In the United States, Jews have long been stalwarts of the Democratic Party. Indeed, they’ve never voted for Republicans by more than about 40% (Reagan) and typically they do about half that: McCain got 21%, Bush got 19%. But the left’s passion for a little anti-Semitism will not be denied. And Jews may soon find themselves in an uncomfortable position vis-à-vis the Democratic Party.
Until the late 1980s, the Democrats promoted the idea that Republicans are anti-Semitic. Indeed, you heard this claim a lot: that Republicans “hated” blacks, women and Jews. This was usually supported with some vague urban legend about some religious right personality talking about converting Jews or sometimes a mention of the Inquisition. . . I kid you not. This was then combined with a demand for unquestioned support for Israel.
Then Bill Clinton came along.
It wasn’t that Clinton was anti-Semitic, because he wasn’t. But after Clinton decided to make Middle-East peace his legacy, Israel elected the Likud Party, which refused to playing along with Clinton’s “peace process.” Team Clinton responded by becoming the first American administration I can think of that broke with the unquestioned support for Israel stance (in fact, they actively undermined Likud). Suddenly, it became acceptable to disagree with Israel in liberal circles.
At the same time, Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam ilk were making inroads in both the black community and the Democratic Party. This is a group that railed against Jews, particularly buying into the world-wide Zionist/banking conspiracy theories, and preached to blacks that Jews were “the hooked-nose blood suckers of the black community.” Interestingly, this wasn’t condemned by liberals at the time, unlike Jesse Jackson calling New York “Hymietown” in 1984.
In 2006, Israel attacked Lebanon. The wire services and groups like Al Jazeera slanted their coverage of this war to make Israel look like it was trying to kill civilians. In fact, at least one Reuters reporter got caught faking photos of supposedly dead civilians. But the deceptions worked and the world was outraged, including many in the anti-War/ anti-Bush left in the US. Suddenly, members of the American left were demanding war crimes charges be brought against Israel.
Fast forward to the financial crisis in 2008. When Wall Street imploded. The left started tossing around all the historical anti-Semitic stereotypes only without the word “Jew” attached to them. In other words, it became acceptable for leftists to rail against “Jewish bankers” so long as they only implied the “Jewish” part.
Then Obama got elected. Obama came through Rev. Wright’s “Christian” version of the Nation of Islam and his friends were 1960s radicals. Why does this matter? Because some of the radicals were Palestinians who had been fighting Israel for decades.
In 2010, a group of Palestinians tried to force their way through the Israeli blockade of Gaza. They used force and Israeli commandos responded by killing nine “activists.” The liberal world was outraged at Israel and friend-of-Obama Bill Ayers and Code Pink both became involved in trying to break the blockade and get Israel condemned at the UN.
Later in 2010, OWS is born from a jackass. . . like Damien from The Omen only dumber. Within days they start trotting out anti-Semitic statements and carrying anti-Semitic signs. They even allowed the NeoNazis to join them in some locations.
Just this week, Obama’s ambassador to Belgium told an audience that there are two types of anti-Semitism, the “traditional” kind, “which should be condemned,” and Muslim hatred for Jews, “which stems from the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians” and which, by implication, is apparently acceptable.
Enter George Soros.
The Center for American Progress, the Democratic Party’s “key hub of ideas and strategy,” and George Soros’s Media Matters have started attacking the Democratic Party’s “staunchly pro-Israel congressional leadership.” In fact, they have gone to war with those who would support Israel:● MJ Rosenberg of Media Matters spends his days online “heaping vitriol” on those who support Israel. In particular, he openly questions the loyalty of the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin when it comes to Israel. . . this is an old tactic of anti-Semites and racists, to suggest secret foreign loyalties.
Incredibly, CAP only halfheartedly distanced itself from this after people pointed out these comments were “borderline anti-Semitic.” Incredibly, they claimed these comments, posted on their own blog, were not their official opinions. Yet, they have not taken them down, retracted them, condemned them, or fired anyone.
● Both CAP and Media Matters have attacked anyone who tries to argue that Iran is trying to build a bomb, even the White House, as Israeli stooges. CAP’s Eric Alterman accused the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC of trying to get America to go to war for Israel and called this AIPAC’s “big prize.”
● They attack people who support sanctions against Iran as “Israel-firsters,” implying racial supremacist beliefs in such actions. In one instance, Rosenberg blasted Democrat Brad Sherman for supporting sanctions as “the most ugly expression yet of this country’s almost bizarre obsession with punishing Iran, its people along with its government.” Note the idea that opposition to Iran is aimed at Iran’s people, i.e. “racism,” and it’s a result of a mental condition.
● Matt Duss at CAP wrote this: “Like segregation in the American South, the siege of Gaza, and the entire Israeli occupation for that matter, is a moral abomination that should be intolerable to anyone claiming progressive values.”
● They get really conspiratorial too. For example, Eli Clifton of ThinkProgress attacked a Quinnipiac poll that referenced Iran’s “nuclear program” because the poll was creating a presumption that such a program exists when there is no “definitive evidence.”
● And they actually called Holder’s idiotic idea that Iran is working with Mexican drug cartels a creation of “conservative think tanks” and AIPAC.
So what you have here is THE Democratic think tank and THE group that controls the media for the Democrats turning on Israel and batting about the idea that Jews in American (AIPAC) have some hidden control over our government which is being used to help world-wide Jewish interests. This is otherwise known as the International Zionist Conspiracy conspiracy theory. It is anti-Semitism at its worst.
Add in the fact the Democrats have made the Wall Street banker into the new enemy of mankind and their street urchins are actively spouting anti-Semitism in support of this, and American Jews may want to rethink their relationship to the Democratic Party.
The trend is there. I wouldn’t ignore it.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Anti-Semitism Is Back In Fashion
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
80 comments:
let's see now, Andrew. Barrack has written off white labor class, and now the Jews. His base seems to be shrinking. I honestly suspect this man has a true hatred for white Europeans and now Jews. How else do you explain sitting in Reverend Wright's "church" for eleven years. His explanation that he was there but didn't exhale is about as credible as Eric Holder's claim he didn't willfully mis-lead Congress.
oops, inhale l.o.l.
Considering the surprise GOP win in Anthony Weiner's old seat, which came about largely through traditionalist Jews' disgust with the Dems' anti-Israel policies, there are at least signs the Jewish community is beginning to take note. Let's hope it continues.
Jed, That's hilarious! "I sat in church, but I didn't inhale." LOL! Well put!
I agree about Obama, he definitely has issues with white Europeans and Jews. I honestly think this all goes back to oppression theory and his days hanging out with radicals, which included Palestinian radicals -- the kind who were blowing up airplanes and killing athletes at the Olympics.
But this problem is much broader than just Obama, this problem is becoming a left-wide problem as it's becoming acceptable in their ranks to open display anti-Semitism under the guise of hating "evil" Israel and "evil" bankers. It truly is the start of something very ugly and I'm shocked that "responsible people" on the left haven't demanded a stop to it.
Andrew, I've noticed this too for several years now. It seems that being antisemetic is becoming increasingly more acceptable for liberals, though they pretend they are just criticizing "Israel".
T-Rav, Let's hope. I've known quite a few Jews in my life and most were loyal Democrats, though a couple started changing their minds after the Democratic response to Muslim terrorism.
The problem is that about 60% of Jews (according to polls) consider themselves "liberals or moderates" and only something like 20% consider themselves "conservatives." So they think the natural party for them is the Democratic Party. But if Soros has his way, then they are about to be demonized by the Democrats.
So what do they do then? I'm not sure.
T-Rav, That election had me wondering, that's for sure. I'm not sure how much of that was just a poke in the eye at Obama or how much was signs of a realignment?
I've seen other articles suggesting that Jews are starting to drift toward the Republicans, but the numbers seem to be stuck around 20%. That's not much.
In any event, I see this as a warning for Jews. The Democrats are drifting into the land of antiSemitism and that can only mean bad things. Personally, I would try to put a stop to this or I would go somewhere friendlier... like Republican ranks.
Ed, I think that's exactly right. While much of this is ostensibly criticism of "Israel," it seems to go much deeper than that. This is a different way of thinking which is equating Israel with American Judaism.
But then, I guess we have to ask, what did we expect? The Democrats are a party centered around racial, ethnic and gender division. In that kind of environment, it's only a matter of time before the hate shifts onto someone different. Especially once you start adding the conspiratorial aspects of this into the equation, suddenly all the old "they run the world" stuff starts to appear -- as it does in every time of crisis.
The key now would be for the Democrats to reject this very publicly and let people know it's not acceptable. Unfortunately, too many Democrats prefer to ride the wave of populist hate much more than they like the idea of bringing sanity back to their supporters.
Ed, I've seen those numbers as well. Reagan got 40%, but that was nearly double what anyone else has gotten. So I'm not sure either how much conservatives are making "in-roads."
At least the old garbage about Republicans and Christians hating Jews is finally dying out. That used to anger me a lot when I was younger because it's so far from the truth.
Except that we Jews DO run the world. At least that's what we talk about in our super secret meetings...oops, I've said too much.
But seriously, I remember as a child thinking that WWII had surely ended anti-semitism forever and that all of humanity had learned their lesson. As you point out, slowly it has become acceptable to "blame the Jews" for all of the ills of the world again. Oddly even for the hatred against them.
And as the Ambassador to Belgium points out, it's the Jews fault because if they'd just go away like they were asked years ago, there would no longer be any need to hate them. Or, something along those lines anyway. It's very telling that he has not been asked to resign or even didn't even get a harsh public rebuke from at least the State Department.
Andrew and Ed, I feel about the Jewish community the same way as I do about Pennsylvania. Every election cycle I keep hearing about how the Republicans are making inroads and there's a swing in progress towards the Right, and then when push comes to shove they continue to vote Democratic. That said, the signs do seem to have been borne out to some extent recently, so maybe this time it's really happening. We'll see.
(Not that that's the only way I feel about the Jews as a group; I'm making that reference in a purely political sense; I denounce myself beforehand.)
Bev, I hear it's actually true! ;)
Actually, I hear the Koch brothers run all of conservatism too... yet strangely, I've never gotten a check from them.
If find the Ambassador's comments to be shocking. For him to set up the idea that there is bad anti-Semitism and the the other kind (i.e. "acceptable") and then to blame it on Jews for bringing it on themselves by not is just stunning (especially when you consider what the Muslims want is the Jews wiped out).
And you're right, why hasn't he been fired or called home or reprimanded? If he had said, "well, there's bad racism against blacks, but then there's the racism they bring on themselves by their own actions" -- how long would Obama have waited to fire him? I'm thinking he wouldn't even get a ride home to the states. Yet, this is acceptable?
To me, this is all part of a worrying trend. Big problems start in small ways, and we are well past the point of small ways already if so many people think it's acceptable to hate Jews -- especially people who otherwise claim that prejudice is wrong.
This is the sort of thing that spins out of control very quickly.
T-Rav, "I denounce myself" -- LOL!
I understood your point and I feel the same way. I just don't see the suddenly shift to the right that people keep predicting every election cycle. In fact, I suspect this will ultimately push many Jews out of the Democratic Party and they will either stop voting or go third-party. I don't think too many of them will become Republicans.
Interesting you should pick Pennsylvania. I always think of New Jersey and Washington State. Every single election cycle we're told those two states are incredibly close to being Republican states and this could finally be it.... and then the Democrat wins by 5%. Every... single... time.
Bev, If you guys run the world, can I get a better car? :D
In all seriousness, I don't hate anybody except people who hate others.
The part that amazes me, in most cases, it’s Jewish people attacking Jewish people, Soros, etc.
Once again the great Reagan leads the way, be a proud unabashed conservative and the world will follow.
DUQ, a nicer car! LOL!
Well said, I couldn't agree more -- I don't hate anyone except people who hate others.
Bev, wait a minute, what? You DO run the world? Now I'm starting to wonder if you're really as alarmed by those black helicopters as you let on...
I have never really understood the thinking of most Jews in this country. I swear they put have more allegiance to the democrat party than their own community or to Isreal. Either that or they fear right wing christians over anti-semetic liberals.
Stan, Strangely, this has been true throughout the history of anti-Semitism. Several of the Nazis had Jewish ancestors, many of the communists were themselves Jews -- yet they hated the Jews.
In fact, as an interesting aside, I had a college professor who escaped Hungary to come to the US in the 1970s. His family lived under both the Nazis and the communists and he said the anti-Semitism was identical except in the Soviet Union they hid it behind other words. Thus, whereas the Nazis would round you up for being a Jew, the communists would round you up for being a Jew but would claim they rounded you up for being a traitor.
And many of the guys at CAP and Media Matters who are pushing the garbage are themselves Jewish.
It's a very strange thing that I honestly am at a loss to explain.
T-Rav, The black helicopters belong to a different group that runs the world.
OMG! Obama has lost Korn!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70099.html
Can Missouri be far behind?
Koskcat, When I was still in DC, I knew quite a few Jewish lawyers. These were smart people who believed in free markets, patriotism, etc. -- all the stuff that should make them Republicans. But they were all Democrats. I asked them why.
And the answer that came back most often (this was the 1990s) was fear that the Religious Right was trying to make America into a Christian country where Christianity would be imposed on all. And they decided that being a Democrat was the only way to ensure that didn't happen. As amazingly impossible as this sounds, this is what I heard over and over.
On the one hand, that sounds incredibly paranoid. But on the other hand, look how people react to the appointment of a single Muslim judge in Detroit? If 99% American can freak out that 1% Muslim-America is on the verge of imposing Sharia law, then I guess it's not hard to see how 1% Jewish America could fear the same from fundamentalist Christian America.
I'm not saying it's right, but I can understand it.
Koshcat, I promise you Obama has already lost Missouri. (In fact, he never had it to begin with.)
Koshcat, That's funny. So Obama is just a puppet of the elite, huh? Actually, there's a good deal of truth to that. I'm just surprised anyone who isn't a conservative noticed!
Here's your link: LINK
There are three religions that require conversions: Christianity, islam, and Marxism (I also alway add Environmentalism). My understanding of the Jewish Religion, which is tiny, is that this is not a part of their culture. History shows that they have often been at the wrong end of the conversions. Born Again Christians, Mormons, etc., which make up a lot of the Religious Right, are very active in trying to convert everyone.
BUT, there is a big difference in gettting an annoying Mormon kid at your front door and the aggressiveness of mouslims and marxists. I personally think they need to take a long hard look at who their friends and enemies really are.
T-Rav, Glad to hear it. Sadly, Obama will probably get Colorado. Things have gone very wrong around here. :(
grew up in suburban philly. huge jewish community. Benjamin Netanyahu grew up in Cheltenham along with Reggie Jackson. i think the democratic party dominance goes back to the days when jews were excluded from country clubs, schools, neighborhoods. This was combined with the 20th century view of the G.O.P. as the party of wealthy, blue blood, w.a.sp. businessmen. it is funny in a way, since many of the traits that were valued on American Jewish families (self-reliance, hardwork, excellence) are those more closely associated with libertarian socialism. So . . . maybe this is finally the time we take back Pennsylvania :)
If the Joos would just stop eating Christian children and stealing everyone's money, nobody would hate them.
Koshcat, I agree. There's no comparison between having some Mormon kid standing at your do and having a Muslim governor or Marxist commissar telling you "convert or die."
I'm not sure why American Jews seem to be so blind to the threat posed by modern Islam? They don't even try to hide the idea they want to eliminate Israel and all Jews and force the rest of us to convert. It seems a clear enough statement for me?
I'm also not sure how much of this is just historical political alliances that just continue to play out?
P.S. Koshcat, I would definitely add Environmentalism to the list. In fact, they're probably the most aggressive about forced conversions and gaining control over the day to day actions of people's lives.
Jed, I'm not holding my breath on Pennsylvania.
I think you're right that there is an historical aspect of this. At one point, the Republican Party was the party of wealthy whites, who kept Jews and blacks and others out of their clubs and their businesses.
Throughout the 1980s I kept hearing that stereotype used against the Republicans time and again. But it's not true. Those people have long become the elite of the Democratic Party as the Republican Party has become the party of the small businessman.
I have to wonder if Soros's efforts aren't going to finally get Jews to realize this shift and change sides, just as the South did in the 1980s/1990s?
Who knows.... maybe we will get Pennsylvania back after all?
Lawhawk, Sounds like you've been reading Soros's diary!
Andrew, Then who do I see about getting a new car? Who are the helicopter people?!
I think the point Koshcat makes is a good one that only three religions have the idea of conversions within them. And admittedly, Christianity does have a history with this. As you say, the Inquisition. But at this point, I think a reasonable observer must realize that there will never be a second Inquisition and certainly not one in the United States. But forced conversions from Islam is a definite possibility as they openly claim that's their intent.
Boo Colorado. Stupid Californians and Boulder citizens ruining everything. :-( (If you live in Boulder, then I'm just kidding.)
Pennsylvania just popped in my head because I keep hearing that one every two or four years. I honestly don't have high hopes for New Jersey, and Oregon will probably go red before Washington does (I don't have high hopes for each of them, either). We should be getting New Hampshire back, though.
DUQ, I think the helicopters belong either to the UN or the Bilderberg group depending on who is seeing them.
I don't understand either why people don't grasp that when someone says "we will nuke you" that you can be pretty sure they want to hurt you. And you're right, Islam is premised on the forced conversion and they make no attempt to hide that. So I honestly can't tell you why people don't get that or won't get that?
Incidentally, the Jews-becoming-anti-Semites thing goes way back. Several of the leaders of the Spanish Inquisition were either converted Jews, the sons of converted Jews, or had converts in their families. And it was that group the Inquisition was originally aiming at. Funny how things go.
On the other side, Karl Marx, who was born Jewish but baptized a Lutheran as a child (and then went full-on atheist as an adult), was viciously anti-Semitic as an adult, which is obvious from some of his private correspondence. Actually, he and Engels hated pretty much every non-West European ethnic group.
T-Rav, I consider all of those states "lost." They've moved 5-10% to the left and the fact they throw the occasional tantrum making it appear close in polls just won't change that.
BTW, Don't apologize to Boulder... they don't deserve it. Plus, I'm pretty sure there isn't a single conservative in the whole city (and I'm not kidding). And yeah, it's all California's fault.
T-Rav, Many of the leaders of communism and the Soviet Union were Jewish or born into Jewish families and they were deeply anti-Semitic.
I didn't know that about the Inquisition. Interesting. I knew they wanted to convert Jews, but I didn't know some of their leaders were converted Jews. I wonder what drives this kind of thinking?
T-Rav, That's fascinating. I never studied the Inquisition so I don't know much about it.
Ed, I haven't studied it either, though I know a little bit about it. The strangest thing I read recently was that the Inquisition technically was still going well into the 1970s, it just wasn't what it had once been at that point.
Andrew, that's very true, though many if not most of them were from families which were no longer practicing Jews. Why they became such nasty anti-Semites is something I don't think has ever been fully explained, and many have tried.
On the Inquisition, it's complicated, but one thing to keep in mind was that during this time (14th-15th centuries), most people still conceived of the Jews as a religious and not an ethnic or racial group. Ergo, once you converted to Christianity you were in the clear and no longer a Jew (this didn't always work out in practice, but that was the thinking). So it was easier then to change one's identity in that regard, and having converted, or being the offspring of converts, those individuals may well have not thought of themselves as Jewish.
We are an equal opportunity oppressor. We rent out to any world domination conspiracy group so long as they can meet our considerable fees: $425 per hour in the air.
No one ever suspects the Spanish Inquisition!
T-Rav, I think the same thinking can be seen with the communists. Many of them were born into Jewish families, grew up as practicing Jews, and then abandoned Judaism to become atheists when they became communists. At that point, they no longer considered themselves "Jews" and they truly hated Jews, which they saw as something other than themselves. And as with the people you mention, I don't think it's ever been explained why they had such hatred of Jews.
But in any event, this seems to be a strong human instinct when you join a new group (be it religious, ethnic or economic) to really look down on the group you left. I think we see this a lot with people who move to big cities and become "sophisticated" and then look down on the rubes who are the family and friends they left behind. You also see this a lot with recent converts to a new religion as they often blast their old religion.
I guess if you take this instinct and add in enough social-instability or a public that is willing to be whipped into a frenzy, then I guess you can end up with a pretty combustible combination.
Either way, it's messed up.
Black Helicopters Unlimited? Why am I thinking about ducks?
Although, those are surprisingly reasonable rates...
Koshcat, I've been thinking that all afternoon as well. Monty Python makes everything in life more funny! :)
Black Helicopters Unlimited, do you take a check? Also, you should have posted in a Russian accent.
Being Jewish myself, this stuff bothers me. It bothers me that people think like this and it bothers me no one is calling them out on this.
T-Rav, Could you imagine if a secret organization took checks?
(P.S. We're all set for Saturday's debate. So warm up the sockpuppets!)
P.S.S. Huntsman has not been invited!
ScyFyTerry, I'm not Jewish and it bothers me too. This is the kind of stuff that should be unacceptable in the US.
(snicker snicker)
Couldn't happen to a nicer RINO could it?
T-Rav, Da! Just hold your check out ze window and ve vill pick it up on our next flyby.
for Kosh - "bring out . . . . . the comfie chair!"
I teach at a local college and I've seen this creeping into the student body in the past decade. It's not unusual to see a group of OWS kids say all kinds of vile things about Jews.
"I don't hate anybody except people who hate others."
While I understand the sentiment, this is exactly the same sentiment that the left uses to justify their hatred. They just take the added step of declaring what evidences hate, as well. So if you support Israel, that shows that you hate Muslims--and all "brown" people by extension--therefore it is okay to hate you.
That's why I figure it is safer to just not hate anyone, even if they have it coming. I think some Jew was pretty big on that a couple thousand years ago.
Carl, I've heard that from others and it seems kind of obvious looking at the things the OWS zombies spit out. It's just pretty amazing that they want to think this way.
tryanmax, There are certain people it's acceptable to hate. . . like the New England Patriots.
Besides, I think you're reading DUQ too literally.
I've gotten into a few conversations with conservative Jewish friends about how Jews can be liberal or even go full anti-semitic. The explanation I've received is that being an observant Jew is very much about being set apart (makes sense) and that rejecting Judaism almost always includes a strong desire to fit in, but that it's sort of a chicken-and-egg thing.
I've also had similar conversations with liberal Jewish friends and, while I've never heard the explanation Andrew has, it just seems to me that most of them would rather start wearing the Star of David on their clothes than vote Republican. Good, old-fashioned liberal stubbornness, I guess.
Yeah, I probably am being a little too literal. It's just an important part of my life's philosophy, so I actively look for excuses to pontificate on it.
What I'm trying to say is, "Convert or Die!" :P
tryanmax, I've heard it a lot, the fear that conservative Christians are plotting some sort of second force-conversion inquisition.
In fact, there was even an article at Politico (though I know I won't be able to find it) in the past year in which they were talking about Jews trending Republican and the point they made was that various Evangelical groups had made an effort to explain that this wasn't going to happen, and Jewish leaders felt assured on that point BUT weren't going to switch to the Republicans because they are basically liberal to the core.
One thing I can definitely tell you is that there is a real change in perception of the Republicans in the past 20+ years. In the 1980s, the Republicans really were still seen as an elitist Blue-Blood group who didn't want to associate with minorities. This stereotype got really ugly as the Democrats started losing the South and tried to make up the difference by attracting more minorities by scaring them about the Republicans.
But by the late 1990s, most of this had fallen apart because of the appearance of high-profile minority Republicans. These days only the hardest-core hard-core leftists still accuse the Republicans of being "a rich, white male" party.
tryanmax, Pontificate away, that's what blogging is all about! :)
As for "hating," I actually hate no one. There are many people I don't like, but hate is unproductive and personally destructive, so I don't do it.
I am an ocean of calm.... well, no, not really. But perhaps a pool with few ripples?
And they all work for Media Matters and MSNBC.
Christians planning a new Inquisition? Oh, that's just ridiculous! Politico and its crazy stories. I'll be back in a few minutes; I have to go move some--uh--equipment back into my crawlspace.
Yes, they are still pushing the nasty propaganda of old without regard for the evidence to the contrary. But their audience is shrinking because things like the Tea Party and their selection of many minorities is just blowing obvious massive holes in this propaganda. That's why they end up making contortions like "the Republican support for Herman Cain proves Republicans hate black people."
What they are doing is trying to scare their supporters so they don't actually start using their brains. They tell blacks that conservatives want slavery back. They tell women, conservatives want to force you to get married and have children. They tell Jews, conservative Christians want to convert you. They tell Hispanics, conservatives want to ship you all to Mexico, even if you're here legally. .... so don't listen to conservatives, don't even look at them, put your fingers in your ears.
That's the lie they keep pushing. It's still enough to keep their core supporters in line, but it no longer resonates with the population at large -- so long as Republicans don't do anything to support it.
That's an area where a guy like Newt can be a problem. His comment about the poor the other day plays right into these stereotypes. And I fear he's likely to say things like "black were better off under slavery" or "women shouldn't work."
T-Rav, LOL! It actually wasn't Politico creating a storyline, they were pointing out that this had been an issue which Evangelical leaders had been trying to fix with the Jewish community.
But pay attention to guys like Chris Matthews and see how often he suggest things like "a return to slavery" or "a new Inquisition." There is method to and reason for these kinds of statements.
A pool with few ripples, I like that.
I might not quite be there, though. Not that I stay mad very easily, but so many of the things that make me mad are ongoing. Little things, like the breakdown of the rule of law. Trivial things like that.
Rule of law is overrated. Just kidding.
But probably the biggest thing you can learn in life is to not let things personally upset you if you have no power to change them.
Wow, so last night was time travel night around here and now we're in the Zen Zone. Who said blogs are dull! :)
So good anti-semitism is being Muslim and wanting to kill all Wews and bad anti-semitism istraditional anti-semitism is being a NAzi and wanting to kill all Jews.
How are we supposed to analyze the historical context that the NAzi's encouraged Muslim anti-semitism prior to WW2.
I think the mental gymnastics to make this sophistry work would be most entertaining to watch. Someone please ask the ambassadoir this question.
Indi, As you can no doubt guess, no one bothered to ask questions like that. Nor did they bother to pin the ambassador down on whether or not he thought it was "acceptable" for Muslims to hate Jews -- though that was the obvious implication of his statement.
That's what happens when Democrats get a pass by the MSM. Thoughts like this get to go unquestioned.
And as I mentioned above, substitute "black" for Jew and see how fast this guy would have been fired.
"There is method to and reason for these kinds of statements."
There certainly is! You start by introducing these ideas as quips and asides. Then, gradually, you slip them into the actual conversations. Before you know it, these ideas become the topic of conversation.
I think one of the biggest dupes that the media has played on the public is in convincing them that "communications" is a bogus field. "Anyone can communicate." But we live in a communication age, so it serves to reason that those who know more about it and are better at it will run the show.
...late night musings.
tryanmax, As an attorney, let me tell you, we FULLY understand the power of words. Not only do you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to come up with subtle ways to influence people (e.g. using first versus last names, calling someone by a title, calling something an accident v. collision, etc.), but there is always a huge struggle pretrial about keeping certain words in/out of trials and how thing can be referenced to the jury. It all matters because you can really prejudice people's thinking just through your word choice.
Anyone who thinks you can't do the same thing as a journalist is crazy.
And you're right about how concepts get introduced. It's the same thing with conspiracy theories. You always start with the idea like it's a joke. Then your next step is, well, maybe it's not a joke... you know, I'm not saying this is true but there might be something to it... in fact, now that I think about it, the people who believe this (not me of course, I'm neutral) really do make a great point.... points we should discuss, who knows what we might discover together?
Indi: And during the war as well. In '42 Hitler welcomed the grand mufti of Jerusalem to Berlin to talk about the "Jewish Problem" worldwide and in the Holy Land in particular. The grand mufti, fyi, would later become Yasser Arafat's mentor--not that there's a connection there or anything.
T-Rav, And keep in mind, that was before Israel even existed. So how can they blame Israel for starting something that began before Israel existed?
Let me rephrase... how can they "legitimately" make that claim. Because we know the answer is they will say what they want regardless of facts.
Facts, schmacts. For a time I had an ongoing debate over Israel/Palestine with this guy who took the stance that Israel is clearly in the wrong because that is what international consensus had decided. And everyone knows that international consensus is never wrong.
Wow, I hate that kind of thinking. I run into it all the time... "but if enough people believe a thing, then it must be true."
Yet, these are the same jerks who claim to be "the pro-science" crowd and who will tell you that just because YOU believe something (and have proof) doesn't make it true... not when enough other people believe something else. Idiots.
I see this as a perversion of the herd instinct. People who think like this are programmed to follow the herd and they just don't recognize that is what they are doing. In fact, many of them actually think they are leaders, even though all they are doing is channeling the opinions of the real herd leaders.
These are the people who will happily go along with anything no matter how barbarous until public opinion changes and then they will hate everyone who acted that way in the past. . . themselves excluded of course.
Liberalism at its finest:
Prosecutor: Your Honor the state would like to file charges against Mohammed al Jewhaitten for Hate crimes at this time.
Judge: What is nature of this crime?
Prosecutor: The defendant walked into a synagogue randomly shooting people white yelling “I hate you Zionist Jewish swine”.
Defendant’s Attorney: Your honor we object to these charges being filed for the following reasons:
1) In order to be a racist one must have power over another. As a Muslim the defendant has no power over the state of Israel. As such members of a synagogue, by virtue of their religion, must be considered to be agent provocateurs of the Zionist regime and therefore have the power. Since my client by virtue of his background cannot be a racist he cannot engage in hate crimes.
2) Second your honor my client’s statements have been purposefully and unfairly described by the prosecution without showing the proper context. It is well known the hateful and Machiavellian manner in which the Zionist Pretender to a state treats all members of the Muslim race. Their repeated refusal to allow terrorist attacks and missiles to cleanse the land of their unholy presence without retaliation is evidence that cannot be refuted. Given this “context” we must understand that the statements made are completely understandable, correct and warranted as by the way are the actions which will be addressed in point three.
3) Lastly but not least by any stretch of the imagination these acts are clearly self defense. As agent provocateurs of the heinous pretender state of Zion my client was definitely under threat by their very existence on this planet. Therefore the use of arms by my client is justified. Since the Bush Administration which was a stooge for the pretender state of Zion and they enacted the strategy of preeminent defense thus my client is only reacting in defense of his people.
Your honor these charges must be dropped immediately and the Prosecution has much to answer for….
Judge: Objection is upheld. Mr. Prosecutor you are in conte4mpt of this court. Bailiff, please take the prosecutor to jail.
Note: In the end as all liberal arguments must finalize with, it is Bush's fault.
Indi, Well done! Bravo!
That is actually a pretty accurate portrayal of the logic they are employing.
Although, they would freak out at the blatant presentation and would probably call you a "hater" and demand that you be destroyed for pointing this out.
Indeed, while they do use this type of logic, they really don't like people pointing out what they are arguing.... it makes them look bad. So it's better to stick with sloganeering, which doesn't get people to focus on the hypocrisy and insanity of their logic.
And you're right, most liberal defenses end in "it's Bush's fault," even at this late date. I even saw where they are planning a push to this theme in the coming election to explain the economy -- after three years and trillions of dollars wasted by Obama and many declarations that they had finally "fixed things." Unbelievable.
Indi, Nice!
Andrew, Liberals hate it being pointed out...now. But that is only for the time being until they are able to "build a consensus" around that sort of logic.
As we've discussed times before, facts are of little consequence.
tryanmax, That's true. In the world of liberal political correctness, only "good" facts get recognized and the rest get shouted down.
And then a whole new reality gets built around "consensus."
Post a Comment