"This is a serious charge against Judaism for which there is not a single shred of evidence.... The absurdity of this claim lies in the fact that the selections for the weekly reading of verses from the Prophets, including those from Isaiah, predate Christianity by two centuries. What motive did Jews have for preventing worshipers from converting to Christianity, when at the time the custom to read from the Prophets was created, Christianity and Jesus didn't even exist?" asks [Rabbi Toviah] Singer.
There are plenty of reasons to be perturbed when loons and hate-mongers support a candidacy. But this game of guilt-by-association can be played endlessly. I tend to place greater emphasis on loons and hate-mongers that candidates actively seek out. Pat Robertson is a loon and an anti-Semite and a vicious homophobe who blamed Americans for 9/11.
Giuliani didn't receive some unsolicited money from him; he actually stood on a platform and embraced him. Why one standard for Paul and another for Giuliani?
Pat Robertson, Rudy Giuliani, antisemites of the caliber of Duke, Carto and Black.
So why the double standard SJackson...Is it possible that you support the anti semite Rudy?
I don't think Rudy is an antisemite, I don't think Pat Robertson. There's nothing to condemn either of them for on that account.
I do think David Duke, Willis Carto and Don Black are antisemites and racists, have lifelong trackrecords of espousing hate, and I will condemn them, and the moral vapidness of a political candidate who is unwilling to reject their support.
My position is clear and consistant.
You've noted your condemnation of Giuliani and Robertson as antisemites, absurd imo, and I presume by extension of the Republican Party who has been silent about this purported embrace of hate.
Anything to say about Duke/Carto/Black and candidates who accept their support?