Posted on 06/29/2010 3:40:25 PM PDT by Marcus
Richard L. Rubenstein is a distinguished theologian and professor. a Yale Fellow, a Harvard PHD, and a contributing editor to the New English Review. Rubenstein is therefore not exactly the personification of a conspiracy nut. It is therefore bone chilling to hear from his lips that President Barack Obama would very much like to see the destruction of the State of Israel and her people, so long as his hands have personally not shed the blood
(Excerpt) Read more at associatedcontent.com ...
Thanks.
Perhaps these threats to Israel might sink in for U.S. Jewish voters.
I’ve mentioned this many times and I’m tempted to write a vanity about it but secular, liberal Jews DO NOT CARE about Israel. It simply isn;t on their radar map.
Just like I don’t care about some municipal turmoil over building low-income housing somewhere in Bumblebee, WI — the secular Jews don’t care or think about Israel.
none of these “enlightened” Jews goes into the voting booth saying “does he/she care about Israel”, they go in thinking “I am making the world a better place by voting for the smart, democrat candidate”
>Obama Sr was a Muslim.
Yeah, but he lost his faith and became a atheist, or so I’ve heard.
>Connect that with the information about the non-attendance of the Obama’s at ANY known church in the past 17 months.
On the other hand, he was a member of Wright’s Church for 20 years.
It’s wrong to condemn any group with a broad brush, it’s also naive to claim that the reason the Jews are condemned in each thread in exactly the same way has anything to do with an attempt to understand either the Jewish community or the processes that go on in elections. I’m optimistic that by pointing out the bigotry behind it, some actual thinking may start to take place.
Thank you Albion, I’ll go watch it.
That’s sad! My Step-Dad is/was a Dem., but pretty much of a conservative one. He votes often for Repub.s, but will occasionally vote for a Dem. on a local level if they are mostly conservative! Otherwise, he’ll take the Republican. My Mom is a 83-yr.-old Repub., who mostly votes for Repub.s. Occasionally, like my step-Dad above, she’ll take a local Dem. who is mostly conservative.
Every once in awhile though, she’ll listen to a smooth-talker like Obama, and talk about voting for them, and I’ll shiver! However, she snapped out of that before the 2008 election, and it was McCain all the way! Thankfully, she realized he (B. Obama)wasn’t like Kennedy (who was at somewhat conservative still), she didn’t like him and didn’t vote for him after all.
She’s one of those people who think that at least some Dems. are like they used to be. She’s a smart lady who isn’t easily fooled. My Step-Dad isn’t either. If they don’t like something about a candidate (for example: if they’re too liberal), they won’t vote for them, no matter how charming they seem. And to be fair, they liked Obama at first, because then they didn’t think he was crooked like Hillary!
Also at first, they didn’t realize that Obama was as left-wing as he was. They thought he was a moderate. I can see why; he did at times act like a moderate! Besides, if they had their doubts about McCain, they both liked Sarah, so they voted for McCain/Palin! In fact, my Dad (see above)said that McCain should’ve let Sarah speak out in her own way, and it was a mistake to hold her back; He might’ve won!
Are you calling me a bigot, or my dispassionate attempt to sort out some of the variety of factors in the voting patterns of U.S. Jews an act of bigotry?
| State | Electors | Obama | McCain | Nader | Barr | Baldwin | McKinney | Others |
| New York | 31 | 4,804,701 | 2,752,728 | 41,248 | 19,595 | 634 | 12,801 | 8,936 |
Once again, you are citing raw numbers and ignoring the extraordinary influence of the Jewish professional class, especially in law, education and the media. There is nothing to be gained in straddling the fence by identifying with those who are ardent liberals/Democrats, any more than I should identify with the knee-jerk Irish Catholic Democrats because my people are Irish. I’m a conservative, so what do they have to do with me? Nothing, insofar as voting is concerned. Same with you and those Jews who choose to vote Democrat. Why go on the defensive?
One of the King's many titles is "Keeper of the Holy Places", hence is entitled.
America Obama to Correct the "Historic Mistake" of the Creation Election of Øbama Israel (2010, 2012 Elections)
Since you accused me of calling you a bigot, it is quite clear that you are the one who is on the defensive.
None of the rest of your paragraph has any bearing whatsoever on what I’ve been talking about.
bttt
No, FRiend, I did not accuse you, but asked you to clarify your language. Your complaints about people who post about the Jewish demographic’s voting preference are in the passive voice and therefore are confusing. Are you saying that anyone who posts regarding the statistical trends of a subgroup — any subgroup — are stereotyping everyone in that subgroup, or are you not?
These ‘’Modern day, certified, snot faced, liberals’’ don’t know when to stop do they? Bet on Is. not 0’b.
I have clarified it, but thanks for asking.
There isn’t any good reason to bring it up over and over and over again. If there were, the demographics of each group, even obliquely, ever brought up in any FR thread would get the same treatment.
That doesn’t happen.
It is done in order to bash Jews, period.
The fact that you appear to be unable to understand this makes it clear, again, that this isn’t a conversation at all, much less a worthwhile one. Bye.
The fact that freepers get frustrated with the Jewish vote does not have anything to do with demographics, or thinking that the Jewish vote could have swung the election, although it might have something to do with annoyance that the tremendous influence of Jewish commentary and thinking does not support, in general, what we know to be right.
It’s really just frustration that the 80 percent hasn’t woken up as the 20 percent has. That feeling is the same as our general irritation at the rest of the American voters. It is a terrible blind spot that we seem unable to do anything about.
Too bad the word “liberal” is used in the Bible in a positive way. Of course there it means generosity to the needy—the exact opposite of having the state take care of everyone.
Bingo.
You may have a point about people bringing up Jewish voting patterns inappropriately on other threads -- without seeing such other threads, I can't say -- but surely it is not inappropriate to mention Jewish voting patterns on a thread about Obama's policies towards Israel. You must have missed the many threads that bash Irish Catholics or Catholics in general for their high numbers of Democrat votes (especially the hundreds of threads about Teddy Kennedy and/or Massachusetts Kennedy/Kerry voters), or the Mormon-bashing threads that do actually seem to be about religious bashing and not about voting. I can tell you with assurance that I have never seen a thread on FR since 2004 that has excoriated Jews because of their religious beliefs, or any prejudice at all other than their majority-liberal voting patterns -- with the exception of resentments of those individual Jews who mount lawsuits seeking to ban Christmas displays in public.
I do not bash liberal Democrat Jews because they are Jews -- to assume this is to play the race card. I am, however, aghast at why 80% of the people whose ancestral religion undergirds our system of laws and who were charged by G-d with protecting life, marriage, the rule of law and the Ten Commandments are tolerating such high numbers of secularists and Democrat voting patterns among themselves, since Democrat leaders are nakedly anti-life, anti-male, anti-family, anti-religion and anti-American.
I wonder the same thing about New England liberal Democrats, whose ancestors were the Puritans, Congregationalists and other ardent Christians who founded this country; yet New England has the highest rate of non-attendance at churches among ostensible Christians, as well as the most liberal bastions of academia. That's not bashing New Englanders because they live in New England, or because their ancestors were Christian -- but if I refer to New England Christians with disgust because of their voting patterns, it's because their tolerance for this decadence among their own people has gone beyond critical mass.
I'm disgusted with the liberal Democrats in any groups who should know better for being liberal Democrats, when their heritage suggests they should not be. There is a disconnect, a rebellion, a rejection of what so many of their own blood and countrymen sacrificed and died for, and it's a crying shame.
Nor are New Englanders or Jews the only subgroups who are displaying this behavior. In fact, the Socialist International, the CPUSA, and any other subversive group you wish to name specifically target demographic groups who can be converted to secular nihilism, as the Democrat Party and the gay lobby are now doing by ramming test cases through impoverished midwestern Bible Belt towns and counties that lack the money or the legal sophistication to resist.
Jews happened to come up on this thread because the discussion was about Israel. In many people's minds, there is an indelible connection between Jews and Israel, and an expectation that Jews as well as Christians who live under a sociolegal system based on Judeo-Christian ethics would seek to protect the interests of Israel. Therefore I was shocked, and I imagine most other freepers who mention it were, at the high numbers of votes for Obama from Jews, whose Decalogue and other aspects of law and ethics have always been the topmost influential cultural components of Western civilization and the United States. Our hope is for their conversion not to any other religion but to political conservatism.
Too bad the word "liberal" is used in the Bible in a positive way.
I didn't even know the word "liberal" is used in the Bible. Surely, the word underwent a vast change in usage over the twentieth century. In the nineteenth century, a liberal was one who advocated less government and more individual freedom within the private sector. Today it means just about the opposite. The more appropriate word for the latter is "statism."
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.