Wednesday, March 4, 2015

The Daily Kos Reaction to THE SPEECH (Part Deux)

Michael L.

bibiI was going to move on, but this is too much fun to let pass so easily.

I think that I want to start, this morning, with the piece written by fladem entited, Bibi: I am over Israel.

Basically the piece, such as it is, can be summed up by these words:
"Israel wants my son to fight in their war.   Fuck them."
My, my.  Benjamin Netanyahu seems to have irked some people, just a tad.

I find it interesting that while no country has ever sent "flesh and blood to fight by its side," as Bob Dylan memorably put it in "Neighborhood Bully," there are many millions of people who seem to think that Israel is responsible for dragging other countries, such as the United States, into war.

It's one of those things that reveals the racist nature of many in the West when they pontificate about the Jewish State of Israel.

The Left, for the most part, is responding to Netanyahu's speech as if it was a call to war.

It wasn't.

He even addressed that issue preemptively in the speech, itself.  Netanyahu said:
Now we are being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war.  That's just not true.  The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal.
The reason that so many "Kossacks," such as the genius above, think that Netanyahu called for war when he precisely did no such thing, is because that is what they want to believe.  When most of these people think about Israel or Netanyahu, they are not thinking about the actual country, nor the actual man.  Instead they are addressing the malicious fantasy that they have created within their own minds grounded in hostile anti-Israel / anti-Jewish propaganda.

Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one man
His enemies say he's on their land
They got him outnumbered about a million to one
He got no place to escape to, no place to run
He's the neighborhood bully.

All Netanyahu wants - and he was exceedingly clear on this - is that Iran reform itself before it be allowed into the nuclear club.  That's it.  That's all.  Sanctions should not be lifted unless, or until, Iran ceases aggressions against its neighbors, ceases supporting terrorism abroad and ceases calling for the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel.

Is that honestly too much to ask?  And this makes Netanyahu a "warmonger"?  I don't think so.  They are not addressing anything that he actually said.  All they are doing is spewing hatred toward Israel, toward Netanyahu, and thus, inevitably, toward Jews, in general... which eventually contributes to the kinds of joyous little moments that we've been seeing recently in Europe to cries of "Alahu Akbar" and the rat-tat-tat of automatic gunfire.

Let's take a gander, shall we?

If you do a keyword search you will see that the word "war" comes up, presently, 105 times in a diary with a respectable 150 comments.

Most of those comments suggest that either Israel or Benjamin Netanyahu want war - apparently for no reason whatsoever - whereas they, being good people, want peace.  Israel and Netanyahu represent bad people who wish to visit suffering on others, while they represent the good people who would not hurt a fly.

Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep
He's the neighborhood bully.

Karl Rover suggests that the United States has "no common cause with the war-crazed prime minister and his toadies."

txdoubledd helpfully reminds us that Netanyahu is a "liar" and that "Israel needs us we do not need them."  What a deeply compassionate and progressive point of view.  By the way, they keep calling Netanyahu a liar and, yet, almost never actually tell us just what it is that he is lying about.

If Netanyahu is a liar then just what, exactly, is the lie?

Heart of the Rockies progressively notes that Netanyahu needs "a big slap in the face, metaphorically speaking. Leave the war mongers their on their own."

Whereas nosleep4u is content to call Netanyahu a "warmonger" merely once, Waryliberal trots out the warmonger charge four times in a single comment.

Good for her!  That's telling him what's what.

Meanwhile jayden thinks that Netanyahu is a "war-mongering liar" and the moderate noofsh merely thinks that he has a "warmongering policy."

And, as always, not everyone over there is entirely clueless on this subject:
I can't wait (0+ / 0-)

to make friends with a country that give the death penalty to the gays.  I mean, we're not friends with enough countries like that already.  That liberals are calling for it is completely nauseating.

by leftynyc on Wed Mar 04, 2015 at 05:03:22 AM PST
Nauseating it is, indeed... as I can attest to on pretty much a daily basis.

Now, jasan, is mighty pissed-off.  All that asking-for-a-better-deal-stuff really got his gander, which is why he decided to go the "fucking war criminal" route.  He writes, "Ask them exactly what boots on the fucking ground means to them and if they are willing to do Israel's bidding.   Lets just see how many will take up the cause with their own kids and kin tossed into the cannon fodder."

If you change the word "Israel's" to the word "Jews'" - and if you put your ear to the ground and listen with the right kind of ears - you can practically hear the echos from eighty years ago in Germany.

A number of people, including bruddaone, want the US to abandon Israel entirely. "Yea, fuck Israel...but most importantly stop the aid to Israel, and let them truly go it alone...."

Meanwhile cybrestrike drags out the apartheid slander.

The brooklynbadboy thinks that the neocons - those wraith-like demons from the recent past - are preparing a major comeback.  Just why he thinks this is rather hard to say, but there it is, pixelated in black and white.

However, raptavio, reasonable as ever, says that he will continue to support Israel, but on condition that Israelis reject Netanyahu at the polls.

Anyway, this little exercise is losing its charm, but I think that it exposes something deep within the progressive-left psyche in regards Israel, Israelis, Netanyahu, and the Jews.

So many of these comments are just soo over-the-top that there is nothing within The Speech, itself, to explain it.

The last thing that the speech was, was a call to war.  Netanyahu is not seeking for the United States to institute a draft or wage war against Iran, for chrissake.  Netanyahu is trying to do whatever he can do to see to it that Iran, as it is currently constituted - as an Islamist state - never gets the bomb.

What he suggests is that there should be no sunset clause on sanctions until Iran ceases its imperial projects in places like Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and even Iraq.

The deal as it stands, if the terms that we know of are accurate, is a betrayal of Obama's promise to make sure that Iran does not gain a nuclear bomb.  

I am sorry if this is inconvenient for Obama supporters or Israel Haters, but Benjamin Netanyahu has responsibilities that transcend currying favor with misty-eyed western progressives who will despise the man no matter what he does or does not do, if for no other reason but that he is the leader of Likud.

It was a good speech, powerfully delivered, with exceedingly important points that needed to be made.

The sheer unbridled rage that it elicited from the base of the Democratic party is a disgrace and tells us much more about them than it does about either Israel or Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Netanyahu may be no Churchill, but I bet Churchill would have approved of the speech.

What has he done to wear so many scars ?
Does he change the course of rivers ? Does he pollute the moon and stars ?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill
Running out the clock, time standing still
Neighborhood bully.

It should also be understood, of course, that Netanyahu is no pacifist, either.

If the current US government is content with an Iranian nuclear bomb sometime in the not too distant future - sometime not long after United States President Barack Obama leaves office - then it might be that Israel will have to do the West's dirty work for it, even while enduring their self-righteous condemnations.

This, by the way, received one of the bigger standing ovations of the morning:
I can guarantee you this, the days when the Jewish people remain passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those... days... are... over.
Indeed, they are. 


  1. The shear unbridled rage that it elicited from the base of the Democratic party

    Think this is an overstatement, not to mention it should be "sheer." Most of these screamers are progressives more than Democrats, just as most Democratic legislators were in attendance.

    I guess one can say anything about the "Neighborhood Bully" so long as the projection says "Israel" rather than Israel's Jews.

    1. I despise homophones.

      I am a homophonaphobe.

      In any case, do you think that I am overstating?

      I am very much looking forward to seeing whatever polling data this might generate.

      And just how many congress critters boycotted?

      Do we have hard numbers, yet

    2. When it comes to using the people at Daily Kos as representative of the Democratic base, yes, I think you are overstating.

      Most Democrats do not have such rage as these progressives, who are consumed with a hatred for Israel, the US, and the West unlike they have for actual human rights abusers and authoritarians.

    3. As you know, I take dkos, the Huff Post, and the Guardian as collectively representative of the western Left.

      Do you think that I am mistaken to do so?

      Or do you think that the western left does not represent the base of the Democratic party?

    4. DSKF (Daily Storm Kos Front), Huff & Puff, Guardian are truly represenative of the LEFT. The Democratic party has been on a rightward shift. As such, the places you mention are what the BASE WANTS for the democratic party!

    5. Absolutely.

      What the base wants for the Democratic party is the type of ideology represented by places like dkos among others.

      But they do represent the activist base of the party and that is precisely my point.

      They do not represent the party as a whole, but they do represent the grassroots / netroots, i.e., the base.

    6. Actually, I don't think they do, although they may have disproportionate influence due to their obsessions and the loud voices they use.

      Does Red State represent the base of Republicans?

    7. That's a terrific question.

      I don't know, exactly, and I suppose it depends upon how we define "base."

      If by "base" we mean those individuals who are ideologically committed to the fundamentals of the party platform, as they understand it, and are willing to advance those principles in the public sphere then, yeah, Red State represents the ideological base of the Republican party.

      Just as the Democrats are not limited to their base, so neither are the Republicans.

      But the base is the base and they're always going to be more radicalized, on both ends, than the rest.

      What are your misgivings?

    8. The Democrats play at populism, but the progressive base has generally never had much say when it counts. Though unfortunately, it looks like the one area the 'progressive' activist types are actually somewhat influencing the 'serious people' of the party is in anti-Israel activism. Though my hope is that will end, or at least cool off a bit, after the Obama administration.

      By world standards, the Democratic Party isn't really all that 'left' for the leading left-wing party in a Western democracy, correct?

      The Republican Party doesn't generally portray itself as a populist party, though their populist activist base in the form of Tea Party types actually does exercise a decent amount of power, at least in party primaries, much more so than progressives are able to do in the Democratic Party.

      But ultimately both the 'progressives' of the Democratic base and the Tea Party types of the Republican base are generally manipulated by, and used for the ends of, the traditional powers of both parties.

      Which sucks for those of us like myself who favor things like a universal single-payer healthcare system, but I suppose is ultimately a good thing in the end, as long as that comes along with not living under a government that swings back and forth every few years between banning abortions and forcing Christian prayer in schools, or threatening Israel and seeking to overturn the Second Amendment, etc, based upon who's in office at any given time.

    9. I would say that, aside from my general misgivings that corporations and banks still have more power than they should, that we're not doing anywhere near enough to get ready for a post-cheap energy world, and that, economically speaking, we're still a far too unequal nation (feelings of mine with which I accept that reasonable people can disagree), we've at least arrived at a pretty reasonable place to maintain general political and social stability.

      I don't see much need for radicals to influence much on either end of the political debate in 2015 America, so the dynamic I note above, I see as a good thing.

  2. 'The Toadies' had a few cool songs back in the 90s. If 3rd Bass rapper Pete Nice, who called himself the Prime Minister, tagged up with them, that would be a damned great band name.

    'The Prime Minister and His Toadies.'

    There's gotta be a band named 'Warmonger' out there somewhere, no? Probably some kind of death metal outfit, I'd guess.

  3. By the way, one of the things that West fails to understand about Israel is there is widespread sense in that country - if I am not terribly mistaken - that the government has a moral imperative to see to it that Iran, as an Islamist regime, never get a nuclear bomb.

    The West might not care, but the Netanyahu government understands that a Jihadi Bomb means the end of Jewish self-determination and Jewish self-defense; that is, the termination of Zionism.

    If Zionism means anything it means that no longer will Jews live and die according to the whims of others.

    An Iranian bomb means that an overtly hostile and theocratically apocalyptic government gets to decide.

    It is a foolish risk and one that we simply don't have to take.

  4. OT - From Haaretz:

    " It's true that Saudia Arabia has never called for the annihilation of Israel, but Iran has also never said that it intends to destroy Israel - it relates to Israel as an entity that should not exist."

    Which makes all the difference, apparently.

    1. The Ayatollah has also never explicitly said the words, "We intend to build nuclear weapons which we will fire at Israel in an attempt to destroy the country and to commit genocide," in that very exact order, so why is everybody all up in arms, and reading things into their intentions that they have not said?!


    2. It must have something to do with 'Islamophobia!'

  5. Boy, here's another 'cute' and 'original' 'cartoon.'

    To be honest, though, I think some of them would secretly love a President Bibi. It would give them an opportunity to scream about Teh Joooz all day every day, and claim it's only legitimate political protest.

    Can you imagine the shit they'd come out with if we ever actually did elect a Jewish president from either party?

    1. Well, it's never going to happen for one thing. Never. Not ever. And the cartoon is what Jon Stewart said yesterday "It was the speech they delivered by the candidate they wish was theirs."

    2. Michael Douglas played one in one of my favorite movies. Though I suppose his character, Andrew Shepherd, was pretty WASPy...

    3. That cartoon could have been done by the Nazis.

    4. All that's missing is the giant nose. But that oversight is corrected down in the comments:

      Bibi's nose (6+ / 0-)

      is growing longer.

      The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. - MLK Jr.

      by Quabbin on Wed Mar 04, 2015 at 03:08:38 PM PST

      In that context the quote from Dr. King could not be less appropriate.

    5. I was initially inclined to believe this comment was mocking sarcasm, but based upon this same poster's later comments throughout that thread, I'm now pretty sure he or she is actually serious -

      "If Bibi becomes President, we'll all be forced (0+ / 0-)
      to be Jews.

      Just like if Romney had become President in 2012, we'd all be Mormons now.

      The Republican voters who did not threaten to shut down the DHS but who remained in the fray, are guilty of aiding and abetting.

      by Proginoskes on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 12:33:55 AM PST

      Nothing is really out of bounds at that place anymore, is it?

    6. "Just like if Romney had become President in 2012, we'd all be Mormons now" reads like sarcasm to me.

    7. I thought so, too, until I read the rest of their comments in the thread. In particular, the one where they buy and repeat the silly claim that Mossad 'debunked' the fact that Iran is building nuclear weapons. There was no sarcasm whatsoever in that comment of theirs.

    8. Unless, of course, it's somebody sorta reverse trolling and posting outrageous mockery to make them look bad, but I'm really not sure it's possible to go 'too far' there anymore, short of cross-posting actual Stormfront links and content from David Duke and whatnot.

  6. LOL at this comment
    any anti-semitic antics by GOP leaders are (0+ / 0-)

    welcome to be posted at www.the

    by HarryParatestis on Wed Mar 04, 2015 at 07:49:20 PM EST


    Care to guess where the same antics by the DNC can be posted? LOL

  7. "It should also be understood, of course, that Netanyahu is no pacifist, either."

    By coincidence, neither are the commenters at Daily Kos. They are happy to see Hamas fire rockets into Israel and Palestinian terrorism against Israeli Jews generally. They're as pacifist as they are progressive which is to say they are neither. Every one of them needs to be drafted and have their asses kicked by a sadistic drill sergeant.

  8. In the four and a half days (East Coast USA time) of March, there have so far been 51 diaries posted on Israel at Daily Kos.

    I've only looked at three, I think, but I can't imagine too many (or any) of them have nice things to say.

    1. But you are missing a real whopper

      Jay you are remembered in the comments

      I liked the fact they linked to your last diary there. I LOVED IT!
      I also saw people admitted to vandalizing the tags on your diary, but am sure nothing happened to them as you quite nicely summed up elfling

    2. Heh, everybody loves good ole' Jay.

      I could have left a little more... articulately. But of course, I no longer cared by that point, and just wanted to sign off with a 'fuck you, and have a bad day.'

    3. 51 diaries? Crap, those morans are obsessed. That is truly sick. Surely not even the Nazis had that kind of output.

    4. And, of course, my ten or so last diaries before that were like fly strips for angry antisemites, which exposed at least a dozen or more bigots in all kinds of ways.

      But I was the problem, and not the fanatical antisemites that I refused to ignore, or 'accept' as part of a big tent, or whatever.

      Well, okay then!

  9. Vic Rosenthal has another terrific piece up at the Elder's joint.

    Yes, it was a historic speech.

  10. Who did not attend:

    Sen. Al Franken (D., Minn.)
    Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.)
    Sen. Martin Heinrich (D., N.M.)
    Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.)
    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.)
    Sen. Brian Schatz (D., Hawaii)
    Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.)

    Rep. Karen Bass (D., Calif.)
    Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D., Ore.)
    Rep. Corrine Brown (D., Fla.)
    Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D., N.C.)
    Rep. André Carson (D., Ind.)
    Rep. Joaquin Castro (D., Texas)
    Rep. Katherine Clark (D., Mass.)
    Rep. Lois Capps (D., Calif.)
    Rep. Lacy Clay (D., Mo.)
    Rep. James Clyburn (D., S.C.)
    Rep. Steve Cohen (D., Tenn.)
    Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D., N.J.)
    Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.)
    Rep. Danny K. Davis (D., Ill.)
    Rep. Peter DeFazio (D., Ore.)
    Rep. Diana DeGette (D., Colo.)
    Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D., Texas)
    Rep. Donna Edwards (D., Md.)
    Rep. Keith Ellison (D., Minn.)
    Rep. Chaka Fattah (D., Pa.)
    Rep. Martha Fudge (D., Ohio)
    Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D., Ariz.)
    Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D., Ill.)
    Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D., D.C.)
    Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D., Texas)
    Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D., Ohio)
    Rep. Barbara Lee (D., Calif)
    Rep. John Lewis (D., Ga.)
    Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D., Calif.)
    Rep. Betty McCollum (D., Minn.)
    Rep. Jim McDermott (D., Wash.)
    Rep. Jim McGovern (D., Mass.)
    Rep. Jerry McNerney (D., Calif.)
    Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., N.Y.)
    Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D., Texas)
    Rep. Chellie Pingree (D., Maine)
    Rep. David E. Price (D., N.C.)
    Rep. Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.)
    Rep. Cedric Richmond (D., La.)
    Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D., Ill.)
    Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.)
    Rep. John Yarmouth (D., Ky.)

    1. Franken tops the list, eh?


    2. Keith Ellison didn't attend.
      My heart is broken. ;-D

  11. I been waiting forever for a movie about Israel with "Neighborhood Bully" as the soundtrack.

  12. Oh, yea Jay you get mentioned often whenever they need a Joo Boogeyman your name comes up. It is funny in a silly way.

    1. I won't be truly fulfilled until somebody there claims that I am Ron Dermer!