Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Read an excerpt from Grover G. Norquist and John R. Lott Jr.'s new book -- 'Debacle'
Fox News ^ | March 15, 2012 | John R. Lott Jr. and Grover G. Norquist Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/15/read-e

Posted on 03/18/2012 8:15:49 PM PDT by richardb72

Editor's note: FoxNews.com is pleased to present an excerpt from "Debacle: Obama's War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future " the new book by Grover G. Norquist and FoxNews.com contributor John R. Lott Jr.

Chapter 3: The Stimulus Made Things Worse What Was Promised

Matt Lauer: At some point will you say, “Wait a minute, we’ve spent this amount of money. We’re not seeing the results. We’ve got to change course dramatically?” . . .

President Obama: Look, I’m at the start of my administration . . . And . . . and, you know, a year from now, I think people . . . are gonna see that . . . we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still gonna be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s gonna be a one-term proposition. —Interview on NBC’s Today Show, February 2, 2009

The overall impact on jobs saved or created is just about what was predicted. —Austan Goolsbee, the head of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, December 3, 2010

Even before the 2010 midterm elections, with Democrats controlling massive supermajorities in both the House and Senate, President Obama had passed five stimulus and jobs bills. If you add up the promises, he boldly promised well over 5.5 million jobs “created or saved.” But reality turned out very differently: There were 2 million fewer people working in September 2011 than when Obama took office. On top of that, population growth by itself should have generated more than 3 million new jobs. . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: acorn; austangoolsbee; banglist; congress; corruption; economy; elections; govtabuse; grovernorquist; johnlott; mediabias; norquist; obama; statesrights; stimulus; taxes; teaparty; unemployment
Great new book. Systematically goes through and shows how the Obama Stimulus and economic policies made the economy worse.
1 posted on 03/18/2012 8:16:05 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: richardb72

Some reader reviews of the book are available here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1118186176/ref=nosim/?tag=johnrlotttrip-20


2 posted on 03/18/2012 8:23:58 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

The book’s introduction starts off with a great story on Obama’s views on gun control.


3 posted on 03/18/2012 8:28:29 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

I cannot stomach Grover Norquist. Between his love for Islam and his advocacy for illegal alien amnesty and anchor babies, I don’t care what else he has to say.


4 posted on 03/18/2012 8:28:39 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813

montag813, I have looked through this book and the word Islam is not mentioned once. As far as illegal aliens go, I also don’t think that you know what you are talking about. Take some of Lott’s writings on the topic:

President Obama, You’re Not Fooling All of Us On Immigration
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/09/02/john-lott-illegal-immigration-obama-border-fence-joe-arpaio-arizona-law/

Illegal Alien Legal Challenge
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/06/02/john-lott-illegal-aliens/

You don’t need to read the book to evaluate that your claims are misleading and false. Point to one thing that is objectionable in either of those two articles written well before this book was written.


5 posted on 03/18/2012 8:34:22 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: richardb72
You don’t need to read the book to evaluate that your claims are misleading and false. Point to one thing that is objectionable in either of those two articles written well before this book was written.

Grover Norquist says ending birthright citizenship equals a tax increase

CPAC’s Grover Norquist Joins Obama Push For Illegal Alien Amnesty

A Troubling Influence (Grover Norquist's Islamist Connections

Grover Norquist’s New Muslim Protégé

Frank Gaffney on Grover Norquist and the Muslim Brotherhood

Go shovel it somewhere else, bub.

6 posted on 03/18/2012 9:10:42 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: montag813

Note that none of these posts are direct statements by Norquist. These places take very short quotes and take them out of context. Provide us with complete quotes in context.

On illegal aliens, I gave you complete articles written by Lott. Again, provide one single example in these complete articles that you find objectionable. Can you provide one such example?

Again, there is not one mention in the book on Islam and I bet you can’t find anything objectionable on illegal aliens there either.


7 posted on 03/18/2012 9:21:43 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: montag813

Note you didn’t respond to either of the links that I provided you. I have responded to your links. On that note, one further example. What is the deal with David Ramadan? So what if he strongly opposes ethanol subsidies? Shouldn’t Coburn? This is typical of the very thin attacks on Norquist. Ramadan is a conservative Republican Muslim. All of his public statements support the Constitution. The piece gets upset because he doesn’t have discussions in his campaign literature about muslim dictatorships. Is this serious? The guy was running for a state House district in Virginia. What does that have to do with foreign policy? You cite this article. Explain why this type of piece is relevant towards anything.


8 posted on 03/18/2012 9:28:52 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

How many times will fellow Freepers post items from Grover G. Norquist as though he is a reputable, reliable source?

Norquist is the enemy within.

Grover may understand economics, and that is fine.

However, he also is too cozy with the Islamic infiltrators into our culture.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/grover_norquists_jihad.html

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/02/25/cpac-shills-for-islamic-terrorists/

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/03/pamela-geller-american-thinker-grover-norquists-jihad.html

http://1389blog.com/category/politics/clinton/

It is akin to being a buddy with Adolph Hitler in 1933.

In my view, Lott was a fool to permit Norquist to hide behind his skirts in this fashion, thereby lending undeserved credibility to this cunning enabler of soft-jihad.


9 posted on 03/18/2012 9:34:25 PM PDT by man_in_tx (Blowback: Faithfully farting towards Mecca five times daily!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

Here is some info on Ramadan:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/dhimmitude_north_american_style/


10 posted on 03/18/2012 9:36:57 PM PDT by man_in_tx (Blowback: Faithfully farting towards Mecca five times daily!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: man_in_tx

man_in_tx, my point to you is the same. You have a few malcontents who either have no quotes or few word quotes that are taken out of context for Norquist. Neither of you can provide complete quotes. So Norquist tries to get Muslim Americans to take free market positions? That is bad? Are there groups of Americans that we shouldn’t try to educate on different issues?

Again, the book doesn’t mention the terms “Islam” or “Muslim” or any other related word. You guys strike me as racist by citing articles that attack Norquist for mentioning trying to get Muslims to take free market views.

I see no responses to the points on illegal aliens.

If you can’t point to any direct evidence on your claims and you can’t point to anything in the book that backs up the positions you claim Norquist takes, I find these postings pathetic.


11 posted on 03/18/2012 9:42:56 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

Take your muslim/sharia/islam loving crap to some other site. Grover Norquist.......founder of the islamic institute.....married to a muslim....agenda setter, policy maker, lobbyist, and overall heavy hitter for the American based 1930 Nazi Bund style muslim terrorist front group C.A.I.R. You muslim lovers like Norquist make me ill.


12 posted on 03/18/2012 9:47:17 PM PDT by bobby.223 (Retired high up in the mountains of the American Redoubt and it doesn't get any better than that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: man_in_tx

man_in_tx, this is a good example of how stupid these attacks are. Here is a candidate for the Virginia state legislature who doesn’t think that the government should be able to determine whether different religions can build a house of worship. This Virginia state legislative candidate is being asked about whether he thinks that a Mosque can be built shouldn’t be determined based on the religion. If you are going to ban a Mosque, then you have to ban all houses of worship in that place. This is a legal discussion. This isn’t even a question of whether one likes Muslims. I personally didn’t want a Mosque built near the WTC in NYC, but there is a danger if you have a government discriminate against different religions.


13 posted on 03/18/2012 9:54:07 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: bobby.223

bobby.223, provide one piece of evidence even in these partial out of context quotes that supports your claim that Norquist wants sharia law in the US. Just one source!

These attacks are ignorant. Just absolutely bizarre conspiracy theory attacks based on partial out of context quotes or no quotes.

Since several of these posts deal with Norquist’s connections with a Ramadan, a state legislative candidate in Virginia, I am happy to deal with this. Besides the fact that Ramadan doesn’t think that the Constitution allows you to treat different religions differently, and that is used to slime Norquist, what else do you have? Don’t just link to these pieces without even apparently reading them.


14 posted on 03/18/2012 10:01:43 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: richardb72
Grover Norquist was on the Islamic payroll before and after the carnage of September 11. Gaffney revealed Norquist's close ties to Abdurahman Alamoudi, who is now serving twenty-three years in prison for financing jihad activity. In 2000, Alamoudi said at a rally, "I have been labeled by the media in New York to be a supporter of Hamas. Anybody support Hamas here? ... Hear that, Bill Clinton? We are all supporters of Hamas. I wished they added that I am also a supporter of Hezb'allah." Alamoudi was at that time head of the now-defunct "moderate" group known as American Muslim Council (AMC), and he was active in other Muslim groups in the U.S. that showed sympathy to or support for jihadists. And Alamoudi, according to Gaffney, gave $50,000 to the lobbying group Janus-Merritt Strategies, which Norquist co-founded.

Seems clear enough to me. Only an idiot or an Islamist could argue with that.

15 posted on 03/18/2012 10:44:45 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: richardb72
President Obama: Look, I’m at the start of my administration . . . And . . . and, you know, a year from now, I think people . . . are gonna see that . . . we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still gonna be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s gonna be a one-term proposition. —Interview on NBC’s Today Show, February 2, 2009

*******

Let's face it: Obama and his staff have proven over and over during these past 3 years that they are in way over their heads when it comes to running the economy and the federal government.

President Obama may make wonderful speeches, but when it comes to running the economy and the federal government, he and his staff have no idea what they are doing.

For instance, they don't seem to have any idea how to solve this high gas mess that is strangling the everyday lives of average income Americans.

So I say this: It is time to cut our losses and give somebody else a chance. It is time we voted for someone else come election day Nov. 2012.

I don't think that a new president come election day Nov. 2012 could do any worse with the economy than President Learning-On-the-Job Obama has done with the economy over these past 3 years.

16 posted on 03/18/2012 11:09:11 PM PDT by john mirse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

TigersEye, I suggest that you buy yourself some glasses. The Islamic Free Market Institute is not the same thing as the Islamic Institute. The first was indeed founded by Grover Norquist, the second wasn’t. Just try googling “Islamic Institute” and you will find a lot of institutes with that name. Abdurahman Alamoudi may have given a check to the Islamic Institute, but that is not the same thing. Do you realize how many jumps in logic that you have to make to argue that this connection is what you claim that it is? Suppose the bank doesn’t mind that the name on the check doesn’t match the name of the institute, suppose that this check is real, suppose that it was actually given for the reason that you claim and not some other reason (you provide no evidence on this), do you really think that most people would get bought off for these two $10,000 checks?


17 posted on 03/18/2012 11:51:35 PM PDT by richardb72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

Thanks for confirming that you’re an apologist for Islamists.


18 posted on 03/18/2012 11:56:32 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: richardb72
Do you realize how many jumps in logic that you have to make to argue that this connection is what you claim that it is?

Not near as large of a leap as attributing any of that article to me. I made no claims. Nor was there any mention of The Islamic Free Market Institute or the Islamic Institute in the excerpt I posted. Apparently honesty is not in your playbook. Are you a Muslim?

19 posted on 03/19/2012 12:01:57 AM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: richardb72
Great new book. Systematically goes through and shows how the Obama Stimulus and economic policies made the economy worse.

The Obama stimulus was started by the previous administration.

20 posted on 03/19/2012 12:12:37 AM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

Muzzie loving Norquist can go F himself.


21 posted on 03/19/2012 12:23:58 AM PDT by metesky (Brethren, leave us go amongst them! - Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond, The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, abbreviated ARRA (Pub.L. 111-5) and commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, is an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009 and signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Barack Obama.

House of Representatives
On January 28, 2009, the House passed the bill by a 244-188 vote. All but 11 Democrats voted for the bill, and 177 Republicans voted against it.
February 10, the Senate voted 61-37 (with one not voting)All the Democrats voted in favor, but only three Republicans voted in favor (Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter), with Specter later switching to the Democratic party. At one point, the Senate bill stood at $838 billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009


22 posted on 03/19/2012 1:12:34 AM PDT by anglian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

Grover Norquist’s Strange Alliance With Radical Islam
The New Republic ^ | November 11, 2001 | Franklin Foer
http://www.thenewrepublic.com/111201/foer111201.html

GROVER NORQUIST’S STRANGE ALLIANCE WITH RADICAL ISLAM.
Fevered Pitch
by Franklin Foer

Post date 11.01.01 | Issue date 11.12.01

On the afternoon of September 26, George W. Bush gathered 15 prominent Muslim- and Arab-Americans at the White House. With cameras rolling, the president proclaimed that “the teachings of Islam are teachings of peace and good.” It was a critically important moment, a statement to the world that America’s Muslim leaders unambiguously reject the terror committed in Islam’s name.

Unfortunately, many of the leaders present hadn’t unambiguously rejected it. To the president’s left sat Dr. Yahya Basha, president of the American Muslim Council, an organization whose leaders have repeatedly called Hamas “freedom fighters.” Also in attendance was Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, who on the afternoon of September 11 told a Los Angeles public radio audience that “we should put the State of Israel on the suspect list.” And sitting right next to President Bush was Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Islamic Society of North America, who last fall told a Washington crowd chanting pro-Hezbollah slogans, “America has to learn if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come.” Days later, after a conservative activist confronted Karl Rove with dossiers about some of Bush’s new friends, Rove replied, according to the activist, “I wish I had known before the event took place.”

If the administration was caught unaware, it may be because they placed their trust in one of the right’s most influential activists: Grover Norquist. As president of Americans for Tax Reform, Norquist is best known for his tireless crusades against big government. But one of Norquist’s lesser-known projects over the last few years has been bringing American Muslims into the Republican Party. And, as he usually does, Norquist has succeeded. According to several sources, Norquist helped orchestrate various post-September 11 events that brought together Muslim leaders and administration officials. “He worked with Muslim leaders to engineer [Bush]’s prominent visit to the Mosque,” says the Arab-American pollster John Zogby, referring to the president’s September 17 trip to the Islamic Center of Washington. Says Zogby, who counts Norquist among his clients, “Absolutely, he’s central to the White House outreach.” Indeed, when Jewish activists and terrorism experts complained about the Muslim invitees to Adam Goldman, who works in the White House public liaison’s office, Goldman replied that Norquist had vouched for them. (Goldman denies this, but two separate sources say they heard him say it.) “Just like [administration officials] ask my advice on inviting religious figures to the White House,” says Paul Weyrich, another top conservative activist, “they rely on Grover’s help [with Muslims].”

Norquist denies being involved in “micromanaging the specifics” of White House meetings, but admits “I have been a long time advocate of outreach to the Muslim community.” In fact, the record suggests that he has spent quite a lot of time promoting people openly sympathetic to Islamist terrorists. And it’s starting to cause him problems. Weyrich, echoing other movement conservatives, says he is “not pleased” with Norquist’s activity. According to one intelligence official who recently left the government, a number of counterterrorism agents at the FBI and CIA are “pissed as hell about the situation [in the White House] and pissed as hell about Grover.” They should be. While nobody suggests that Norquist himself is soft on terrorism, his lobbying has helped provide radical Islamic groups—and their causes—a degree of legitimacy and access they assuredly do not deserve.

Norquist is one of the undisputed masters of Republican coalition building. And so it is no surprise that he has turned his attention to America’s fast-growing Muslim population, which by some accounts now stands at seven million strong. (Although two other recent reports suggest it is less than three million.) “He’s worked with [Rabbi Daniel] Lapin to bring Jews into the fold,” says one Norquist associate. “That was an uphill effort. So he figured that he could turn Muslims into the obvious counterweight to the relationship between the Jews and Dems.” In the last few years, Norquist has pursued a Republican-Muslim alliance with a two-track approach. With conservatives, he has emphasized that Muslims are a good demographic fit for the GOP: well-off and socially conservative. “American Muslims look like members of the Christian Coalition,” he wrote in The American Spectator this summer. To Muslims, he has promised a sympathetic hearing for their causes. He has pushed Republican leaders to support a prohibition on the government’s use of “secret evidence” in the deportation of suspected terrorists—an issue that jibes with Norquist’s own anti-government agenda. And he has intimated that Muslim support for Republicans could change U.S. policy toward the Middle East. Appearing on a panel at a 1999 meeting of the American Muslim Alliance, alongside activists who complained about the “Zionist lobby” and Jewish “monopolizing” of Jerusalem, Norquist announced that “[t]oo many American politicians have been able to take their shots at Muslims and at Muslims countries.”

orquist has not undertaken this crusade alone. In the mid-1990s, he enlisted a partner, Khaled Saffuri, then working as a lobbyist and deputy director for the American Muslim Council (AMC). After receiving a master’s in management science, Saffuri came to Washington in 1987 and worked his way up through the city’s Arab-Muslim political apparatus, starting with a stint at the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. In 1998 he left the AMC to help Norquist found the Islamic Institute, an advocacy organization dedicated to promoting a conservative agenda that would appeal to Muslims. Saffuri served as executive director and Norquist as chairman of the board.

The Institute operated out of the headquarters of Americans for Tax Reform, from which it borrowed not just a fax machine and conference room, but an agenda. Soon the Institute was shilling for all of Norquist’s pet issues—a moratorium on Internet taxation, fast-track trade negotiation authority, and personal savings accounts. It even published a paper on the Koran’s compatibility with capitalism. “People should remember that Mohammed and his wife were businessmen,” Norquist notes. With the help of Saffuri, who brought ties to a vast network of activists, the Islamic Institute became a nerve center for Muslim lobbying in Washington. As Norquist puts it, “They gather at the Islamic Institute to plan and debrief, when they have meetings [with administration officials].”

Through the Islamic Institute, Norquist appears to have developed close relationships with a number of Muslim leaders. When I recently spoke to the Muslim Public Affairs Council’s Salam Al-Marayati, the man who fingered Israel as a potential sponsor of the World Trade Center attacks, he recited Norquist’s phone number from memory. When University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian e-mailed The Wall Street Journal in response to an op-ed that tied him to Islamic Jihad, he CC’d Norquist. Last year at its annual dinner, the AMC presented Norquist with an award for his service. As John Zogby told me, “[H]e’s played the role of interlocutor. With all respect, many of the leaders are immigrants and don’t have years and years of experience. Grover has filled that void.”

And he has done so to their mutual political benefit. During the 2000 campaign, Norquist urged Karl Rove to focus on the Muslim vote—pointing to, among other things, the thousands of Muslims in the key state of Michigan. By all appearances, the Bush campaign heeded Norquist’s advice. In an admirable departure from the usual Republican script, Bush frequently integrated mosques into his platitudes about churches and synagogues. In the second presidential debate, Bush vowed to repeal the use of secret evidence, just as Norquist had promised. Bush even named Saffuri as the campaign’s National Advisor on Arab and Muslim Affairs.

When Bush won, Norquist credited the Muslim strategy. “Bush’s talk about outreach and inclusion had extraordinary results—the Muslim community went 2-1 for Bill Clinton in 1996 and almost 8-1 for Bush in 2000,” he told The Washington Times. (That statistic is almost certainly untrue, and Bush actually lost Michigan, the state where Muslims are most heavily concentrated.) Or, as Norquist put it in the Spectator, “George W. Bush was elected President of the United States of America because of the Muslim vote.”

Norquist quickly set about turning that supposed electoral influence into legislative influence. One day after Bush’s inauguration, he and Saffuri arranged for Muslim leaders to meet Newt Gingrich and Congressman Tom Davis, head of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Soon Saffuri began regularly appearing at the White House, accompanying imams and heads of Islamic organizations to discuss the faith-based initiative and concerns about law enforcement persecution of Muslims. Suhail Khan, an administration adviser who helps plan Muslim outreach, once served on the Islamic Institute’s board. And at one of his regular Wednesday meetings, according to two witnesses, Norquist announced that he had lobbied to get Khan his White House post. On the afternoon of September 11, a group of Muslim leaders happened to have plans to meet the president in the West Wing to discuss their grievances with racial profiling and secret evidence. When they couldn’t enter the building, along with almost everyone else, they headed a few blocks uptown and reconvened—in the conference room of Norquist’s office.

ut the events of September 11 have cast some of Norquist’s relationships in a less flattering light. Consider first the history and recent statements of the American Muslim Council, the organization that presented Norquist with an achievement award, and whose officials attend Norquist-arranged meetings with the Republican hierarchy. In the 1990s it co-sponsored two conferences with the United Association for Studies and Research, which, according to The New York Times, a convicted Hamas operative named Mohammed Abdel-Hamid Salah in 1993 called “the political command” of Hamas in the United States. At a Washington rally last year, Abdurahman Alamoudi, Saffuri’s boss at the AMC, declared, “I have been labeled by the media in New York to be a supporter of Hamas. Anybody support Hamas here?...Hear that, Bill Clinton? We are all supporters of Hamas. I wished they added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah.” In press releases and forums, the AMC has defended the terrorist-harboring Sudanese government against charges that it massively violates human rights and condones slavery. As late as June of this year, the AMC put out a press release entitled “SLAVERY IN SUDAN IS A SHAM..”

The record of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)—which, like the AMC, sends members to meetings organized by Norquist and Saffuri—is no more encouraging. When interviewed by Salon’s Jake Tapper on September 26, CAIR Communication Director Ibrahim Hooper refused to condemn Osama bin Laden. CAIR founder Nihad Awad, who appeared with Bush at the Washington Islamic Center, has argued that “[t]here is ample evidence indicating that both the Mossad and the Egyptian Intelligence played a role in the [1993 World Trade Center] explosion.” And Siraj Wahaj, who has served as a CAIR board member, has been described by federal prosecutor Mary Jo White as a possible conspirator in the ‘93 bombing. As Harvard professor of Islamic studies Ali Asani has complained, “There is general concern among Muslim intellectuals about how not only CAIR but some of these other organizations are claiming to speak in the name of the Muslim community, and how they’re coming to be recognized by the government as spokespeople for the Muslim community in the U.S.”

nd Norquist hasn’t only developed close ties to American groups that apologize for terror. He has also flacked for at least one Middle Eastern autocracy: Qatar. Eager to improve relations with the United States, Qatar worked with Norquist and Saffuri to help portray itself as a liberal outpost in the Islamic world. In April, Saffuri sponsored the “First Annual Conference on Free Trade and Democracy” in the Qatari capital of Doha, for which the Islamic Institute received over $150,000 in payments from the Qatar Embassy’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs Account. (Saffuri says these were reimbursements for the travel expenses of congressional delegates.) A lobbyist at Norquist’s firm, Janus-Merritt, has solicited pro-Qatari op-eds from at least one conservative pundit. When the emir of Qatar came to Washington, Saffuri hosted a Capitol Hill luncheon in his honor. And just three weeks after September 11, Norquist wrote an op-ed in The Washington Times in which he claimed that “Qatar has taken great strides to enshrine values of universal suffrage, a free press, and human rights.” He continued, “[S]he really means it on being a reliable ally.”

Qatar may not be Iraq, but Norquist’s arguments are still laughable. Freedom House, which monitors religious liberty, rates Qatar “not free.” Among countries in the Middle East—a region hardly known for its liberalism—Qatar finished in the bottom half of a Heritage Foundation “Index of Economic Freedom.” Two days after Norquist’s op-ed, The Washington Post reported on Qatar’s refusal to support a widening of the war on terrorism to include Islamic Jihad, Hamas, or Hezbollah. And, just two weeks later, the foreign minister of Qatar—our “reliable ally”—announced that “[t]he attacks against Afghanistan are unacceptable and we have condemned them. It is our clear position.”

orquist’s new associations—particularly his links to groups like CAIR and the AMC—have not gone unnoticed in conservative ranks. Paul Weyrich says, “I have on at least one occasion [confronted him] and he assured me that he knew what he was doing and that I shouldn’t have any concerns.” Another conservative says he told Norquist about the two organizations’ statements on terrorism, but it didn’t make an impression. “We can’t knock it off; we want them on our own team,” Norquist replied.

Norquist’s relationships have even pitted him against the GOP leadership. After the Republican convention last year, he set up a lunch at the Capitol Hill Club for Republican Party chairman Jim Nicholson to plot strategy with Muslim leaders. But in the week before the event, angry Jewish groups provided the RNC with a set of damning quotes from representatives of CAIR, the AMC, and some of the other invited guests. When I asked Cliff May, who was the Republican National Committee’s communications director at the time, he confirmed the story. “I was approached and apprised of their backgrounds and told the chairman there’s reason to be concerned.” The event took place—Nicholson didn’t feel he could cancel it—but not as originally planned. As one RNC source explains it, Nicholson gave a “generic five-minute talk about lower taxes and less government and said thank you for your support and got the hell out.”

Since September, not surprisingly, conservatives once willing to overlook Norquist’s alliances have more aggressively aired their grievances. Consider William Murray, head of the Religious Freedom Coalition. He had considered Norquist a comrade, but now makes no secret of his displeasure. “Grover has a very liberated view of Islamic nations,” says Murray, somewhat hyperbolically. “So they behead people in the public square. He thinks that’s their business. Hey, it’s no big deal to have people beheaded for religious crimes.” Weyrich, too, has made his unhappiness a matter of public record: “I’m afraid Grover’s woefully naive.” Even Norquist’s weekly confab has become the scene of internecine fighting. At a session earlier this month, Frank Gaffney questioned the presence of terrorist sympathizers at the White House. Norquist exploded, accusing Gaffney of smearing Muslims. Later he choked up as he addressed the meeting and asked Gaffney to stand up and join him in condemning anti-Muslim bigotry. One conservative who witnessed Norquist’s tirade says, “His response is powered in part by a sense that this whole edifice he’s created is in danger of coming unraveled because of [these groups’] stated and abiding positions.”

When I visited Norquist, he was in a similarly embattled frame of mind. He asked me to turn off my tape recorder. Any quote I wanted to use, he told me, would require his approval. There were none of his usual passionate ideological perorations. He just sat in his chair, seething. “There are some people who spit on Muslims and wouldn’t like to see them have any role in American politics,” he told me in a near scream. Grover Norquist’s pursuit of the fabled Republican-Muslim alliance, it seems, will continue for a long time.

FRANKLIN FOER is an associate editor at TNR.


23 posted on 03/19/2012 1:51:58 AM PDT by RaceBannon (Romney would surrender to Islam as fast as Obama promotes it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

This is the kind of thing that is in John Lott’s wheelhouse and I look forward to reading it. He is a master with statistics.


24 posted on 03/19/2012 9:23:45 AM PDT by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: richardb72; RaceBannon; TigersEye

See posts 15 and 23 on this thread for your answer. They have put it down better than I ever could. You islam/muslim lovers are really something. When your muslim pals have you kneeling down, hands and feet bound, preparing to SAW off your head maybe you can just let ‘em know what a good pal they have in you. They might just change their minds, tell ‘em you know Grover Norquist!!!! Later muhammed, allah ackbar buddy!!! PS: don’t forget to pray 5 times today, (on a rug, facing east of course).


25 posted on 03/20/2012 3:40:00 PM PDT by bobby.223 (Retired high up in the mountains of the American Redoubt and it doesn't get any better than that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bobby.223

He completely destroyed his own credibility. It’s a troll.


26 posted on 03/20/2012 3:50:19 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

I agree with your troll assesment. Hmmmmm.....I wonder, do ‘some’ kind of trolls maybe wear diapers on their heads? Jump on their carpets to get down to the 7-11? Kneel on a rug to pray 5 times a day? Ya never know!!!


27 posted on 03/20/2012 4:14:46 PM PDT by bobby.223 (Retired high up in the mountains of the American Redoubt and it doesn't get any better than that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: richardb72

If you are trying to de-legitimize Ms Pamela Geller as a “malcontent,” then you are either truly ignorant (which I doubt), or, you may, in my view, perhaps, harbor some agenda to whitewash the deleterious influence of Islam in this country.

Ms Pamela Geller does her research and knows her stuff. I have heard her speak. No dummy, she. And she is no malcontent!

Congressman Frank Wolf published the following about your apparent idol, Mr Norquist:
http://wolf.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=34&parentid=6&sectiontree=6,34&itemid=1805

To try to characterize the issue as trying “to get Muslim Americans to take free market positions” is disingenuous, at best, and outright CAIR-type propaganda, at worst.

Wow! And THERE YOU GO, trying to smear me and/or Ms Geller as follows: “You guys strike me as racist by citing articles that attack Norquist for mentioning trying to get Muslims to take free market views.”

First, my objections have nothing to do with the “free market views” of anyone, Muslim, or otherwise.

Second, as you WELL know, Islam is NOT a race. As Muslims love to tout at every turn, Muslims come from virtually every ethnic group imaginable, including caucasians. Surely, you have heard of Albanians and Bosnians?

That’s the ticket: Smear anyone trying to call out Norquist with his unsavory ties to Jihadists, and you can count to three before someone rolls out the “r-word” to try to shut it down.

No, the issue is not race. The issue is RELIGION — and one religion in particular that espouses crushing all others in its path via jihad — whether hard jihad, of the type that al-Qaeda employs, or soft jihad, of the type that friends/associates of Norquist favor. Please do not tell us you do not know what the dream of worldwide caliphate entails.

Enough of your Dhimmi-friendly whitewash, please.


28 posted on 04/07/2012 12:53:41 PM PDT by man_in_tx (Blowback: Faithfully farting towards Mecca five times daily!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson