Posted on 02/10/2016 5:31:43 AM PST by SJackson
I promised to post this (no pun intended, so here is my letter to the Compost.
To the Editor:
What’s worse than anit-Semitism? Calling someone an anti-Semite when you know the charge is completely false. Yet that is what Dena Milbank did in his Sunday column [”Ted Cruz. Master of Insinuations”, February 7].
I was born and raised n New York. I completely understood what Ted Cruz meant by “New York values” and not only was it not offensive, I agree with him. Donald Trump is a liberal with the values of a New York liberal. He has changed his party registration six times.
The term has nothing to do with Jews, unlike the liberals’ constant invocation of Goldman Sachs. It has everything to do with issues — with Mr. Trump’s opposition to defunding Planned Parenthood, with his support for touchback amnesty (sending illegal aliens home, then letting them back in — which is precisely Trump’s position), with his support for socialized medicine, which he says “works well in Scotland and Canada”, and so many other liberal positions Mr. Trump is trying to hide.
To suggest that the term has to do with anything else — especially to impute something as vile as anti-Semitism to it — is thoroughly dishonest and a shameless smear. I thought the Post had higher standards than to print such vile falsehoods.
And Milbank also knows that the full CNN report on Ben Carson insinuated that he might be leaving the race — especially in the context of his advisor, Armstrong Williams, having suggested as much and staffers leaving Carson for Cruz.
Does Ted Cruz scare you so much that you have to resort to lies and smears to destroy him? I wouldn’t be able to sleep well at night if I had written what Milbank did, or if I had published it. You should be ashamed, but I’m not sure you have the capacity.
Nothing I can disagree with there. As to Milbank’s motivation, perhaps he misuses antisemitism for political purposes, perhaps he equates New York with Jews, . They are 13% of the cities population after all, unacceptable to some people. Perhaps there’s a less amoral explanation, but I can’t think of it.
How can one be both a spokesperson for Khalistan and Pakistan and pro-Jewish/Israel at the same time? Inquiring minds would like to know, TBP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.