Thursday, May 14, 2015

Happy Nakba Day!

Michael L.

jump for joy I love Nakba Day.

I understand that that many Arabs are not happy about the fact that the Jewish people escaped from the Islamic system that we call dhimmitude after thirteen centuries of second and third-class non-citizenship under Arab-Muslim imperial rule... but I could hardly be more pleased.

The Muslim Brotherhood is unhappy with Jewish liberation from Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

Hamas is unhappy with Jewish liberation from Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

The Islamic State is unhappy with Jewish liberation from Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

Islamic Jihad is unhappy with Jewish liberation from Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

Boko Haram is unhappy with Jewish liberation from Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

Speaking for myself, I could not be happier or more satisfied in the rightness and justice of the failure of Islamic rule over the Jews.

Nakba Day is one of my favorite holidays, but my favorite holidays are generally concerned with issues of liberation.  I love Thanksgiving, for example, because it represents the roots of the United States and, thus, the liberation of millions of people from European authoritarianism and monarchy.  I love Passover for much the same reason.  It represents the freedom of the Jewish people from persecution by non-Jews, which is why we drink our wine in a lounging position.

Slaves do not get to lounge.

The Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday in the United States serves much the same purpose for African-Americans.  It represents their ongoing efforts over centuries to free themselves first from slavery and then from Jim Crow and finally from de facto racism.

It is all about liberalism and freedom.

But Nakba Day is really something special.

It is the day that the Palestinian-Arab losers in their war against the Jews get to whine at one another - and everyone else - just how unfair it is that the Jews succeeded in freeing ourselves from their bigotry and persecution and domination over thirteen centuries since that Muhammad fellow started chopping off Jewish heads.

I think that we make a mistake when we merely leave it to the Palestinian-Arabs to celebrate the defeat of their aggression against us.

I think that we should embrace Nakba Day as a Jewish day of celebration, as well.

Our Arab brothers and sisters should not celebrate alone.  We should join them.

The question is, what form should Nakba Day take for the Jewish people?  I am thinking of a celebration along the lines of New Years Eve.  Lots of partying and fireworks and singing of joyous songs among friends.

What do you think?

Unfortunately, I will be on a plane heading home tomorrow and will miss out on most of the festivities.

I very much hope that you guys enjoy yourself and if you have any suggestions for how Nakba Day should be celebrated by Jews, please share.

Maybe by this time next year we can agree on the rituals of the holiday.

Perhaps falafel can be part of the traditional food-stuffs of Nakba Day for the Jewish people.

Peace to you, please, my friends.

123 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. We can organize Nakba Day celebrations and parties and all sorts of fun things!

      Delete
  2. I had sabich at Mama's in Center City yesterday. I'll retroactively dedicate it to Happy Nakba Day!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had a good laugh a couple of years ago in Israel, when Mordechai Kedar told me he had organised that year 'Arab apartheid day' at Bar Ilan university

    ReplyDelete
  4. And on a serious note, just imagine - they could be celebrating their 67th birthday this year, too, if only they were capable of living in peace next to Jews. There's your real 'nakba.'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And that Jay is one reason that I deny the "Nakba" as they mean it...

      Let me clarify though.. The Palestinian people (and I accept that there is indeed a Palestinian people) did suffer a "Nakba" (Catastrophe) in 1948-'49. But it was not caused by the Zionists. They suffered in having horrible leadership who convinced them that the other Arab Nations would "step up to the plate" for them and drive the Jews out of the Palestine Mandate and then give them a country. Of course, that proved false as Jordan and Egypt had absolutely no intention at all of giving them anything. How do we know that? Well Gaza, and the West Bank were not given to the Palestinians from 1948-67 now were they?

      But years of broken promises by their so-called "Allies" and corrupt and inept leadership have led to a Nakba for the Palestinian people who as you rightly point out, could have had their own State in 1947.

      Also, I would hardly call the founding of Israel a "Nakba" under any circumstances. In fact I would call it Bullshit that they claim that.

      Delete
    2. Leaving the question of "Palestinian" as a distinct ethnicity aside, agreed.

      Sooner or later we'll have that conversation, if you wish, VB.

      Delete
    3. Nah Mike... I don't want to have that conversation because like the "Obama supported the MB" you and I will never "see eye to eye" on it. Nothing you can say will convince me that the Palestinians are not a people. Absolutely Nothing. I have heard all the arguments for and against and I think the arguments for are more right.

      SO... rather than argue about something we won't possibly agree upon, I would rather find the the things we DO agree on and figure out what are the best ways to present those arguments to make for a better solution to the issues.

      Delete
    4. VB, can I assume that you've decided on this as a different way of approaching dialogue than in the past? You did say something like you wanted to change the manner in which you engaged in on-line debate.

      I respect that.

      The only thing that I would say is that we have these discussions not just to try to convince the other person, but to put out arguments and thoughts for the consideration of others, as well.

      But, you knew that.

      I will, however, ask you one question and leave it, between you and I, at that. You can make a statement, or not, but if you do, you have the last word in this thread on that topic.

      Here is the question:

      Do you argue in favor of the reality of "Palestinian" ethnic identity because you believe to argue otherwise is counterproductive from a tactical standpoint?

      Or,

      Do you argue in favor of the reality of "Palestinian" ethnic identity because you believe in its reality? Or, perhaps, in varying degrees, both?

      You can answer, of course, without elaborating and I will not ask you to.

      If you do not respond, I fully understand, as you will understand that I intend to continue to raise the issue, although not specifically with you in the future.

      Delete
    5. I do believe it is reality. It may not always have been so, but, I believe that it is now. I am convinced of it, and you know what... It doesn't really affect my view on the conflict at all. Anyway, I am sure you don't accept that, and that's ok with me. I am more interested as I said in approaching this from a results / positive orientation.

      As for changing dialogue.. Yeah. Being a "snarky know it all" is not a way to deal with people. I see it on DKos all the time and frankly lately it pisses me off. I think that more of an approach of "How would I talk to this person in real life" is better.

      The other thing is that I want to argue FOR something not against something. I think that is more important. I like to see what all sides are offering not just how bad one side is.

      So civility and positive arguments that is what I am hoping to get too.

      Delete
    6. "As for changing dialogue..."

      This strikes me as a very positive development.

      It is not as if either one of us have been saints, for chrissake.

      So, what do you want to argue for?

      Delete
    7. How does one define a Palestinian? What makes one Palestinian?

      Is it good enough to have been present in Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948?

      Yeah, they are a people, but how do they define themselves as such. Usually there are distinct cultural aspects, even though a people can form over self-determination. So what would a Palestinian say makes them a people?

      Delete
    8. School, this is an absolutely fascinating question and even Rashid Khalidi acknowledges the newness of Palestinian-Arab national identity, although he would source it ultimately to sometime around the turn into the twentieth century. Nonetheless, it is an historical fact that most of the Arabs who call themselves "Palestinian" did not think to do so until after the 6 Day War.

      I would say two additional things. Although I acknowledge Benedict Anderston's insight of nationalities as imaginary communities, it nonetheless remains the case that for a distinct nationality to be a distinct nationality it must have significant cultural differences from other communities. The fact of the matter is that the Palestinian-Arabs are, for the most part, culturally identical to the surrounding Arab world. They speak the same language as other Arabs. They share the same cuisine, with regional variations, with other Arabs. They share the same religion with other Arabs and customs and forms of dress. The Palestinian-Arabs do not represent a distinct ethnicity apart from the larger Arab world.

      Except in one significant way.

      They are the only subset of Arabs that came into being for the sole purpose of robbing Jewish people of self-determination and self-defense. To the extent that the "Palestinians" are a distinct people, it is only due to that one significant fact.

      And, my friends, as the very people that Palestinian nationalism is hostile towards, I see that we are under no ethical obligation to acknowledge them as a distinct nationality. Why should we acknowledge a people who came into being as a people for the purpose of harming the tiny and harassed Jewish nation?

      We owe them nothing.

      If they had been willing to share Jewish land with the Jewish people, I would feel different. But how many more decades will it take - and how many more dead - before we get it through our own thick skulls that this is not what they want.

      Delete
    9. "even Rashid Khalidi acknowledges the newness of Palestinian-Arab national identity, although he would source it ultimately to sometime around the turn into the twentieth century. "
      Well, shucks, I wonder what was going on at that time that would have that impact. Who was it that they were distinct from ? ;-)

      Delete
    10. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge the historical truth and claims that the fakestinians are a people rather than a population is either a traitor (if Jewish), or a Jew hater (if gentile), or a stupid moronic imbecile (if they really believe it to be true). Any person who isn't any of the above would be able to understand what a people is, what a population is, and the huge difference between those two. The fact that this so called "people" (that has been created in the late sixties with the help of the KGB) are recognized as a "people" by the international community does not make them a people.
      Furthermore, this fakestinian population is NOT indigenous to the land of Israel, even their name is stolen (the name of a people who has been obliterated by history - the Philistines who came from Greece, invaded the coast of Eretz Israel from Gaza to Ashdod, hence were called Pelishtim/invaders, then were expelled together with the Jews from Eretz Israel by the Babylonians, and never returned because unlike the Jews they had absolutely no roots and no connection with Eretz Israel). The claim that those Arabs who stole that name are in anyway the descendent's of the Philistines is the grossest historical fake in the whole history of humankind.
      Those Arabs - so called "palestinians" - have NOT been living in Eretz Israel for thousands of years. Some of them settled there during the Ottoman occupation, but the vast majority came to Eretz Israel from neighboring Arab countries and settled there during the British "mandate" after a few waves of Jewish aliah had made the Land of Israel flourish again.
      I totally agree with Mike L. The fakestinians have no language of their own, no culture of their own, no traditions of their own (excepting the intifadas). They are a population used as a tool to undermine and eventually destroy Israel. Their final goal is the final solution: the genocide and total ethnic cleansing of all the Israeli indigenous people - the Jews - from their ancestral land - Eretz Israel.

      Delete
    11. Arthur, welcome to Israel Thrives and thank you for reminding me that Nakba Day 2016 is only in a few days, the 15th of May.

      Nakba Day is one of my favorite holidays!

      Thank G-d for the Nakba, otherwise Jews in the Middle East would still be living with their heads under the Arab-Muslim boot.

      Delete
  5. There can be no justice no resolution w/o equal care being given to the 950,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab 'countries' during the same period. None. Sweep it off the table unless and until they're willing to deal with that. Two thousand six hundred years of history wiped out in a decade at gunpoint. Tens of billions of dollars in assets seized. The Arabs put up numbers that would make the SS wince. >99% reduction in Jewish population.

    So they want to talk tragedies? OK let's do that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fully agreed.

      And it also doesn't hurt to point out that the difference, of course, is that we took ours in, while they kept theirs in perpetual misery and statelessness for generations, to be used as human pawns forever.

      Delete
    2. I disagree Trudy....

      I don't think that is a winning argument. Why? Because the Palestinians argue (and rightly so) that they weren't the ones who tossed the Jews from their countries. In fact, this is an argument of the Pal. One State people. They advocate that the Arab nations do indeed offer Right of Return to the Jews.

      So let's say the Arab countries do something like that (which is as likely as say a snowball lasting more than 10 seconds in the Lake of Fire in Hell), then where is that argument. AND seeing the way the Arabs conduct politics, they might do something like that just too embarrass Israel.

      But in any case, that is an argument that Palestinian supporters make.

      No.... I think that what happened, happened. Israel took Jewish refugees in. The Arab nations, who preached a good game about their "Brothers and Sisters" totally screwed the pooch and left the Palestinians out in the cold so that they would have a weapon to use against Israel (and because they really don't actually like the Palestinians despite their rhetoric).

      And that is the real "Nakba" or Catastrophe about the whole thing - the Arabs hosed each other and then have successfully blamed the Jews for their completely screwing each other hard.

      Delete
    3. That's an interesting take I didn't consider.

      I would argue, though, that since the Arab countries fully completed their ethnic cleansing of Jews in direct response to Israeli military victories, the issue therefore cannot be logically or credibly separated. It's all part of the same conflict, regardless of whether the Palestinian-Arabs themselves had nothing to do with the expulsions of Jews from the Arab world.

      It's all part of the same issue and the same conflict.

      Delete
    4. I gotta disagree here Jay.

      Even though it is part of the same conflict it is not the same area nor the same people nor were there even similar conditions. The Jews in the Arab countries were not a "hostile population" that was taking pot shots at their government and were not actively engaged in military operations against the local regimes. Many Arab villages were staging grounds for just those operations against the Jews.

      But what happened, happened. I am not going to ask the Arabs for reparations because I don't want anything from them or to give them the chance to re-write history. The ethnic cleansing of the Arab world happened and that was in the past. I think it should be left in the past. Israel absorbed those folks, they are Israelis now and Israel is all the better for it. It is what it is.

      Delete
    5. No , the Palestinians didn't expel the Jews from Iraq or Egypt or Morocco, etc., but they did try to expel them from Israel. They were the Arabs who, even with lots of help from their Arab brethren (and the Brits), were unsuccessful at expelling Jews who unlike the Jews in those other places could actually defend themselves.
      I shall rejoice each and every Nakba Day until they come to their senses, which probably won't be any time soon.

      Delete
    6. I view it as part of cognitive warfare, Volley. I fully understand your take, and you've again made another excellent point re: conditions and hostile populations.

      I just don't think it's strategically sound to drop this aspect of the issue, thereby leaving the Palestinian-Arabs holding the sole 'victimhood' card.

      We need to point out that the number of refugees were ultimately similar, if even though for much different reasons, as well as point out how the contrast in how each was then treated by their own could not be more clear.

      Delete
    7. Ultimately what I mean to say is that it's not about reparations. It's about maintaining the moral high ground, or at least not ceding it without a fight.

      Delete
    8. I respect that Jay but I think you are potentially ceding the "moral high ground". See the Palestinian One Staters are more than happy to argue that Jews should have the Right of Return and Reparations to the Arab countries. They just want them the hell out of Israel. So when you make that argument, the One Staters just counter by saying "Hey, we agree and since we agree, shouldn't you agree with us" and just like that, you've lost the moral high ground.

      No... it's better to just say... Shit happens and it's how you deal with it that counts. And in that respect, Israel wins hands down.

      Delete
    9. Have to disagree.

      That would be true if I was arguing for "ROR" to Arab countries, or legitimizing the non-existent concept, but I am not.

      What I am insisting, rather, is that we need to place all aspects of the issue in context, and not allow the Palestinian-Arabs to claim hold of the victim card.

      Fully agreed with your last sentence. It's merely tactics and rhetoric where we disagree, which is fair enough.

      Delete
    10. Fair enough Jay.. I think though RoR to the Arab countries is where that argument ends.

      Anyway... it's all good.

      Delete
  6. "the Palestinian One Staters are more than happy to argue that Jews should have the Right of Return and Reparations to the Arab countries. "
    They are more than happy to argue all sorts of nutty things, and do. That doesn't mean we have to entertain such degrading and malicious ideas about the status of Jews. We're are not their toys and this is not a cartoon. Both history and the law are on Israel's side and it is past time we all began, especially the Israeli gov't., to assert that with prejudice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What if one were to stipulate that Palestinians can have a "right of return" to Bosnia, Sudan, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Arabia, etc. How does that sound?

      Delete
  7. volleyB you really miss the wider point. No Jews are returning to the Arab world. That's actually the point. Never. They got over it. You're suggesting the Jews be punished and hobbled BECAUSE they made of a go of their new lives.

    My ancestors were Russians. Before that they were probably in Belarus or Poland. Should I start firing anti tank missiles at Polish school buses until they give me the farm my g-g-g-g-g-g-g-grandfather worked on the shetl somewhere? Where do the peaceniks really want to reset the clock for the Jews? 1948? 1879? 1543? 1016? 586BCE? Tell us what YOU think is fair?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm sorry Trudy but who in the world are you talking too when you say:

    Where do the peaceniks really want to reset the clock for the Jews? 1948? 1879? 1543? 1016? 586BCE? Tell us what YOU think is fair?

    Do you even have any idea of what I believe? Because if you think I somehow want to "reset" the clock on the Jewish people you are sorely mistaken. ALSO, if you somehow think I want to "hobble" or "punish" the Jewish people you need to put the crack pipe down and seek help.

    My point exactly IS They (the Jews) got over it. You're suggesting the Jews be punished and hobbled BECAUSE they made of a go of their new lives..

    Seriously Trudy, you are arguing with the volleyboy1 that is in your head, because what you are saying here doesn't apply to me in any way, shape, or form.

    Now if you go back and actually read what I have written in this thread not what arguments you imagine I am making, you might actually find I agree with the point that the Jewish people and Israel HAVE DONE THE RIGHT THING HERE!!!

    Really Not that tough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And let me back up my point here Trudy... This is what I actually said (once in response to you... the first paragraph, and once in response to Jay the second quote):

      Quote #1: No.... I think that what happened, happened. Israel took Jewish refugees in. The Arab nations, who preached a good game about their "Brothers and Sisters" totally screwed the pooch and left the Palestinians out in the cold so that they would have a weapon to use against Israel (and because they really don't actually like the Palestinians despite their rhetoric).

      And that is the real "Nakba" or Catastrophe about the whole thing - the Arabs hosed each other and then have successfully blamed the Jews for their completely screwing each other hard.


      Quote #2: "But what happened, happened. I am not going to ask the Arabs for reparations because I don't want anything from them or to give them the chance to re-write history. The ethnic cleansing of the Arab world happened and that was in the past. I think it should be left in the past. Israel absorbed those folks, they are Israelis now and Israel is all the better for it. It is what it is."

      So... you were saying?

      Delete
    2. Trudy and VB,

      if I may interject.

      Having just scanned this thread it seems to me that you guys lost focus on Trudy's initial claim and VB's initial response. As I say, I just scanned the thread, so if I am wrong because I missed something key, please say the word. This is the essence of the argument as it began:

      Trudy - "There can be no justice no resolution w/o equal care being given to the 950,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab 'countries' during the same period."

      VB - "the Palestinians argue (and rightly so) that they weren't the ones who tossed the Jews from their countries"

      Jeff - "the Palestinians didn't expel the Jews from Iraq or Egypt or Morocco, etc., but they did try to expel them from Israel."

      Is that not a fair distillation of the root of this discussion?

      For my part, I would tend to disagree with Trudy if I thought for one moment that the Arabs had any intention of leaving the Jewish people in peace. Since it should be obvious by now that this is not going to happen then we must emphasize the extreme hypocrisy of western-left anti-Zionists who weep for Arab displacement during the '48 War, but who could not care less about the ethnic cleansing of the Jews throughout the Middle East.

      Anti-Zionist hypocrisy could hardly be more blatant. Something like 5.5 million dead in the Congo war? Nobody cared.

      The question between VB and Jeff goes to the question of Palestinian-Arab responsibility for their part in the broader Arab genocidal effort against the Jews directly after the Holocaust.

      The fact of the matter is that the Palestinian-Arabs were allied with Hitler.

      And, yet, we never mention it.

      I wonder why?

      Delete
    3. With all due respect Mike.. I think you missed my point completely.

      I was merely pointing out that as a tactic I don't think it is necessary to point out anything like that out. It's a non-starter. The Israelis absorbed the Mizrachim and that was that. The point about the Palestinians was merely a mention of their tactical argument. Not any over-arching point.

      IN FACT, I AGREE with Trudy when she says:

      No Jews are returning to the Arab world. That's actually the point. Never. They got over it.

      and... not only do I agree with her when she says that, but, I think it is much to Israel and the Jewish people's credit that they (we) were able to move on and make something productive happen.

      I don't know what the F--- she is talking about with the rest of that nonsense.

      So, Mike in essence... my point cannot be distilled down to what you are saying because what you highlight was not central to my point. It is just about a Tactical aside.

      Delete
    4. As I said above... There is no need to point anything like that out because it's an argument that eventually goes no where. I don't think we gain very much from using that argument. It's a discussion on tactics and that's all that I for one was dealing with.

      Israel did the right thing for the Jewish people and absorbed the Mizrachim after they were ethnically cleansed by the Arabs, as opposed to the Arabs who totally screwed their Palestinian Brothers.

      Nothing more complicated than that.

      Delete
    5. What can it be distilled to?

      What exactly is your central claim?

      Are you suggesting that from a tactical standpoint it is unhelpful to remind others of the ethnic cleansing of the Jews of the Middle East?

      Delete
    6. Pointing out the ethnic cleansing of the Jews of the Middle East is about historical memory and about making people understand that the other side are not comprised of innocent bunny rabbits.

      Delete
    7. No one ever said they were... Mike....

      You have been most welcoming and I appreciate that. BUT if you are not going to read my posts then I am going to respectfully cease commenting and talking with you. Why? Because there is no point to the exercise.

      You said:

      Pointing out the ethnic cleansing of the Jews of the Middle East is about historical memory and about making people understand that the other side are not comprised of innocent bunny rabbits.

      I agree... and I have been saying that I agree for a couple of days.

      I don't find anything wrong with pointing out that not only did the Arab Nations (for the most part) ethnically cleanse their Jewish population, but that Israel helped the Jewish people and did the right thing in taking in that population.

      All I find to be a tactical mistake is to insist that the we receive compensation and/or Right of Return to Arab nations. I am just saying we did the right thing by the Jews and now the Arabs need to do the right thing by the Palestinians.

      Anyway.. if we are going to have a conversation, I respectfully ask that you actually read what I write and if you can not or do not want to do that, then let's just leave it at that, and I will cease posting and that will be that.

      Delete
  9. Mike, with all due respect... Are you not reading my posts?

    Please read them.

    I think from a tactical point of view, it is not a necessary thing and I outlined my entire argument with Jay.

    But Mike, if you want to point it out, or if you think it is helpful.. Dynamite. Do so. I don't think people care one way or the other.

    IF I was going to do anything with that, I would spend my time pointing out that Israel and the Jewish people responded most positively to a bad situation while the Arabs "hosed" their brethren.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you think that not only is compensation not necessary (which I agree with you, btw), but you also think that the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish people from Arab lands is irrelevant to the larger conversation?

      And you pointed out your reasons to Jay...?

      This seems to be your primary response to Jay.

      Jay argued, correctly, that the ethnic cleansing of the Jews is part of the same ongoing conflict and you agreed.

      Your reasons for not caring about compensation are understood.

      Your reasons for not presenting the issue as part of the larger conversation are not.

      I would suggest that avoiding the question of Arab-Muslim ethnic cleansing of the Jews from Middle East is very similar to the disinclination to speak about the history of dhimmitude and the oppression of all non-Muslims under Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

      I just fail to understand the queasiness.

      Delete
    2. Ok...

      So you think that not only is compensation not necessary (which I agree with you, btw),

      Yes, that is right.

      and

      but you also think that the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish people from Arab lands is irrelevant to the larger conversation?

      No... that is not right. I think it is relevant, but only from the standpoint of pointing out that Israel and the Jewish people did the right thing and absorbed the refugees that were ethnically cleansed from the Arab nations.

      My "queasiness" (which is not really "queasiness") is regarding the argument about reparations. That's it. That's all. Nothing else.

      I have been trying to tell you that for a few posts. I laid out my argument to Jay on why we shouldn't make an argument for reparations or Right of Return. Nothing more, and nothing less.

      Now please read this as it is important and should put this silly conversation to an end.

      Trudy wrote: There can be no justice no resolution w/o equal care being given to the 950,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab 'countries' during the same period. None. Sweep it off the table unless and until they're willing to deal with that. Two thousand six hundred years of history wiped out in a decade at gunpoint. Tens of billions of dollars in assets seized.

      I took that to mean that she was talking about reparations or the world insisting on the same thing it insists regarding the (non-existent) Palestinian R.o.R.

      I was simply disputing that. That was all.

      Now I hope that puts this silliness "to bed" and we can move off of this.

      Delete
    3. I see.

      I did not think that Trudy was referring to reparations and that's where we got our wires crossed.

      I did read what you wrote, but with an eye to Trudy's initial comment, which did not make any reference to reparations, although it is not hard to see how one might get the implication that you drew.

      But you do agree that the ethnic-cleansing of something approaching one million Jews from their homes throughout the Middle East is relevant "but only from the standpoint of pointing out that Israel and the Jewish people did the right thing and absorbed the refugees that were ethnically cleansed from the Arab nations."

      I guess my question would be, why only from that standpoint?

      The fact of the matter - and I very much hope that you will agree with this statement - is that the Jewish minority in the Middle East has been the victim, over millennia, of a much larger hostile majority that now increasingly has the support of Europeans and Americans, most relevantly those on the Left. They ground their argument in ideas of social justice and human rights. They tend, more and more, to think of Jewish Israelis as villains and their welcoming of anti-Semitic anti-Zionists as part of the larger movement reflects this.

      What I would suggest is that we need to turn the tables of the discussion by turning to the history of the Jews of the Middle East, including the ethnic-cleansing of the Jewish people from that part of the world, so that people can hopefully avoid the Israeli cartoon villain of their imagination, which the Palestinian-Arabs and their allies do everything that they possibly can to promote.

      We must talk about the ethnic-cleansing of the Jews, just as we must talk about the fact that for thirteen centuries Jews under Arab-Muslim rule were often not allowed to ride horses, only mules; not allowed to rebuild synagogues; somtimes we were not even allowed to leave our homes during rain so that the clean streets of Baghdad or Amman or Cairo would not flow with our filth.

      Delete
    4. Ok.. fair enough and a much larger discussion but thank you for reading the conversation. I do appreciate that.

      I will concede that at this point the Left in the U.S. and Europe are leading the charge of anti-Semitism, though I think that it is still an issue for the Right, it's just that currently, I believe that right now, they hate the Jews less than they hate the Arabs. HOWEVER, I will also say that the European Hard Right, anti-immigrant movement is heavily invested with anti-Semites as well.

      That said... I don't think anything we argue about the Arab ethnic cleansing of the Jews (in a negative sense, or in the sense of saying "hey look what they did to us), except for pointing out that Israel did the right thing by taking in the Jews does us much good. Why? Because I don't think anyone in the world really gives a shit about what we went through. Just us, and then only some of us.

      That's the first thing. The second thing is as oldschool and others here have alluded too, it won't win any arguments with anyone outside of Conservatives because it is an East / West, "Mean White People vs. Poor Helpless Brown People" argument (which is totally nonsense, but I am just referring to perception, and not reality) and that gets "sucked up" by many peoples naivete. No matter what the truth of the matter may be, Israel is viewed as a "White people's colony" where the Palestinians are viewed as poor helpless bunnies being colonized. And nothing the "colonized" can do is or will be bad.

      The anti-Semites both on the Left AND the Right have been smart to play up that angle so that the Useful Idiots and their crew just huff along with the narrative. So, this East / West dichotomy has been sold and swallowed up "Hook, line, and sinker" by those who are both inclined towards anti-Semitism or simply idiocy.

      Mike, I just don't particularly focus on anyone's anti-Semitism because in some parts of the world (and very much the Christian world as well as the Muslim world) one is considered strange for NOT hating the Jews. It's all just the same old song and dance.

      The Arab nations treating the Jews badly? Ok, and in other news... water is wet.

      As has been said at Passover Seders... "They oppressed us, they killed us, and they failed. Let's eat".

      I think rather than talk about all the injustices and mis-deeds that have befallen the Jewish people, our best strategy is to point out the good things we have done (and continue to do - Nepal anyone) as well as to point out what we will continue to do as a community.

      We have to get back to the spirit of the Halutzim (Pioneers) and be a force that is strong and self-reliant rather than trying to play a suckers game.

      That's my $ .02

      Delete
    5. Why shouldn't there be compensation for violations of human rights?

      Palestinians who left voluntarily will get compensation. Do Jews that left from oppression deserve less?

      The fact is that most people, including many Jews, have no knowledge about the cleansing of Middle East and North African Jews. There is no sense to run from history.

      Delete
    6. volleyboy1,
      The perceptions of which you speak were not always the perceptions that westerners had of this conflict. The perceptions of this conflict did not change all by themselves, they had lots and lots of help. The perception of Jews of Middle Eastern countries (and I'd even argue, Jews of Europe) as just some privileged "white people" doesn't stand up to history's smell test. What I'm saying here is we shouldn't simply accept them because they happen to popular at the moment. Things change, and if we are all smart about it we can influence perceptions.
      Jewishness and Israel transcend the "white vs. brown" paradigm which you yourself acknowledge is bull. So we can agree that the people who believe in that paradigm uber allies, so to speak, are forcing a square peg into a round hole. Why shouldn't we insist that such perceptions are in error? That is my question.

      Delete
    7. VB,

      it seems to me that the key to your argument is post-colonial theory.

      That is, when you write, "it won't win any arguments with anyone outside of Conservatives because it is an East / West, 'Mean White People vs. Poor Helpless Brown People' argument (which is totally nonsense, but I am just referring to perception, and not reality)..." you are referring to a trend that began in the academe - promoted by people such as Edward Said and Noam Chomsky - and then picked up by the activists and spread throughout the culture, more generally.

      The basic theme, as you well know, is that white, western imperialists imposed themselves upon poor people "of color" throughout the world for purposes of exploiting both natural and human resources to the benefit of the home country and at the expense of the indigenous.

      Israel is seen as a western imperial proxy and therefore must be opposed as it goes about oppressing and exploiting the allegedly "native Palestinian" population.

      What the enemies of the Jewish people, both Islamic and western, are doing is cramming the square peg of imperialism into the round hole of Jewish nationalism and people are buying it.

      One way to oppose this creeping false perception is via history.

      I am a broken record on this.

      We must expand how we discuss the issue both historically and geographically and we need to emphasize the fact that whatever else Zionism was, it was also a reaction to thirteen hundred years of Arab-Muslim persecution of the Jews, and all non-Muslims, grounded in theocratically-based hatred of the other.

      If we are to have a chance of changing people's perceptions to something more reasonable, this is a good place to start.

      Delete
    8. Mike and Jeff... I disagree with you guys. In the case of Israel you know the "White vs. Brown" stuff is bullshit and I know the "White vs. Brown" stuff is bullshit, but, many people and a growing number of people within our own community DON'T know that at all. As you both are aware, that is a growing trend. Was Israel always looked at that way? No. At one time Israel was a radical idea filled with collective farms and "plucky" folks who stood up for themselves. Those days with the "Win" in '67 are gone.

      Mike, I agree with you when you say:

      What the enemies of the Jewish people, both Islamic and western, are doing is cramming the square peg of imperialism into the round hole of Jewish nationalism and people are buying it.

      and I also agree with this:

      One way to oppose this creeping false perception is via history.

      Anyway, if I felt I could speak freely here I would tell you but I am not sure you want to hear what I really think here. And rather than have an argument about it I will just say, that I disagree with your methods and I think there are better ways to change peoples perceptions particularly younger people that are going to be decision makers going forward.

      I'll just leave it at that.

      Delete
    9. VB,

      I do not have any "methods."

      You make it sound sinister.

      I just tell the truth as I see it.

      Delete
    10. Mike... everyone has "methods".

      There is nothing sinister implied. We just have profound disagreements. No biggie there, I have profound disagreements with most, if not all of your commenters. But so what? It is what it is.

      Of course, I also find myself having profound disagreements with those on the Left and those that are getting more and more mainstreamed into the Left. Honestly, I think both the Left and Right suck.

      Believe it or not, I agree with oldschool when he talks about (paraphrased) "Theories in academia that sound great but don't work so well in real life". I see that at places like DKos all the time and honestly I think that they "young Left" is losing touch with reality. HOWEVER, at the same time, I think the Right has completely lost touch with reality and offers up no suggestions for how to fix things, just one criticism after another and an abject failure to take responsibility for anything.

      The thing is that while I vote based on domestic policy (which is why I CANNOT wait to vote for Sen. Sanders, and will most likely vote for the Democratic nominee in 2016, because there is simply no way I would vote for a current Republican under any circumstances - they just all suck way too much), I think both the Dems. AND the Repubs. blow on Foreign Policy.

      I don't think either party has a clue what to do and once again America's foreign policy suffers for it. In 2007 we were tremendously hated and for the most part mocked for our failures. In 2015 we are only mildly hated but what is worse is that we are disrespected and considered a joke. The last two years with Sec. Kerry have been a cruel joke on the American people while at the same time the Republicans have and continue to be a cruel joke on the world.

      Delete
    11. It seems the "methods" of progressives to change the perceptions of people, especially the young, are not very helpful to show Israel in a true light or to address growing antisemitism among its ranks.

      As an aside, speech should not be conditioned on what others want to hear. That is another silly progressive notion, that speech is violence which necessitates a "safe space."

      Delete
    12. the Right has completely lost touch with reality and offers up no suggestions for how to fix things

      Total overstatement. You just don't like the suggestions.

      The most out of touch are progressives that want to make others who live on the front lines conform to their view of what society should be. They have suggestions galore, so many of which they make sure they are not subject to.

      Republicans could give more credence to the plight of the oppressed, but progressives take the oppressed for granted. Which is worse?

      Suggestions of both sides can benefit finding solutions that work. To suggest that only one side promotes the general welfare is a partisan claim and false.

      Delete
    13. Ok.. let's do this one thing at a time oldschool:

      It seems the "methods" of progressives to change the perceptions of people, especially the young, are not very helpful to show Israel in a true light or to address growing antisemitism among its ranks.

      Whether they are "helpful" in talking about Israel or not, is NOT the issue or what I am talking about. The issue is whether they work or not and honestly, they are working far more than our methods are. That is simply a fact and it is a fact borne out in polls.

      As an aside, speech should not be conditioned on what others want to hear. That is another silly progressive notion, that speech is violence which necessitates a "safe space."

      Err... who cares about "safe spaces" - and stop... if you are implying that I am trying to create one or care about that crap, you are wrong, wrong wrong and if you are not implying that about me, then why mention it in the first place? My only reason for saying what I said is that I am a "guest" on Mike's blog and I am trying to keep a civil tone regarding what I think. I don't think there is any need for me to show up here and rip people apart. It doesn't seem like a productive use of anyone's time.

      Total overstatement. You just don't like the suggestions.

      Ummm, there are no suggestions beyond tax cuts on the super rich. How can I not like the suggestions when there are no specific suggestions in place?

      The most out of touch are progressives that want to make others who live on the front lines conform to their view of what society should be.

      Nothing like a good generalization is there?

      They have suggestions galore, so many of which they make sure they are not subject to.

      Unlike those on the right who simply have no suggestions other than to tell the poor to "get a job" or self righteously proclaim "they would be fine if they only had family values like we do".

      Republicans could give more credence to the plight of the oppressed, but progressives take the oppressed for granted. Which is worse?

      They both suck, but at least progressives care. It may be misguided and sometimes (well, a lot of the time) not work out, but it is far better than the Social Darwinism promoted by Republicans.

      Suggestions of both sides can benefit finding solutions that work. To suggest that only one side promotes the general welfare is a partisan claim and false.

      Pardon me, but this is simply generalized drivel. Please explain to me using specifics how Republicans promote general welfare. What programs of theirs do this? Please use examples of policies that they actually promote so we can all see.

      Thanks in advance.

      Delete
    14. So now the methods are "ours" when before they were not. Make up your mind.

      Your view of Republicans is skewed. You admit that you do not even look at their sources. Which explains the fact that you rely on a progressive stereotype that does not comport to reality.

      "No suggestions except tax cuts on the super rich." False. The typical overstatement that flows from the mouths of progressives. Caring for the family promotes general welfare. Caring for national defense promotes general welfare. You act like Republicans ONLY care about tax cuts, and that is nonsense. It's just like with Geller. You ACT like you know, but you really don't know because you refuse to educate yourself.

      Caring is what matters. Gotcha! The worst ideas are fine so long as one cares. Talk about generalizations! Not buying THAT drivel. It's not true either, that progressives care more.

      As for #safe spaces," it was a jab at progressive mentality because you were hesitant to say something that people did not want to hear. One might think I touched a nerve, based on the response, though it was not directed specifically at you. When did you become so sensitive anyway?

      Finally, being helpful may not matter to you, but it does to me. I am confused, however. Is caring more important or is what works more important?

      Delete
    15. This thread started here.

      Trudy said this: "There can be no justice no resolution w/o equal care being given to the 950,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab 'countries' during the same period."

      This is the question under discussion.

      It is not about me.

      Delete
    16. Going to play tennis. but didn't Republicans just pass a bipartisan anti-trafficking law? Oh yeah, it's just about taxes! I forgot.

      Delete
    17. So now the methods are "ours" when before they were not. Make up your mind.

      What does this even mean? My reference to "ours" is I am talking about the Pro-Israel side in general. On that one issue I assume (and maybe I am wrong) that you and I are both on the "Pro-Israel" side. Even if we come at it from different perspectives.

      Your view of Republicans is skewed. You admit that you do not even look at their sources. Which explains the fact that you rely on a progressive stereotype that does not comport to reality.

      Nope.. You are simply and totally WRONG. First off I don't "admit" I don't even look at their sources. Where have I ever said that? Actually, I look at Republican leaning sources on a fairly regular basis. I usually look at articles from DKos and then "fact check" them against what Republicans actually say. Not only that but, my boss (who is a good friend) is a hardcore, Conservative Christian Republican and he sends me mounds of what can only be termed "nonsense". See unlike some folks, I actually read what the "other side" says.

      "No suggestions except tax cuts on the super rich." False.



      Ok then, PROVE me wrong. Show me where a specific Republican Jobs Bill exists with SPECIFIC programs, not some 20 page marketing brochure with no specifics. How about showing me where the replacement for the ACA is? Got that handy?

      Caring for the family promotes general welfare.

      Great.. and Water is wet. SO... what Republican programs actually fund or help build family caring. Can you point to a few specific programs?

      You act like Republicans ONLY care about tax cuts, and that is nonsense.

      You're right, they don't just care about tax cuts. They care about "gutting" environmental regulations, they care about destroying the Voting Rights Act, they care about fighting for the rights of bigots to discriminate against same sex couples. They care about privatizing the social safety net, and rolling back The New Deal. Yep, they sure do care about more than tax cuts.. my bad. Oh, and before you call "bullshit" on any of that, I can point to a number of examples where Republicans have made legislative moves to do all of those things.

      But again oldschool.. Where are the specific programs? You haven't provided one example of anything.

      It's just like with Geller. You ACT like you know, but you really don't know because you refuse to educate yourself.

      LOL this is nonsense. I do know and provided examples of Geller's bigotry. Just because you didn't read my posts or bother to look at my examples is not my problem.

      Caring is what matters. Gotcha! The worst ideas are fine so long as one cares.

      BWAHAHAHA not what I said at all... Good to see you missed that point completely. All I said was that caring was better than the ridiculous Social Darwinism that the Republicans support. But, since you are so high on Republican suggestions, please enlighten me with some of them.

      As for #safe spaces," it was a jab at progressive mentality because you were hesitant to say something that people did not want to hear.

      Got that one wrong as well. I was just trying to be a nice positive guy. Nothing more to it. But since you had nothing policy wise, you figured you take a personal jab, eh?

      Finally, being helpful may not matter to you, but it does to me. I am confused, however. Is caring more important or is what works more important?

      Well you are definitely confused since you apparently missed this point as well... Of course what works is more important than simply caring. So please if you would, point to Republican programs or specific plans that work. Surely you can do that. Right?





      Delete
    18. Mike, no one said this was about you.

      All I am saying is that rather than criticize you or your arguments I am keeping my mouth shut. After all, this is your page and having me rip into your ideas is probably not the best way to go.

      It is simply a matter of polite respect.

      Delete
    19. oldschool... You mean this:http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/04/22/anti-human-trafficking-bill-passes-senate-after-weeks-of-partisan-bickering

      Which is good... but Where Republicans tried to insert anti-abortion measures and did shoot down funding for:

      an amendment to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act that would have reauthorized the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act and included new provisions to curb trafficking. The measure also contained a clause barring recipients of federal money for homeless youth services from discriminating against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender minors. Up to 40 percent of homeless youth are estimated to be LGBT, often cast out by parents who don’t approve of their orientation or identity and likely to get involved in commercial sex out of desperation.

      though in fairness Susan Collins and a FEW other Republicans DID support that.

      So have a nice Tennis game. I am off to train Krav Maga (tonight is Strike and Fight - a class that combines Fighting with Technical Krav Maga) and watching the kiddies while my wife gets to go to the Warriors game. Some people have all the luck!

      Delete
    20. No matter what they tried to add, something Democrats actually agreed to previously, the point is that it shows that your assertion was factually incorrect.

      But of course, I am totally wrong. I do not understand. Perhaps you are less coherent in your own proclamations than you think.

      You have made the claim about sources repeatedly in the past. I'll stick with my view that you really don't know much about what Republicans are about other than what progressives feed you. You admit, Daily Kos is your point of departure and you fact check from there. What an arduous methodology to determine what conservatives have to say about issues and policies. Perhaps if you were to seek out information, do more than reject the nonsense of your hard core conservative boss, it might be different, and you would see that many conservatives have principled positions and do care.

      About caring: "They both suck, but at least progressives care." Once again, a skewed view. Progressives just care more while Republicans don't. How many progressives shout about caring, then do nothing?

      I think your mind is the one that is closed. Otherwise, you would understand that Republicans are not the demons you make them to be, but people that are concerned for the welfare of the country.

      Delete
    21. The only things I am going to say are that:

      1. I asked for specifics and you either refuse or simply can't give them. In the end that's why your boy Romney lost. He simply didn't offer a coherent vision for America, and Republicans still can't.

      The only reason they won in 2014 is due to the fact that the Democratic polity is so damn stupid that they couldn't be bothered to get out and vote (Nat'l turnout at 37% as a nation, we should be embarrassed). Now they (and the U.S.) are screwed and you know what? That's tough shit on all of us. The Progressives who whine about what the Republicans are doing are more to blame than the Republicans. Why? Because they had the numbers to stop the insane clown show that the Republican Party represents and they couldn't be bothered to show up at the polls. They knew what the Republicans would do. The Republicans told us what they were going to do.... It just shows that if you want better policies you have to GOTV. The Republicans did it in 2014 and Democrats sat at home with their thumbs up their asses and now when they lose the ACA and many other programs, they will get what they deserve.

      2. You say:

      I think your mind is the one that is closed. Otherwise, you would understand that Republicans are not the demons you make them to be, but people that are concerned for the welfare of the country.

      and you are completely and totally wrong. Most of my friends (not some but most) are Republicans (and fairly Conservative). The Martial Arts and Tactical shooting community is not really known for it's progressive views on things. Often times, my buddies rag on me as their token Liberal friend.

      I know very much that Republican and Conservative people are not "demons", in fact on a 1 to 1 basis I prefer them to overbearing Liberals and Progressives. But to say they are concerned for the "welfare" of the country is simply unadulterated bullshit. Most of them are concerned for their friends, local communities, and really... their wallets and bank accounts. They don't give a flying fuck about anything outside of that except for some vague notions of not letting people cheat on welfare, supporting the police against the hordes of inner city thugs, making sure that the Military kicks ass, and that "big brother" is getting too big. That's it. Get specific with them and they sputter about individual ruggedness and responsibility.

      BUT, generally they are good people at heart. So please, when you talk about me making Republicans out to be "demons".. that is nonsense (except when you talk about Dick Cheney - I am convinced he is Sith). They are just selfish in terms of National politics. Is that demonic? No. It's just selfish.

      Delete
    22. I only needed one specific, the trafficking bill, to show your statement was false.

      There is also defense bills, the trade bill, the NSA and Patriot Act, energy, regulatory reform, to name a few. NONE deal with your dumb claims that:

      "the Right has completely lost touch with reality and offers up no suggestions for how to fix things" or "there are no suggestions beyond tax cuts on the super rich."

      You just don't like their philosophy of how to govern, so you address it with dumb claims. Who is the one sputtering?

      And to say that you so not and have not demonized them, and even non-progressives you don't agree with, is a joke. Of course you have.

      Then again, your basis of information, as you admitted, is Daily Kos and your far out conservative boss. As I said, you are ignorant about the other side, yet you claim to know. Only someone ignorant would make the claims you have.

      Why not tell us how great the progressives are when it comes to things, of taking their privileged ideas and the rest be damned, so we all suffer at their expense because they are just smarter and care more.

      Delete
    23. LOL... so still nothing eh? You can bluster all you like but that still doesn't show that the Republicans care anything beyond tax cuts and making sure that the 1% own that much more of our nation.

      And you are pointing to the Patriot Act as a good thing??? BWAHAHAHA.

      You pointed out a trafficking bill that stripped protections to LGBT teens (some estimated 40% of the people who exploited), not too mention funded itself from the Affordable Care Act. Oh yes, nothing says caring like worrying about keeping things "budget neutral" as your primary concern.

      and then there is this drivel:

      There is also defense bills, the trade bill, the NSA and Patriot Act, energy, regulatory reform, to name a few. NONE deal with your dumb claims that:

      Yes, there are defense bills that increase spending on an already bloated defense budget yet cut benefits to actual veterans in the name of "cutting entitlements". But the real cruelty here is that you guys claim to care about veterans. SO.. where are your specific plans to deal with them. Can you name one that actually deals with specifics involved in costs. No? What a surprise.

      The Trade Bill? You mean that mess that the President is pushing. You guys came up with that? No... no you didn't. But the only plan you guys have for trade is blocking penalties against U.S. companies that ship jobs overseas. Really great job there.

      Energy Regulatory Reform? You mean cutting taxes on Energy providers or cutting penalties to violators? Or fracking in a State in a drought, and next to a fault line? Or perhaps you mean loosening regulation on Nuclear Waste and denying climate change? Excellent.

      So again... can you please be specific as to plans that will fix environmental damage, or create jobs. If you would like you support the Ryan Budget, although you might have to explain which specific programs you will be cutting to help the inner city or social safety net.

      All you guys come up with are talking point brochures with idiotic, generalized statements (similar to what you are making here) but you have ZERO in the way of actual specific plans.

      Oh and hey oldschool... Where is the replacement to the ACA when your bought and paid for court destroys it? Come on buddy where is the plan? Is it in the same drawer as your non-existent jobs plan.

      Delete
    24. But you know what... Let's get specific.

      You keep talking about Republican plans that help the inner-City. Great...
      How about you present to us some of the specific Republican plans that will do that? Is it the abstinence only education programs you folks are so proud of? How about cutting school lunches? Or maybe it is cutting those after school programs so those little delinquents who abuse the largesse of the rich can actually be forced to do some work?

      Let's just stick to this one thing. Surely you can tell me and everyone else here just WHAT the Republicans are specifically programs beyond, "The family is breaking down, and Inner City people should want to have jobs".

      Delete
    25. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    26. YOU were the one that said they offered no suggestions, not me. I showed you were wrong. Now I hear your own talking points. Get them from Daily Kos?

      I am not a Republican, but not foolish enough to say they have nothing to say or add to the overall political debate, which seems to be your position.

      So are you proud of the progressive tendency to make everything about identity? That under progressives, the cities have crumbled and the world is, too? That antisemitism and BDS are significant issues among your brethren? That you can be lied to with impunity and you will still go out and sputter?

      And since you are so well versed in Republican policy, why don't you tell us which conservative sources you rely on to get your information. Media Matters?

      Delete
    27. LOL... You still have nothing eh? You still can't come up with specifics to disprove my points? Ha.

      I am not a Republican, but not foolish enough to say they have nothing to say or add to the overall political debate, which seems to be your position.

      Yeah right... Sure you aren't a Republican. You just parrot their talking points word for word. LOL....

      And like a typical Republican you have to make things up (because you can't actually point to specifics) as has been shown throughout this thread where you continually assign beliefs to me that don't exist. But hey man... I can keep going as long as you can and refuting each one of your nonsensical claims.

      So are you proud of the progressive tendency to make everything about identity?

      BWAHAHAHA seems like you are the one making things about "identity", I mean look at the sentence you just wrote. Irony anyone?

      That under progressives, the cities have crumbled and the world is, too?

      Wait, the inner cities were not a mess under Republican administrations? OH WAIT.. you are going to go with the Republican talking point that most civic administrations are run by Democrats. What you don't think I read what you guys are saying? I told you I did.

      But I will tell you what, since you bring up the Inner Cities... What are the specific Republican plans for making sure they don't crumble? What specific programs are you folks proposing to make things better. I asked above and you had nothing. Perhaps you want to enlighten me? Oh yes, and nothing like using "identity politics" in the first sentence of this, all while just above you decry "identity politics".

      That antisemitism and BDS are significant issues among your brethren?

      Proud of anti-Semitism and BDS??? Are you high? No, seriously I am wondering if you are, considering you are aware of my combating both anti-Semitism and BDS. You cannot be that dumb to think that I would be supportive of anti-Semitism and BDS. I didn't think that was humanly possible.

      That you can be lied to with impunity and you will still go out and sputter?

      AHAHAHA, says the guy complaining about President Obama in Iraq. Holy crap... even Republican insiders are pissed about how the Bush Administration lied it's way into Iraq: http://www.salon.com/2015/05/20/george_w_bushs_cia_briefer_admits_iraq_wmd_intelligence_was_a_lie/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

      Project much?

      And since you are so well versed in Republican policy, why don't you tell us which conservative sources you rely on to get your information. Media Matters?

      Well Media Matter IS and Excellent Source of information, but, I would hardly call them Conservative. No, No... I read CNN and other sources from Drudge, when I see something that interests me. But rather than rely on those and swallow the lies hook, line and sinker like you do, I actually fact check them.

      So anyway, how is that finding specific programs going? Did you find the replacement for the ACA yet? How about a Republican Jobs Bill that comes down to something more than cutting corporate taxes or ending regulations? You got something there? How about helping the inner cities? Which programs should we cut to make things better down there?

      Let me know anytime... I am waiting.

      Delete
    28. Let me ask you this oldschool... You say you are not a Republican, right?

      Ok, then where do you disagree with them and more to that, specifically which programs do you disagree with them on?

      Delete
    29. You sound like a parrot.

      I am not a Republican. To use your words: You are totally wrong! In the face of your ignorance, I prefer not to be silent.

      Rather than rag on Republicans, however, it's interesting how little you seem to care about the ills brought by your own affiliation of progressivism, one that wants to dictate to everyone. That makes virtually every issue about identity. That censors and demonizes at the drop of a hat. It is an illiberal crowd that thinks it's fine to deceive and manipulate for an end that will tear the world asunder. I forgot, you guys just care more than anyone else!

      Once more, YOU were the one that stated unequivocally that Republicans
      had NO SUGGESTIONS besides tax cuts for the rich. You have been proven wrong on this as well. Dumb statements deserve to be exposed.

      The rest is just more dumb games. You don't know what you're talking about, yet pretend that you do. You are too dismissive of conservatives to actually know what they are saying. You act is if conservative views are not part of original American ideals, when that label more accurately belongs to progressivism.

      Next you'll be telling everyone how ISIS strategy is a success, that Benghazi was about a movie, that you can keep your doctor. You will tell us how much Clinton cares about the common person, or how Obama has improved race relations, or how progressive havens like universities are bastions of tolerance.

      I may have nothing in your view, but that is better than something that sounds so nice, but is utter failure when applied.

      Delete
    30. I think that Republicans have too little understanding of the plight of oppressed peoples, and place too much faith in the market as the solution. I don't agree with them on many social issues, on the fetish for guns or the death penalty.

      But on all of those issues, and others, they have valid points to make, and in matters such as free expression, they put Democrats to shame.

      Delete
    31. Heh.... Part One - This is wayyyyyy to easy.

      You sound like a parrot.

      I am merely asking you for specifics about your positions. I would think you might want to enlighten people about what you believe. I'm sorry that you are so ashamed to admit what you really believe.

      I am not a Republican.To use your words: You are totally wrong! In the face of your ignorance, I prefer not to be silent.

      Sure you aren't oldschool, sure you aren't. Even though you parrot their every talking point. So if you aren't a Republican, where exactly do you differ from them?

      And speaking of broad generalizations and "Identity Politics"..

      Rather than rag on Republicans, however, it's interesting how little you seem to care about the ills brought by your own affiliation of progressivism, one that wants to dictate to everyone. That makes virtually every issue about identity. That censors and demonizes at the drop of a hat. It is an illiberal crowd that thinks it's fine to deceive and manipulate for an end that will tear the world asunder. I forgot, you guys just care more than anyone else!

      Do you even read what you write? This whole nonsensical screed is strictly about "identity politics". OH NOEZ.. here come the big bad Progressives who want to tear the world apart (or at least tax my 1% pals just a bit more, but really same thing in the end). Irony, anyone. Too funny.

      You don't know what you're talking about, yet pretend that you do.

      You keep saying this but refuse to provide any specifics about Republican plans. So, if I don't know what I am talking about (which I have a feeling I that I know far more about actual Conservative policies than you do), please enlighten me. Again, I ask... Where is the replacement for the ACA? You guys have one? Right? How about a coherent jobs program that is not dependent on gutting environmental regulation and/or tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Got that one?

      You are too dismissive of conservatives to actually know what they are saying.

      Ummm no.. I would say that if anyone is dismissive it is you. I actually know what Conservatives and Republicans say. I can tell you what their little info-brochures say (that one about the ACA was a "hoot"). I know they don't have specifics beyond gutting environmental regulations, and making sure that the Tax Cuts for the 1% are passed. You can't even say what it is that your party stands for in specific terms. If anyone doesn't know what they are saying that would be you... and it has been proven time and time again. Either that, or you are simply embarrassed (I know I would be if I were a Republican).

      You act is if conservative views are not part of original American ideals, when that label more accurately belongs to progressivism.

      Aside from this sentence which absolutely REEKS of generalized "Identity politics" Do you you mean the founding fathers set this up to be a "Christian Nation"? After all that is what modern Conservative politicians are pushing. The founding fathers were rather "Progressive" in their ideals compared to the "Conservatives" at the time actually. You might want to learn some history there son.

      Delete
    32. Part II of "Heh"

      Next you'll be telling everyone how ISIS strategy is a success

      Apparently you haven't read anything I have ever written, well that or you are dumb as a rock and have the reading comprehension of a Kindergartner. You really should read what I have written about my disdain for the President's strategy regarding ISIS. This one is pretty funny oldschool.

      that Benghazi was about a movie,

      Nope Benghazi was about stupidity on many different fronts. NOT THE LEAST was Republicans hypocritically manufacturing a crises from something that they in part are responsible. Remember they are the ones who CUT SECURITY BUDGETS for foreign outposts. But rather than take my word for it, perhaps you should read the words of the Independent Commission. Here, let me help you: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf

      that you can keep your doctor.

      Ahh the old Republican lie about the ACA. That was/is true, that you could keep your doctor. First of all, if you had insurance, your insurance providers had keep up with the new guidelines which were much more consumer friendly. IF your doctor or insurance providers did not want to do that, whose fault is that? Second of all, if your insurance was compliant to national standards your plan wouldn't be touched. SO way to repeat yet another Republican lie.

      You will tell us how much Clinton cares about the common person, or how Obama has improved race relations, or how progressive havens like universities are bastions of tolerance.

      I will? Nothing like generalized "Identity politics" eh, oldschool?

      But please, tell me how the Republicans care so much about the common person. Is it in their cutting education funding or allowing for discrimination against same sex couples? Perhaps it is in the fact that want to shift the tax burden from the 1% to the Middle Class? Maybe it's when they shut down the Government at a cost of $ 25 Bil. to make some dumb ass point about not paying our debts.

      Of course nothing says improving race relations like denying the Dream Act or gutting the Voting Rights Act, or just making it harder for people to actually vote. Yes indeed. It's why the Republicans and Conservatives are so very popular with minority communities. Because you folks care just so much...

      I may have nothing in your view, but that is better than something that sounds so nice, but is utter failure when applied.

      Well good that you admit you have nothing. At least that is a start.

      So in this sentence are you saying "Well, vote for us... we don't really know what we are going to do, and have no specifics but, hey trust us to run the Government because you know, not knowing anything has worked so well in the past".

      Delete
    33. Now this response is interesting...

      I think that Republicans have too little understanding of the plight of oppressed peoples, and place too much faith in the market as the solution.

      I can't disagree with that in general terms but I am curious as to what specifically you feel represents the Republicans lack of understanding for oppressed people. Do you also include the poor in your terming "oppressed"?

      As for too much faith in the "Market", I can agree with that completely. Though I am baffled since you say this, but, earlier you posted that the Republicans had helpful ideas on Regulation which sort of flies in the face of this. Can you be more specific, as to what you mean when you say Republicans have too much faith in Market Based Solutions.

      You say:

      I don't agree with them on many social issues, on the fetish for guns or the death penalty.

      So, which particular social issues do you disagree with them on?

      As for Guns... I would say some certainly do have a fetish for them but many (when you talk to them) are all for reasonable gun control measures. Though you would not hear that in the MSM or their own media. When I go shooting, I ask guys (who are Conservative) do they really believe the b.s. from the NRA and most say "No". But they are not the ones making policy. Most of them are wannabee hero's and vigilantes.

      As for the death penalty, believe it or not, I agree with the Republicans on it. I support the death penalty as I feel that some people simply cannot be reformed.

      But on all of those issues, and others, they have valid points to make, and in matters such as free expression, they put Democrats to shame.

      Ok cool, so what in your mind are some of those "valid points". I would disagree with you about "free expression" (remember the Bush WhiteHouse and it's restrictions on just that) in terms of Republican Politicians. But in terms of "Conservatives".... I might actually agree with you on that. My Conservative friends are much more open than my Liberal friends are. But that is purely anecdotal.

      Delete
    34. To clarify when I say:

      "But they are not the ones making policy. Most of them are wannabee hero's and vigilantes."

      I am talking about the pols. that support NRA ridiculousness and extreme positions.

      Most of the guys I shoot with are either veterans or cops or both. They are the "real deal"

      Delete
    35. I see you are still on it. I am amazed how much being right matters to you that you must use so much hot air.

      That your first utterance in the last round, "This is wayyyyyy to easy," gets to the heart of it, and shows what a waste it is to even attempt meaningful discussion.

      In other words, I stopped reading.

      I go back to my original comment:

      the Right has completely lost touch with reality and offers up no suggestions for how to fix things

      Total overstatement. You just don't like the suggestions.


      I did not make the blatant, false overstatement. If you don't like my views on progressives, you don't have to. But from the way you talk about these people you disagree with, it appears you know hardly anything about them.

      Kirsten Powers recently wrote:

      "Two experiences unexpectedly put me in a regular relationship with conservatives: working as a contributor at Fox News and a later in life conversion to Christianity. The more I got to know actual conservative and religious people, the harder it was to justify the stereotypes I had so carelessly embraced. In my early days at Fox, I can remember trying to convince a conservative there that George Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court didn't really count as a female appointment because she was conservative and an evangelical Christian. He was horrified. I was confused as to why he would be horrified. I'm now embarrassed that I ever thought such a thing, let alone said it aloud. Such a prejudiced view was only able to take root because of the lack of ideological, political, and religious diversity," she wrote.

      http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/confession-liberal-columnist-says-left-lies-intimidates-to-silence-right/article/2564284/section/elizabeth-warren

      You can now carry on against her.

      Delete
    36. LOL...

      I see you are still on it. I am amazed how much being right matters to you that you must use so much hot air.

      Speaking of "still being on it". You just can't help yourself can you?

      In other words, I stopped reading.

      Of course you did.. and yet you still keep commenting. And what is better, is that you admit you have no idea what you are talking about. Brilliant.

      I did not make the blatant, false overstatement.

      Amazing how you just did make one. I notice that you actually tried to "cherry pick" my quote. Here... let's go with the whole quote:

      "Believe it or not, I agree with oldschool when he talks about (paraphrased) "Theories in academia that sound great but don't work so well in real life". I see that at places like DKos all the time and honestly I think that they "young Left" is losing touch with reality. HOWEVER, at the same time, I think the Right has completely lost touch with reality and offers up no suggestions for how to fix things, just one criticism after another and an abject failure to take responsibility for anything.

      You freaking dunce... My quote started by saying I agreed with you, but you are such a goofball that you can't acknowledge that. And then I went on to rip the Left... But in your efforts to portray my quote as something it was not, you cherry picked it and tried to spin it.

      See this is the problem with being ignorant - which you admit you are. You don't read things but then you expound on them. You are in an argument and you have no idea what I am saying. Talk about "identity politics"....

      oldschool.. if you want to make sense in an argument / debate, here is a "pro-tip", know the argument and actually understand what the other person is saying. You don't do either and because of that you are a buffoon.

      But since you insist on being an idiot - let me address your Kirsten Powers comment.. Here are quotes from me regarding Conservatives:

      But in terms of "Conservatives".... I might actually agree with you on that. My Conservative friends are much more open than my Liberal friends are. But that is purely anecdotal.

      And

      "and you are completely and totally wrong. Most of my friends (not some but most) are Republicans (and fairly Conservative). The Martial Arts and Tactical shooting community is not really known for it's progressive views on things. Often times, my buddies rag on me as their token Liberal friend.

      I know very much that Republican and Conservative people are not "demons", in fact on a 1 to 1 basis I prefer them to overbearing Liberals and Progressives. But to say they are concerned for the "welfare" of the country is simply unadulterated bullshit. Most of them are concerned for their friends, local communities, and really... their wallets and bank accounts. They don't give a flying fuck about anything outside of that except for some vague notions of not letting people cheat on welfare, supporting the police against the hordes of inner city thugs, making sure that the Military kicks ass, and that "big brother" is getting too big. That's it. Get specific with them and they sputter about individual ruggedness and responsibility.


      Now stop being dopey and embarrassing yourself.

      Delete
  10. So there effectively was a population exchange. That's a complete change of narrative.
    No "Jews stole the land". Population exchange where Jews got a sliver of land, but Arabs got 99% more. Happened right after WWII, it's just a part of massive population swaps. Why are "palestinians" different from East Prussians?

    ReplyDelete

  11. "All I am saying is that rather than criticize you or your arguments I am keeping my mouth shut. After all, this is your page and having me rip into your ideas is probably not the best way to go."

    VB,

    I may not be quite so ego-invested as you may think I am.

    I am not afraid of criticism, if it is criticism. That is, if it is free of malice and presented in an honest manner, I have no problem.

    I tell you what, choose one specific criticism that you have been reluctant to air and air it.

    Be concise and be fair about it.

    I do not have problem admitting when I am wrong, once I come to believe that I am wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike.. I don't think you are "ego invested" and believe it or not, I don't have malice towards you. I really don't. In fact... after years of dealing with the fucked up blockheads at DKos, I think I actually am starting to understand why you have the P.O.V. that you do. Though I still don't agree with it.

      Right now, I am tired as all get out, because sparring and fight drills for an hour are hard, but, I will consider your offer.

      Like I said Mike, this is your page and I respect the work you put in to grow it. I doubt I can change your mind about any number of things so why cause stress? I would rather focus on the things we CAN agree on and leave it at that.

      Delete
    2. Y'know, VB,

      sometime in the future Paul is going to make a trip to SF.

      When he does, we should hook up.'

      The three of us.

      Maybe at that joint in North Beach.

      Delete
    3. Sure Mike.. That would work for me.

      Delete
  12. What if it's more complicated - more sophisticated - than one side being right about everything and one side being wrong about everything?
    What if the debate is more nuanced than that?
    What if a good piece of thinking is worth listening to regardless of its origins?
    What if it doesn't matter whether an idea happens to have become labeled as "left" or
    "right" wing. Who cares?
    Surely the most important thing is whether it might go some way towards helping incredibly intractable problems?
    Government seeks to solve problems through legislation. Legislation can't, by definition, solve all problems.
    Many of the deepest problems need to be looked at in a wider way. By everyone.
    Especially, with a view to help the most vulnerable in society.
    Sometimes people disagree, that doesn't necessarily make them 'wrong', it can just mean they have a different opinion. Sometimes those opinions can be valid.
    Different, but valid.
    In an open debate it might be necessary to embrace that idea.
    The point is not to pour scorn on one's perceived ' opponents ', but to be open enough to be prepared to listen.
    Listen, and be open to the possibility that something they have to say might be helpful.
    There are so many important issues that require complex thinking.
    Complex thinking might mean accepting ideas and evidence from all sides.
    Without prejudice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't disagree with that K.

      Delete
    2. vb,
      you said earlier in the thread - I'm paraphrasing - that you felt you couldn't speak freely here. I know from previous comments that you believe in people being open. I do, too. Would it be possible for you to voice whatever it is that you are alluding to?
      I'd be really interested.

      Delete
  13. Well put, k. I imagine to large chunks of the world, American partisanship looks pretty silly, considering that our entire mainstream political spectrum generally covers one relatively tiny sliver which runs from center-right to slightly-further-right-than-center-right.

    On a few issues, there are certainly vital differences, such as the desire on the part of certain conservatives to take us back three or four generations on social issues. I'm not singling them out, just pointing out the first thing that comes to my (liberal, socialist-neocon-Democratic) mind.

    But for the most part both parties just play to their base while campaigning -- which is admittedly now a permanent feature of our politics in this 24/7/365 media era; the next election season begins before the concession speeches are even finished -- and turn their backs on them when it comes to actually governing.

    Which is certainly not to say we shouldn't be concerned about such aforementioned vital differences, but I think it's often safe to say that our system is set up so that radical changes just don't occur often, if ever. After all, Democratic or Republican strategists don't want to lose their hot-button social issues which whip up partisan fervor and get people to write checks and (sometimes even) come to the polls.

    But perhaps I'm just getting jaded as I get older. I could be wrong, for sure, I'll freely admit. I mostly just want *all* these damned politicians off my lawn, for right now. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jay... best comment of the thread in my opinion (and I include my comments in that judgement).

      This:

      But for the most part both parties just play to their base while campaigning -- which is admittedly now a permanent feature of our politics in this 24/7/365 media era; the next election season begins before the concession speeches are even finished -- and turn their backs on them when it comes to actually governing.

      is dead on. Particularly your first sentence. Everyone is always campaigning. It has gotten to the point where I believe that we don't really have a functioning system anymore. Just a system of constant recriminations. It is sad that this is what has happened to our nation.

      Delete
  14. K -

    I don't feel that my comments generally get read. Particularly when they are in opposition to the general "zeitgeist" of the page. As you can see from my discussion with oldschool, the guy didn't even read my comments. I went through his line by line to answer and yet he just kept commenting even though he was ignorant regarding what I am saying.

    Anyway, it's no big deal.. K... If I knew that what I said would get a "fair hearing" I would be more than glad to talk about what I alluded too.

    The thing is, that Mike has been very gracious in helping "bury the hatchet" and put his and my fights behind him. This is his space and I don't think he needs me telling him what I think is wrong. It's just a consideration thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Horse shit.

      I want you to tell me what you think is wrong.

      I welcome criticism.

      And criticism need not be vitriolic, nor in any way mean-spirited.

      It just needs to be honest and straightforward.

      These are talents that I know from experience that you own.

      You undoubtedly have numerous criticism of this blog and the viewpoints expressed here.

      Think it over. Pick one. Put it out there. And we can discuss it.

      You are only in hostile territory, VB, if you think that you are.

      I have specific criticisms of the western Left, in terms of Israel, and the Jewish Left, as well.

      We can discuss those, if you like.

      Delete
    2. No.. Mike it's not "Horse shit"... See this is what I am talking about.

      I don't think you cannot handle criticism. I am not saying that at all.

      You are right when you say this:

      You undoubtedly have numerous criticism of this blog and the viewpoints expressed here.

      I do. And they are fundamental differences along with simple tactical differences.

      So I will make a deal with you. Let's discuss, just you and I, one thing and make the promise that in that discussion that we will read everything of what the other writes, include context to quotes we cite (in other words if we are going to quote, use the full quote) AND if we find ourselves disagreeing then we ask the other (as you did with me in the Trudy thread) "are you suggesting..." and then actually "listening" to the response.

      IF we can agree to that, then sure I will do this with you.

      Fair enough?

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Quit creating a false impression that "the guy didn't even read my comments."

      I did not read your last set of comments, and stated why! You see this as a competition, and you demand that other play by your rules. What kind of power trip is that?

      You cannot seem to fathom that your need to inspect every line leaves you prone to misconstrue the whole. No one is obligated to read the same old same old comments, competition style, especially when the ideas could be said in few words, rather than dozens.

      Delete
    5. Quit creating a false impression that "the guy didn't even read my comments."

      It's not at all a "false impression" and your comments bear that out. You simply didn't read my comments. It's pretty obvious when you read the whole thread.. and then you admit it again here:

      No one is obligated to read the same old same old comments, competition style, especially when the ideas could be said in few words, rather than dozens.

      You know the rule about "holes" and "digging" oldschool...

      Delete
    6. No, I just don't answer in a way that pleases you. Which is why you have to resort to being snide.

      Guess it's better than the way you censored remarks at your site, not to mention the vile way that dissenters were treated. Shows how open you are to real discourse, as compared to your preferred version of discourse where you must dictate.

      Delete
    7. oldschool,
      Let the guy live in his hell already. He won't say what he believes because it will offend Mike or everyone will disagree or nobody reads it anyway or any number of excuses why he can't say what he means, yet he keeps showing up.
      I actually agree with the guy about some stuff, when he actually says something, which is hard to do since I obviously don't read what he writes and most likely would disagree.

      Delete
    8. You've got a deal, VB, but let's keep it sharp.

      A nice tight criticism.

      I am open to it.

      Delete
    9. In fact, if you want, you can take a little time and front page a piece.

      Y'know, all those times that I was criticizing the progressive Jewish left, I was not thinking of your blog, The Progressive Zionist, specifically. Left-leaning Zionism represents the majority of all diaspora Jews.

      It is not hard to see why you might take it personally, but I always had an eye on a larger field.

      In any case, yes, I would like for you to have at it.

      I will front page you if you give me 700 words.

      Or you can simply comment.

      Delete
    10. vb,

      "Wrong" as in a viewpoint you disagree with, or " wrong" as in morally unacceptable in some way?
      Or worse?

      I agree that anything anyone says here is likely to be hotly disputed by others. And to be agreed with - at least in part - by some.
      That seems OK.

      I can't imagine, for example, that you think Jay wouldn't give what you had to say "a fair hearing."
      You and he share a lot of common ground, it seems.

      You might assume I couldn't give your views a fair hearing; but I'm sure I would.
      It's reasonable that you might not trust that to be the case; I haven't been around here long.

      In the UK, at the moment, people are slinging around accusations of everything under the sun. There's a lot of anger, bile, hatred etc. etc. Charges of people being cruel or compassionless or selfish. And much talk, in different ways, about notions of racism.
      Some of it's fairly toxic, but it's what we do. It's how things are. So far, no one has actually fallen over with shock. I think.
      I doubt if people here would fall over with shock, either.

      My guess would be that things which are difficult to speak freely about are not issues to do with differences of opinions on economic models, for example.









      Delete
    11. Mike,
      the majority of Jews in the diaspora have always been left-leaning and Zionist. However, those realities are changing outside of America. ( And, they will be changing inside America.) More and more traditional left- leaning Jews in the rest of the world - Britain, Europe, Canada, Australia - are finding it impossible to feel comfortable with the political parties of the progressive left. Because of their obsessional anti-Zionism and their often blatant anti-Semitism. I can't find the relevant link, but the numbers are seriously alarming.
      At some point, it might be useful to go beyond the internal disputes of American politics and to take a really good look at how enormous the problems facing non- American Jews are.

      Delete
    12. I agree with all the regular posters and commenters here on at least a few things, but then again I freely admit that a chart mapping out my political positions anymore would resemble something like Lombard Street in San Francisco superimposed over a hedge maze. Heh.

      I would very much like to see volley and Mike have a civil discussion on certain fundamentals as laid out above.

      And your second comment hits it right on the button, k.

      Delete
    13. Mike,

      I greatly appreciate your willingness to do that and even to "front page" the commentary. HOWEVER, I don't think I can keep criticisms to 700 words, I suck at being concise (as you can see above) and often times on the internet things that are "concise" are oft times taken for something they are not.

      Plus I don't think being limited to 700 words would do my criticism justice. SO rather let's start a whole new post and build from there.
      And rather than think of it as criticism, approach it, as dialogue?

      Perhaps even take K's comment (as Jay suggests) and roll with that one. Particularly in defining exactly what is "Left Leaning".

      Delete
    14. Kate,

      "More and more traditional left- leaning Jews in the rest of the world - Britain, Europe, Canada, Australia - are finding it impossible to feel comfortable with the political parties of the progressive left.

      I assume that you do not mind if I use "Kate." It is not like giving up your identity, I do not think.

      In any case, you are correct. American Jews, from what I have read, are an outlier. That is, while most diaspora Jews have moved away from left-leaning political parties, American Jews continue to cling to the Democratic Party as Barack Obama thinks that conservative Americans in the midwest cling to their guns, their fears and hatreds, and their religious mythologies.

      In 2008 something like 80 percent of American Jews voted for Barack Obama, including me. In 2012 that number fell to a mere ten percent, despite Obama support for the Muslim Brotherhood, which, I have to say, surprised me.

      Recent polling, however, shows American-Jewish support for the current administration to be down around, or just under, 50 percent.

      My suspion, nonetheless, is that a majority of American Jews will vote for the Democratic candidate a year from November, who will probably be Hillary Clinton.

      It is probable the current administration, and the Democratic Party, have trimmed off maybe 15 percent of Jewish support over the course of this administration. The polling suggests more, but at the end of the day, most American Jews will remain loyal to the party. I think that it is a mistake, because I very much prefer us not to be taken for granted, but Jews and the Democratic Party are kind of like peanut butter and jelly.

      I am not recommending that anyone vote Republican, but I am recommending that we do not support any political movement or party that makes of itself a home for anti-Semitic anti-Zionism.

      I may turn to the Republicans, yet.

      But I have not, yet, done so.

      Delete
    15. Please, let me be more precise.

      One of my issues is:

      How can one call themselves a Liberal and yet actively support (through voting and advocacy) "Conservative" political forces that enforce entirely non liberal solutions to issues when they make policy. Not only that, but that those forces that are not Liberal are not ever criticized or mentioned when often times they engage in similar behaviors.

      I cannot see consistency there.

      Delete
    16. VB, you have carte blanche.

      I like the idea of dialogue.

      Criticism, however, seems misunderstood by many... not necessarily by you, but by many.

      Criticism is not a bad thing.

      To my mind criticism is nothing more than fair commentary.

      It can even take the form of agreement.

      But, yes, I am more than happy to have a dialogue. It's the same thing, anyway.

      Political dialogue, for it to be, dialogue, must include criticisms.

      I am almost at the point that I want to make the criticisms for you.

      Have at it, my friend.

      Delete
    17. One of my biggest criticisms for instance of the Useful Idiot, is that he calls himself "Pro-Israel" yet all he does is criticize Israel and engage with anti-Semites. YET how can one be "Pro-Israel" when one does not contextualize and balance criticism or point out what the other side is doing. In David Harris Gershon's case, all he does is provide fodder for anti--Semites and anti-Zionists. I believe there is a lot to criticize Israel over but compared to other nations it is hardly the worst offender and in that region is often the best alternative.

      I see a similar thing here but from a different side. I think in many ways this is the flipside of DHG.

      That is just one criticism but I think it has to be fleshed out to be fair to you. So how about we use that for the basis of our discussion. Or the Liberal thing. We can do that as well.

      Delete
    18. VB, do you want that to be the primary criticism that we discuss?

      There are all sorts of criticisms that you can have, including the criticism of "racism" if you wish.

      btw, I misspoke above. Obviously Jewish American support for the Obama administration did not fall to 10 percent between 2008 and 2012, but by 10 percent. I only make the correction here for other readers. I know that you know what I meant.

      "How can one call themselves a Liberal and yet actively support (through voting and advocacy) "Conservative" political forces that enforce entirely non liberal solutions to issues when they make policy. Not only that, but that those forces that are not Liberal are not ever criticized or mentioned when often times they engage in similar behaviors."

      Do you want this to be your primary criticism?

      I think that, unless you change your mind and want to go down a different road, I will front page this question because I think that it is a fair question and we need a new thread, anyway.

      I will give you a little time, but if I do not hear otherwise within, say, about an hour, I will front page this as a general question for the community.

      What I want you to understand, tho, is that our disagreements were rarely personal for me. My criticisms of "progressive Zionism" were not short-hand for criticisms of you, personally.

      Delete
    19. I got it.

      I see where you are coming from.

      Let me chew on it a bit and I will start a new thread shortly.

      I tend to take these things slower than you do, VB.

      I will put up a front page post announcing the question and then we can have that dialogue.

      And, certainly you should know, I have nothing whatsoever against you.

      If I did not think that you had something to say, I would never have invited you into the venues that I did.

      Delete
    20. Mike.. fair enough.. Let's make that the dialogue question.

      As for this:

      And, certainly you should know, I have nothing whatsoever against you.

      If I did not think that you had something to say, I would never have invited you into the venues that I did.


      Let's get beyond this.

      I think you and I are starting off on a brand new path. I am willing to give it a go and it seems you are as well.

      So let's just go from there.

      Delete
  15. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I just don't answer in a way that pleases you. Which is why you have to resort to being snide.

      Not really... You just don't read responses to you and either make up some lie (which you were caught in twice in the thread - well three times because you claim that you read my words even though you admit you didn't read them), or you just blithely argue with the "Progressive in your head" but no one in reality.

      Guess it's better than the way you censored remarks at your site. Shows how open you are to real discourse.

      No, see let me explain the word "discourse" to you.

      Proper discourse is when people exchange ideas and converse in a reasonable way, when both sides actually "listen" or in this case "read" what the other person is saying. I did that here, and just because I didn't let any of your bullshit slide, now you are mad. You, on the other hand really didn't read anything I wrote which is obvious from your commentary.

      But really... oldschool you just keep digging.

      Delete
    2. Can you be any more arrogant than having to "explain" what discourse is?

      The fact is that you are so think skinned that anything will provoke you. You take comments that make a large point and treat them as if they were directed at you, the forest and tree syndrome I mentioned above.

      I guess that's why you censored like a dictator, because only you get to decide what is valid. What a scary thought!

      I don't "dig." The need to drop these type of jabs is another indication of that you have no clue about what constitutes discourse.

      The fact is that I read it all, except for what I said, when you said "This is wayyyyyy to easy." For your information, starting a comment like that shows a lack of desire for discourse. If I told you my name, you would tell me I am wrong.

      Delete
    3. Heh (again) Part III:

      Can you be any more arrogant than having to "explain" what discourse is?

      Not arrogant, it is just clear that you don't understand the term "discourse". I was just helping you out.

      I guess that's why you censored like a dictator, because only you get to decide what is valid. What a scary thought!

      Talk about feeling self-important.. gee whiz. Your points were removed at PZ because you could not stay on topic particularly after you were warned to do that. Our page was not created for your O/T commentary about how Progressives and President Obama were bad guys. The internet is NOT the public square in Manhattan. Those were the conditions for posting on our page. You did not respect that.

      Nor did you read the comments to respond to actual points being made. SO all of us decided that when you strayed from the topic, your comments were struck. If you can't follow the rules then don't get mad when people get pissed off and if you don't like the rules then don't participate. Period.

      Delete
    4. Heh Part IV:

      The fact is that I read it all, except for what I said, when you said "This is wayyyyyy to easy." For your information, starting a comment like that shows a lack of desire for discourse. If I told you my name, you would tell me I am wrong.

      No oldschool you are lying. Either that, or you have absolutely ZERO reading comprehension. Zero. But I cannot believe anyone can be that dumb so I would rather think you are simply lying for political reasons. Forget that you simply blew off any of my requests for a policy discussion and rather you turned this into an idiotic personal discussion..

      BUT you then posted that ridiculous piece from Kirsten Powers defending how nice (paraphrased) Conservative people were and told me to argue with her.

      The only thing was that earlier in the discussion (when you supposedly reading my comments - but obviously did not), I said this:

      But in terms of "Conservatives".... I might actually agree with you on that. My Conservative friends are much more open than my Liberal friends are. But that is purely anecdotal.

      And

      "and you are completely and totally wrong. Most of my friends (not some but most) are Republicans (and fairly Conservative). The Martial Arts and Tactical shooting community is not really known for it's progressive views on things. Often times, my buddies rag on me as their token Liberal friend.

      I know very much that Republican and Conservative people are not "demons", in fact on a 1 to 1 basis I prefer them to overbearing Liberals and Progressives. But to say they are concerned for the "welfare" of the country is simply unadulterated bullshit. Most of them are concerned for their friends, local communities, and really... their wallets and bank accounts. They don't give a flying fuck about anything outside of that except for some vague notions of not letting people cheat on welfare, supporting the police against the hordes of inner city thugs, making sure that the Military kicks ass, and that "big brother" is getting too big. That's it. Get specific with them and they sputter about individual ruggedness and responsibility.


      Had you actually read my comments you would not have made the Powers comment, as you can see I addressed those issues already with you.

      But this comment... this one is rich:

      If I told you my name, you would tell me I am wrong.

      You are wrong... LOL. . No really you are. And this sentence tells me just how much you really didn't read what I wrote. Now before I show you just how wrong you are, let me point out that you actually used part of the quote I am going to prove you wrong with to try make some twisted point. But anyway here goes:

      "Believe it or not, I agree with oldschool when he talks about (paraphrased) "Theories in academia that sound great but don't work so well in real life". I see that at places like DKos all the time and honestly I think that they "young Left" is losing touch with reality. HOWEVER, at the same time, I think the Right has completely lost touch with reality and offers up no suggestions for how to fix things, just one criticism after another and an abject failure to take responsibility for anything.

      Whoops....

      That is you once again projecting. Now, I am being to feel sorry for you here, so please stop. BUT if you insist on keeping this going, I am going to keep on hammering you.

      Delete
    5. Hammering is what matters most to you. How sad.

      Delete
    6. Hammering is what matters most to you. How sad.

      Really??? That is your "take away"... HAHAHA

      Well no, "Hammering" is not at all what matters most to me. In actuality, I sort of feel bad for you. What matters to me is that I simply won't let your bullshit stand. Not one little piece of it.

      You were caught in a lie, that lie being (paraphrased), "I read what you wrote". I just proved again that obviously either you didn't or you actually have serious reading comprehension issues. Take your pick.

      But anyway, Fine... So be it. Again, I can go as long as you can with this nonsense. You want to keep embarrassing yourself. Okay by me.

      Delete
    7. Of course it is. You cannot even see it because you are too wrapped in your self-anointed role of McGruff. So much effort on something that matters so little. We are forever grateful.

      I suggest that you are the one actually embarrassing yourself.

      Delete
    8. I suggest that you are the one actually embarrassing yourself.

      You may suggest anything you like but that doesn't make it right. But bluster as a response... I don't know man if that is a great idea. I mean either you were caught in a complete lie (claiming you read my comments) or you have zero reading comprehension. Those are proven above. YET.. you continue to argue.

      Of course it is. You cannot even see it because you are too wrapped in your self-anointed role of McGruff. So much effort on something that matters so little. We are forever grateful.

      McGruff the Crime Dog???? Are you committing a crime or something? I just thought you were bullshitting, I would hardly consider that a crime.

      So much effort on something that matters so little. We are forever grateful.

      Not really that much effort wiping out your bullshit. But who is "we" when you refer to someone being grateful. Or is this some weird "imperial" thing of self titling (like "the Queen is not Amused")

      Delete
    9. So much goes over your head because of your obsession. Good luck!

      Delete
    10. So much goes over your head because of your obsession. Good luck!

      Pray tell what "goes over my head"? That you don't read my posts? That you just don't know when to stop?

      I would say, if anyone is obsessed it is you my friend. You simply can't help yourself. Just look at that insane screed in Mikes latest piece where we are talking rationally without using "Identity Politics" yet even the term "Progressive" gets you "figuratively foaming at the mouth" . You even invoked Michael Brown... LOL

      Maybe you can simply read what is written rather than continually "Go Long".

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. No, I have better things to do. Sorry.

      I am not foaming, either. That appears to be your specialty.

      Delete
  16. This just gets better..

    I say "Maybe you can simply read what is written rather than continually "Go Long"

    And you answer:

    No, I have better things to do. Sorry.

    LOL you goofball... Make up your mind.. are you reading comments or not.

    And you most certainly are foaming. Look at you trying to break up dialog in Mike's latest post. It's getting pathetic oldschool... really it is.

    ReplyDelete