What's offensive about Tolliver's comment is that he assumed Ellison is not qualified to serve because of his religion, not because of Ellison's personal views or positions with respect to gay rights.
Sorta like proclaiming that Kennedy wasn't qualified for President because he was Catholic and would take orders from the Pope.
I think there has been somewhat more piling onto my TBR buddy Jazzhead than is actually warranted--at least, from what I can see on this particular thread.
However, I would point out to Jazzhead that if the thread's headline is correct--and it seems to be correct--then Tolliver was thrown out of the DNC Chairmanship race, not for being bigoted against Ellison, but primarily for stirring up a fracas with Ellison as a way of telling the
truth about Islam--i.e., about the
real Islam, the Islam of the
Koran.I would next declare that, although Tolliver was rather clumsy in his approach, he was correct. Real Muslims, the kind who really believe the Koran--not like our occasionally American brand of MINOs (Muslims-in-name-only)--should be disqualified from office (by a thoughtful, informed public, at least) as necessarily unable to take the Oath of Office of loyalty to the U.S. Constitution. By extension, Radicals like Ellison (and yes, he is a real Radical) should be disqualified by the DNC from the DNC Chairmanship--which is what Tolliver was saying sort of
under his breath.
***
Ah, but the DNC wants Radicals like Ellison in its Party leadership. The DNC is only pretending to be deeply concerned about Ellison's religious rights. The truth is, the DNC is doing what CAIR always does: the DNC is playing a shell game that nets out as
protecting Radical Islam, which is a
politico-military entity that the Global Socialists want to exploit, under the phony cover of
religious freedom, against our free, sovereign Republic. And it is pretty easy to see that Ellison is part of
Radical Islam--the crypto-Communist branch thereof, oddly enough. (See Trevor Loudon's recent elucidation of the details about Ellison in his recent movie release.)
Notice that I am sort of taking issue with Jazzhead's comment that Ellison should not be disqualified because of his religion. I am saying Ellison should be disqualified because of his necessarily anti-American political position--which hides behind a shield of religious protection. (The concerns about JFK as a Romanist were nothing after all, by the way. Like most RCs in America, even those of JFK's era, JFK was pro-American. Ellison, on the other hand, is pro-Koran and pro-Farrakhan--and these "pros" are, sociopolitically speaking, radically
anti-American.)
