I see in this is something I just saw on one of the morning shows.  A reporter was commenting that an image of all the presidents was being displayed and Obama’s was added.  The reporter commented to a woman, “You know, 12 of those men owned slaves,”  to which the woman replied, “That stain is washed.”

Yes - we are on the precipice of electing this man to the Presidency.

I weep for America.