If this is what they do, then he wants to be a neocon, too

Star Newspapers (Chicago south suburbs) ^ | Sunday, May 4, 2003 | Michael J. Bowers Star columnist

[wardaddy]

For some Joe, this is merely cover from which to attack the Christian Right and culture warriors because they have a problem with that first and foremost. They also use it to attack those asking for a sensible immigration policy...like you or I.

One of many ironies in all of this is that the Christian Right is the biggest supporter of Israel there is..period...even more so than many American Jews whose liberalism gets in the way of seeing Israeli realpolitk necessities at times in a manner I cannot fathom.

Nor are many of the Christian Right (paleos culturallly)....toothless hick racist trailer park dwellers as we hear so often tossed around here. Typically, they are rather affluent, with large intact families and politically active in conservative circles.

This whole game here that a few like to play is smoke and mirrors hiding their true crusade and prejudices which is to attack social conservatism.

[wardaddy]

Who were you before? You have too readily absorbed the nastier side of this forum too quickly to be a newbie.

[xm177e2]

BTW, Semite historically meant all peoples from that region

Yes, but "anti-Semite" historically meant just people of Jewish descent (not necessarily the religion, but the ethnic component)

[xm177e2]

And isn't it just typical that a man whose family quite possibly assisted in and definitely approved of the Holocaust should be telling the Jews to "put it behind us"?

That's not fair. Pat Buchanan's uncle died in a Nazi concentration camp.... He fell out of a guard tower and broke his neck! </kidding>

[Polybius]

al-Qaeda is virtually dead, and nobody, but nobody, is going to challenge the United States.

Well,.......almost nobody.

N Korea announces it has 100 missiles pointed at USA

[billbears]

I don't agree with a lot of what Buchanan has said especially when it comes to Israel. However, I don't agree with anything a neocon has ever said. Fact of the matter is that the liberals in conservative clothing, neocons, have hijacked the Republican party and are running full force into implementing their version of government. Needless to say, it's not smaller in any way shape or form.

About the only thing I've seen some 'Republicans' truly disagree with Democrats on lately is abortion and that's even starting to crumble. They may disagree on the size of the tax cut, but you won't hear them disagreeing on how good government is for us and the fact that we need even more

[wardaddy]

All I could find:

1873: The term "antisemitism" is first used in a pamphlet by Wilhelm Marr called "Jewry's Victory over Teutonism."

from this site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_pers2.htm

[Mr. Mojo]

I don't agree with anything a neocon has ever said

So-called 'neocons', to the very last man, venerate Ronald Reagan. Do you disagree with them about this as well?

[wardaddy]

LOL...not to mention NK's sponsor.

[xm177e2]

1873: The term "antisemitism" is first used in a pamphlet by Wilhelm Marr called "Jewry's Victory over Teutonism."

Religious bigotry was considered politically incorrect at the time, so Mahr coined the new word ("anti-Semitism") to mean being against Jews as a race.

[wardaddy]

I doubt I could find any leader in recent history where I could truly say I disagree with everything they said.

I'm sure Uncle Joe got up one morning and said "Damn these Russian winters are cold".

[Mr. Mojo]

Yep, and I share a love of baseball, cigars, and beautiful women with Fidel Castro.

[MHT]

This is a great article.

Until the past year, I thought that the relationship between Democrats/liberals/Jews was so intwined, it was practically melted solid. In the mid-1960's, a book entitled "The Real Majority" showed that Catholics were more likely to change their voting loyalty from the Democrat party than other associated blocks (at that point, blacks voted basically evenly for both parties). Jews were the most entrenched and most loyal to the Dems. Reagan proved this theory right. Catholics switched in droves and became "Reagan Democrats" and pro-life Republicans. Blacks became more dependent on social programs and grew solidly Democrat. Jews not only voted liberal but gave significant amounts of money.

From this affiliation, one would assume that the Dems would be Israel's best friend. Studies of Jewish voter affiliation showed "tradition" (my immigrant dad voted for the Dems so I will, too) was a key factor in Jewish voting habits. In fact, I have always been amazed at the support that the Dems in Michigan got from the Arab community because high-profile Jews were also affiliated with those same Democrats. Other than Jacob Javits, Jewish Republicans were in the background helping formulate policy, notably Irving Kristol (Bill's dad) and Herb Stein (Ben's dad).

Everything changed with the Clinton's. Hillary's hug of Arafat's wife was a big deal. The assumption of a pro-Israel Democrat party was undermined. The pro-Israel bias in the press also shifted, and I cannot figure out why. Jews in America control a disproportionate amount of American assets relative to their percentage of the population. Similarly, there is over-representation of Jews in the media. Given the fact that there are as many (if not more) Arabs in the US as there are Jews, were the Clinton's just playing both electoral sides against the middle? Does it really represent some resentment of the monetary success of their loyal Jewish Democrat contributors? Was it just an anti-Christian gesture as many conservative Christians are deeply committed to the survive of Israel?

Like the blacks, the Jews need to look at what their loyalty to the Democrat party really got them. At this point, one of the most important points to remember about Israel and its defense is that if a small independent nation like Israel cannot survive, other weaker nations cannot survive independently either. What hope is there for a Taiwan if Israel cannot make it? If there are suicide bombings at pizza parlors in Tel Aviv, when will the same type of person do the same thing at a mall in London or LA? Nine-eleven changed everything.

NPR recently ran a debate between Bill Kristol and another man who claimed that the Bush agenda of imposing democracy on Arab countries was wrong. If the Iraqi's wanted a democracy, they should earn it and fight for it like we did three hundred years ago. Wolfowitz is the new Rasputin to a dumb W. and, is consequently, the most dangerous man in the world. Of course, to him, Arafat, Hussein, and the other cast of dubious characters had no malevolent agendas of their own which needed watching.

In the end, the whole "neocon" argument is the ranting of Clinton-loving, elitest, arrogant, Ivy-League ideologues who are united in their hatred all of things Republican, particularly Bush. They reflect the soul-less nature of a Democrat party which has not only lost the majority, but has also lost a guiding philosophy and focused political agenda. Ultimately, they are also going to lose the lemming-like electoral support of groups they took for granted.

[wardaddy]

Yes...it was considered to be a more innocuous term for their aims.

Oddly, anthropologists still refer to ancient and some modern peoples who have populated the regions from North Africa along the Med coast eastwards all the way to the Turkish border as "semites".

Funny how labels take on lives of their own. I wonder where Neo and Paleo will be down the road....I suspect in the history bin with "Know Nothings" and "Fire Breathers".

[wardaddy]

Ha!....you and me both...in fact I'm having my morning Double Corona La Gloria Cubana at this moment, pro baseball is about the only "sport" left I can bear to watch, and well...my admiration for beautiful women is legendary.

Regards...you HAVE to be a fine fellow!

[Mike Darancette]

Since the Diaspora it has always been easiest for Europeans to blame misfortune and the actions of others on the Jews.

Europe has always needed the Jews as cash cows and scapegoats.

[wardaddy]

Kristol is a bit full of hisself a times admittedly. He also seems to vaccilate quite a bit.

He is often the poster child for what folks claim not to like about NeoCons.

My wife thinks he's good looking though.

One interesting and encouraging tidbit I'm reminded of is that the majority of Jews under 30 voted for Lazio over Clinton.

[xm177e2]

Oddly, anthropologists still refer to ancient and some modern peoples who have populated the regions from North Africa along the Med coast eastwards all the way to the Turkish border as "semites".

I don't think that's necessarily odd, that's what the term "semites" really means.

[wardaddy]

That is true but the perception of secular Jewish involvement in the vanguard of the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks did them no favors.

Course Uncle Joe sure appreciated their efforts didn't he? He blamed them all for Trotsky.

I highly recommend a recent movie that came out on video called Sonneschein which gives a total 20th century history of a prominant Jewish family in Hungary and the rise and fall and rise and fall of their family and shifting loyalties between Monarchists, Nationalists/Facists, and Communists...it was quite good and scary...one scene in a camp is truly horrific and hard to watch

[billbears]

By the exact definition of the word? No. I respect him yes, but venerate? I think however he was one of the best Presidents we have ever had in restoring people's spirits to some level of self dependence and he was exactly the man needed for the job at the time.