Free Palestine!!!

America, Israel, and the Arab communities must move above ideology, anger (which comes from fear), and mistrust to interacting as brothers and sisters. Strength through Peace

I greatly respect Dennis Kucinich’s domestic agenda, but on foreign policy he is one step away from being Neville Chamberlain. He would have said the same thing about Hilter in 1938.

Hyperinflation in post WWI Germany was a result of a worldwide great depression, which had a particularly negative effect on Germany due to its dependency on American loans, which the US collected on. Then came the treaty of Versailles and its crippling economic effects and BAM, hyperinflation.

Let us not forget that it wasn’t the FDP (Germany’s Libertarian Party) that brought about Germany’s revival economically. Having spent a week at the FPD’s think tank in Gummersbach, it became pretty evident that this truly is the economic theory of the “Besserverdienenden” (better earning people) as one FDP member put it in the middle 90s.

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

Misguided folks like “themiddle” like to paint Ron Paul as some sort of fringe candidate; are we in bizarro world? Dr. Paul is a man of intergrity and reason; a true for preaking truth in a political landscape of liars and crooks…

I dare any of the liberal socialist or neocons (two sides of the same coin) posting on this blog to find a presidential candidate with a better record than Dr Paul! He sticks to the constitution and advocates peace….

The SHEEPLE on this site prefer establishment candidates who are enslaved to all lobbying groups, not only AIPAC…

Read up on Dr Paul before passing judgement, and wake up!

Irrespective of the various details pertaining to AIPAC’s Republcian orientation, the margianilization of Israel’s supporters, and the like, I think the fundamental issue here is implicated in ck’s comment that my views are a species of anti-AIPAC sloganeering, even if a relatively benign one. To wit, it suggests to me that the debate has been framed in such a way in mainstream circles that the views of people like myself are genuinely regarded as “anti-Israel.”

If that really is the case, well, frankly, it occurs to me that Israel is in deep shit. (As I think it similarly is if, as Jewish Mother commented previously, The Forward is deemed to be “anti-Israel.”) I believe there is ultimately a self-fulfilling prophetic quality to such accusations, and that, in a broad sense, this way madness comes. Indeed, I have to admit that it only recently occurred to me that such views could even be sincerely held rather than crude propaganda, given how extraordinarily at variance they are with my own perceptions.

But please try not to add fuel to the fire. Try not to hold AIPAC to some idealized standard that ought to apply to them and no one else. In doing so you lend credence to the arguments of certain individuals and organizations whose company you would probably not want to be in.

Once again TM, good response. I particularly enjoyed the donkey balls reference. Kudos!

Second, I don’t know how I’ve signed on to become an AIPAC defender since I really don’t care that much about them. However, I am friendly with some AIPAC folks and was invited to a regional gathering in the past. I haven’t heard any of these friends, nor did I hear at the regional conference ANY suggestion that the US should attack Iran.

I did hear a speech advocating placing pressure and sanctions on Iran. I also heard an unequivocal call to place such sanctions so that there would be no war because AIPAC does not wish to see such a war.

I guess I could be cynical and view these public statements in a large public forum and private statements made to me as part of one big lie, but I don’t think that that’s how advocacy groups work. If they wanted an aggressive military posture, they’d say so over and over, because their public presentation would have to match their private presentations. There are no secrets, especially when you have to address two political parties’ representatives.

Third, you accuse them of dishonesty and malevolence (I’ll agree with you about arrogance, although I don’t consider that a sin and I’m sure I could find hypocrisy if I looked hard enough) and I just don’t see it as I visit their website and look at the information they provide. They have a bias and advocate strongly for Israel. They also take obvious pride in the strength of American-Israeli ties and appear to drive most of their message to maintaining and strengthening those ties. These aren’t lies and there’s nothing wrong with any of this.

Now I have no idea why you think they are Republican puppets. Here is a list of their activities, as listed on their website. I see nothing partisan either on the Dem or Republican side in there. They’d be fools to take either party to bed while excluding the other.

But before I continue, rather than giving a blanket denial about your other accusations, I’d like to see some evidence. Perhaps I’m naive or haven’t seen “contempt for the vast majority of American Jews…[and] slandering them [and politicians]…as dupes and anti-semites.” Can you provide some REASONABLE sources that I could review?

Along the same lines, what do you mean when you say that they’ve marginalized Israel among people of good will? People of good will include many supporters of Israel. I would guess that people without good will like Juan Cole or the editors at AP and Reuters who have allowed many of their Arab and Palestinian stringers to color their widespread news stories about the Arab-Israeli conflict have probably done far more to damage Israel’s reputation than AIPAC. I’m not of the mind that those people who view Israel in a harsh negative light are people of “good will.” Some are and some aren’t. Many have deep ill will against Israel. Many have deep ill will against Jews but find the word “Zionist” a convenient shield from what would otherwise be obvious charges of anti-semitism. Many are people of good will whose good will may be misguided because they’re naive. I think, for example, of all the people who are now seeking to find excuses for the steps Hamas has just taken and the clear (and possibly final) rupture they’ve caused among the Palestinians and the hope of some for a unified state. They meant well, but now these people of good will who probably attacked Israel over and over have to face that the people (Hamas) whom they’ve been defending are heinous individually and as a movement.

AIPAC is a convenient scapegoat in a universe replete with overt and covert hints of Jewish control of various institutions. This has nothing to do with “people of good will.” It has everything to do with the prominence of AIPAC. How often, in debates with anti-Zionists, do I see comments about Jewish control of the media? How often do I see comments about Jewish control of politicians? These are the people who shout loudest against AIPAC. Let them shout, they’re people I’d rather not have on my side.

Finally, I have to ask what you mean by “racist policies of Likud.” I’m not even sure why this is relevant since Likud is currently not even in the large coalition which Olmert heads. But let’s say it is relevant because the Likud is the traditional home of the center-right in Israel and has represented a big bloc of voters historically. Which policies are racist? Are you speaking about settlements? Are you speaking about the security fence? The word “racism” is one that I generally challenge strongly when used with regard to Israel. Israel is at war with another nation and with a number of other nations on and over a small parcel of land. Seeking security and/or separation or even an advantage is not racism. Even seeking to take over as much of the land under dispute is not racism. One can disagree with the fairness or justice of what happens and one can oppose it, but I’m quite leery of attributing racism as a factor. I simply don’t think it exists or if it exists, it is no more and no less than racism that some might have toward other groups who are not Arabs but also reside inside Israel and may be Jewish. I reject the idea that racism is what drives this conflict or what drives the Likud, Kadima, or Labor, Israel’s three largest parties or most of the other parties.