"Republicans more pro-Israel" is absolute nonsense

[Behind the Aegis]

Note: This is a 'talk back' feature, so the 'article' may move. I will post the question and part of the response. As new questions are added, this particular one, may move lower down the page. BtA


Dear Alon

Let's get more specific on the politics of Israel in America.

In an interesting article in the Jewish Forward, California Democrat Rep. Howard Berman blames the Republican Jewish Coalition for "making a conscious effort to destroy" the "bipartisan consensus" on Israel. In this, he refers to ads published in Jewish newspapers across the
country, arguing that Democrats are not as strong in their support of Israel as Republicans.

This "cheap ploy," he argues, "will inject uncertainty into the American-Israeli relationship - and ultimately make Israel less secure."

Do you agree?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Howard Berman's contention about the Jewish Republican Coalition is essentially true, yet his conclusion about Israel becoming less secure as a result of cracking the "bipartisan consensus" on Israel is somewhat exaggerated.

Jewish support for Republicans is a brand new phenomenon in American politics which started tentatively during the Reagan years and has evolved steadily for reasons having little to do with Israel or the two parties' positions on the Middle East.

Since the 1930s Jews have been an integral part of the great Democratic coalition: ethnic minorities, trade unions and big metropolitan politics. In the 1950s-60s Jews supported Democrats across the board in astounding numbers, when, especially along the big east-coast cities Democratic candidates were paying tribute to "The three 'I's": Italy, Ireland and Israel.

more...

The response is from Ambassador Alon Pinkas.

[Syrinx]

1. I agree

Republicans are just more violence-oriented than Democrats. And a lot of them are evangelical nuts that want to see a mideast conflagration, so that "Jesus" will take them to heaven.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. I agree as well.

But I thought this quote was very accurate; "...since 1994 the GOP control Congress (excluding a period in which the Senate was all tied), and its congressional leadership was indeed pro-Israeli, but more so, anti-Palestinian and anti-Syrian. These tones did not go unnoticed by Jews."

However, I think that quote works in reverse as well, which is causing great concern among Jews who are supportive of Israel, as well as other Democrats and progressives that are pro-Israel.

[Syrinx]

3. we've found something we can agree on

In the immortal words of Martha Stewart, that's a good thing. :hi:

[Behind the Aegis]

4. We'll always have this and Turkey!

:rofl: :hi:

[aquart]

5. Bush's initial laissez-faire led to years of war and terror for Israel.

He completely neglected the situation. Bill had them talking. (Bill always gets everyone talking. And if you don't agree with him, he keeps talking. When he's tired, he sends in someone else to talk.) Bush isn't capable of sustained discussion. He issues orders.

The current situation between Israel and the Palestinian arabs is largely the result of Bush incompetence and neglect.

Another thing Bill did was always respect both sides equally. Bush never gave the Palestinians any respect. That's what made him look pro-Israel, when all he was was ill-mannered and too stupid to conduct normal international diplomacy.

[madrchsod]

6. what...the republicans are more pro israel?

talk about rewriting history! i`ve have several books in my collection from the 30`s that are rabid anti jewish. one named "the octopus" which is one of the most rabid anti jewish book i have ever read outside of hitler`s. this book wasn`t written by the democrats that`s for dam sure. any jew who thinks the rabid right wing christians are their friends is delusional...i may have my opinion on the state of israel`s policies but never the jewish religion

[Behind the Aegis]

9. Did you read the response at all?!?

The person CLEARLY said that is NOT the case! Sheesh.

[ConcernedCanuk]

7. INteresting nic

.
.
.

From a google:

"Ægir is an unrelated Old Norse word meaning "terror" as well as the name of a destructive giant associated with the sea. "Ægis-" is the genitive (possessive) form of ægir and has no relation to the Greek word ægis.

Ægis has entered modern English to mean a shield, protection or sponsorship, based on its use as a protective shield of Zeus."

MORE

Interesting that the definition of "terror" is NOT related, but mentioned anyways -

hmmmm

[Behind the Aegis]

8. is there a point other than attacking my username?

[ConcernedCanuk]

10. WOW - you read that wrong, expressing interest is not "attacking"

.
.
.

my apologies that my interest appears to have upset you

won't happen again

[Behind the Aegis]

11. Apologies, then.

I thought this was another "hit and run" on my name (has happened a few times, more so with my choice of avatars).

Since you have expressed interest, I chose that name because of my affinity to the goddess Athena. She was also thought to have used the aegis. As it is "indestructible," I thought the best place would be to be behind it. I really enjoy Greek Myths and wanted a name that stood out.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[ConcernedCanuk]

12. Heck, I never even considered that your Avatar could be offensive

.
.
.

After all, it is the Star of David

Which just happens to be my Christian name

hmmm

here's an interesting one

[Behind the Aegis]

13. A little more info...

My avatar is actually what was worn by gay Jews in the concentration camps. However, many a gay Jew will now wear it as a symbol of pride in both our communities (identities). Some here take exception to it for a variety of reasons. Such is life.

I do like the one you posted, as well.