Bucking this trend of capitulation, Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (Florida Republican) responded with a vigorous defense of the Hogans' freedom of speech -- a freedom, she wrote, Jeb Bush and Co. were quick to forget -- advising CAIR that its "area of concern should not be focused on the statements of the Hogans, but rather upon the actions of many in your community who created these beliefs." This bold congresswoman (thankfully re-elected) was the GOP exception. The party line demanded the Hogans recant.
The couple refused to apologize for calling Islam "hateful and frightening." I can only say, bravo, Hogans.
Why? Having written thousands of words on Islam, I haven't used precisely the Hogans' language. I have used many other words to refute the comforting but untrue consensus that Islam has nothing to do with the generic "terrorism" that has reduced our liberties, and, by introducing fear into American life, diminished us as a people. I have used many other words to describe the appalling process of Islamization, whereby Europe, via Muslim immigration, is being transformed into an Islamic continent increasingly subject to sharia, the Islamic legal system antithetical to Western-style freedom of conscience and equality before the law, and to urge the United States to amend its immigration laws to prevent the same transformation from occurring here.
Is such analysis "bashing people," as Mel Martinez might say, or something to apologize for, as Jeb Bush might demand? Does ostracizing the Hogans render jihad and sharia, the signal points of contact between Islam and the West, not "frightening" and not "hateful"? Of course not. When the GOP renounced the gutsy Hogans for voicing their apprehensions about Islam it also renounced key teachings on freedom of speech (not to mention logic), and that's frightening and hateful in itself. To be sure, if the Hogans and Ginny Brown-Waite had agreed to mouth the mantra "Islam is peace," it would have made them good Republicans. But it would also have made them lousy in a foxhole.