Post #151,288
4/15/04 6:23:51 PM
|
It has nothing to do with Duh's "religion"...
..and everything to do with a November election.
Interesting (but not surprising)-- Bush et al are doing just exactly what they wailed and whined about the Demos doing in the last two elections: Pandering to the Jewish vote.
How predictable.
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #151,291
4/15/04 7:19:23 PM
4/15/04 7:40:44 PM
|
It's very short sighted.
But so was his recess court appointments.
As you say, it's pandering for votes. I should have expected it, but it still angers me.
Did you see Bush make the announcement during the press conference? He spoke very clearly and kept looking at the camera while he was talking. It was a clear, deliberate strategy and he knew exactly what he was doing. You can see the video on [link|http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp?Cat=Current_Event&Code=Iraq&ShowVidNum=6&Rot_Cat_CD=US_Iraq&Rot_HT=&Rot_WD=|CSPAN] - there's a link on the left to get the free Real Player v10 (that requires an e-mail registration, but doesn't require a CC number like RealOne seems to.)
Added in edit:
---
In Bush's remarks, at 5:20 in the CSPAN clip, his voice suddenly got louder as he got to the heart of his statement. Yes, he mentions the UN resolutions, agreements between the parties, not prejudging the outcome, etc., etc., but what he wanted to be the sound-bite is clear, IMO.
---
Powell and Boucher are already [link|http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/8440226.htm?1c|trying] to say that there are no changes in US policy, that it's good for the Palestinians, etc., and trying to keep the Arab leadership from blowing up. I don't think they'll be able to spin this that way.
I think that Bush just trampled on nearly 30 years of US policy for what he hopes are a few thousand votes in swing states. :-(
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #151,293
4/15/04 7:34:00 PM
|
Problems, the US cant adjudge right of return
we can agree with the Israeli position or not but we dont live there. Same thing for settlements, what right and what isnt needs to be accepted by both sides. The issue is that the Palestinians feel that if they continue the killing and accept the counter killing for generations if they have to they will get the entire area and Israel will cease to exist. On the israeli side even the most peace loving leftwing folks who would give Jeruselem back if they hought it would help are heartily sick of Palestians and dont want to see them ever. This gives 2 unilateral plans, one of Arafats to keep the status quo until he runs out of Jews and Sharon able to swap the close settlements to Israel for some sand dunes south of Gaza in the Negev. Sharon's plan complements Arafat's, neither would work if there was any indication of change but Arafat wants to die of old age not a bloody murder so he cannot back away from wanting all of Israel and Sharon wants to stay in power to avoid arrest. Maybe in 20 years or so they can try again.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,296
4/15/04 7:53:37 PM
|
I agree, we can't impose a settlement.
Yes, both sides must come to an agreement.
But Bush has thrown away what little credibility we have as an honest broker who will reward and punish both sides as necessary to move them toward an agreement. It gives ammunition to the radicals who believe that we're deciding and helping to implement Israel's policies. He's undercutting his own Roadmap for Pete's sake.
Indeed, it may take another 20 years. It'll probably take longer if Bush is re-elected. :-(
Sharon and Arafat both know they don't have much time left in this world. Approaching death can bring a certain sharpening of focus to people who still have their faculties, but I don't know if Arafat and Sharon are in that category...
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #151,573
4/18/04 8:18:08 AM
|
Hopefully, it makes the Palestinians more realistic
The sooner the Palestinians understand that there is no right of return the sooner they will be able to actually negotiate a reasonable settlement. The Palestinians want it both ways, they want a Palestinian state with no Jews in it, and they want to return to Israel as well turning Israel into a second Palestinian state. There is no precedent anywhere for the right of return, just look at India and Pakistan.
In addition, the Palestinians need to learn that actions have consequences. They could have had a much better deal 3.5 years ago at Camp David, instead they started a war of terrorism. You can't make a deal if the other side believes that they have nothing to lose by waiting. The Palestinians until now have worked with the following assumption. No matter what they do they can always get a deal based on the 67 borders. Therefore, they have no incentive to truly negotiate, stop the terror, etc. What do they gain? They are still hoping that with terrorism etc. they will get more. What Bush has done is say that actions do have consequences, and the fact that the Palestinians haven't accepted a deal will hurt them. Hopefully this brings the Palestinians to a more realistic stance.
|
Post #151,582
4/18/04 10:59:19 AM
|
You make some good points. Thanks.
|
Post #151,657
4/18/04 7:19:00 PM
|
Re: Hopefully, it makes the Palestinians more realistic
There is no precedent anywhere for the right of return, just look at India and Pakistan. The problem is that you can apply that to Isreal also, which wipes out a large percent of the reason for the country to exist. Like it or not, the same historical rational that says that Isreal should be where it is, says that the Palistinians have just as much right to that land. The problem with the Palistinian right of return has nothing to do with them having a legitimate claim, rather the problem is that there isn't enough land in Isreal to let them back in. You can't make a deal if the other side believes that they have nothing to lose by waiting. The Palestinians until now have worked with the following assumption. No matter what they do they can always get a deal based on the 67 borders. Therefore, they have no incentive to truly negotiate, stop the terror, etc. What do they gain? And quite a few Isreali governments have stalled also, knowing that the longer they stall the more land the settlers take. Both sides of this dispute are guilty of many crimes, and both sides have large groups that wish the dispute to continue. Solving the dispute is going to require an outside mediator that can force both sides to negotiate fairly. What Bush has done is say that actions do have consequences, and the fact that the Palestinians haven't accepted a deal will hurt them. Hopefully this brings the Palestinians to a more realistic stance. That might be what Bush had in mind, but that is not how it will come across to the Palestinians. They will percive it as meaning that there is no reason to negotiate at all now, because now that the US has sided with Isreal there is nobody that will force Isreal to keep any agreements they sign. Jay
|
Post #151,659
4/18/04 7:29:34 PM
|
enough land isnt the question its the keeping Israel
a home for the Jews. If an Islamic government got voted in by plurality in less than 10 years according to some estimates it would be death for all jews all the time.. With an Hamas operative in charge of the courts, Arafat heading the Supreme Court, Hezbulla in charge of housing and the EU wringing its hands going please stop now. Thats why there will be no right to return now or in the future. Unlike the territiries Israel has elections. I suppose they could do what the Arabs do, have one election and spend the next fifty years saying we are democratic, we had one election already. no need for more.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,668
4/18/04 8:15:47 PM
|
But then you reap what you sow.
The Zionist came to dispossess and annihilate the locals.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,672
4/18/04 8:35:04 PM
|
came to what and when?
They came to a desert bought land, cultivated it and only defended after attack upon attack by folks brought there by greed who wanted what another had built without doing the work themselves. That was the origin until statehood. After statehood land was grabbed and people killed, but the Arabs were on the offense until 1948. After that they went on offence many times but lost many times.
When the Jews were going into camps during the War the Mufti Of Jerusalem was there inviting the Germans to come and finish the group in the ME. I have sympathy for the current folks but non at all for the people that brought them to their current impasse.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,685
4/18/04 9:36:34 PM
|
That's a false premise.
[link|http://www.zmag.org/content/Mideast/jewsfjustice.cfm|Jews For Justice In The Middle East]: The standard Zionist position is that they showed up in Palestine to reclaim their ancestral homeland in the late 19th century. Jews bought land and started building their Jewish community their. They were net with increasingly violent opposition from the Palestinian Arabs, presumably stemming from the Arabs` inherent anti-Semitism. The Zionists were then forced to defend themselves and, in one form or another, this same situation continues up to today. The problem with this explanation is that it is simply not true, as the documentary evidence in this booklet shall show. What really happened was that the Zionist movement, from the beginning, looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the indigenous Arab population so that Israel could be a wholly Jewish state, or as much as was possible. Land bought by the Jewish National Fund was held in the name of the Jewish people and could never be sold or even leased back to Arabs (a situation which continues to the present). The Arab community, as it became increasingly aware of the Zionists intentions, strenuously opposed further Jewish immigration and land buying because it posed a real and imminent danger to the very existence to Arab society in Palestine.Because of this opposition, the entire Zionist project never could have been realized without the military backing of the British. The vast majority of the Population of Palestine, by the way, had been Arabic since the seventh century (over 1200 years).
In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world-view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didn\ufffdt matter. The Arabs` opposition to Zionism wasn\ufffdt based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people. Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,688
4/18/04 9:39:03 PM
|
well nicely worded spin to fit your view
but we have been down this path before. The british actively helping the Jews? When the Jordanian officer corp was to a man British Army after 48 I tend to doubt that.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,690
4/18/04 9:52:13 PM
|
Did you get to the Balfour Declaration part?
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,709
4/18/04 11:15:46 PM
|
when do my wife and kids get to move in upstairs?
Balfour, the Jews get everything wast of the Jordan the Arabs everything east. When does it go into effect?
people pay cash for dirt. They spend more cash for more dirt. The locals dont like it start attacking the newcomers. Sounds like upstate NY and the Mowhawks to me.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,841
4/19/04 5:47:20 PM
|
The Balfour Declaration was just an idiot's thought.
It has no meaningful significance. Makes as much sense as Bush declaring the Sunni triangle in Iraq as the new homeland for US illegals from Mexico. Populating the cradle of civilization and all.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,868
4/19/04 10:25:01 PM
|
As long as Rceaga has a history of belonging in Falujah
that the western world celebrates twice a year with lots of rejoiceing in and fingering their knives and muttering in their beards about those despicable Mexicans running the world, let them move there.
You cant be hosannaing the christ one minute and then claim Jews dont belong in JUDEAH the next. Pick one story to beleive in and stick with it.
Next thing you will tell me that manifest destiny was ordained by whities god to use the good land the Indians didnt use efficiently.
Jews needed a homeland, not welcome anywhere else as equal citizens so might as well let them have the one they always lived in before several other attempts to evict them permanently. The locals could have made welcome, as prior to 600AD they probably were the same folk. Their leaders determined otherwise and made a determined effort AGAIN to rid them from the soil. They killed everyone in Hebron, they killed all in Safed who NEVER LEFT in the years PRIOR to 1948 from the roman evictions. As expected the cousins who had been living elsewhere until they PAID for their dirt and moved in took exception.
No matter all your distaste and hatred for Sharon and his despicable acts does not entitle you to kill all the Jews who dare set foot in Israel. Or to place people in charge whose only goal is to kill all the Jews in Israel and make sure all the rest of the jews be moved there to be killed.
What is happening is wrong and will be sorted out but not by Hamas, Sharon and Arafat and Hizbullah, the sooner they die and determined men in the PA take over with pragmatic vision there will be Palestine. The dinosaurs have to become extinct first.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,874
4/19/04 10:48:08 PM
|
In the words of Mordechai Vanunu:
Via [link|http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3640989.stm|BBC]: "We don't need a Jewish state," he said. "There needs to be a Palestinian state."
He added that there was no need for him to reveal anything more about Israel's nuclear programme, as the US and Europe already had all the information they needed.
"Despite everything that was published, nothing changed - no one came to Israel and made [disarmament] demands," he said.
Among government restrictions to be placed on Mr Vanunu's movements are thought to be a ban on going abroad, on speaking to foreigners and on getting within a hundred yards of any foreign embassy in Israel in case he should seek asylum.
'Totalitarian' state
A brother of the former technician, Meir, said it was "scandalous" that Shin Bet - the internal security service - had allowed the interrogation to be broadcast.
"This reminds one of the methods of a totalitarian country," he told AFP news agency. Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,877
4/19/04 11:34:04 PM
|
so you agree that only arabs who want to kill all jews are
the only ones entiltled to rule over the jews then with real regret you can say you didnt mean for them all to die. I know you are not like this so I will exit this sub thread,
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,886
4/20/04 1:11:14 AM
|
That's not what the man is saying.
No one is killing anyone. He is proposing the "one state", I think sectarian, solution. The summabitch converted to Christianity in prison.
I ask you to one more time to think about the [link|http://savvytraveler.publicradio.org/show/features/2002/20020503/interview3.shtml|synagogue in Tunisia] that was attacked by al Qaeda. There's been a Jewish community there for 2500 years (i.e. from a prior Diaspora). So Jews can coexist with the "goyem" with reasonable harmony. I'll grant you it's become more difficult since the creation of Israel and word of its atrocities spreading.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,892
4/20/04 2:16:28 AM
|
I guess the existence of Israel was responsible for...
The crusades, the Spanish inqi=uisition and expulsion of Jews from Spain, teh pogroms in Russia in the 1880's, the Holocaust etc.
|
Post #151,958
4/20/04 3:56:41 PM
|
Did I say that? :)
Or deny that the events you cite occurred? Lot's of minorities have suffered at the hands of majorities, or the powerful, or the religious.
So it's your turn to do the same and annihilate the pesky Palestinians and everybody else shut the fuck up?
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,889
4/20/04 2:11:58 AM
|
Instead they should have executed him ...
like the US did to the Rosenberg's
|
Post #151,959
4/20/04 3:57:38 PM
|
I agree, it would have been in character.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #152,039
4/21/04 2:42:52 AM
|
Actually not considering that Israel has no death penalty
It is very much in character for the US where even retarded teen age criminals are exexcuted.
|
Post #152,051
4/21/04 7:11:47 AM
|
Since when?
Honest question. I thought one of the Nazi war criminals (I've forgotten his name) was hung in Israel.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #152,081
4/21/04 12:23:54 PM
|
He was
Israel has the death penalty in law for only two crimes - Nazi war crimes, and cases of "extreme terrorism." In all its history the State of Israel has conducted only one judicial execution - that of the Nazi Adolph Eichmann. What this means is that for all intents and purposes Israel does not have a death penalty even though officially the law is on the books.
|
Post #152,181
4/21/04 11:56:59 PM
|
Not counting summary executions without trial of any...
Palestinain that happens to be in sight.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #152,201
4/22/04 8:21:56 AM
|
bargouti ring a bell, he was summarily killed? Arafat?
attempting to explain profiling doesn't require one to take a position for or against it any more than attempting to explain gravity requires one to be for or against gravity. Walter Williams
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #152,241
4/22/04 3:04:03 PM
|
Re: Arafat?
Sharon needs Arafat. It was explained in Haaretz yesterday and I should have linked it.
As long as Arafat is around, Sharon need not talk to Palestinians and just keep killing and robbing them of dignity, livelihood, and land. The best thing for some Palestinian to do would be to knock off Arafat.
Barghouti is the back up for Arafat in case someone does take out Arafat.
Sharon was not born yesterday.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,890
4/20/04 2:14:29 AM
|
Considering that the British and the French drew ...
all the lines in the Middle East and much of Africa at that time, let's just redo everything. After al who gave them the right ot create Iraq or draw the border between Syria and Palestine and Lebanon, etc. Iraq was a creation of the British (if I am not mistaken Winston Churchill) to safeguard the oil there.
|
Post #151,720
4/19/04 4:26:52 AM
|
Re: Hopefully, it makes the Palestinians
The Israeli government offered almost all the territory back about a month after the war (started by the Arabs to throw the Jews into the sea)in 1967. The Arabs responded with the famous 3 no's of Khartoum. The fact is that there was no one to negotiate with in the 1970's and 1980's. The PLO was crowned by the Arabs as the representative and the PLO did not recognize the right of Israel to exist. When Egypt sat down to talk they got back every inch of territory in 1978.
It is hard to deny the Jews historic connection to the land. See [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=151574| here ] for a humorous take on this. Jews have lived in Judea (the West Bank) uninterrupted for thousands of years. For a Jewish government to deny Jews to live in their holiest cities would be criminal. This is how the "settlements" started.
The bottom line is that time doesn't stand still. If the Arabs had accepted the UN partition plan they would have had a state in 1948. If they would have accepted Israel's offere in 1967 they would have had all the territory. They didn't and now the facts on the ground have changed.
There are 22 Arab countries comprising 99% of all the land in the Middle East. Is it too much to give the Jews 1% of the land? As I stated population transfers have occurred in many places. During wars that is what happens. The Arabs started teh war and reaped the consequences. Here also, over 800,000 Jews fled Arab countries to Israel from 1948-1953.
|
Post #151,722
4/19/04 4:36:45 AM
4/19/04 4:37:02 AM
|
Definition of refugees
According to most estimates about 800,000 Palestinians were displaced in 1948 many of them leaving because the Arab leaders told them to. Somehow this has mushroomed into 3.5 - 4 million refugees 50+ years later. This is unprecedented in history. Think about this, UNWRA is the only UN refugee organization of it's kind and has been in existence for over 50 years. It's very existence perpetuates the refugee problem. Every other refugee issue in the world has been solved in much less time then the Palestinians. Why are they still living in refugee camps 50+ years later?
Edited by bluke
April 19, 2004, 04:37:02 AM EDT
|
Post #151,779
4/19/04 1:01:55 PM
|
It would be nice
It would be nice if the other countries in the region had accepted the Palestinians into their countries as part of the population. It would have prevented a lot of problems. But they didn't and they are not going to.
Sometimes I think the Isreali's don't understand that it doesn't matter how resonable their posistion is. The point of negotiating a deal with other countries and groups is to find a posistion that everybody finds acceptable.
Jay
|
Post #151,783
4/19/04 1:11:44 PM
4/19/04 1:13:55 PM
|
That goes for both sides
to ask on one hand for your own state with no Jews in it and on the other hand claim that millions of refugees can go back to Israel is ludicrous. The right of return is another way of saying the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. The Palestinians have not budged an inch in their positions, Israel has moved a lot. You tell me who is being more accomodating?
Edited by bluke
April 19, 2004, 01:13:55 PM EDT
|
Post #151,292
4/15/04 7:33:54 PM
|
No, this isn't pandering to the Jews
It is pandering to the Religious Right.
Israel features very heavily in prophecies of Armageddon...
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #151,294
4/15/04 7:40:58 PM
|
It's pandering all right, but it's more than just to Jews.
It is also to the [link|http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/6099|Chrisitian millenialists].
There is also [link|http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/bushjews.html|this]. Just a bit out date, I think.
Rapture Bush out, Lord!
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,295
4/15/04 7:53:30 PM
|
that second list, they all go to temple?
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,305
4/15/04 9:06:13 PM
|
Don't be so sure.
Bush accepting Jesus as his personal savior is not neccessarily a political ploy engineered by Rove. A simple man desires simple answers after all. A scion of the wealthy, confronted with the realization that he is a worthless boil on the rump of humanity, may decide to turn his life around and recieve the version of Jesus as accepted by other wealthy men. The Supply side Jesus[link|http://www.beliefnet.com/story/132/story_13245.html|.].
(Yeah, I know. A false dichotomy. So sue me.)
-----------------------------------------
It is much harder to be a liberal than a conservative. Why?
Because it is easier to give someone the finger than it is to give them a helping hand.
Mike Royko
|
Post #151,316
4/15/04 9:45:16 PM
|
Oh, there is a fair amount of pandering
Oh, there is a fair amount of pandering going on here. But the degree to which the US simply embraced Sharon's posistion suggests there is more to it then that.
Sharon's plan is considered radical even in Isreal and the American Jewish population is more to the left then Isreal in general. If his only goal was pandering for Jewish vote he would have been better served taking a more moderate posistion.
Either Bush's religion or the neo-con cable behind the Iraqi war influenced his posistion to be further to the right.
Jay
|
Post #151,322
4/15/04 9:59:00 PM
|
Re: the Iraqi war ascpect.
Supporting Sharon in this case highlights Bush as occupying Iraq as Israel has occupied Palestinian land. The Palestinians were missing at the White House announcements. Bush now has even less credibility about the talk of Iraqi "liberation". Our soldiers will pay for it.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,330
4/15/04 10:25:24 PM
|
the amount of people trying to kill americans in Iraq
will not be effected in any way by this announcement. Its just another excuse.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,346
4/15/04 11:30:23 PM
|
Would you like to poll the Iraqi Governing Council?
These are the US hand picked folks.
And, isn't Iraq the place you want to ship those Palestinians after the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank?
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,349
4/15/04 11:46:05 PM
|
right after we get the mexicans resettled there
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,343
4/15/04 11:09:16 PM
|
Pandering to the Jewish vote?
We are about 2% of the population. 2%!!!!!!
With the exception of a few well known focal points, certain cities, etc, we are invisable to the politicians.
Who the hell panders to 2% of the vote?
|
Post #151,344
4/15/04 11:16:39 PM
4/15/04 11:17:30 PM
|
2% that repeatly votes....
and 2% that offers nice political contributions.
That said - it's fair more likely that the pandering is to the religious right (Christian) than the Jewish communities. (But that's just me)
|
Post #151,361
4/16/04 1:10:01 AM
|
That's not just you
Smart political commentators that I have seen comment, have been very consistent in their commenting on that point.
The Religious Right tends to care strongly about Israel, and they are a major voting block by anyone's standards. (Half of the vote for Bush.)
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #151,347
4/15/04 11:39:08 PM
|
Are you forgetting they actually vote?
Not to mention political contributions and influence buying. Do you think the fact that Israel has cost US taxpayers over $100 Billion is an accident?
[link|http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop.html|Check Florida], a key state.
Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,351
4/15/04 11:46:53 PM
|
dam near as bad as the cubans
the micks, the nigras and the mezkins
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,356
4/16/04 12:03:16 AM
|
ROFL! Hey, voting is a good thing! Now, from the horse's
mouth ([link|http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:ZK4-rA9w3DYJ:https://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/spages/406177.html+voting+rate+jews&hl=en&ie=UTF-8|Haaretz]): "If [President George W.] Bush could find Jewish roots, he would use them, too," says Gilboa. "The wife of candidate Howard Dean is Jewish, Wesley Clark has a Jewish grandfather, and they all considered Judaism a good sales pitch. In these elections there is a tremendous battle for every vote, after the last elections were decided by a few hundred votes. Although the Jews constitute only 2 percent of the population, according to the myth, Jewish capital constitutes half of the contributions to the Democrats. The Jews also vote in very high numbers, about 90 percent of the vote, as opposed to an overall voting rate of about 50 percent. The Republican Party also wants Jewish capital and the Jewish vote.
"In the last presidential elections, about 20 percent of the Jews voted for Bush. At his headquarters they are hoping for a Jewish vote of 30 percent. The competition for Jewish capital and the Jewish vote will be more significant this time. That is why candidates are emphasizing their Jewish roots." Alex
Sacred cows make the best hamburger. --Mark Twain
|
Post #151,381
4/16/04 9:30:24 AM
|
2%
Just think what a 2% swing in the vote in Florida would have done in 2000, and you'll see that that 2% is Enormous!
And remember that in Florida, the number is bigger than 2%!
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
