Free Republic

Very important differentiation. The 'grassroots' being attached in S. 2128 are not political grassroots, but policy activist groups like NRA, Family Research Council, taxpayer groups and state think tanks. Go to the "member" section at LobbySense and look at all the groups that signed on. They put it very well that it is about fundamental first amendment rights ... like, speech, assembly, petitioning the government, etc.

Don't know how I miss this. The Senate, started by John McCain is - this week - about to place all kinds of restrictions on grassroots groups and think tanks.

All the information is at LobbySense.com, a new site run by Kerri Houston and Jason Wright.

We need to call our Senators now. LobbySense says this is going to be voted on THIS WEEK in the Senate.

David Keene has such great expertise on this issue and respect for the scholarly work of Steve Emerson that he doesn't know his name is not Terry. And that no one ever refers to Daniel Pipes as Dan.

David Keene's main goal in all of this is to make sure that the darts are all thrown at Grover Norquist, Suhail Khan, Ali Tulbah, or anyone who isn't him because of the big problems at CPAC with the bumper stickers and the bigoted statements made on the panels. Those problems started this whole discussion and he has slithered right out of that net by making it sound like Norquist, Khan and Tulbah have control over the Secret Service and the Oval Office.

Incidentally, My colleague was at Grover's meeting last week and said that Keene and Norquist seemed to be getting along fine. Probably because Norquist has refused to engage on the issue and have a public fight with Keene.

It is strange because at CPAC Frank Gaffney stated that "we should give up some of our liberties now rather than have to surrender them all at a later date." That doesn't seem to be Keene and Barr's position at all. Bob Barr has been a great leader on civil liberties - I wonder why Keene is keeping him quiet now.

My daughter was with YAF at CPAC, and she heard a number of rumors of problems there that happened internally. Sounds like David Keene want to make sure no one talks about those problems.

OK, back on the subject. I'd like to try to bring this thread back to facts. Not that there really have been any so far.

"Grover is with terrorist groups." OK, name one. Then when you're done, name where you got the information.

The Secret Service investigated him and he is in jail. No? hmmmm. Seems they would seeing he's at the White House all the time bringing terrorists past Karl Rove and the President, who seem, by implication, to be quite out to lunch.

The Treasury raided his operation and he is in jail. No? hmmm. Seems everyone thinks he is getting money from terrorists. Paul O'Neill used to have dinner at his house, you'd think he would have noticed something odd. Like Burkas hanging in the closet maybe.

I find this thread extremly distrurbing. Like him or not, here is a man who has done much to elect Bush 1 and Bush 2, more Congressmen and Senators than you can count - not to mention state legislators and governors, pushed tax cuts, pushed free trade, taken the unions on full force for stealing money out of members' paychecks, worked with Jews, Christian righters, Blacks, Hispanics, gays, pro-lifers, pro-choices, given support and money to state policy groups, flown all over the country to give speeches to anyone who asks - for FREE (yes, my group has benefited from that) and because he pulled Moslem voters into the fold BEFORE 9-11 and started a freemarket DOMESTIC Moselm operation, he must be terrorist.

Why? Because Gaffney who now has nothing to do now that we are in the midst of a pro-defense, pro-missile defense administration is attacking him. Why doesn't someone ask Gaffney why he has turned the Center for Security Policy into the Center for Moslem bashing and WHO FUNDS HIM?

I also wonder how many of you are public figures and would enjoy have your patriotism and idealogy smashed to ribbons after dedicating your life to this country and the conservative movement?

OK, back on the subject. I'd like to try to bring this thread back to facts. Not that there really have been any so far.

"Grover is with terrorist groups." OK, name one. Then when you're done, name where you got the information.

The Secret Service investigated him and he is in jail. No? hmmmm. Seems they would seeing he's at the White House all the time bringing terrorists past Karl Rove and the President, who seem, by implication, to be quite out to lunch.

The Treasury raided his operation and he is in jail. No? hmmm. Seems everyone thinks he is getting money from terrorists. Paul O'Neill used to have dinner at his house, you'd think he would have noticed something odd. Like Burkas hanging in the closet maybe.

I find this thread extremly distrurbing. Like him or not, here is a man who has done much to elect Bush 1 and Bush 2, more Congressmen and Senators than you can count - not to mention state legislators and governors, pushed tax cuts, pushed free trade, taken the unions on full force for stealing money out of members' paychecks, worked with Jews, Christian righters, Blacks, Hispanics, gays, pro-lifers, pro-choices, given support and money to state policy groups, flown all over the country to give speeches to anyone who asks - for FREE (yes, my group has benefited from that) and because he pulled Moslem voters into the fold BEFORE 9-11 and started a freemarket DOMESTIC Moselm operation, he must be terrorist.

Why? Because Gaffney who now has nothing to do now that we are in the midst of a pro-defense, pro-missile defense administration is attacking him. Why doesn't someone ask Gaffney why he has turned the Center for Security Policy into the Center for Moslem bashing and WHO FUNDS HIM?

I also wonder how many of you are public figures and would enjoy have your patriotism and idealogy smashed to ribbons after dedicating your life to this country and the conservative movement?

It seems to me that Gafney is the only one bickering. I haven't seen Grover airing any laundry publicly.

WHO IS WITH PRESIDENT BUSH?

Decidedly NOT Frank Gaffney.

Number one, has anyone ever seen one single shred of evidence, documents, etc. from any source whatsoever that anything that Gaffney alleges is true?

Number two, since when did we cease to be a country started because of, based on, and dedicated to religious freedom.

Sam's a bad guy because he's a Jew. I don't think so. Ed's a bad guy because he's Catholic. I don't think so. Mary is suspect because she is a Methodist. I don't think so.

Abdul is suspect because he is Muslem. Okay.

Moral relativism has no place in the tenets of America's religious freedom.

it seems to me that it would be a good idea to get some facts straight. I heard Gaffney's comments at CPAC and I thought it was awful. He claimed that some guy at the White House shouldn't be in the White House just because he is a moslem. That is not just a shot at the guy, its a shot at the President. The left is always going after Grover making up stories that he hangs out with bad moslems just because they can. Why are so many conservatives feeding that frenzy, I don't know. People need to realize that not all moslems are Islamic extremists, and shouldn't be treated as if they were.

As for Grover, whether I agree or disagree, I admire what he is trying to do. He is taking the position that we shouldn't have hatred or bias towards people because of their religion and because some evil people performed evil in its name. It is a hard, politically incorrect thing to do. It's easy for people like Gaffney to call everyone a wahabi without even thinking about it, its much harder to defend the unpopular, even in a country created for purposes of religious liberty.

And he does not date a moslem. He has been dating a person in the movement for many years whose name most of you would recognize.