Order hydrocodone….

Maybe they don’t like religon in schools. Does religon define a persons voting preferance. Maybe they agree with the republicans on Israel but not on intelligent design, abortion, taxes, enviroment, etc etc.

Jews need to realize that this is not 1942 and the religious right of today is not anti-semitic - just the opposite. They also need to realize that there are no leaders in the Democratic Party who are F.D.R. That party doesn’t exist any more.

I’d argue, that at least in the modern day, the religious right are the best friends jews ever had, and I think most jews that pay attention would agree, but unfortunately, that’s just not accepted well enough.

It can’t hurt having Ken Mehelman and Norm Coleman running around though.

But I will say that I totally agree with her comments that Jews do not belong in the Democratic Party of today.

First of all, here is some information that was sent out in the past couple of days by the Republican Jewish Coalition:

“Democrats Increasingly Turn Their Backs on Israel”
A disturbing and dangerous trend is emerging

September 6, 2006, Washington, D.C.

“We are seeing a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party today, one that the American Jewish community needs to take note of,” said Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matt Brooks. “Democrats are increasingly turning their backs on Israel, and have done so even in the midst of Israel’s efforts to stop Hezbollah from bombing Israeli cities.”

Brooks pointed to increasing evidence of a deep shift in the Democratic Party’s relationship with Israel and the Jewish community:

In an August 15th interview with Der Spiegel magazine, Democratic Party elder statesman and former President Jimmy Carter called Israel’s actions against the Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon “unjustified”:

“I don’t think that Israel has any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon. What happened is that Israel is holding almost 10,000 prisoners, so when the militants in Lebanon or in Gaza take one or two soldiers, Israel looks upon this as a justification for an attack on the civilian population of Lebanon and Gaza. I do not think that’s justified, no.”

In the same interview, Carter said, “I think I represent the vast majority of Democrats in this country. I think there is a substantial portion of American people that completely agree with me.”

Recent polling has shown a sharp disparity between Republicans’ and Democrats’ support for Israel. The Democrats have become the party of neutrality:

A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in late July showed that there is a strong gap between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to support for Israel. The poll showed that among Republicans, an overwhelming 84% say they sympathize more with Israel (1% sympathize more with Arab states); by comparison, just 43% of Democrats do so (12% sympathize more with Arab states).

This is not an isolated instance.

In a poll by the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg at the very end of July, when asked whether the US should be more neutral in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah or whether the US should align itself with Israel, Democrats supported neutrality over alignment, 54% to 39%. However, by comparison, Republicans strongly supported alignment with the Jewish state 64% to 29%.

These poll results follow several recent political developments:

Seven Democratic members of the US House of Representatives voted, in the heat of Israel’s battle against Hezbollah, against a resolution passed on July 18 which expressed support for Israel’s right of self defense, called for the return of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers, condemned Iran and Syria for their support of terrorism, and condemned Hamas and Hezbollah for using civilians as shields. Those seven House members (and the committees or subcommittees they would likely chair in a Democrat-controlled House are: Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, (Armed Services Committee’s Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee), John Conyers of Michigan (Judiciary Committee), John Dingell of Michigan (Energy and Commerce Committee), Carolyn Kilpatrick of Michigan,Jim McDermott of Washington, Nick Rahall of West Virginia (Resources Committee), “Pete” Stark of California (Ways and Means Committee’s Health Subcommittee). In addition, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi removed her name as a co-sponsor of this important resolution.

Democratic voters in Connecticut threw Senator Joe Lieberman out of the Democratic Party, effectively silencing one of the leading voices for Israel in their party.

Instead, Democrats let stand remarks like those of Democratic Party activist Cindy Sheehan, who declared last year that America and Israel were to blame for terrorism, saying, “You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you’ll stop the terrorism.” (Dallas, 8/5/2005)

Congressman John Dingell from Detroit made a shocking statement in late July when he told a local television interviewer on WDIV on July 30th, “I don’t take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel.” While he condemned Hezbollah for its “violence”, he could draw no moral distinction between Hezbollah’s random attacks on Israeli civilians and Israel’s targeted self defense response.
Matt Brooks said, “Increasingly, the pro-Israel voices in the Democratic Party – Joe Lieberman, Harry Truman and Scoop Jackson – have been replaced by Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Al Sharpton and Jimmy Carter. As President Carter’s remarks in Der Spiegel highlighted, what was once the left wing of the Democratic Party is becoming its mainstream. The anti-Israel sentiment which was once the mark of the leftist fringe now appears in major Democratic forums. American Jews, who for decades supported the Democratic Party, need to take a fresh, objective look at the Democratic Party today and decide if it’s the party for them.”

I will make further comments about your post in the next comment I post.

Spot on. How dare you speak your mind where do you think you are America?

Look Jonah. Gary made a point stop bush countered it. It is called debate. You can point out the holes in stopbush’s arguement and people who might be going stop bush is right might read you counter arguement and change their mind. Alas they read your comment and think you are scared.

Why do people think that Israel is the biggests issue for jews. Do people think Northern Ireland is the biggest issue for irish Americans?

You could’ve stopped at that. StopBush!, you’re the only joke here.

Your comments deserve no further commentary.

Maybe when you change your name to StopIran! we’ll take you a little more seriously.

Taking the results of the Gallup poll and representing that republiCONs support Israel and democrats don’t is the equivalent of saying “the real thing” is cola and “the un-cola” is not. Gobbledegook, folks. Here’s the facts:

Among political groups, Israel evokes the most sympathy among self-identified conservatives and Republicans. Among religious groups, white evangelical Christians are the most sympathetic to Israel (59%), with white Catholics slightly above the average (at 48%) and mainline Protestants and seculars significantly less sympathetic (33% and 24%, respectively). But even among those groups that express less sympathy for Israel — Democrats, mainline Protestants, seculars — few say they sympathize with the Palestinians; more say they have sympathy for neither.

That there is a high correlation between Evangelicals and republiCONs explains Zito’s misleading statement; but what’s BS is the statement that democrats somehow support Palestinians, and that democrats would take a more “balanced” view towards Germany during WWII and Iran presently. Hardly.

Let’s dissect some of the more outrageous remarks.

Jews and Jewish interests are the main target of the Islamofascists.

Broad and sweeping generalizations add little to an intelligent debate. Assuming that Islamofacists is code for terrorists who are Muslim, and discounting the fact that the preponderance of 9/11 victoms were not Jewish, the same for victims in the Madrid train bombings and the London subway attacks, I guess we can all agree.

The largest Jewish population lives in New York, the bulls eye for terrorism in this country.

If New York is the bullseye, why did the Department of Homeland Security reduce antiterrorism funding? Oh, I know: DHS is anti-semetic. And it’s being run by a self-hating Jew, to boot.

Democrats are weak on defense and weak on the War on Terror.

Then why is it that all the wars we’ve won in the past 100 years were waged by Democrats, and all the wars we’ve lost were waged by republiCONs?

They voted against the Patriot Act…

Wrong. The PATRIOT Act passed in the Senate by a vote of 98 to 1, and in the House by a vote of 357 to 66. Or did the sloppy author mean the renewal? Oops, wrong there, too: It was renewed on March 2, 2006 with a vote of 89 to 11 in the Senate and on March 7 280 to 138 in the House.

Of course, if Zito had bothered to look at legitimate research, he/she would have noticed that the American people are, at present, pretty evenly split on the PATRIOT Act, with 45% saying the Act goes “too far” and 49% saying it doesn’t “go far enough.” But here’s an interesting statistic: 52% of Americans are concerned that the Act infringes on their civil liberties. What do we make of that?

… are against NSA terrorist wiretapping, against terrorist profiling, against looking at the bank records of terrorists…

Wrong and wrong. If the NSA can identify a target as a terrorist, I doubt you’d find a democrat who’d say their phonecalls should be tapped and their bank records examined. The problem is that when the government goes fishing, it always takes it too far, and we wind up with Watergate. I think we all learned a lesson there, and as a result, we now have FISA courts and laws that establish the use of surveilance and spying. Democrats think the Administration should simply obey the law.

…in favor of giving terrorists “constitutional rights,” even when they are not citizens of this country…

Where did Zito find this gem? Firstly, observing the Geneva Convention has nothing to do with Constitutional rights and everything to do with supporting our troops. Or, in words that Zito can understand, we want to hold ourselves to a higher standard than the terrorists. When we sink to their level, we are no better than they are. We get upset when they dismember, burn and then display Americans on TV; how do you think the average Mohammed felt when they hear of Marines raping a girl and killing her family?

They are weak on the security of our nation.

Yeah, all those democrats who refuse to take of their shoes at the airport and want to carry liquid explosives in their luggage…

Democrats see the War on Terror as John Kerry so eloquently put it, as “a nuisance” or more of a police action than an actual war.

Sen. Kerry was speaking rhetorically (that means he was saying something to make a point and not speaking literally, Zito), and frankly, he was right. We would be lucky as a Nation and a people if terrorism were just a nuisance. But it is not, as he pointed out, and we need to be one step ahead of the terrorists if we are going to win; not fanning the flames of hatred and violence, and making another breeding ground for terrorism.

You see, the War on Terrorism is being fought through policing. It was policing by British intelligence that brought down the airplane bomb plot; note that no one (not even mAnn Coulter!) suggested that the domestic spying and SWIFT surveilance program had anything to do with the discovery of the plot; it was solid, feet-on-the-street policing that revealed the sinister plot. Thank God for the Brits. They saved us on this one.

And now for the biggie:

They want to cut and run in Iraq.

Wrong. Democrats want this illegal war that is costing us our blood and treasure, was conceived by idiots and justified through lies, deceipt and corruption, to be brought to an end. If we don’t tell the Iraqis that they have to fend for themselves, they’ll never do it. It was only through pressure and setting a time-line that they formed a government, held elections, and began the process of establishing a democracy… why is it so hard to see that if we don’t apply the same pressure to get out of Iraq, we never will?

Bobbi Leigh, you have it all wrong. You see, it was through George Bush’s failed leadership that Israel lost the recent 34-day war to Hezbollah (and if you don’t think it was a loss, just wait).

Bush conveyed his strong personal support for the military offensive during a White House meeting with Olmert on May 23, according to sources familiar with the thinking of senior Israeli leaders.

Olmert, who like Bush lacks direct wartime experience, agreed that a dose of military force against Hezbollah might damage the guerrilla group’s influence in Lebanon and intimidate its allies, Iran and Syria, countries that Bush has identified as the chief obstacles to U.S. interests in the Middle East.

…

But the month-long war has failed to achieve its goals of destroying Hezbollah forces in south Lebanon or intimidating Iran and Syria.

Instead, Hezbollah guerrillas fought Israeli troops to a virtual standstill in villages near the border and much of the world saw Israel’s bombing raids across Lebanon – which killed hundreds of civilians – as “disproportionate.”

And if you don’t think this fiasco hasn’t emboldened the “Islamofacists”, just take a look at how quickly Iran is stopping its nuclear program and backing down in its fanatical statements to the world press.

As a thinking, intelligent and observant individual, I can’t see why anyone has faith in this president, let alone would think he’s the best friend of any Jew.