[montag813]

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.

[richardb72]

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.

[richardb72]

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.