Replies

Neo-cons are not necessarily Jewish, and most do seem to value Israel highly. She could see it as a neo-con plot. ;) Which means she can accuse big business of complicity as well.

As I said, she could be anti-Semite. Or she could just be another stupid, naive, overemotional, exaggering, moral absolute relatavist, anti-action lefty moonbat. G-d knows there's no shortage of those.

And so what? Many people hate Bush. It's nothing new. I'm Canadian. Even my friends rib me for giving him any support or defense at all, and other people outright insult me from time to time.

Though I should go hassle that group. ;)

Do my answers satisfy you now?

"Iconoclast: One who attacks and seeks to overthrow traditional or popular ideas or institutions."

I would say the above fits the dear boy to a T. If things aren't to your liking, find something others like or agree with and tear it down. If you oppose something positive or admired in the world, that makes you avante garde and quite trendy-smart. Right? /sarc

Iconoclast has a strange inability to see how his remarks so closely parallel the early antisemitism of pre-Reich Germany of the thirties.

In the media, and in "polite" discussion, it was merely enough to suggest that the Jews (not yet openly "dirty Jews") were in control of EVERYTHING, all production, farming, the arts, you name it. This became generally accepted, and later it went from that to "they must have deceived us, tricked us, and taken those means of control FROM us!" in short order. It mattered not that they busted their a$$es and built what they had, it only mattered that the Germans (superior and all) had been foolish enough to let it happen... but those Aryans, uh, Germans knew that could be changed...

The anti-semites of today speak of "Neo-cons" and the Jews running the world stage as a cabal. The Muslims in particular, as GOOD Muslims, should be the rulers (superior and all) and to be denied such power must have been victims of theft from the devious Jews... Does this sound at all familiar to you? Any of you?

Iconoclast, sadly, is of the same ilk as the Nazi sympathizers of the 1930's and 1940's, and would throw in with today's fascists if they sought real control here, on this soil.

His flawed opinions about why we are in Iraq, or extremely off-the-mark comments about giving up on OBL (psst... we're still in Afghanistan) notwithstanding, he couldn't get it right if he tried. And he's not trying - He'd rather be wrong. While your admonitions regarding labels are taken well by me, and I generally agree, the above is the reason this label fits him rather well.