White House Pushes Back On Report That Rahm Was Skeptical Of Obama's Mosque Endorsement

The White House is pushing back against reports that the president's closest confidants, namely Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, were skeptical of Obama's decision to support the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" in his initial statement on the matter last Friday.

The New York Daily News reported on Wednesday that Obama went ahead with his endorsement despite a lack of consensus among "top political advisers" as to whether it would be wise. "Emanuel," the paper reported, "was one of the skeptics."

Asked for a response, White House spokesperson Jen Psaki stressed that no one on the president's team tried to dissuade him from backing the Islamic cultural center. She emphasized that it was Obama's decision to make the remarks and everyone recognized that he had to weigh in on the debate.

"The president understood the charged political climate surrounding this issue, but felt he had a responsibility to speak to it," said Psaki. "His advisers appreciated that, and there was no effort to dissuade him."

The intrigue over what prompted the president to endorse the project has been spurred mainly by the fact that Obama tempered his support in a follow-up statement the next day. By not commenting on the "wisdom" of building a Islamic cultural center close to Ground Zero (but, merely, acknowledging the right to do so) the administration invited the speculation that it was divided on the matter.

That Emanuel would emerge in reports as a chief skeptic only fueled interest. It was during the heat of the health care debate, after all, that Emanuel was pinpointed as the adviser who, at the beginning of the debate, urged the president to tackle legislation incrementally. Those stories helped frame the chief of staff as the wise pragmatist of health care reform (except that the White House ended up succeeding in getting a more comprehensive package). It also sparked a week's worth of speculation that his office was strategically leaking information to the press.

Comments

[ReedYoung]

11:52 PM on 08/21/2010

The meme "that Obama tempered his support in a follow-up statement the next day" is not a fact, Sam.

Think about it. A *right* means anybody's else's opinion of "the wisdom" of doing it IS IRRELEVANT. That's why the President didn't comment on it. Put your thinking cap on before you write your next column.

[eztempo]

11:59 AM on 08/19/2010

Not surprising that Rahm Emanuel would be the Chief Weasel in this debate. It's the role he plays most of the time, isn't it?

[Ucan2]

11:48 AM on 08/19/2010

Yellow journalism

1.the type of journalism that relies on sensationalism and lurid exaggeration to attract readers

2.Yellow journalism or the yellow press is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers. Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism.

3.Inflammatory, irresponsible reporting by newspapers. The phrase arose during the 1890s, when some American newspapers, particularly those run by William Randolph Hearst, worked to incite hatred of Spain, thereby contributing to the start of the Spanish-American War. Newspapers that practice yellow journalism are called yellow press.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

[Woodmist]

09:42 AM on 08/19/2010

What? Endorsement? Does someone at the Daily News just make stuff up? I think so. My word, the man can't say a word without some tool deciding it meant something else. We have serious issues in this nation yet what we're all flogged with daily is this kind of nonsense. None of it that matters in the daily life of most Americans. For those that find these silly things disturb their lives, well, they need to find another outlet. Gah.

[DemCentrist]

11:39 AM on 08/19/2010

When you stand hand in hand with NY politicians, leaders of the Muslim community and call a press conference.......IT'S AN ENDORSEMENT.

[USNDC]

09:37 AM on 08/19/2010

Rahm Emanuel would abandon his mother for a perceived political advantage ... just like he abandoned his Jewish heritage over the ground zero mosque issue ... and now he's trying to find some cover.

The administration is treacherous.

[Firbolg]

09:30 AM on 08/19/2010

I’m sure everyone in the White House, Congress, big business and the Military are fully behind all the remarks, contradictory or otherwise, about Cordoba House.
Aided by the MSM, they have thoughtfully provided this distraction to keep us entertained while they, as always, are working steadfastly on the real issues behind the scenes and will soon solve all our worries as has always happened in the past.
We are the luckiest people on the planet to have such caring overlords who, despite all being more secure and more comfortably off than most of us common people, are constantly looking out for us. God bless them, one and all.

[lohu]

09:32 AM on 08/19/2010

So we are getting like Venezuela or Cuba?

[Firbolg]

01:39 PM on 08/19/2010

Nothing so contemporary.
More like the Roman Empire under Constantine after he merged with Christianity.

[Pema]

09:27 AM on 08/19/2010

attention huffington post it is not a ground zero mosque, stop listing it as such journalistic crediblity is not by imitating the new york post!

[justalurker]

09:20 AM on 08/19/2010

There was never any endorsement. Pointing out facts ( constitution protects property rights and freedom of religion) is not an endorsement. Later, bringing up the wisdom of the choice and not commenting about the wisdom is also not an endorsement.

Duh....

[DemCentrist]

11:39 AM on 08/19/2010

When you stand hand in hand with NY politicians, leaders of the Muslim community and call a press conference.......IT'S AN ENDORSEMENT.

[justalurker]

07:00 PM on 08/19/2010

Here are the quotes at the White House iftar dinner friday night that I could find from the NYTimes:

“as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”

“I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,”

“This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

I find no endorsement and see nothing to disagree with here. Do you disagree with any of it?

At best, I see a carefully worded statement noting that the Muslims proposing the new mosque (with the approval of local political and religious leaders) are within their constitutional rights.

The main thing Obama was doing was UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTION in this matter.
Do you have a problem with the constitution?

The next day, on the fly, he noted that he wouldn't comment "on the wisdom" of the location decision. This is a clever way of noting that he did NOT ENDORSE or ENDORSE the current location plans, he merely pointed out what the constitution guarantees.

If Republicans want to trash the constitution in the name of fear, they can and already have (Patriot Acts I and II). But I won't be a party to it.

[lstl4]

09:14 AM on 08/19/2010

I am sick and tired of the news media saying that Obama backed away from his first statement. He very clearly stated that he was simply speaking to the 1st amendment and not to the wisdom of it. This does not mean that he agreed or disagreed with the building of the mosque. I am also sick to death of these sorry democrats who continually try to distance themselves from the President during this next election. I hope they lose because of it. Reid really makes me sick--I dont like him, but he beats the alternative. I am glad he isnt my state rep.

[LosingLiberty]

09:23 AM on 08/19/2010

Agreed, Angle is a complete nut-job.

[wizzardly]

09:14 AM on 08/19/2010

Obama is a big FAIL. He is for everything America is against.

[PeterGSW]

08:52 AM on 08/19/2010

This is not a story, folks. Move along.

[oregonrain]

05:24 PM on 08/24/2010

Agreed !

[DaddyDayCare]

08:24 AM on 08/19/2010

Yeah, I'm still trying to figure why Obama didn't stand buy his original comments. I wish these guys cared more about principle then the mid-term elections -

[Supersteel]

08:32 AM on 08/19/2010

Your second statement answers your first :P

It's politics.
According to a new TIME poll, 61% of respondents oppose the construction of the Park51/Cordoba House project, compared to 26% who support it. More than 70% concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2011799,00.html#ixzz0x3RVFMgs


That's all. No one wants to be fully out there on an issue that has no political benefit for them, even if the position is the correct one

[DaddyDayCare]

09:02 AM on 08/19/2010

wow! that's some scary stuff. thanks for the info.

[LosingLiberty]

09:15 AM on 08/19/2010

What none of the polls seem to ask though is how much people care. Ranking the importance of this issue would go a long way into prioritizing the main campaign issues this fall and might start to diffuse this craziness.
In the 90's the issue of flag burning and a constitutional amendment to ban it came up. something like 70% opposed it but when asked to what extent, it was discovered to be of trivial importance to most voters.

[Supersteel]

08:14 AM on 08/19/2010

Of course they were. Their job is to look at things politically, and with polls showing 70% of peopel against this, or close to it, and Obama's personal approval rating fairly low, politically speaking only, the last thing they'd want in an election year is to have the president take a stand on this issue.

Im sure there were those arguing agaisnt it, and I'm sure Rahm has been doing damage control with angry democrats in close elections.


Doesn't mean he shouldn't have said it but sure, those whose job it is to think about the political ramifications would not be happy.

[mom792]

08:41 AM on 08/19/2010

Don't just throw out the " 70% against" figure. Dig, research who did the poll! And is it only one poll?
90% of my parent's senior facility would be against this mosque...90% of them think they are the next target. Where does this statistic come from?
I'm a former New Yorker who was horrified at this disaster, but I still believe the Muslim community has the right to expand the mosque there.

[Supersteel]

08:48 AM on 08/19/2010

One was time magazine


According to a new TIME poll, 61% of respondents oppose the construction of the Park51/Cordoba House project, compared to 26% who support it. More than 70% concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2011799,00.html#ixzz0x3RVFMgs

Sienna college-limited to NYS voters


Opposition to the Ground Zero mosque has crept up to 63 percent among state voters, as more New Yorkers choose sides in the debate, according to a Siena Research Institute poll released yesterday.

A similar survey two weeks ago found 61 percent oppose the proposed project, known as Park51 two blocks from the World Trade Center site. Support for the project was at 22 percent, compared to 21 percent in the Aug. 5 poll.



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/more_losing_faith_in_project_poll_Rm6uYQHbWcabrlwXd2WpfM#ixzz0x3V0GVhG


CNN
The CNN/Opinion Research survey showed that 68 percent oppose the plan to build the mosque, compared to 29 percent who favor it.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/113747-poll-public-strongly-opposes-ground-zero-mosque-

I think it's pretty undisputed that, right or wrong, most people are agains it. and since most people are against it, while that doesn't impact their righjt to build it, it does impact politically, potentially, which is why this story is credible.

[janedorothy4]

08:11 AM on 08/19/2010

Does Rham Emmanuel disagree that anyone who questions where the mosque money comes from should be investigated as Nancy jetsetter in taxpayer funded jet Pelosi has asked for. Or doesnt it matter where the Imam who said Americans were accomplices to 9/11 gets his money.

[buckbanter44]

07:09 AM on 08/19/2010

It just makes sense that the WH would try to avoid a division over the mosque issue with elected democrats. What's so surprising?

[Supersteel]

08:29 AM on 08/19/2010

you can't criticize obama or his administration around some people. it has to be lies and a manufacured plot by the Rethugs (they will say Rethugs as if they are being clever).