Democrat's remarks on Israel may lead Jews to cut funds

[Resistance]

round and round we go ...

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/339448.html

WASHINGTON - The recent statements about Israel by
leading Democratic presidential candidate Howard
Dean were the last thing the Democratic Party
needed. The Israel issue sparked off a public
confrontation among the candidates, with
Democratic congressmen joining the fray

Jewish organizations protested Dean's comments,
which indicate he wants to change the American
pro-Israeli policy to reflect a balanced
approach to both sides. A letter is being
circulated in Dean's party denouncing his
statements and position, and even Democratic
minority leader Nancy Pelosi and her deputy
Steny Hoyer have criticized his position.

Sources in the Jewish community say that Dean
has wrecked his chances of getting significant
contributions from Jews. However, some say this
is less significant to Dean, whose campaign is
based on contributions from citizens via the
Internet. Many believe Dean's statement will
drive more Jews toward Lieberman and Kerry,
enabling Kerry to take the lead again.

(snipped the rest)

[soleft]

1. I wonder if his wife will stop speaking to him

:eyes:

[pruner]

2. his kids too.

n/t

[Cha]

4. Oh yeah! Dean really blew it now!

Even his own wife won't say hello!

We'll just have to see what happens. I tend to think there are a lot of Jewish People who aren't so knee jerk. And want a more balanced approach to get lasting Peace!

[Darranar]

3. Great...

Sources in the Jewish community say that Dean
has wrecked his chances of getting significant
contributions from Jews. However, some say this
is less significant to Dean, whose campaign is
based on contributions from citizens via the
Internet. Many believe Dean's statement will
drive more Jews toward Lieberman and Kerry,
enabling Kerry to take the lead again.

This is the last thing we need. I'd donate to Dean to prove a point if I already wasn't for Kucinich.

[Cha]

6. Thanks! I'm sure many People will donate to Dean to make

a point!

[madrchsod]

5. i thought the president

was supposed to look out for the best interests of the american people not another country. what is wrong with a balanced approach? must mean that one side can`t suck as much money out of the american taxpayers...

[Prodemsouth]

7. I have to question Dean's political/ election wisdom on this one.

Near 9/11 , and at a time when Bush is looking bad; he brings up the most divisive issue among Democrats. Not commenting on what he said was right or wrong. Just the time. BTW, the list is long of dead political carrers of those who advocated an "even hand" in the middle east. Ask Charles Percy, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hillard to name a few.

[Resistance]

11. who could have known

that suggesting an "even-handed approach" to the conflict would result in such a fierce backlash? Personally, I do expect better from Democrats.

[Prodemsouth]

13. Who could have known? Respectfully..is that a serious question?

Look at the trouble these Israel - Palestine threads start on this and other left of center sites, and then ask me that. Still say that the way Dean approached this was wrong. I will come clean and say I did not think he was wrong about being even handed, it would be better for America and the whole world. Looking at the past political races where this issue played a role and you have an answer as to how this is likely to conclude. I thought Dean was serious about taking the White House.
He was not listening to a professional campaign staffer when he made this remark at this time.

[Resistance]

18. I see your point - but still

it isn't like he suggested cutting off all funding to Israel and start pouring all that money towards the PA and helping them rebuild. All he said was that he thought an even-handed approach is best, without mentioning any specific proposals other than dismantling settlements.

All I am saying is that although I have previously felt that Democrats were too far to the right in their stance on Israel, I still wouldn't have known it had become this bad. And it is really really bad.

[Flying_Pig]

8. Then I will simply increase mine, ...and so

will a lot of other people. I am sick of the Likud/AIPAC/PNAC bunch influencing our government. Our government is supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, of the United States of America, ...not Likud-run Israel! Every time I read something like the above quoted article, my support for Israel declines even more. Matter of fact, my support is turning to abject hostility, and if they, and their friends and sycophants in the media, do a "hit job" on Howard Dean and the Democrats, my enmity is ensured, and so is that of millions of others. Is this what they want?

[vierundzwanzig]

9. But he still

has this AIPAC guy running his campaign. Not to be anti-Semitic but so does Kucinich (the only of the candidates that has my bumper-sticker). Somehow 2% make up 90% of the influence. Quite a feat.

And I'll probably get banned for it.

[Darranar]

10. Kucinich has an AIPAC guy running his campaign?

I don't think so... He was one of the few representatives who voted present on a bill showing solidarity with Israel or something.

[Tinoire]

44. Pray tell about Kucinich

This is the first I've ever heard of this because Kucinich is the one who's stayed the furthest away from AIPAC; most of his long-time involvement has been with AIPAC's counterparts (Tikkun and Americans for Peace Now) so I'd be interested in what you found.

I'm not saying you're wrong- I'd just be moderately surprised... I had a conversation with Kucinich about Israel, Palestine, and peace between the two and let me tell you what a joy that was!

Check this out... Mostly un-related to your point but found during a Kucinich AIPAC google:



New Group Offers Alternative To AIPAC, by Caryle Murphy

On the same day that President Bush holds a summit with Arab leaders in Cairo, about 500 activists will visit 160 Capitol Hill offices today with the message that some supporters of Israel believe its security depends on creating a viable Palestinian state.

Participants in the "Teach-in to Congress," many of them Jewish, have been meeting in Washington since Sunday to discuss, among other things, how to counter the influence of the American Israeli Political Affairs Committee. Organizers of the conference said that offsetting AIPAC's lobbying efforts would help bring about a more even-handed U.S. approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"This is the first attempt to build a national organization that is an alternative to AIPAC," said Michael Lerner, editor of the Jewish magazine Tikkun and an organizer of the four-day conference. "We are a progressive middle path. We are both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian."

<snip>

The Tikkun conference has drafted a resolution for Middle East peace that U.S. Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio) will introduce tomorrow, conference spokeswoman Deborah Kory said. The resolution urges Bush to bring an end to the violence between Israelis and Palestinians by introducing "an international buffer" of "neutral forces to separate and provide protection" for both sides. It includes calls for an end to Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, reparations for Palestinian refugees and the creation of a Palestinian state that would include parts of East Jerusalem.

<snip>

http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/the_clipboard/005765.htthttp://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0603-13.htm

[jos]

46. That is anti-semitic

And I believe an apology is in order. I happen to be one of the "2%," as you put it, and I am opposed to AIPAC. Obviously, I don't have "90% of the influence," as you put it.

Such bigotry needs to be noted. I'm not one to go running to the moderators, so I would appreciate an apology.

[Tinoire]

50. Please

Please either clarify or apologize for unintentionally causing offense. We've all on both sides clumsily stated things when no malice was meant and this is the only way we learn.

The problem is not what you meant to say or do- just that it offended someone in what I know was a clumsy statement because otherwise you would not have a Kucinich sticker on your car seeing that his girl-friend is Jewish and has an AIPACer on his staff (I'd still like to know who because there's AIPAC and then there's AIPAC).


On edit: Grossman by the way wasn't as hawkish as the AIPACers who followed him based on how much hatred for him I see a few real Likudniks at Shamash expressed.

[Jackie97]

12. Dean doesn't need those funds then.

I would like to hope that there are plenty of Democrats and other groups that support his ideal policies to fund him.

[shance]

14. An underhanded attempt by Establishment Dems, etc. to attack Deans lead

How underhanded and pathetic.

Governor Dean didnt even say anything that would any way shape or form invite or invoke such a one-sided, highly immature and over reactive response.

Are these individuals two year olds?

[LastDemInIdaho]

15. Maybe these people are not as forgiving of suicide bombers as some others

I think they are entitiled to their opinion.

[dfong63]

16. it needed to be said - good for Dean

[bemildred]

17. Dean needs to ignore these twits.

And he needs to stick with his message.

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. Sure

Why not chase away the black vote as well. After all, those are the ONLY two reliable groups of Democratic voters.

He has already alienated one, why not go for BOTH!

[Violet_Crumble]

25. So, it's unacceptable for a presidential candidate...

..to want to have a balanced approach to the conflict? Seriously, if there's any groups of people who would stop voting for someone because they want to be even-handed on something, as far as I'm concerned those narrow-minded fuckers should be shown the door...

Violet...

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. Israel

Israel has been a U.S. ally and has clear support for its continued existence.

That means an even-handed approach would represent LESS support for Israel. Wow, what a shock that pro-Israel people don't like this.

[Violet_Crumble]

27. That's total bullshit...

So what? Iraq was a US ally and had clear support for its continued existence....

Guess what? An even-handed approach would represent MORE support for Israel, because despite yr belief that support = blind approval of everything Israel does no matter how bad it is, truly supporting an ally means being able to give criticism when it's due and when offering up their service as an impartial mediator, to actually mean it and not side totally with Israel...

Violet...

[jos]

28. Then

if the U.S. cannot be "evenhanded," it should get out the peace brokerage business.

[tinnypriv]

31. The US isn't in the "peace" brokerage business

It is in the brokerage business. Big difference.

[The Magistrate]

32. Perhaps Of We Could Find Some Way To Commodify It, Sir

Were peace in the form of securities paying 6% and traded freely on the Exchange, perhaps some interest might be shown.

[bemildred]

36. Like the DARPA project,

perhaps we could all trade in "peace futures".

"I'm shorting peace futures for Afghanistan, it's
Spring and I expect the Taliban to start their yearly
offensive."

[tinnypriv]

37. Al-Jazeera won't be happy

They can't get on the NYSE floor.

:evilgrin:

[IndianaGreen]

29. Allies don't bomb each other's ships, or spy on one another

USS Liberty

Jonathan Pollard

[Muddleoftheroad]

33. Allies spy on one another all the time

It's what spies do.

As for the bombing, try something from the last 30 years or so.

[fla nocount]

42. IG was alive then.........so was I. Both remember........millions do.

Let's remember as well that Jewishness, Israel and the "Z" word are not the same and in the minds of many have have little or nothing in common.

[calm_blue_ocean]

34. Neither political party is what it used to be.

The Republican Party changed first (became much uglier, meaner) and now we are seeing lots of (positive) change on the Democratic side.

Go, Dean!

Your even-handedness rules!

New paradigm in the Middle East!

Don't chase the big money -- appeal directly to the hearts of the voters!

[bemildred]

38. I assume that is intended as sarcasm.

It seems at best unclear that he has alienated any large
group of voters with this statement, it seems more in the
nature of some party hacks attempting to exploit what they
see as an opening or weakness in Mr. Dean's political defenses.

[Muddleoftheroad]

40. Weakness

It IS a weakness. Dean has great potential to split the party away from part of its base on this issue alone. What else can he do?

[bemildred]

43. We disagree.

I think it is strength to see through and ignore
this sort of divide-and-conquer attack from single
issue political hacks.

[Resistance]

49. Sometimes you just have to take a stand

because it's the right thing to do. It seems to me that Dean is at least making some meager attempts to do so, yet he's quickly shot down by - of all political partisans - fellow Democrats. No wonder the party is in such disarray. It's despicable.

[bemildred]

51. It's more than that.

One must have positions and be prepared to defend them,
of course. One must have principles or it becomes difficult
to answer as to why one seeks power in the first place.

But as in a chess game, one cannot allow one's opposition
to dictate to course of the game, to put one the defensive,
to force one to defend here and there and some other place,
without extracting a penalty. If one allows one's opposition
to seize and hold the initiative, one is already half way to
losing.

This seems to be one of Mr. Dean's strengths, and it is one not
common in today's teleprompter-addicted politicians. When
challenged, as here, by some wit-deficient opponent seeking
some advantage, one parries and returns to one's plan, to one's
intended message. One does not spend the next two weeks playing in
Mr. Lieberman's court and trying to explain how one did not really
mean what Mr. Lieberman says one meant.

Edit: spelling and grammar

[Flying_Pig]

19. Here's the way this article "reads" to me.....

"We (those who would support reducing or eliminating donations and support to Dean, and/or, Democrats, because of perceived slights against Israel), are American citizens, who live here, work here, raise our children here, have dual loyalties. Push come to shove, our loyalty is to Israel first, and the United States,.....second. Anyone who dares speak out against the actions of Likud run Israel, or calls for something as simple as "even handedness", will earn our lasting enmity, and will be attacked by our allies in the political spectrum, and in the media."

"Further, we will also threaten to continue to support the right-wing, fascist, criminal cabal currently in power in the United States, to the detriment of this nation's citizens, and the rest of the world, as long as they agree with everything that Israel does, and, they continue giving Israel billions of dollars every year. We care not a whit about democracy in our native land, or the destruction of the American Constitution, or economy, or anything else, ....except for the fact that Israel be allowed to conduct its affairs free from criticism or restraint."

Now, that's how I read something like this article. Would someone like to tell me where my interpretation is wrong? And while you're doing that, please remember, that while I am agnostic, I am of part Jewish familial heritage. I would really like to hear from both conservative Jews, and liberal Jews, on my perceptions. Tell me where they are wrong, ...or right, and as a progressive liberal, why I *shouldn't* be upset with these people.

On edit: And even more importantly, how can we resolve this schism? It helps no one, not Israel, not the U.S., and certainly, not democracy.

[bemildred]

20. Your post shows a lot of bias, Sir.

You really should not call the current administration
a "right-wing, fascist, criminal cabal", that is just
your opinion.

Otherwise, I can't fault your analysis.

[Flying_Pig]

21. LOL!

I do wish though, that there would be more comments on what I've posted. I think it's important to discuss these things. For so many years, Jews have been untiring advocates of democracy, not only in this country, but others as well. They have been an integral part of the Democratic Party, for over 100 years. Without them, civil rights in this nation would be nowhere near as developed as it is. And on, and on. So, it saddens me to see this schism, and my logic receptors just can't wrap around it ....

:shrug:

[bemildred]

35. As other posters say in this thread,

I think identifying these sorts of one issue "party hacks"
with American Jews in general is an error. Such people are
best ignored, to pay attention to them merely gives them an
illusion of significance. The idea that they speak in any sense
whatsoever for American Jews in general is laughable, like the
idea that say David Duke speaks for American Whites or that
OBL speaks for American's of Middle Eastern descent.

Your comments on the contribution of American Jews to the
political process in this country are well taken.

[DuctapeFatwa]

23. Maybe he can go shoot a couple of Palestinian toddlers

Bulldoze a few houses on top of people, make a couple of old ladies drink lye, just do a li'l damage control to show the money boys his heart's in the right place.

It really will be a shame if he loses money over that. I don't think anybody would accuse him of actually wanting the US to be "even handed" in the ME.

He would have to be a man of extraordinary moral character to seriously suggest that so many companies voluntarily renounce such a revenue generator.

[Fight_n_back]

41. Wow

how many lies can a person put in one post whose name isn't Bush?

You could work for Fox news.

[jos]

24. Exaggerated

Some of the ones who make the most noise might bolt, but at least 2/3 of Jews will vote Democratic if Dean if the nominee. And the 10% or so we might lose, should be more than made up by Arab and Moslem voted who voted for Bush in '00 and lived to regret it. Reagan got nearly 40% of the Jewish vote in '80, so this is nothing new.

[The Magistrate]

30. Well Said, Sir

It is important not to overrate either the numbers or the power of these cliques within the Jewish community in the United States.

The broadest pool of unreasoning support for Israel is not among Jews, but among reactionary Christians, who are going to vote Republican anyway.

[Cassandra]

39. Far-right Jews would also support...

Bush (maybe a few for Lieberman), so I don't really feel I need to be led around by the nose by their opinion of Dean.

[Tinoire]

45. or Kucinich...

thanks to the work Tikkun and Jews for Peace are doing solely for Kucinich.

[ikojo]

47. This Jew thinks there needs to be a more balanced

approach to the I/P issue that's for sure.

I am sick and tired of mainstream Jewish "leaders" holding foreign policy hostage. Israel is a very powerful country, quite capable of defending itself. Go ahead withhold money from Dean...he gets money from the other sources.

I just wish politicians would realize there ARE other opinions within the Jewish community regarding I/P. Many Jews support the idea of a Palestinian state.

I am ashamed at how Israel has handled the Palestinians, the oppressed has indeed become the oppressor. As difficult as it is for some Jews to accept that the most despised religious group in history has become as oppressive as those who oppressed them, it is true.

Attack as you see fit.

[Resistance]

48. what I am ashamed of is our Democratic leaders

who SHOULD stand proudly on the 'balanced', 'even-handed' side, yet they are every bit as hawkish as their right-wing Republican buddies.