Well Damn! Somebody finally SAID IT!!

The mistake of crying racism is especially tempting to upscale, influential liberals who, no less than protesters on the right, are ducking the true causes of dispossession, fear and rage: the premises and practices of financial capital, predatory consumer marketing and a national-security state boondoggling.

Liberals who've done well by those practices aren't always serious about redressing their inequities and disruptions. But they can't bring themselves to defend them very wholeheartedly, either. So they grasp at symbolic gestures against racism that short-circuit political currents for necessary change as surely as Rush does.

Remember the moralistic passion plays over the dubious black church "arson epidemic"? Or the supposed "ethnic cleansing" in congressional redistricting in which black incumbents actually won in majority-white districts? That politics of "anti-racist" paroxysm eclipsed the real challenges, which have only worsened since then.

Carter is hardly wrong to condemn racism when he sees it in the protests. But to blame racism for an "overwhelming portion" of the fear and rage rising around us would be to consign legitimately frightened and angry people to demagogues and shut out real change. That would be a strategic blunder, and ultimately a moral one, too

But to blame racism for an "overwhelming portion" of the fear and rage rising around us would be to consign legitimately frightened and angry people to demagogues and shut out real change.

Foofie wrote:

Yes, because the problems with the Palestinians evolved after the 1967 War, and Israel found itself in the situation of being a landlord.

Oh bullshit . . . the "problem" started in 1947 when the Jews began running the Arabs off their land.

I think most of them are incapable of rational thought so they are frightened easily by demagogues.

parados wrote:

I think most of them are incapable of rational thought so they are frightened easily by demagogues.

That's my take on it too. Death Panels? Communism? Are you for real???

You're living in fantasy land, as usual. The Zionists had a plan for the "appropriate" Jewish homeland which they presented to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919:



This was equivalent to the territories they took in the 1967 war. (Source at the Jewish Virtual Library)

The Zionists had a plan to take the territories which Israel in fact did seize in 1967, and well before the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. The agitation of European Jews for a homeland lead to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181, which authorized the establishment of a Jewish state, and the partition of the western portion of the Trans-Jordan-Palestine Mandate. (You can read UNGA Resolution 181 by clicking here.) Among the provisions of this resolution was an economic and customs union of the two communities within Palestine--something which Israel has never even given lip service to.

Your claim was that the "problem" with Palestinians began after Israel became a "landlord" in the wake of the 1967 war. That's just plain bullshit, and you are the one who is conveniently ignoring history. Even the Isrealis themselves acknowledge that Palestinians left the partitioned territory in large numbers beginning in 1947, although their propaganda line is that this was because surrounding Arab states told them they could get their land back as soon as the Arabs were victorious in their war against the Jews. A problem with that line of propaganda is that there is no evidence to back it up. The majority of the Palestinian refugees in 1947 ended up in the Gaza strip, and by March, 1948--before the war began--at least 100,000 Palestinian Arabs had fled the Mandate, most of them ending up in Gaza.

You can peddle Zionist propaganda bullshit all you want, but you'll get called on it. And by the way, Obsesso Boy, this thread is not about Jews and it's not about Israel.

That's why you are almost completely irrelevant at this site. You want to turn every discussion of any topic into a discussion of the Jews.

I think most of them are incapable of rational thought so they are frightened easily by demagogues.

By the way asshole, this thread isn't about the Irish, either--nor the Catholics, nor New York. Do you even know what this thread is about? Do you ever know what any thread is about when you show to whine about Jews, New York and Israel? Do you care? You're like a little boy, sitting in the corner, pulling his pud.

In the right time and place, I see nothing wrong with calling the President a liar. Wilson's time and place were wildly inappropriate. [/quote=roger"]

I don't argue with that.

On all the other stuff, I suppose I'll need to go back and parse the article(s) and points. Illegal aliens and Carter and other matters on this thread are beside my present interest re the original and secondary Dowd articles. Remember, I'm not a Dowd yes person, even if I sounded like it. I'll let you know if I end up thinking we don't have ducks.

But it’s time for other Americans, of whatever persuasion, to take a stand, to say we’re better than this. They should do it because it’s right. But also because we’ve seen so many times what can happen when this garbage gets out of control.

Think about the Oklahoma City bombing, and the assassinations of King and the Kennedys. On Nov. 22, 1963, as they were preparing to fly to Dallas, a hotbed of political insanity, President Kennedy said to Mrs. Kennedy: “We’re heading into nut country today.”