SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home As If We Needed Any More Proof That Obama's Courting of...

THE SPINE DECEMBER 1, 2010

As If We Needed Any More Proof That Obama's Courting of Turkey Was Another in His String of Failures

BY MARTIN PERETZ

The courting was actually of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the personification of the new Turkey. And it wasn't as if Erdogan was an unknown quantity.

In this morning's Financial Times, Daniel Dombey and Delphine Strauss report (through the horrible graces of WikiLeaks) that Eric Edelman, former U.S. ambassador in Ankara, had "described Mr. Erdogan as having 'overbearing pride'; 'unbridled ambition stemming from the belief that God had anointed him to lead Turkey'; 'an overweening desire to stay in power'; and 'a distrust of women'." But this was six years ago, and the new Ottoman sultan was still preening for the West. Erdogan wanted Turkey to be in and of Europe and needed to dispose of what he must think of as "surplus populace," an ugly concept.

Turkey is as likely to be integrated into the European Union (if the E.U. stays alive, which is dubious) as Israel will soon be a member of the Arab League.

Maybe Obama saw the changes in Turkey: its belligerence to the West, its swing toward Iran, its Muslim ambitions, And maybe he wanted to stop them. In any event, amidst the deluge of memos there is nothing suggesting any of this. But I think not.

Instead, in his three day (yes, three day) trip to Turkey during the spring of 2009, Obama let his imagination float free: "We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country." Blah, blah, blah. To a round of applause from the parliament, he assured that the United States favors the admission of Turkey to the E.U. Does he really think that? Or is it one of his fantasies, like that the U.N. is a benign institution?

Anyway, in the interim, Ankara has asserted itself in its practical friendship with Iran and its concrete enmity towards Israel, especially in the orchestrated six vessel intervention for Hamas in Gaza.

The FT WikiLeaks article details Turkey's cooperation with Iranian nuclear development.

And Mrs. Clinton apologized for the leaks.

But it's good that we know their contents.

Even if the president believes the opposite.
 

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 309 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

309 comments

Maybe Obama wanted to make doubly sure that there was indeed no way of wooing Turkey away from Iran's extended arms. Every suitor worth his salt knows that "no" sometimes doesn't actually mean quite "no" but just a coy disguise for a "yes".

- noga1

December 1, 2010 at 4:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Could someone please detail for me the extend to which Turkey has "cooperated with Iranian nuclear development"? My impression, which I'll allow may be woefully incomplete, was that Turkey viewed Iran obtaining the bomb as less of a threat regionally than the destabilizing effects of a US strike on Iran. And that Turkey continued to pursue talks with Tehran about energy needs. Is there more to the story, or does this, in Marty's mind, constitute cooperation with nuclear development? The text paints a Le Carre picture of shadowy Turkish spies handing over plutonium triggers to even shadowyer Iranian spies, which come to think of it may be Marty's intention. As for painting other pictures for us, I'm sure Marty calling the democratically elected Prime Minister of Turkey "the new Ottoman Sultan" (to say nothing of Marty using his formidable powers of clairvoyance to discern the Erdogan's secret desire to rid himself of surplus populace) is in now way reflective of his desire to conjure certain negative stereotypes to mind. Marty would never stoop to such bigotry. Not when you have such a vast intellect to command. I am curious, though, about Marty's ability to read thoughts, though. On the one hand, he states plainly his knowledge regarding the President's personal view that the U.N. is a benign institution (though for reasons that escape understanding, he has kept this to himself, rather than dutifully calling the White House and telling the President this is a "fantasy"). Yet his sight is clouded when it comes to discering whether the President TRULY favors admission for Turkey to the E.U. Perhaps it is like the magic 8-ball I bought for my daughter, and someone should shake him until he reads something other than "Not clear, ask again later". And... the E.U. staying alive is a dubious prospect?

- Tristan

December 1, 2010 at 4:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"s for painting other pictures for us, I'm sure Marty calling the democratically elected Prime Minister of Turkey "the new Ottoman Sultan" (to say nothing of Marty using his formidable powers of clairvoyance to discern the Erdogan's secret desire to rid himself of surplus populace) is in now way reflective of his desire to conjure certain negative stereotypes to mind. Marty would never stoop to such bigotry. Not when you have such a vast intellect to command." ___________ "American diplomats distrust Erdoğan and his unrealistic views on the world, wrote Der Spiegel. He gets his information almost exclusively from newspapers with links to the Islamists and allegedly has little time for the analyses of his ministries, the diplomats believe. The prime minister, one of the United States' most important NATO partners, has surrounded himself with "an iron ring of sycophantic [but contemptuous] advisors," writes a diplomat. Despite his bragging, he is afraid of losing power, according to the dispatches viewed by Der Spiegel. One source is quoted as telling the Americans: "Tayyip believes in God but doesn't trust Him." Erdoğan's advisers, and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, are portrayed as having little understanding of politics beyond Turkey. A high-ranking government adviser, quoted by U.S. diplomats, describes Davutoğlu as "exceptionally dangerous" and warns that he would use his Islamist influence on Erdoğan. A cable signed by the U.S. ambassador in January 2010 says the foreign minister wants to reassert on the Balkans the influence the Ottoman empire used to exert on the region." http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/109725/wikileaks-files-show-us-worries-about-turkish-pm-39-s-dependability.html

- noga1

December 1, 2010 at 4:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The estimable Lee Smith over at the left-leaning Jewish WebMag Tablet has an interesting piece on 8 foreign policy fictions (mostly mid-east related) that were destroyed (probably inadvertently) by Wikileaks. See here. Regarding Turkey. It's actually not at all surprising to anyone who has been following the developments there since the rise of Erdogan and many have written on it. Much of this seems to have escaped the ostensibly omniscient NY Times, in particular their supposedly savvy columnist Roger Cohen, who (as is his wont) blamed Israel for the deterioration in the West's relationship with Turkey in the aftermath of the flotilla incident. I guess it would be too much to expect an apology from Cohen. Being a Times' columnist means never having to say you are sorry. For an interesting twist on the directions Turkey & Iran may well be headed see Daniel Pipes' piece here. Worth reading if you are willing to suspend, or better yet discard, progressobabelian dogma. hg

- ginzy

December 1, 2010 at 4:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Erdogan's secret desire to rid himself of surplus populace)" http://www.slate.com/id/2249825/ "This year, the House foreign affairs committee in Washington and the parliament of Sweden joined the growing number of political bodies that have decided to call the slaughter by its right name. I quote now from a statement in response by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the current prime minister of Turkey and the leader of its Islamist party: In my country there are 170,000 Armenians. Seventy thousand of them are citizens. We tolerate 100,000 more. So, what am I going to do tomorrow? If necessary I will tell the 100,000: OK, time to go back to your country. Why? They are not my citizens. I am not obliged to keep them in my country. This extraordinary threat was not made at some stupid rally in a fly-blown town. It was uttered in England, on March 17, on the Turkish-language service of the BBC. Just to be clear, then, about the view of Turkey's chief statesman: If democratic assemblies dare to mention the ethnic cleansing of Armenians in the 20th century, I will personally complete that cleansing in the 21st!"

- noga1

December 1, 2010 at 4:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ditto to noga. To be blunt, the United States adopted Turkey as part of "Europe" when Turkey was included in the Marshall Plan, and then NATO. 60+ year old policies die very slowly. Maybe Obama did not need to spend three days in Turkey and not one minute in Israel after his inauguration, but at least he was able to form his own opinion about Erdogan. I remind Peretz that Obama dissed Erdogan at the G20 immediately after the Mavi Marmara in 2010 by refusing a public bilateral photo op - such is the dance of the public face of diplomacy. And a delegation from Turkey's parliament was denied much access on a recent visit to DC. And we still do not have a current ambassador to Turkey - whatever that means these days.

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 4:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ditto to noga. To be blunt, the United States adopted Turkey as part of "Europe" when Turkey was included in the Marshall Plan, and then NATO. Maybe Obama did not need to spend three days in Turkey and not one minute in Israel after his inauguration, but at least he was able to form his own opinion about Erdogan. I remind Peretz that Obama dissed Erdogan at the G20 immediately after the Mavi Marmara in 2010 by refusing a public bilateral photo op - such is the dance of the public face of diplomacy. And a delegation from Turkey's parliament was denied much access on a recent visit to DC. And we still do not have a current ambassador to Turkey - whatever that means these days.

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 4:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Isn't it time to suspend Turkey from NATO?

- amidut

December 1, 2010 at 4:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Corrected Pipes link. I hope it works this time: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=197476 hg

- ginzy

December 1, 2010 at 4:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan: you should read up on the Islamabad-Teheran-Istanbul freight rail line that is one of Turkey's proud accomplishments for 2010. In case you want to think about what nuclear Pakistan could possibly be shipping to Teheran in freight cars. apologies for double comment above - guess I should not be using Internet Explorer.

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 4:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is there a mechanism for suspending a country from NATO? I assume if one such mechanism exists there must be explicit criteria, e.g., the equivalent of "high crimes & misdemeanors". hg

- ginzy

December 1, 2010 at 4:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

amidut: "Isn't it time to suspend Turkey from NATO?" You would think so, instead of NATO deciding to site missile defense against Iran in Turkey. or the US selling the Turks fighter jets. sorry - no detail - must go offline. I did write to my congressman in October (Engel, NY17) suggesting Russia was a more reliable NATO partner than Turkey these days, at the end of a scathing letter on Obama's obsession with apartments in Jerusalem.

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 4:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Aren't there NATO nukes on Turkey's land which rather complicate things? I vaguely recall reading something about it.

- noga1

December 1, 2010 at 4:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2k - And read it I will. Thanks....

- Tristan

December 1, 2010 at 4:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Via Martin Kramer: http://www.facebook.com/martinkramer.page/posts/144618812255971 "You knew this was coming: an official of the ruling AKP party in Turkey suggests that Israel is behind the WikiLeaks dump. The report adds that "[Turkish] government officials believe the cables leaked through WikiLeaks were selected as part of a comprehensive plan to corner Turkey both in terms of domestic and international politics." Obviously."

- noga1

December 1, 2010 at 4:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ain't it grand to have your own publishing vehicle? That way you can studiously ignore everything notable that Wikileaks published that blows a hole in your own idees fixes (such as Obama's willingness to aggressively constrain Iran's nuclear ambitions or that he doesn't want to pressure North Korea). Instead, you can rant about the major disclosure from Wikileaks that the President of Turkey is nasty and narrow-minded!

- wildboy

December 1, 2010 at 5:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

wildboy "Ain't it grand to have your own publishing vehicle?" The terminably dumb wildass has spoken.

- jdyer

December 1, 2010 at 5:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually Wildboy has a point. There is much more nuance to the leaks that have been published so far - they do indicate quite a bit of skill and success in dealing with Russia, for example, vis a vis Iran. And, as far a courting Turkey is concerned - it's probable that Obama knows what Erdogan represents BUT Turkey is so important he went and courted THE PEOPLE, not the leadership, and I would have done the same. Nothing is written in stone. Turkey is still a democratic state and still capable of electing an opposition leader. It may not necessarily fall into the Islamist camp. Indeed many Turks are secular, there are Jews and Christians there and of course it has substantial minority groups. It does have an issue with the Kurdish people and with Kurdish militants (is it ok to say "terrorists?") OK there are terrorists. There is also an argument for Kurdish statehood - that's a very complex proposition however given that Kurdish people range from Northeastern Iran, through Iraq and Northwestern Iran, up into the Caucasus and of course constitute a large number of Turks. So, that's a discussion worth having openly. However, many if not most Kurds may not in fact seek statehood, and, they are not a monolith either. Again - not a simple issue. Meanwhile, Turkey shares a border with Iran AND Iraq, it's both European and Asian, it's next to Russia, part of the Middle East too, it does have substantial ties both to Israel and to Europe and the US - and it's linked to Turks in Central Asia - and it's no less strategically located, and no less strategically important, than it ever was. Therefore, regardless of Erdogan's personality and/or his party's philosophy, it was natural and right for Obama to speak to the Turkish people. By the same token it's important for Westerners to see Muslims as the complex people(s) that they are. Islam is no monolith, we should study the history of Turkey, the many ethnic groups of the region and the Islamic world as a whole - and try to learn more about its people(s).

- Sophia

December 1, 2010 at 5:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually, it makes much more sense to blame Israel for the fact that Turkey has been moving into the Islamic sphere than to blame Obama. Israel, after all, was there when the process began. Obama wasn't. And even if Israel didn't start the process, its failure, despite its supposed alliance with Turkey, to arrest this development is the clearest possible indication that Israel's foreign policy is a disaster based on fantasy. You mean to tell me that a small nation than can consistently defeat tens of millions of Arab enemies cannot rein in a medium sized country like Turkey? And why is Israel still a member of the UN, conferring legitimacy on that absurd institution? Indeed, when you think about it, Israel had a military alliance of sorts with Iran, and Iran went downhill too. If one is looking for clear indications of cause and effect, rather than Peretizian drivel and spittle, it seems obvious that Israel is the proximate cause of the deteriorating relationship between the west and the Islamic world. Every time Israel befriends some Moslem nation, poof, it goes down the tubes. But for Israel, the UN would have plenty of time and resources to deal with other issues. In light of the facts, how dare Peretz lay every American foreign policy problem at the feet of Obama?

- roidubouloi

December 1, 2010 at 6:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Turks really come out the worst of what I have read so far, of the personality assessments, although, admittedly, there is surely more to come. Tristan: the western msm ignored the I-T-I railway aka the “Zahedan corridor”. Here is "Riding the Rails" J. E. Dyer - 07.07.2010 (J E Dyer is a retired naval intelligence officer who is scrupulous in her fact checking, and I am certain is no relation to TNR's jdyer) http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/j-e-dyer/324836 Oy, by next week, the entire Islamic world will be convinced that Julian Assange is not only Jewish, but working deep cover for the Mossad - from birth. (They already think Rupert Murdoch is Jewish!) Using a variation of the NCIS storyline of how fictional Mossad Director Eli David deliberately sired a son with a Palestinian doctor in Gaza; sent the son, Ari, to medical school in Scotland in a lifetime project to create the perfect mole in Hamas. Of course, Ari turns out to be double-crossing Mossad out of hatred for his father's nefarious plot, but makes the fatal mistake of trying to kill NCIS SA Leroy Jethro Gibbs, who is considering a bid for the 2012 presidential nomination. (ok, I added that last bit although I do believe the not-liberal 80% of America yearns for a president like this former Marine sniper from West Virginia who embodies the best of American hero iconography a la Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry cloned with Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan, who was also a Marine, albeit one with the Congressional Medal of Honor.) All these diplomatic insights reminds me of the characterizations of ALL the characters in "George, Nicholas and Wilhelm: three royal cousins and the road to World War I" By Miranda Carter. Quite a fine read.

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 6:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

whack-a-mole. as I emailed to a friend on Sunday, Wikileaks is better than Palin...

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 6:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Oy, by next week, the entire Islamic world will be convinced that Julian Assange is not only Jewish, but working deep cover for the Mossad - from birth." K2K, your story begins to unravel the mystery. Hasn't anyone noticed how much Assange resembles Liam Neeson? Wasn't Neeson the leading actor in Schindler's List? I rest my case.

- noga1

December 1, 2010 at 6:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I never understood why the President visited Turkey first or what he saw there. During the campaign he supported the Armenian Genocide view of history and led us to believe that he would stand up to Turkey. Instead he goes and tells them how great they are, how bad Israel is, and how America is just like Turkey. All of it was complete Bullshit. While he was blowing sunshine up their skirt, they were backing Iran. Against our sanctions and wishes. The President tried and needs to realize that he failed. His reset isn't restting. Pull our NATO Nukes out of Turkey (or let the Iranian National Guard paractice handling them) and tell Turkey they did murder millions. At least you are dealing with reality.

- CRS9TNR

December 1, 2010 at 7:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga: "Hasn't anyone noticed how much Assange resembles Liam Neeson? Wasn't Neeson the leading actor in Schindler's List? I rest my case." by golly, Assange does look like a young Liam Neeson, who does not seem to have ever played a Jewish character. As the voice of Aslan in the Narnia films, one could argue that he is the archetype for Christianity. A worse omen is that Neeson played Baron Godfrey of Ibelin in that forgettable film "Kingdom of Heaven", whose heir manages to lose Jerusalem to Saladin, and here we are, still fighting over the same holy city, more than 800 years later. Saladin was a Kurd - too bad his empire did not survive the ascent of the Ottoman Turks. Happy Hanukah all! Filmography for Liam Neeson, ultimate NOT-a-Jew: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000553/filmoyear

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 7:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

it seems there are 90 nuclear missiles based at the U.S. Air Force base in Incirlik, Turkey as part of the NATO-sharing nuclear warhead program. Geography always favors whoever controls Anatolia and the Bosphorous. All the more reason for an independent Kurdistan.

- K2K

December 1, 2010 at 7:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sophia, you are missing the point. It doesn't matter what the documents show. The fact that secret government correspondence was stolen and published is the point.

- jdyer

December 1, 2010 at 8:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi "Actually, it makes much more sense to blame Israel for the fact that Turkey has been moving into the Islamic sphere than to blame Obama. Israel, after all, was there when the process began." Yea, after all Israel exists hence it is to blame. If he had to choose between Obama's presidency and the existence of the Jewish State he would choose the former. Roi's crude anti-Israel rhetoric is getting cruder by the day.

- jdyer

December 1, 2010 at 8:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Israel responsible for WikiLeaks in anti-Turkish plot, AKP members says" SEVİL KÜÇÜKKOŞUM ANKARA – Hürriyet Daily News "Israel could have engineered the release of hundreds of thousands of confidential documents on WikiLeaks as a plot to corner Turkey on both domestic and foreign policy, according to a senior ruling party official. “One has to look at which countries are pleased with these. Israel is very pleased. Israel has been making statements for days, even before the release of these documents,” Hüseyin Çelik, deputy leader of the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, and the party’s spokesperson, told reporters at a press conference Wednesday. Following initial reaction to the leaked U.S. Embassy cables, which have revealed diplomatic secrets about Turkey, Azerbaijan, its Middle Eastern neighbors, Turkish officials have started to suspect that “the main cause of these leaks was to weaken the Turkish government.” WikiLeaks has released approximately 250,000 documents of confidential U.S. diplomatic correspondence to newspapers around the world. Around 8,000 of those documents are from the U.S. Embassy to Ankara. The first signal came from President Abdullah Gül, who said Tuesday the leaks seemed to be a result of a systematic work with some purpose behind it. Though government officials like Deputy Prime Minister Cemil Çiçek avoided naming Israel in their public statements Wednesday, Çelik, a close aide to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, singled out the country with his comments Wednesday." http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=akp-hints-israel-as-8220behind-the-wikileaks-conspiracy8221-2010-12-01 Roid would of course agree.

- jdyer

December 1, 2010 at 10:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh fer pete's sake Jackson. Don't be silly. Roid isn't blaming Israel he's simply trying to re-establish some balance! Talking to the Turkish people was not a bad, stupid or wrong thing to do. Indeed, what we have in some of these comments is a tendency to discuss Turkey in a way that people talk about Israel - as though both countries aren't extremely complex, full of diverse people(s) and capable of listening to new ideas and making up their own minds. They are both democracies too. So if you're mad at the government, fine, but don't stereotype or dismiss the people. As far as turning away from the West or becoming more Islamist, that may well have had a great deal to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - assuming that AKP really does represent a large majority of Turks, it's probably that they are afraid of us. The other possibility is simply that it's a cyclical thing, a desire to seek old roots - it's not as though we don't have a very strong religious thing going on in the US, correct? People are reacting to dramatic change and a sense they lack control over things, which is not an inaccurate perception. So, they start praying. And powerful people exploit the superstitious. It's a lot easier than coming up with rational ideas. It's obvious AKP are scrambling though, from the Wikileaks revelations - if they have to concoct a Mossad plot to explain this stuff - it makes them look pretty desperate. Don't forget the mass arrest of Turkish army officers also - an above assertion that a Turkish general must ipso facto be unreliable is an uninformed comment.

- Sophia

December 2, 2010 at 12:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think nobody would disagree that the U.S.-Turkey relationship is in a volatile state at the moment. In Washington, who knows for sure what the current Turkish government wants, and the U.S. policy may well be damage-limitation. But the effects of a rise in economic bouyancy on the one side and a set of economic and political problems on the other can create a relationship in which the formerly super-powerful power is over-conscious of its new difficulties. I think Obama has been trying to make a long pitch to the Turks to try and think through their new geopolitical notions as an adjustment of, rather than a rejection of, the decades of NATO membership and pro-western orientation. That it didn't work is not a condemnation of the original attempt. In fact, the more I hear about this, the more I think Obama is really trying out a new engineering for American foreign policy, and he's finding that the people who want to old one are abroad.

- ironyroad

December 2, 2010 at 3:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Roid isn't blaming Israel he's simply trying to re-establish some balance!" Oh fer pete's sake Sophia. Don't be silly roi's perverted positions about Israel are too well known around here. It's interesting how the leaks reveal a certain parallel between Israel and Turkey, though it is more of a chiastic parallel. Israel is publicly flogged and villified by Obama's administration while behind the scenes everyone knows that Israel is not the engine that drives the Middle East toxicisity. Turkey is publicly wooed and flattered by the Obama administration while behind the scene it is clear that Turkey is becoming a rogue state in NATO and posing a huge and basically unsolvable problem for all. In other words, Israel is chosen as Obama's whipping boy while Turkey is being petted and coddled. Surely when policies are driven by this kind of blindness and reversal of ethics, when you treat your friend as if he were your enemy and you treat your enemy as if he were your best friend, some insane things can happen. For a community organizer, this is not a very commendable policy to follow, rewarding the group that keeps exhibiting anti social behaviour and punishing the group that plays by the rules. ____________ "Mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers our soldiers.” – RTE, 6 December 1997 “Democracy is not an aim but a means to an end.” – RTE “We will turn all our schools into İmam Hatips [religious schools]” — RTE, Sept. 9, 1994 “Thank God Almighty, I am a servant of the Shari‘a.”— RTE, Nov. 21, 1994 “I am the imam of Istanbul.” — RTE, Jan. 8, 1995 “Democracy is like a train, we shall get out when we arrive at the station we want.” – RTE "..democracy is a product of western culture, and it cannot be applied to the Middle East which has a different cultural, religious, sociological and historical background." Recep Tayyip Erdogan

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 8:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here is another example of Obama's administration wooing Muslims on the brink: http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/3628 "The East London Mosque is among Britain's most extreme Islamic institutions. Built with financial aid from Saudi Arabia, the sprawling facility is home to the London Muslim Center where incendiary preachers are regularly welcomed. On Monday, the East London Mosque hosted a very different kind of visitor-the U.S. ambassador to the United Kingdom, Louis Susman. Urged by President Barack Obama to engage with British Muslims, Mr. Susman spoke of his "great admiration" for the mosque and his enthusiasm for meeting its staff. By any measure the East London mosque is a troubling institution. Last year, for example, it hosted an event titled "The End of Time: A New Beginning," where pamphlets were distributed showing Manhattan crumbling under a Hadean apocalypse of meteors, which shattered the Statute of Liberty asunder and set the city ablaze. One of the invited speakers, Khalid Yasin, described the beliefs of Christians and Jews as "filth." Most worryingly, the event also featured a live video question-and-answer session with Anwar Al Awlaki, the U.S.-born preacher aligned with al Qaeda."

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 9:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually, I was quite clearly mocking Peretz. But there are two posters who are, as usual, too stupid to notice. Those would be noga and jdyer. Really, you two are consummate assholes. First-class. You always lead with your ignorance. Come to think of it, that stands to reason as that is what both of you have in extraordinary abundance. To which noga brings the added gift of her ghoulish bloodthirstiness and anti-Moslem racism. Invariably noga thinks her racism is excusable because the world includes lots of anti-semites too. Nary a shred of difference between them in my opinion.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 9:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And Israel's colonization of a Moslem population most certainly is toxic, in the Middle East and in the world.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 9:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

perhaps the only way to stop Islamic [it is what it is] Imperialism is through re-colonization and re-education, as it will take at least forty years to undo all the lies they have been taught for the past sixty years. Not just the Muslims who call themselves Palestinians, but all of them, except maybe Morocco, the Kurds, and the Alevis, who are concentrated in central Anatolia, Germany, and Azerbaijan. It is as if this religious ideology insists on staying medieval while using modern technology. Crusades with lethality, built on ignorance. Once they kill all the Jews, they will continue to kill the Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and animists, in that order. Andalusia beckons...

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 10:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Of his 98 word comment (12/02/2010 - 9:50am EDT | roidubouloi), only 7 words directly have any substance relevant to the topic. The rest, 91 words, is just his morning abusive routine exercise. And why would roi generate so much noise unless it is to mute any criticiam at Obama's extraordinary affection for wooing radicalized Muslims? Anyway , to respond to roi's illusion of himself as a satirical critic of Peretz: Poor roi doesn't get it that in order for a satire to be credible it has to maintain the consistency and uniformity of the absurd. You can't come whining that you intent was misunderstood when into the satire you insert your usual fare of subject matter, hyprbole, delusion, and venom. It's like Der Sturmer claiming that the one article where it was claimed that Jews were like rats was actually a satire and not to be taken seriously. Obviously Jews are not rats. The metaphor was only intended to mock Goebbles. ___________ It's pretty amusing to see roi, the quintessential "Democrat", goes out of his way to defend the reputation of Muslims who invite someone like Khalid Yasin, who "described the beliefs of Christians and Jews as "filth." Most worryingly, the event also featured a live video question-and-answer session with Anwar Al Awlaki, the U.S.-born preacher aligned with al Qaeda." According to roi, an injury is done to radicalized Muslims when it is pointed out that they are represented by reactionary Islamic organisations, Sharia councils, fanatical imams, who deny the principles of universality and pluralism and act to suppress the rights, freedoms and equality of women and of any people who were not so fortunate as to be raised a Muslim.

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 10:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid - I took your first post as tongue-in-cheek but felt, given your tough-on Israel reputation, that some of your detractors would surely take it literally and respond accordingly, which they did. Your last post is clear enough but so myopic and one-sided as to lose even me, one of your admirers. On earlier threads, you have characterized Israel's continued construction of settlements in the West Bank as not in Israel's enlightened self-interest, a position I happen to agree with. Here you go much further: to characterize Israel's role in the West Bank as "colonization" and "toxic" is to be willfully oblivious to Israel's vulnerability and consequent need to err on the side of protecting its security. This is a case in which paranoids really do have enemies.

- JackR

December 2, 2010 at 10:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"tongue-in-cheek " implies a certain wit, good humour, and charm. I doubt any of roi's genuine admirers can accuse him of being in possession of any of these toxic ingredients. roi is the quintessential purist, an all or nothing kind of guy, an either you are with me or against me semi-professional politician, a literalist through and through, an Obamic fundamentalist: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-spine/79401/obamas-foreign-policy-needs-reset "Camped on a tropic riverside, One day he missed his loving bride. She had, the guide informed him later, Been eaten by an alligator. Professor Twist could not but smile. "You mean," he said, "a crocodile."

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 11:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sorry, jack, but there is no plausible case that colonization of the West Bank is a legitimate security interest of Israel. It quite clearly jeopardizes Israel's security. That is what makes the professions of the right to care about Israel's security ring so hollow. The right is more than willing to compromise Israel's safety and security in pursuit of the illegitimate objective of settling the West Bank without according equal political rights to the inhabitants. There is far too little distance between Israel's policy and apartheid for it not to be toxic. It renders peace settlement intractable and provides endless fodder for anti-western and anti-American agitation. To no good or legitimate end. The security claims are but thin cover for what would otherwise be unthinkable. Moreover, colonization is not a legitimate response to one's enemies, not least because it quickly becomes impossible to separate the cause from the effect.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 11:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

12/01/2010 - 5:56pm EDT | Sophia Good post, informative, even handed, knowledgeable and judicious--a breath of fresh air actually. I also immediately caught the irony and sarcasm in Roidubouloi's post. I'm surprised others took it seriously. Jack, I finally finished Grossman's book just a few days ago, about which I have some mixed feelings. I wouldn't mind getting the benefit of some clarifying of my own muddiness. How to do so though? Why not set up a link--I'm happy to do it-- to some outdated thread and toss it back and forth a bit? (I promise not to drone on and on. :-)

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 11:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The ever witless noga weighs in with even more blather than usual. Usually people get over thinking that cutting and pasting is a substitute for thought some time around the eighth grade. We can thus add to the list of noga's indubitable charms -- her overall viciousness, her vacuousness, her bathetic marital distress, her debased moral sensibility -- severely arrested development. Stay in Canada. Stay far far away from Israel and the United States. The safety of the western world depends on it.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 11:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Of course, I don't defend radical Moslems, as noga, the Goebbels acolyte, likes to claim. I have never in my life uttered a word that could possibly be construed as such. What is inexcusable, however, is noga's invariable tactic of associating everyone whom she detests (and that is a very long list) with radical Moslems or of using their crimes and abhorrent utterances as some sort of justification for other crimes and abhorrent utterances that she applauds. The one is not moral justification for the other. It is for this reason that I describe noga as being morally debased. Not an absolutist, not a purist, just a barbarian decked out in Jane Austen.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 11:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, and needless to say I did not complain for a moment about being misunderstood. I was understood by those who have the capacity to understand which is more than sufficient. Rather, I took the occasion to point out how reflexively stupid two of the posters are. I should confess that I say this about jackson only to annoy him. He is a bully and I know he is sensitive about his lack of formal education. So, when he gets in his bullying mood in my direction, I say this to get under his skin and remind him that he doesn't enjoy being such a bully when someone fights back. In noga's case, it is literally true. She is thick. Glib, but thick as a post.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 11:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"[B]lather" can be rephrased as "noise to signal" ratio. Consider (12/02/2010 - 9:50am EDT | roidubouloi): 7 words of signal to 91 words of noise. BTW, roi, you can twist and squirm all you like, but those cut&paste words haunt you. The more you ridicule me, the more relevant they become. The more insanely personal your insults get, the greater the proof that you are out of control, trying to kick up as much dust by way of distracting from your hideous ideology.

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 11:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi says: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-spine/79401/obamas-foreign-policy-needs-reset And here is how he deals with it: "The ever witless noga weighs in with even more blather than usual. "Usually people get over thinking that cutting and pasting is a substitute for thought some time around the eighth grade. We can thus add to the list of noga's indubitable charms -- her overall viciousness, her vacuousness, her bathetic marital distress, her debased moral sensibility -- severely arrested development. Stay in Canada. Stay far far away from Israel and the United States. The safety of the western world depends on it." Can anyone point to even one word that deals directly or even indirectly with the actual words he is quoted as writing? Why don't you explain to us, roi, that when you called at least 50% of Americans " the enemies of America... happy intentionally to damage the nation .... happy to side with our enemies.. what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable.... Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." you did not actually mean all Republicans, or those who vote Republicans? Did you misspeak? Did you get carried way by the exuberance of your own rhetoric to the abandonment of all consideration for rational discourse? Why then you can correct that right away. Admit you were just ventilating, that you didn't mean even half of what you actually said, apologize for misleading others, for inadvertently and unintentionally smearing and slandering hundreds of millions of loyal and law abiding citizens of the US. Or was this, too, another one of your "tongue in cheek" satires? Let's see roi having the courage of his semi professional politician convictions.

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 12:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...your hideous ideology... ?

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 12:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...President Obama pronounced the meeting “extremely civil,” and Republicans concurred. ...civility, properly understood, advances rigorous arguments, for a simple reason: it forecloses ad hominem attacks, which is the refuge of sloppy, undisciplined minds. ... Civility does not preclude spirited debate or confrontation. Clashing arguments are often clarifying arguments. Civility does not mean we do not call things by their rightful name. Evil is sometimes evil; and wicked men are sometimes wicked men. Nor does civility mean splitting the difference on every issue under the sun. ... the most important debates and many of the most important figures in American history were polarizing. They stirred deep passions in people, which is precisely when civility and even a measure of grace are most needed, to keep democratic discourse from jumping the rails. In all this, Abraham Lincoln is, as he almost always is, a model. Lincoln is the finest political writer and, with James Madison, the finest political thinker in American history. He set a standard for meticulous, sophisticated arguments that had never been seen and has never been matched. As a young man, it is said, his satirical inclination and self-confident polemical power provided him with the “power to hurt.” But as he matured, William Lee Miller has written, “one can almost observe him curbing that inclination and becoming scrupulous and respectful.” His personal and professional dealings — with clients, editors, supporters, and opponents — had a “distinctive quality of tact, generosity, and civility.” In response to a visit by citizens after the 1864 election, Lincoln said, “So long as I have been here I have not willingly planted a thorn in any man’s bosom.” None of us possesses Lincoln’s virtues. But all of us should aspire to cultivate them." "Civility as a Political Virtue" Peter Wehner - 12.01.2010 http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/wehner/383069

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 12:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I read that piece by Wehner before and thought it very good.

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 12:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat you are exactly right. There is in Ontario now and for the last few years a huge legal-ethical push for, and emphasis on lawyer to lawyer civility, and lawyer to court civility. Incivility is a huge functinal problem for the administration of justice. Bad faith in specific contexts can now be a legal defence and the occasion for a cause of action. We--including me, too often--fall unacceptably below the ideal Wehner describes as Lincoln embodying. Somewhere around here Chait wrote a model piece inveighing against ad hominem argument. A problem with such high mindedness is that politics is of its nature a mugs' game--because one of its primacies is the reflection of the inevitable pusuit of interest. Another, related, is: what assumptions do we start with: the disintersted search for truth; or the pursuit of interest.? The former necessitates rational civil discourse, the latter will use rational deliberation tactically amongst an array of techniques, some laudable some not, to advance its ends. The latter flows pronouncedly from the nature of ideology--a hemermetically closed system of thought as opposed to a particular conception of liberalism as an open ended approach to truth that is double minded: it believes and doubts; it holds fast to tradition while it questions and probes, respecting evidence and a better argument.

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 1:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

They don't haunt me noga. As you are too thick to notice, much of the time when you cut and paste them, I take great delight in quoting myself again. I only wish I were clever enough to find 50 different, engaging ways of restating the same thing. I do my best. The Republican party, and the somewhat broader rightwing of which it is the major part, IS the enemy of the United States of America. It is a criminal syndicate that is intent on doing damage to the nation's economy and security because it believes that this is the path to power. And what will it do with that power? Only more damage to the nation, under cloak of outlandish ideological claims, but in fact with no purpose other than delivering as much of the nation's treasure and power as possible into the hands of a plutocratic few. The first sentence that I wrote is literally true in all its particulars. The embellishing paragraph almost so, except that it is of course impossible to know with particularity the subjective intentions of millions of people. So what? This is how language is used. If we described "the Japanese" or "the Germans" as our enemies during World War II, did this require us to know the subjective purpose of each of millions? Of course not. That they served the beast that was our enemy made them our enemies, such that we were willing to slaughter hundreds of thousands of them without inquiring into their state of mind. Those Americans who serve the rightwing beast are enemies of this nation. They threaten it with harm. Of course, you last leapt to the conclusion that, if this were the case, we would be obliged to persecute them. That is because you are at bottom a fascist. So, of course that is the first thing that comes to your mind. I am not a fascist. So, what I believe is that we must have a clear understanding of their purposes and methods, scurrilous, lying, always dishonest methods, and be willing to fight them relentlessly, tirelessly with all legal means. We as a nation cannot afford Obama's belief that these people merely have some different view about policy alternatives and so are open to compromise in the interest of the nation. They are not. That is a fantasy. They have indeed nothing that could be called a policy view unless you are willing to include such things as apples falling upward. They have in fact no bona fide interest in policy at all, in what will work to achieve an end. They are only interested in power and plunder. They cannot be bargained with -- as we see in the pageant going on today in the Senate. They can only be beaten. We must rouse ourselves and get on about the job of destroying them as a political force. Unfortunately, much pressing business of the nation must wait until the political task is accomplished. But as nothing much can be accomplished until they are defeated as a political force, delay in undertaking that necessary business only postpones the day when we can take care of the nation's business. That you imagine that I am for an instant embarrassed by my own views is merely more evidence, as if we needed any more, of what a halfwit you are. You properly think this because you generally mouth off out of emotion in the absence of any deliberately thought out political views. I don't.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 1:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roidubouloi, I have over the years strained against your one-note castigation of all Republicans. But, while I do not go so far as you as evidenced by your just above post, when I see all Republicans in the Senate taking what I think is the economically ludicrous and dangerous position that no legislation will pass without making permanent the last decade's tax cuts for the rich, I've gotta' start thinking this guy's--you to be exact-- got a definite point and it's not such a bad note. All this hullaballoo over 3 or 4% more tax on the last $50,000.00 of taxable income over $250,000.00,--if I have that right--I find it simply confounding and so ideologically stupid and mendacious. Now, that's "a hideous ideology!"

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 1:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"That you imagine that I am for an instant embarrassed by my own views i" I don't have to imagine. You have just spent nearly 600 words to try to re-wind what you said to render it a little more palatable to those who follow your lead here. "The first sentence that I wrote is literally true in all its particulars. The embellishing paragraph almost so, except that it is of course impossible to know with particularity the subjective intentions of millions of people. So what? This is how language is used." Here is that first sentence: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." Language used in this way is the language of fascists and totalitarian revolutionaries. People with some decorum of thought and ethics do not express themselves this way. Can you quote anyone else around here who makes these kinds of statement "And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." ?? Robespierre comes to mind. "For the love of humanity, be inhuman". The corner stone of the purist, the terrorist, the fascist. You roi feel that there are no boundaries to be respected. All is allowed. Nothing is beyond the pale as long as you get your leader to be blindly followed and obeyed. As I said, the more personally insulting you get, the more it is obvious to those who can actually read that you have run out of plausible, credible explanatons. "I am not a fascist.", yea. Why don't you repeat this plea to pity? It's a convincing repudiation of your own words. It's just the right fit for you. Fascists are the most slobbering sentimentalists when their egos get dented and they have nowhere to hide from their own damning declarations. No one can cringe like a fascist. Try another post of 600 words to cleanse this sheretz. And another.

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 2:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat, as one guy famously said: "we stand where we sit."

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 2:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is what roidubouloi "Actually, it makes much more sense to blame Israel for the fact that Turkey has been moving into the Islamic sphere than to blame Obama. Israel, after all, was there when the process began." When challenged he calls me a bully. There is no more bullying poster here than Roid. As for not having a "formal education" I wish I had been lucky enough to avoid the University circus, especially those at Ivy League schools. In any case, Roid's education hasn't helped him. Each of his posts shows an astonishing lack of understanding, skewed logic and no historical understanding. Look again at the quote above and you’ll see what I mean.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 2:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jack I left you a note above on Lion's Honey, in case you missed it.

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 2:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You know hit a nerve when Roid starts to froth at the mouth and accuse you of being a bully As for Israel being responsible for Turkey’s embrace of Islamic values, this would come as surprise to their Nobel prize winning novelist Orhan Pamuk who has been tracking the phenomenon in his novel’s since at the mid 90’s. Of course what would Roid know about literature or Turkish culture? Israeli presence on the West Bank is the worse crime in the world for Roid and explains all other evils including global warming.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 2:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

anyone who believes the highest priority is to destroy the political power of the opposition, whether it be the "rightwing beast" or the "leftwing statists", is the real enemy of America, proof that the two-Party duopoly that only seeks power is why America's political structure is the real failure. And why control of the Congress is subject to increasing volatility. Swing voters keep swinging within the straitjacket of two Parties who are not at all interested in governance for the good of the nation. If only duels were still legal...we might get rid of ALL such power-hungry politicians.

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 2:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

basman “Jack I left you a note above on Lion's Honey, in case you missed it.” Thanks, I just read it. I am not surprised that you didn’t care for the book. I thought you wouldn’t. However if you wish to talk about, we can do so here. http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/magazine/79073/portnoy-agonistes-philip-roth

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 2:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If only duels were still legal...we might get rid of ALL such power-hungry politicians." We might, and some not so power-hungry politicans too. Legalize righteous murder and you kill the good as well as the bad.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 3:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jack, thanks, I'll drop a short note at that cite at a better moment. But can you tell me here in just a word if you liked it?

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 3:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'll respond on the other thread.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 3:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Okay.

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 3:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Legalize righteous murder and you kill the good as well as the bad." I think K2k meant it in jest.

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 3:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

actually, the prospect of roid's imaginary political battle to destroy the "rightwing beast" taking precedence over "much pressing business of the nation must wait" made me think, if only the ardent ideologues of the left and the right could just fight each other to the death, perhaps the nation's business could move forward. Some collateral damage is acceptable if it meant enough serious pragmatists survive. At least we would find out who is willing to put their life on the line for their ideology. just read Der Spiegel on Wikileaks Russian mafia - the next phase of the Jewish global conspiracy is to paint Russian mafia with clout as Jewish. The "proof" will no doubt be if Russia sends firefighting planes to Israel, as just requested from Russia, Italy, Greece, and Cyprus.

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 4:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, you have reached your inevitable bottom of incoherence. There is no coherent response possible to such a mish-mash other than repetition: You are at base a fascist. You routinely deploy the fascist propaganda technique of endless lies repeatedly endlessly, of associating those you detest with all sorts of unmentionables, which for you doesn't happen to be rats but Moslem fanatics. It is inevitable that you bring the subject of murder to politics -- which I of course do not -- because that is the gutter that your mind runs in. To you, giving political battle is the same as murder. If you were a Moslem, you would be a terrorist. If it were the 40s, you would be in the Irgun slinging your tommy gun at Deir Yassin. Nothing pleases you more than what you imagine to be righteous bloodshed. That makes you a ghoul too. On top of being a fascist, and terrorist sympathizer, and ghoulish, you are a complete ninny. Such an empty head! Keep counting the words, you helpless boob. It is probably the most rational thing of which you are capable.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 4:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You know hit a nerve when Roid starts to froth at the mouth and accuse you of being a bully As for Israel being responsible for Turkey’s embrace of Islamic values, this would come as surprise to their Nobel prize winning novelist Orhan Pamuk who has been tracking the phenomenon in his novel’s since at the mid 90’s." I apologize, jackson, for suggesting that you aren't as thick as noga. Plainly you are, although, despite your incessant belligerency, I do still detect a level of decency that one cannot possibly discern in her case. In your so earnest literalness, do you suppose that indeed Obama bears any more responsibility for Turkey's embrace of Islamic values than does Israel? Oh, "since the mid-90s" you say? Then how exactly are we to hold Obama responsible for this phenomenon? More important, can the inanities of Martin Peretz never offend you merely because he claims to be an advocate of Israel? And just how absurd does satire have to be for you to get it?

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 4:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Swing voters keep swinging within the straitjacket of two Parties who are not at all interested in governance for the good of the nation." This false equivalence lies at the heart of our current dilemma. What evidence would K2K offer that the Democratic party has not struggled to govern for the good of the nation, even if you believe that all of its policies are misguided? And what evidence would you offer that the Republican party has any interest in governing for the good of the nation unless the nation is defined as the wealthiest 0.2% of the population? The false equivalence makes it appear that there is no difference between the now completely radicalized Republican party and the Democratic party the policies of which owe far more to its right wing than to its left. In the Republican party there is not center or left, only a lockstep radical right. The inability to recognize that the Republican party has become a radical party over the last 40 years threatens us with tragedy.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 4:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roidubouloi is frothing at the mouth, again. You talking about decency is like Erdogan talking about secular governance: it’s an oxymoron.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 5:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And basman: I can appreciate that it is very difficult for anyone who participates in a "civil society" to recognize when a powerful radical element has arisen. We strain to explain the behavior and rhetoric of such an element within the norms to which we are accustomed. It is the easiest thing in the world to denounce anyone who says that there is such a radical element, that it is large and dangerous, as paranoid. After all, there are always people around saying such things, that such and such, FDR for example, is a radical threat to the American way, etc., etc. Usually, they are paranoid nuts. How then to distinguish the case of a genuine radicalized threat from paranoid delusions? I don't know of any rule or reliable method of doing so. One has to observe and consider constantly what particular political rhetoric and behavior portends. To me, the Democrats remain stunned, as they have been before, because they cannot accept the reality that they are no longer dealing with a Republican party that participates in the normal give and take and compromise of politics, but with a radical party that simply wants to destroy the Democratic party and everything it has ever achieved going back to the beginning of the Republic. K2K up there complains about how awful it is to place political defeat of the opposition above the interests of the nation. But I am nobody posting on a website. The next Speaker of the House, Republican John Boehner said exactly that a few days ago, out loud, in public, and the political world didn't even react. I am no historian, sociologist, psychologist, or political scientist with the tools to explain and chart our descent. But it does seem to me to have begun in earnest with Reagan, when the Republican party discovered that it could tell preposterous lies and nobody cared, even when events proved the preposterous lies to be just that. Then Bush I, who was not a radical, lost the election because he, unlike his predecessor, attempted to govern from some standpoint of rationality. It was he after all who coined the phrase "voodoo economics" when contesting with Reagan for the Republican nomination in 1980. Those two events seem to have let slip something in the Republican party -- you tell preposterous lies, you win; you attempt to govern, you lose. Hence the sheer fury at Clinton who was hardly some radical leftist. Not even close. How to tell a radical movement from a mere ideological tendency? Two things suggest themselves. One is this departure from rationality, the ability to claim, and apparently to believe, patently absurd things about the world. The other is the insistent nostalgia for a morally pure imagined past, unpolluted by the accretions of modernity. Rhubarbs pointed out the other day that the Tea party is simply opposed to modernity in all its elements. I think that is correct. And the Tea party is simply the vanguard trend of the Republican party. Sure there are old-timers who don't believe the nonsense, but they are being purged or cowed into silence. Boehner even suggested that he would accept a compromise with the Democrats on taxes and they were all over him. I believe that the Republicans are no longer a political party in the sense that it has been understood for more than two hundred years in the context of our "two party system." There is no negotiating with them, no compromising with them. They are bent on power without regard to the needs of the nation. They say so openly. We ought to take them at their word instead of imputing some more benign interpretation to what they say. It is always thus in the relatively early stages of the growth of a radical movement, difficult to believe that the radicals could actually be that crazy. You have to listen to what they say and accept that they do mean it, and consider the implications if they succeed in imposing their agenda. Is that a world we even recognize? What will prevent them from doing just what they say?

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 5:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, don't take it so personally, jackson. I was just pointing out how completely loathsome noga is by comparison to you. That doesn't mean you are not still a jerk or that you do not manage to display your mental density when given the opportunity.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 5:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm curious, Noga. What should our president do? His job is to protect America's interests and safety (though technically speaking his job is to uphold the constitution). And somehow, you think the president should . . . spank the Turks? Tell them to make nice with Israel? Beat our chests because that would really show 'em. With Iran building the bomb, the Turks just ain't as afraid of us. And how, do you say, we get tough with the Saudis you so hate (with good reason). Do we tell them we won't buy any more of their oil? Pick up our marbles and remove our military presence? The fact is, in the Arab world, other than war, the only real options are diplomacy and sanctions (which apparently are starting hurt to Iran's economy). Your opinion, Noga, of Obama trying to make inroads in the Arab world seems especially curious in light of the fact that the father of our last attempted bomber alerted the FBI. He was an American, he was Muslim, and he obviously loved his country enough to sacrifice his kid. Same with the undie bomber, whose father also tipped off the FBI about his son's extremist beliefs. The FBI chose not to act on that, but that's not the father's fault. And finally, it was Saudi intelligence who saved the plane carrying the printer bombs. By the way, the Arab communities have a presence in the US as well. They are also citizens, and as such their needs should be addressed. How could pissing off these citizens help us? The Arab/Muslim world also has a presence in England. Is their government cowardly let their bus drivers pray during their shifts. What a stupid thing to do--avoid alienating more Muslims, inside and outside of Britain.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 2, 2010 at 5:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That was very eloquent and persuasive, molly. I still owe you something. I haven't forgotten.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 5:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

all due respect, I am the one who suggest duel-to-the-death to purge both parties of their extremist ideologues. I have never expressed the view anywhere that I "believe all of its [Democratic Party] policies are misguided." I have consistently called for ALL of the Bush43 era tax cuts to expire as intended if the "surpluses as far as the eye can see" failed to materialize. I do object to many of the priorities of Pelosi and Reid these past two years, and same for the next three weeks. Is the DREAM Act really more important than finding a way to fund an extension of unemployment benefits? Why did the Dems conveniently forget to finally fix the Medicare provider reimbursement formula - a promise that they made in order to get ObamaCare passed, a promise then forgotten? They squandered their majorities, for which I actively worked into 2008, in too many ways to recount. Only in roid's overheated brain that is [congenitally?] blind to evidence of anything he disagrees with, am I labeled as a rightwing extremist, solely because I comment in The Spine. Face it roid, you are a very different commenter in The Spine than elsewhere in TNR. You attach your personal animus for Peretz to anyone here, even when they criticize Peretz. Your mission is to distract any comment from the topic of any Peretz post, or comments between commenters. If you detest Peretz so much, one wonders why you waste your time here, since you have gone to such lengths to instruct us as to the extraordinary value of your time. I assume it is because you can not find acolytes elsewhere, so you come back to The Spine to froth and fume in what is truly embarrassing behaviour for an adult with an alleged superior education. Even in the DSM-V, you will still be a psycopathic bully. Back to ignoring anything roid writes since there is no chance he will disappear. Whack-a-mole.

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 5:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K: The repugs really are worse. The new speaker of congress held a sign saying saying that he would not talk with the dems until the dems approved the Bush inheritance tax. I don't recall a democratic politician who ever did something so vile. They can't offer even a pretension of a bipartisan congress. There's something wrong when nobody in your party will say that the guy's "just excited, don't put much store by what he says."

- MOLLYSIMON

December 2, 2010 at 6:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi "Oh, don't take it so personally, jackson...." I don’t take anything personally anything that you mumble. In any case, I don't read your long loathsome screeds. Only that part that unfortunately is exhibited to all to see before one mercifully comes upon the " ... view full comment." One can only hope that one day the masters of these blogs will come upon a way to only make visible the name so that one would be relieved of the necessity of reading your execrable comments.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 6:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

MOLLYSIMON “I'm curious, Noga. What should our president do? His job is to protect America's interests and safety (though technically speaking his job is to uphold the constitution). And somehow, you think the president should . . . spank the Turks? Tell them to make nice with Israel? Beat our chests because that would really show 'em. With Iran building the bomb, the Turks just ain't as afraid of us.” What makes you think that making nice with the Erdogan regime is in our interest? A Turkish-Iran alliance is primarily a threat to Europe. Israel is just a side show. Are you aware of the history of the Turkish European wars which lasted for centuries? Do you know how the Turks think about it? A revival of the Ottoman state isn’t either in Europe’s or our interest. Why do you think that Europe is building with our help a missile defense system? Against whom are the protecting themselves? http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-19/world/us.nato.summit_1_strategic-concept-nato-members-alliance-and-european-security?_s=PM:WORLD You make a lot of assumptions in your post, Molly. Care to defend them? Btw: the duty (not just “job”) of the President is to defend and protect us against all enemies foreign and domestic, this isn’t just a “technical issue,” it’s the raison de etre of holding office.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 6:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

BTW, Turkey just offered firefighting equipment to Israel, without being asked. Guess they did not want the Greeks and Cyprus to get all the credit for doing the right thing? Molly: if the GOP is "worse", then all the more reason to hold the Democrats responsible for wasting their majorities, and ignoring the debacle they engineered by spending so much time on health care reform without EVER reforming Medicare. That is why the Dems lost the senior vote. We do not react well when our doctors tell us to get lost. To put the DREAM act ahead of fixing Medicare this month is truly tone-deaf. Just read Politico, and seems Obama is working on one thing ($150Bil to extend unemployment for one year, and other bits of the original Stimulus that worked http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45890_Page2.html ), but Congress is not on board. Obama is not leading the Democratic Party.

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 7:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid - I appreciate your clarity about the current Republicans. For someone like me who experienced benign politicians like Wilkey, Vandenberg, Eisenhower, Dirksen, Dole, Lugar, and many others, it's hard to realize we are looking at a phenomenon that could arguably be characterized as evil, but there it is. When you put together opposition to START, to extending unemployment benefits, to ending DADT, to passing DREAM, to confirming sub-cabinet and judicial nominees to saving the 700 billion that extending the Bush tax cut would add to the deficit, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that these folks don't have the best interests of America and most Americans at heart unless they happen to be very rich. They will oppose anything, however beneficial to the nation, if it will help take down Obama. So even though you haven't used the word, you are describing evil, and I believe that that perception should govern our response. Now if only our President could see this.

- JackR

December 2, 2010 at 9:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I don’t take anything personally anything that you mumble." But clearly, jackson, you do. Indeed, you hang on every word I say and cannot restrain yourself from responding in your customary bullying style. I am very flattered. ____________________ Now, K2K, are you having some kind of fantasy? I made no comment about you. I noted your observation about how awful it is that, in your view, both parties put political success ahead of the national interest. And then you get all weird and defensive as if someone had said something about you. Conscience bothering you? Your observation that I am, as you put it, "a different person," here and elsewhere on TNR is quite right. But do you know why? It is because there is no equivalent elsewhere to the vileness of Martin Peretz and his acolytes, the jackal pack. Elsewhere, there is seldom any reason to be other than civil, because the discussion, led by whatever the blogger posts, is generally civilized. Sometimes arch, sometimes biting, often heated, but generally quite civilized. A little sarcasm here and there generally suffices. At the Spine, however, we see all the so-called friends of Israel, led by Peretz who sets the tone, smearing, slandering and generally behaving in a manner that is surely no credit to Israel and is, by any rational standard, quite disgraceful. It is just a theory of mine, and others can and do disagree, that the only way to deal with the scum is on their own terms. Sweet reason with animals is unavailing. It is interpreted by them as weakness and only invites further attacks. I prefer therefore to give better than I get. If you care, you will note above that, as ever, it is not I who first starts with ad hominem.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 9:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid - on our earlier exchange, I think I was reacting to the word "colonization", which suggested to me a more pervasive civil invasion than an expansion of existing settlements and would therefore be an exaggeration for effect. But as I thought about it, if lonely little Plymouth Rock qualified as a colonization, maybe my objection was a language quibble and not even an accurate one.

- JackR

December 2, 2010 at 9:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree, jack. "Evil" is a word I refrain from using because it has all sorts of religious overtones that often conflict with what I want to say. But it is as good a word as any. I would probably say "malicious." Your main point though is spot on. We need this president to understand clearly who he is dealing with and start to respond appropriately. That does not mean shrieking at them or calling them names, unless on a given day rational consideration suggests that that is the best tactic. Just as calling the Turks names is not the way to deal with that problem. But one does have to understand the problem and have a clear, consistent, relentless strategy for defeating it. So far, there is no evidence that Barack Obama yet understands the Republican party that confronts him or is even thinking much about a strategy for defeating it on the field of political battle. This is not Eisenhower's Republican party.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 9:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jack, re "colonization", First, let me say that I always take your criticism seriously, even if it smarts. I realize that the word "colonization" is provocative, but I think it is both accurate and necessary. Necessary because it jars people from thinking that the settlements are just some benign process of a new neighbor moving in next door. The Israeli settlers function under an entire a different set of "extra-territorial" laws than the Palestinians. Resources of various kinds, land, water, right of passage, are commandeered for their use, often exclusive. The housing that is built for them is subsidized and superior to what Palestinians can afford. By any objective standard, the Israelis are colonists, settling the land without the consent of the Palestinians and enjoying a privileged status protected by the power of the colonial government. I don't think there is much of anything to distinguish them positively from the colonists in the Americas, South Africa, or Australia. The word is disturbing because it should be. But the problem isn't the word itself, but what is happening in the West Bank. That should disturb us profoundly. Of course, when the Americas, South Africa, and Australia were colonized, the western world had a very different view of the morality of these practices. Slavery was acceptable then too. So was the practice of treating women as chattel property. We cannot undo history and I don't think we should try as there is no place in time to begin if we once start, anachronistically, to apply modern moral standards to the past. But these are not acceptable practices in the modern world, in the present. They should not be considered acceptable practices by Israel because the security threat to Israel is genuine. They are not responsive to the security threat in any meaningful way. Rather, they exacerbate it. The hope is that by saying the world "colonization" out loud, people will stop and think long enough to realize that this is exactly what it is and that it should not be considered acceptable. That the settlements threaten Israeli security, and that the colonial adventure will almost certainly be a failure in the end at tremendous cost to Israel, makes them a tragedy.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 9:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi has been trying desperately to move the discussion from Obama's failed policies in Turkey to his usual herd of cows: oh look, colonization! In the meantime... "In the past, Turkey served as an important pro-Western anchor in the Middle East and played a stabilizing, responsible and constructive role. Today, it constitutes a threat and jeopardizes most Arab regimes, and also Israel, being a focal point of shocks and tensions. Erdogan is threatening regional stability with his thuggish, megalomaniac behavior and with his support for axis of evil elements. The regimes in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian Authority and many others are greatly disturbed by the new, aggressive player that suddenly emerged against them. While everyone knows that Iran is an enemy, the current regime in Turkey still hides behind the glory of previous Turkish regimes which were friends of the West. We better understand that we are dealing with a hostile regime that has no intention of giving up power in Turkey. And now came Erdogan’s latest statement in Beirut, whereby “Turkey won’t remain silent” in case of a new war between Israel and Hamas or Hezbollah and made the threat substantive. From now own, according to its own declaration, Turkey is a potential military foe of Israel and may embark on war against us." http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3993211,00.html

- noga1

December 2, 2010 at 10:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...Roid - I appreciate your clarity about the current Republicans... I'll second that. (And unfortunately I'm old enough to remember a more moderate, centred Republicanism.) It simply amazes me, for one tired, well trod, other instance, that anyone for one nano second takes the execrable Palin(ism) seriously and gives her a moment of their time save to scorn, bemoan and reject her wretchedness. I thought yours and jackR's very good posts and I repeated both elsewhere with attribution to both your user names here.

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 10:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roidada, "But clearly, jackson, you do. Indeed, you hang on every word I say" You wish.

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 10:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...From now own, according to its own declaration,Turkey is a potential military foe of Israel and may embark on war against us." leading me to ponder publicly as to how the terrible forest fire near Mt. Carmel started, and whether Turkey's sudden offer of firefighting assistance is a Trojan horse... On the domestic front, looks like Geithner+Yew are going to find $150billion left over from TARPand/or unspent CRRAStimulus funds to pay for all the unemployment compensation+other renewed stimulus programs that are justly needed. Otherwise, Obama will lose whatever memory voters have of the Democratic Party as the true believers in fiscal discipline - the Clinton legacy that was a key reason swing voters took the chance on Obama in 2008. The Dems in Congress seem to be in denial that is why the swing voters want the brakes on deficit spending. Harry Reid is delusional in making the DREAM act a priority for this lamest duck congress. They really should let all the Bush43 tax cuts expire. The message that the GOP only cares about millionaires is not getting traction outside the leftwing echo silo. Only the extremes of both par-tees want to play extreme pingpongpolitics.

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 10:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Turkey Prepares to Sue the American Envoy" Thursday, 2 December 2010 By Gamze Coşkun (JTW) "In response to the diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks, Turkey gives the most serious and strongest reaction. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erodgan prepares to sue Eric Edelman, the American envoy to Ankara. In one of the cables signed by Edelman, it was stated, "We have heard from two contacts that Erdoğan has eight accounts in Swiss banks; his explanations that his wealth comes from the wedding presents guests gave his son and that a Turkish businessman is paying the educational expenses of all four Erdoğan children in the US purely altruistically are lame." There were also some other leaked documents accusing Erdogan of having personal gains from a billion-dollar privatization." http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/109812/-jtw-analysis-turkey-prepares-to-sue-the-american-envoy.html

- jdyer

December 2, 2010 at 10:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

See, jackson? You just cannot help yourself, can you? ______________ And here is noga, objecting to anything that resembles civilized discussion of any subject relating to Israel. If it is not polluted with her sputum, it is unbearable for her. Still, she summons us back to the task at hand. Molly Simon put it very well. There is nothing to add. As ever, the propaganda from the self-declared friends of Israel, led by the bullshitter in chief, Peretz, is long on accusation but very short on alternative policy and completely lacking in any coherent explanation of how such non-existent alternatives might plausibly lead to a better outcome, particularly an outcome that is better for the United States which, after all, is the president's responsibility. He is not, contrary to what some here seem to believe, the prime minister of Israel. And here is where it all comes together. The friends of Israel have no interest in policy, other than that the United States conform its policies to every whim of the Netanyahu government. Their sole interest is in attempting to discredit Obama because he will not conform the policies of the United States to every whim of the Netanyahu government. Basically, they want President Obama to call Bibi to find out what he should do on any subject of interest to Israel and then do it. If he doesn't, the will smear and slander him relentlessly. That is the sum and substance of what they have to say, on this occasion as on every other occasion. They are not friends of the United States of America. No one should imagine that they are.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 10:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K I think you have the worse of the argument in suggesting equivalence between the Ds and the Rs by resting your position on purging the extremes of both parties. What comparison is their between the most liberal of legislating Democrats and the ideological right? Do you see a comparison between Pelosi Reid—if they are your Liberal standard bearers—and a Mike Pence, Rand Paul or a Michelle Bachman, to name a few, or 40 Republican Senators so cowed by the Tea Party they have agreed to a man and woman to disallow any legislation to come forward unless all the Bush tax cuts are made permanent, something you say you oppose. Interestingly, and revealingly, you list some R policies you are squarely against, but what you say you oppose on the D side is its prioritization. ((Priorities— reasonable people can argue reasonably about them.) What D policies do you oppose as such? Where are their ideological rabidities equal to Tea Party/ Right wing policies and positions. Further you say the Ds spent too much time on health care reform without reforming Medicare. Is that really what you mean: putting reforming Medicare over taking a crack at beginning an overall reforming of Medicare in your country? Your country’s health care system was a national disgrace plus constituted a ticking systemic danger to your country’s crushing burden of debt. If overall reform has taken a good first step, begun to get off the ground, begun to address the explosion of debt the unreformed system promised, then the claim that the Ds should have incrementally fiddled with Medicare makes no sense to me. Surely it makes sense to work on incremental fixes once the back of a terrible system has been broken as much the reality of political constraint allowed for.

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 11:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks for sorting that out, basman. I couldn't.

- roidubouloi

December 2, 2010 at 11:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...an overall reforming of Medicare in your country?... should read ...an overall reforming of health care in your country?...

- basman

December 2, 2010 at 11:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

basman: expand your media sources because you have a very distorted view of who is what in the USA. My understanding is the GOP senators want to make dealing with the Bush tax cuts a priority, not "making them permanent", before considering other legislation. I do not consider Mike Pence a rigid ideological extremist - in fact, I am willing to vote for him for President despite his social conservatism, but that is based on listening to him in committee hearings, not the sound bites. Pelosi has been a disaster. I completely oppose the sausage that became the health care reform law. It is a disaster. Worse disaster was the way the Dems refused to acknowledge the opposition during the obsessive process. The failure to include reform of Medicare, e.g., reform of Bush43's abysmal Rx-Part D which was a major campaign issue in 2008 in many of the House seats that Dems won from the GOP (especially Bishop's win in Hastert's former seat), and the perennial problem of the reimbursement fix, was a huge mistake. Expanding Medicaid eligibility to expand coverage was also a huge mistake because it gives every state a reason to file a lawsuit and/or opt out of Medicaid, which is what is now happening. New York has the most expansive Medicaid eligibility, and Obamacare makes it frigging illegal for New York to change that before 2014. Medicaid is bankrupting New York. Property taxes on the Westchester County house I sold in 2000 have doubled, from $8,000 to almost $16,000 per year in 2009, because of Medicaid. and that was a house priced at the very bottom of the market. The original Stimulus bill was very badly structured as it emerged from the House, framed by committee chairs who think it is still 1964. It was appalling that the Senate refused to consider ANY idea put forward by ANY Republican - I watched those floor debates. The Dems had their chance and failed. I now consider the leftwing of the Democratic Party far more dangerous to the future of America than anyone on the far right. The left is so ignorant of how the economy works that they should be sent to school in Finland for the next two years, learn some math, and stay away from the Federal budget. and so now basman will tell me that none of my points are acceptable to him. 60% of America wants pragmatic governance. screw the DREAM act. and DADT. the Dems do not give a rat's ass over the millions of unemployed over 50 because there is NO JUSTICE IN AMERICA.

- K2K

December 2, 2010 at 11:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

On the estimable Mike Pence: Bruce Bartlett writes: " ...Yesterday Rep. Mike Pence, Republican of Indiana, chairman of the House Republican Conference and likely candidate for governor of Indiana gave an important speech to the Detroit Economic Club. We know it was important because Pence’s staff told everyone it was and because it was given at a venue where many important economic speeches by the likes of John F. Kennedy have been given. So my expectations were pretty high when I sat down to read it. Here, I thought, I will finally find a serious Republican analysis of our economic problems and serious proposals for fixing them. Unfortunately, Pence’s speech was nothing of the kind. It was a hackneyed rehash of every simplistic idea ever floated on Larry Kudlow’s TV show, which appears to be the only source of information Pence has on the economy. I don’t know how else to explain his obsession with inflation, a strong dollar, Fed bashing, tax cuts and the gold standard. Pence could have given the same identical speech in 1980 and barely needed to change a word. In the Pence/Kudlow world it is always 1980–stagflation is the primary problem and tight money and tax cuts are the cures. The problem is that stagflation isn’t the problem today. We have stagnation all right, but the “flation” we are suffering from today doesn’t stand for inflation, but deflation. But because it is always 1980, right wingers are incapable of seeing that monetary policy functions very, very differently in an inflationary and a deflationary environment. They seem utterly incapable of comprehending constraints like the zero-bound problem, which sets a floor on how low interest rates can go. They are also incapable of seeing the exchange value of the dollar except in macho terms, which demands that the dollar be strong at all times. That makes about as much sense as saying the price of oil or any other commodity should always be strong. That’s obviously nuts, but the dollar is no different. It must be allowed to adjust freely for changes in supply and demand or the result will be imbalances–too much will be imported if the dollar is overvalued, too little exports, thus increasing American’s international indebtedness. Indeed, it was right wing saint Milton Friedman who taught economists the truth of this mechanism. But Pence and Kudlow don’t draw the line just at demanding a strong dollar regardless of the economic circumstances, they would hold American monetary policy–and hence the economy as a whole–hostage to the fluctuations of the price of one commodity: gold. If the price of gold rose, as it has lately, the Treasury and the Fed (assuming there still is a Fed, which most gold bugs like Ron Paul believe should be abolished) would be required to deflate the economy; to tighten monetary policy and force down all wages and prices until the price of gold fell back to whatever arbitrary level it had been set at. And it’s worth reminding right wingers who claim to worship at the alter of Milton Friedman that he thought the gold standard was completely nuts. There is also no doubt that he would be supporting the Fed’s policy of quantitative easing since he have the same identical advice to Japan in the same circumstances.. .

- basman

December 3, 2010 at 12:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I haven't heard a single Republican legislator say he or she doesn't want to make the tax cuts permanent. But I will accept good evidence and I keep an open mind. What "media sources" and which Republican specifcally have said what you say "you understand?"

- basman

December 3, 2010 at 12:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid thinks he is an idiot savant, he is wrong he is just a self righteous idiot.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 12:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“My understanding is the GOP senators want to make dealing with the Bush tax cuts a priority, not "making them permanent", before considering other legislation.” You are mistaken K2K, the GOP want to make the tax cuts permanent. The saner among them might be willing to compromise on merely extending the tax cuts if the those making top dollar are also included. I hope the Dems don’t compromise. The wealthy don’t need tax breaks the middle and lower middle classes do: “A pair of prominent Republicans -- one from the Senate, the other from the House – on Thursday called for a permanent extension of tax cuts at all income levels, just as a vigorous floor debate was under way about Democratic legislation to extend tax relief for just the middle class. "Sen. Jim DeMint and I are introducing legislation that will ensure that no American, small business owner or family farmer will see a tax increase on Jan. 1, 2011, 2012, 2013 and beyond," said Indiana Rep. Mike Pence. “ http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/02/gops-demint-and-pence-tout-permanent-tax-cuts-for-all-bill/ The hypocrisy of the Republicans is evidenced in their use of language. The are no millionaires in their only “small business owner or family farmer.” The inheritance tax is a “death tax.” And your friend Mike Pence is in the forefront of the dishonest use of language. “completely oppose the sausage that became the health care reform law.” Here you are just repeating Republican talking points. The health care reform act is here to stay, btw.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 12:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jackson, as far as I can tell, you're not disagreeing with me. Did I say the Turks are a dream date? No, I said we have to do everything in our power to keep them from getting too cozy with Iran and give them whatever incentives we can without undercutting our own security. So what, I ask, are our other options? Start another war? We already have two. A third would land us squarely in Also, speaking of Erdogan, how could he have done anything but to condemn Israel during the blockade maneuver. His own citizens had been killed. He's supposed to stand in front of the entire Muslim world and explain that Israel is only trying to secure its borders? He's supposed to show the world that their relationship with Israel is more important than Turkish life? Yes, yes, he would have cozied up to Iran regardless of that disaster. And I suppose you can argue that it's not just religion that links them but the Turk's desire to befriend a country that is probably going to be the next gone-nuclear country. So as I keep asking, what are we to do. It's getting late here and I have to put my kids to bed. PS, I wasn't trivializing when describing the role of the president. I was making a very lame attempt at humor, because in fact the president's first duty, as far as I know, is upholding the constitution. That is the oath all presidents take on inauguration day.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 3, 2010 at 12:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

MOLLYSIMON “Jackson, as far as I can tell, you're not disagreeing with me. Did I say the Turks are a dream date? No, I said we have to do everything in our power to keep them from getting too cozy with Iran and give them whatever incentives we can without undercutting our own security. So what, I ask, are our other options? Start another war? We already have two.” I don’t agree that we have to give them “incentives” to be nice. The Turks foreign policy will be determined by their ambitions. The desire to expend their sphere of influence among other Turkic speaking as well as Arab States, their rivalry with Russia (a traditional enemy) their distrust of the West (who don’t want them in their “Christian club” the EU) is of more importance to them than getting “incentives” from a weakened US. Your ideas about war are at this point superfluous. If you are constantly afraid of war you will make war more likely. Nothing brings out the killer instinct in animals, human beings and even States than a perception of weakness. Incidents like the flotilla can lead to blows only if there are advantages to be gained by it. I don't think that the Turks see and advantage in breaking off completely relations with Israel. The Turks may grumble but they need them around in order to offer protection to the Arabs.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 12:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Just a note on (something that interests me) the Republican demagoguing of the estate tax as a "death tax" and keying in on a microcosmic issue separating Ds from Rs. Some of the rationales for the estate tax go directly to where the Ds and the Rs stand apart. These rationales start from the premise that tax provisions should, among other things, enhance equality of condition. Equity and efficiency are the broad criteria for evaluating tax laws. Part of tax policy ought to be, accordingly, resource allocation to lessen somewhat--not enough in any event-- gaps between rich and poor, with a view to funding human capital to help serve general welfare. Death compels an accounting since the deceased is no longer alive to use his or her wealth. Redistribution reallocates some of it broadly, rather than allowing it all to pass into the hands of those who haven’t earned it. At death, entitlement sprouts up unconnected to the creation of wealth. So estate taxes modestly, generationally, lessen wealth concentration. Wealth consolidation otherwise in the hands of the few can reasonably be redirected to help the less advantaged. Thus, these taxes help distribute wealth across society, serving distributive justice by helping the most poor to better their life chances. Therefore, these taxes are also anti plutocratic by mitigating the hardening and entrenchment of class stratification coming from the passing of wealth through inheritance. So, estate taxes actually promote the efficient use of resources—therefore, promoting equity and efficiency. As well, stable laws and institutions in a stable society are vital to the fair amassing of wealth. Accounting at death repays the state in recognition of its enabling role. Those funds then, as noted, support human capital expansion for others, leading, ideally, to refreshed conditions for new entrepreneurship, itself ideally promising a better life for others.

- basman

December 3, 2010 at 2:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Incidents like the flotilla can lead to blows only if there are advantages to be gained by it. I don't think that the Turks see and advantage in breaking off completely relations with Israel. The Turks may grumble but they need them around in order to offer protection to the Arabs." The Turks don't merely grumble. In the article I linked to they speak very clearly and Israeli s hearing what is being said. This state of affairs will only change if Erdogan and his party are replaced by more rational actors. And I don't see it happening. There is one possibility that the information about his 8 Swiss accounts might enrage his people enough to impeach him. But if that were about to happen we would see an intensified campaign to incite against Israel and Jews and to provoke confrontations, by way of deflection. It's the Turkish way of doing business, unfortunately. At least we know where we are and our anxieties can no longer be lulled to sleep by Obama's sweet lullabies. Thanks to wikileaks we now find out that Erdogan is truly a nutsy fundamentalist and a corrupt one as well. Funny how MollySimon struggles to find excuses for Erdogan, as if lying to the Turkish people is the only option he had for dealing with the flotila incident. The underlying understanding that lying bullies must be understood and forgiven is mind boggling.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 8:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Maybe there is some room for hope: http://blog.z-word.com/2010/12/mobilizing-for-israel/ "And this: Despite the great diplomatic tensions vis-à-vis Israel, Turkish officials announced that they too will be sending two firefighting airplanes. It should be recalled that Israeli rescue teams are usually among the first to arrive in disaster areas - as they did, for example, following the terrible earthquake in Turkey in 1999. Notwithstanding the political calculations that invariably contribute to a decision to send humanitarian aid, it’s heartening to see similar urgency in responding to Israel during its hour of need."

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 8:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's pretty wonderful to see what is being uncovered by these leaks. Here is another tidbit that explains a great deal: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/german-chancellor-s-top-mideast-advisor-supports-goldstone-report_520641.html "The German equivalent of Charles W. Freeman Jr. has surfaced in a WikiLeaks cable from the U.S. embassy in Berlin. His name is Christoph Heusgen and he is a senior adviser on the Mideast to German chancellor Angela Merkel. Heusgen urged the U.S. to heavily tone down its opposition to the U.N.’s anti-Israel Goldstone Report in order to force Israel to freeze settlement construction, according to a cable from the U.S. embassy in Berlin published by WikiLeaks on Wednesday. By outing himself as a supporter of the viciously anti-Israel Goldstone Report, Merkel’s top point man has revealed the emptiness of Merkel’s often repeated declarations to the U.S. Congress and the Israeli Knesset that the Jewish state’s security is “non-negotiable” for Germany."

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 8:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The left is so ignorant of how the economy works that they should be sent to school in Finland for the next two years, learn some math, and stay away from the Federal budget." Other than jackson dyer imagining he knows the difference between an idiot and a savant, this is the funniest single thing I have read at TNR. The Republicans aren't merely without a clue about economics, they are insane. Everything they want to do to the economy with high unemployment is backwards, including cutting taxes for the wealthiest. The fastest way to stabilize the economy would actually be to raise taxes on the wealthiest and spend the money that they have no interest in spending. The Republicans give us deficits during a boom, which is a big part of why we have a bust and an even bigger reason why it is so hard to apply fiscal stimulus. They make the income distribution, already a problem, even worse. Basically, every single fiscal and tax policy they advocate or, worse, put into practice is completely ass-backwards, unless your goal is to loot the economy for your friends' benefit. One must wonder what someone who could write the claim above knows about economics. Almost certainly, nothing whatsoever. As for HRC, almost all of its distortions and contortions were the result of trying, foolishly, to write a bill that would garner Republican votes. As it stands, there is nothing especially wrong with the bill except that it does not go nearly far enough to control costs. That is the fundamental problem with our system, the cost. How it is financed is actually somewhat tangential except as it bears on cost. Doing better on cost control, as with a public option, was made impossible by the toxic political environment created by obstructionist Republicans. Had the Democrats sent someone to negotiate with the Republicans, after disconnecting his cellphone so that nothing said in the negotiations would have any chance of becoming law, and just written and passed their own bill, we would have had a better outcome. One wonders what the person who could write that complaint actually understands about ACA and the economics of the health care market. By all appearances, nothing whatsoever.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 8:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Weekly Standard, quoted as authority for anything? Surely you jest. I don't agree with the Goldstone report in any respect, but the idea that it is synonymous with Israel's security is a typical extremist right-wing sentiment. This is about like proposing that one cannot support American security without supporting Bush's torture. The right- wing meme, as usual, is that, if you do not concur with any and every misadventure of government, you are an enemy, unless of course it is what the right imagines to be a left-wing misadventure in which case opposition to government is a patriotic duty to be accompanied by gassy excrescence about your Second Amendment rights and how you may just have to use your own weapons if the government doesn't straighten up. How anyone can read this bullshit without being overcome by nausea is beyond me. Well, perhaps that's too strong. Sadly, there are many people who enjoy nothing more than a good wallow in such bullshit. Many of them belong to the Tea party. The rest appear to be of like mind, or mindlessness.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 9:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Excellent exposition about the importance and equity of the estate tax, basman.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 9:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The German equivalent of Charles W. Freeman Jr. has surfaced in a WikiLeaks cable from the U.S. embassy in Berlin. His name is Christoph Heusgen and he is a senior adviser on the Mideast to German chancellor Angela Merkel." Noga, advisors advise, they don't make policy. Moreover there is no sign that Germany has changed its policy toward Israel. Should they do so they would leave behind all the progress they made in its effort to de-Nazify. An anti Israel Germany will be an antisemitic Germany. Notice that the advisor urged the US a country in which he has no standing and not his own government. Now, what exactly do you think the telegram explains?

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 9:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...the idea that it is synonymous with Israel's security is a typical extremist right-wing sentiment. This is about like proposing that one cannot support American security without supporting Bush's torture." I think this statement by roi, a knee jerk reaction devoid of any attempt at some authentic reflection, tells us everything we need to know about his "understanding", knowledge or analytical thinking. But what else to expect from someone who went on record as stating: " What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." It all hangs together. And roi is revealed for the empty barrel that he is, with one coin inside making a lot of noise as it gets rolled. But he is an excellent insulter. I'll give him that. Incomparable, and a head and shoulders above those others who try to steal that crown achievement from him. A semi-professional politician par excellence, with the emphasis on the "semi".

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 9:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Now, what exactly do you think the telegram explains?" It's written in the article: "All of this helps to explain why Chancellor Merkel’s pro-Israel rhetoric does not amount to an actual pro-Israel agenda."

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 9:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think jackson fairly well shreds noga's finest effort to date at "analytical thinking." What's your word count there, noga? And I see not a single word relevant to the point. Of course, you cannot actually offer so much as a word in defense of the inane point you thought you were making because, as usual, it is just cut and paste. You have no point, you have no thought. A completely empty head. I do thank you for your recognition of my skills as an excellent insulter. I have been cultivating them assiduously as a distinctly semi-professional politician. And I thank you too for the opportunity to put them to such noble use. There are very few Republicans I have encountered as well-deserving of insult as you.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 9:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"All of this helps to explain why Chancellor Merkel’s pro-Israel rhetoric does not amount to an actual pro-Israel agenda." Have the Germans actually changed their policy towards Israel during her term in office?

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 9:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Also, I must thank you for constantly re-publishing my thoughts about the American right-wing. I would be embarrassed incessantly to quote myself, but, as far as I am concerned, you should do nothing else in every single post. Your oeuvre would be distinctly improved.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 9:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"And I see not a single word relevant to the point." That never worries you when you dedicate entire comments to non-issues. Surely you will not deny what you so clearly allow yourself. "Also, I must thank you for constantly re-publishing my thoughts about the American right-wing." Not to worry. I'll keep on quoting you. Until another valuable quote is made available, just a matter of time, when it comes to you.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 9:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Have the Germans actually changed their policy towards Israel during her term in office?" Do we need to actually have a change declared? Israel cannot afford to delude itself that Germany works in Israel's best interests. http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/articles/europe/1314-germany-redefines-relations-with-israel "In what is being hailed a historic and rare instance of the German government falling out of step with Zionist Israel, a cross-party resolution by Germany's federal parliament, the Bundestag, was passed at the beginning of the month. The resolution, which demands an end to the crippling and illegal blockade that has devastated the economy of the Gaza Strip and brought the sector to the brink of humanitarian disaster, is being viewed in the context of the international clamour that arose following Israel's bloody assault on a humanitarian aid flotilla in May. That the vote was unanimous uncharacteristically for the politically diverse Bundestag speaks volumes about the strength of the international message the Germans sought to convey. Nevertheless, the actual content of the motion has left many divided over its true import and potential effectiveness in the context of achieving a just and lasting resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 9:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Of course one can bury one's head in the sand and pretend that all is fine and dandy. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/germany-asked-u-s-to-force-settlement-freeze-on-israel-wikileaks-cables-show-1.328127 "The WikiLeaks website exposé of the inner workings of American diplomacy continued Wednesday, with revelations that Berlin pushed for the U.S. to impose a settlement freeze on Israel. According to a telegram published by the whistleblowing website, two weeks before Israel's inner cabinet decided on a settlement construction freeze in November 2009, a senior German government official urged the United States to threaten Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that if he did not agree to a moratorium, Washington would withdraw its support for blocking a vote on the Goldstone Report at the United Nations Security Council. The telegram shows that German National Security Adviser Christoph Heusgen met with U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip Gordon and with U.S. Ambassador to Germany Philip Murphy on November 10, 2009 to discuss the matter. Even though German Chancellor Angela Merkel is considered one of Israel's closest friends, her senior advisers urged the Americans to step up pressure on Netanyahu. At the time, relations between Netanyahu and Merkel were tense over German opposition to Israeli construction in the settlements. Two and a half months earlier, a planned visit by Netanyahu to the German capital was nearly canceled following a clash between Heusgen and his Israeli counterpart, Uzi Arad. Arad had demanded that during the meeting between the two leaders, the issue of settlement construction not be raised and warned that if the Germans did not agree, Netanyahu would cancel the trip. "

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 10:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 - perhaps because of your hostility to roid and his insults, I believe you are dismissing his (and my) characterization of the malign nature of current Republican opposition way too blithely. Mitch McConnell gave away the game when he announced that his purpose was to do whatever he had to do to defeat Obama in 2012. The unsaid part of the message was: public interest be damned. Think about the implications of this (quite apart from roid, if possible).

- JackR

December 3, 2010 at 10:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Of course one can bury one's head in the sand and pretend that all is fine and dandy." What a perfect description of Netanyahu and Israel under the governance of the Likud and its version of the insane right: Just keep giving the finger to the world. Ignore completely their opposition to the settlement policy telling yourself it is all just anti-semitism. Tell yourself that Israel can continue to exist in complete isolation from the entire world, at least so long as it has the bulwark of the United States. Then, for good measure, give the finger to the United States too, the only thing that stands between Israel and unbearable pressure. This isn't so much head in the sand as complete self-interment. Maybe noga is absolutely correct and the traditional support of West Germany for Israel is being undermined. But don't imagine for a second that anything Israel does could possibly have anything to do with that distressing evolution.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 10:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Mitch McConnell gave away the game when he announced that his purpose was to do whatever he had to do to defeat Obama in 2012. The unsaid part of the message was: public interest be damned. Think about the implications of this (quite apart from roid, if possible)." I would be surprised if Mitch McConnell expressed full support for Obama and vowed to do whatever he had to do to keep Obama as president in 2012. He is after all in the opposition and the opposition is always working to replace an elected president. Didn't the Democrats do the same during Bush's tenure? Didn't the Republican party go much further in their efforts during Clinton's presidency? When the incumbent is a weak leader, roi's thuggish ways of persuasion actually highlight that weakness. He inadvertently revealed himself by deploying the "look cows" argument once too many times. It's exactly what he is doing here. Thoughtful people who care about the Democratic party as an ethical project, not just a political party in the boxing ring, would not encourage such tactics as roi's. I would have thought that was obvious, but apparently not. The need to score points, no matter how fragile and short-lived their effect, is so much stronger. I think a major contributor to John Kerry's failure to get elected was Michael Moore's support. It's always a mistake to underestimate people's intelligence.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 10:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

JackR "noga1 - perhaps because of your hostility to roid and his insults, I believe you are dismissing his (and my) characterization of the malign nature of current Republican opposition way too blithely." I despise Republican hypocrisy. I also despise Roid’s nastiness and delusions of grandeur. He courts hostility. This is the way he deals with people who disagree with him. In terms of attitude Roid and the Republicans are a perfect match. Noga, I believe is conservative and her stance on Roid, it seems to me, is not what drives her comments on political issues.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 10:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Maybe noga is absolutely correct and the traditional support of West Germany for Israel is being undermined. But don't imagine for a second that anything Israel does could possibly have anything to do with that distressing evolution." Israel will do whatever it deems necessary for its own interests (which involve more than mere survival) . Anyone who believes that this principle is on par with "giv[ing] the finger to the United States" reveals himself to be no more than a malicious voice devoted to the idea that Israel is an uppity illegitimate nation whose will must be broken. ____________ roi's comment put me in mind of this episode in Israel's history: "Um-Shmum is a phrase coined by David Ben-Gurion, on 29 March 1955, during a debate within his cabinet, as a scorning utterance towards the United Nations, and an expression that reflects, even as to date, the way many Israelis feel about this institution-body. In that very same debate, he also famously said: "What matters is not what the Gentiles will say, but what the Jews will do",[citation needed]. The original expression was uttered after Moshe Sharett responded to Ben-Gurion saying that there is a need to drive away the Egyptians out of Gaza due to the fedayeen's attacks from there. Moshe Sharett claimed that "The U.N should be treated with respect, since without it, the state of Israel would not have been established", and so Ben-Gurion replied: "Only the daring of the Jews founded this country, not the resolutions of the U.N"." (wikipedia)

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 10:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 “Of course one can bury one's head in the sand and pretend that all is fine and dandy.” As far as the revelations about Markel’s advisor go, I don’t see any evidence that his advice changed either Germany’s policy towards Israel or the US view of the Goldstone report. This particular piece of advice is very cynical. Either the report is valid or it is worthless. If valid then endorse it; if it’s viewed as one sided and prejudiced towards Israel (my view and apparently also that of the State department) then to use to coerce an ally to change its policies would be an act of blackmail. In any case, the US didn’t endorse the report and Germany didn’t change policy towards Israel. If they did, the Israel government is not without the ability to push back.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 10:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Noga, I believe is conservative " I don't get how you can stick on me an appellation that has no meaning or relevance for me. As far as I'm concerned, "conservative" means someone who frowns upon people who live outside wedlock, deplores homosexuality or can barely tolerate it, is against social medicare, and opposes affirmative action. To name but a few issues. From your own expressions here, I could easily label you a homophobe and a bigot. It might even be the popular thing to do, with some of the posters. But I don't do that because I give you some credit for basic decency, even if it cracks from time to time under provocation.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 11:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here is the problem. Erdogan happens to be democratically elected. Remember that is one of the things we were trying to accomplish in Iraq. He also happens to be popular. He is also overbearing and egotistical, and does not always do what the US wants (kind of like Mr. Netanyahu). Anyway, Turkey remains important strategically for the US (and more so Europe). Over the next 15-20 years, the importance of Turkey in the world (both strategically and economically) will only grow. Continuing to engage with the country and its leadership makes all the sense in the world. Besides, Istanbul is a fantastic place. Obama was right to spend three days there. Marty, maybe you should consider making a trip. There is an excellent Jewish community there waiting to greet you if you are still too scared to engage with any Muslims.

- nkabcen

December 3, 2010 at 11:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Istanbul is a fantastic place. Obama was right to spend three days there. " I've never been to Istanbul. But I have uncles, aunts and cousins living there. My brother, about 18 months ago, had to go to a business meeting in Istanbul. The customs officer who greeted him advised him not to divulge the fact that he was from Israel or that he was Jewish. My brother was there to meet a representative from Indonesia. As an Israeli he couldn't travel to Indonesia. The Indonesian representative told him that he too was given some advice about behaving properly in Turkey. He was told not to go out in the streets because Turks don't like foreigners who look like him. So they spent the two days of their meetings in the hotel and only once took a cab to and from some restaurant. That was 18 months ago. Imagine what it must be like now. I can't get any information from my cousins. All they say is: "we hope for the best".

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 11:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

my last comment here on US domestic issues, hoping basman will try to understand that there is such a thing as a Pragmatic Centrist, about 60% of American voters. from William A. Galston and David Frum Friday, December 3, 2010 WashPo op-ed, worth reading in its entirety: "...Our political system does not work if politicians treat the process as a war in which the overriding goal is to thwart the adversary. At a time of national economic emergency, when Americans are clamoring for positive action, our government is routinely paralyzed by petty politics. Through the summer, as the economy teetered between recovery and stagnation, the Federal Reserve lacked a quorum because a single Republican senator took it upon himself to block Obama's appointments. Republicans were only doing unto the Democrats as the Democrats had done unto them: In January 2008, as the country geared up for an epoch-making election, the Federal Election Commission lacked a quorum because one Democrat had put holds on President George W. Bush's nominees. Nor does the political system work if politicians treat members of the other party as enemies to be destroyed. Labeling legitimate policy differences as "socialist" or "racist" undermines democratic discourse. ..." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/02/AR2010120205216.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions jackson: I know the GOP wants to make all the Bush43 tax cuts permanent. Duh. My point was that they wanted to put that debate and vote as a priority before they would even consider Harry Reid's agenda of DREAM Act first, NOT that the tax cuts HAD to be made permanent first. If the Dems had had the guts to tackle this earlier; if Obama had not been so fixated on his campaign pledge on the "middle-class" tax cuts; if Pelosi had not used many of the same tactics as Tom Delay; etc, etc, well, maybe we would not be in this quandary right now. basman: I do not know much about Bruce Bartlett, but I rarely depend on what other people write. It is always best to read or listen to the PRIMARY source, and make one's own conclusions. Other people's opinions can be useful, but too often these days include an ideological revisionist tone. I remain anonymous even though revealing my identity would highlight my successful, published, economic forecasting and analysis 1993-2002, before my former industry got offshored to China.

- K2K

December 3, 2010 at 11:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"So they spent the two days of their meetings in the hotel and only once took a cab to and from some restaurant." That's a pity. I have been to Turkey many times and travelled many of its nooks and crannies. Istanbul is so amazingly diverse that to suggest someone should not go out because they look "foreign" is just silly. And, at any rate, before the flotilla incident (which is when I was in Turkey last), all the Turks I came across (admittedly, secular, educated, urban and urbane) were supportive of the ties to Israel and to the West. The country has a lot of issues, to be sure - the same Turkish friends insisted that there were no Kurds in Turkey, "we are all Turkish" - and Erdogan is a dangerous demagogue, but to go to Istanbul and stick to the hotel and cabs for two days out of fear - a bit excessive, IMHO.

- icarusr

December 3, 2010 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

[if anyone wants to follow Turkey, you can subscribe to the Hudson Institute's blog, which almost every weekday posts a summary from Turkish Daily Press, including translations into English from the Turkish-only news sources. http://www.hudson-ny.org/1705/turkish-daily-press-december-1-2010 Today's most interesting post:] "TURKISH PM'S MISSILE DEFENSE PIERCED BY WIKILEAKS" "Senior Turkish officials' claim that plans for a radar system on Turkish soil have not been discussed prior to a recent NATO summit have been refuted by U.S. State Department cables released by the website WikiLeaks. According to the documents, Turkey and the United States have been discussing the idea of such a system for nearly a year. In one of the leaked cables sent to Washington, former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey James Jeffrey describes a Feb. 6 meeting in Ankara between U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and his Turkish counterpart, Defense Minister Vecdi Gönül. "Gönül told SecDef [Gates] that discussions about the radar were ongoing within the Turkish government and inquired about what alternate sites [the] U.S. was considering," Jeffrey wrote in the diplomatic cable. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu have both long dismissed reports that the United States had begun trying to persuade Turkey to allow a radar system to be based within its territory prior to the NATO summit held in Lisbon on Nov. 19 and 20. "There has been no request made of Turkey. No request. As no request has been made of us, making a statement on the subject is useless. We won't face any sort of a fait accompli at the NATO summit," Erdoğan told reporters Oct. 16. Similarly, Davutoğlu said, "Discussions on the matter were on principles rather than technicalities [technical aspects]." The recently leaked cables seem, however, to completely contradict the top Turkish officials' statements. "We have made the point to the Turks that a decision to not base the AN/TPY-2 radar in Turkey is essentially a decision to opt out of missile-defense coverage for Turkey; this would not be a political consequence, but just a fact based on physics and geometry," Jeffrey said in an earlier cable to Washington that outlined the issues to be discussed during Gates' visit to Ankara on Feb. 6. The ambassador advised Gates to raise the issue again with Erdoğan in a gentle manner while emphasizing the value the United States places on Turkey's participation in the project. Jeffrey's use of the word "again" indicates this meeting would not be the first time Erdoğan heard about the radar request from Washington. In a meeting in the U.S. capital with President Barack Obama, Erdoğan insisted the project should be a NATO initiative because he did not want to bear its political cost, both in terms of domestic politics and Turkey's relations with Iran, the presumed target of the missile shield. The cable, however, clearly said, "Erdoğan is concerned that Turkey's participation might later give Israel protection from an Iranian counter-strike." In response to the Turkish prime minister's concerns, Gates further emphasized that "without radar based in Turkey, significant areas in the eastern part of the country would not be covered by the system." If Turkey refused to offer its soil for the radar system, the United States said, it would be located in a Southeastern European country, leaving some parts of Turkey undefended against a potential missile attack. According to diplomats familiar with the negotiations, the upcoming months will bring more behind-the-door discussions between the two allies about the controversial radar system. NATO agreed at the Lisbon summit not to single out Iran as a threat to be thwarted by the missile shield, a key demand by Ankara. "The decision will be political," a diplomat told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Tuesday on condition of anonymity. "But we still have time to further discuss the details." NATO members approved a new Strategic Concept during the Lisbon summit that paved the way for the alliance to build its own missile shield to protect its members from a potential nuclear attack. It is still unclear, however, where the missiles will be deployed. Romania and Poland are both seen as top candidates. NATO countries are expected to discuss a plan in March and finalize it in June." http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=wikileaks-reveal-8216denied-truths8217-over-missile-bargains-with-us-2010-11-30

- K2K

December 3, 2010 at 11:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"In any case, the US didn’t endorse the report and Germany didn’t change policy towards Israel. If they did, the Israel government is not without the ability to push back." So I guess, now, having actually read the reports, you are making a different point: it hasn't happened yet, but even if it does happen, well, Israel has its options. That's not quite the same as: ""Have the Germans actually changed their policy towards Israel during her term in office?" dismissing my reading as overly-hysterical.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 11:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga1 I go to Istanbul often. I do business with Turks (both Muslims and Jews), most of whom know I am Jewish. I have never had a problem, and I have never felt uncomfortable.

- nkabcen

December 3, 2010 at 11:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...a bit excessive, IMHO." Well, that's my brother, always extra careful around strangers. I, or my husband, wouldn't have behaved in this way. I - just out of curiosity to see for myself (it's the same impulse that takes me to Arab blogs). My husband, because he is afraid of nothing and no one, even though you wouldn't guess it, from his general demeanor. But I don't think we are going to visit any time soon.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I do business with Turks (both Muslims and Jews), most of whom know I am Jewish. I have never had a problem, and I have never felt uncomfortable." Well, I have a Turkish friend who converted to Judaism and he hasn't even told his family and friends in Istanbul about it. You never know what some crazies might do, he told me by way of explanation. I would tend to trust his experiences and my cousins' troubling silence. With all due respect to your experience.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 12:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke over the telephone with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan for the first time since he took over the office of Prime Minister, more than a year and a half ago. Erdogan expressed his sorrow in light of the heavy losses caused by the massive fires in the Carmel, and said that Turkey is ready to continue to help Israel overcome the fires. Netanyahu thanked Erdogan for his words, saying, "We very much appreciate your help, and I am sure that this incident will offer an opportunity for improved relations between our two countries." Turkey sent Israel at least two firefighting aircraft to help control the huge brushfire that has been raging through northern Israel. Its aircraft were among the first to arrive, owing in part to its close geographic proximity, relative to the European countries that also sent firefighting aircraft. Other countries sending aid to arrive at Israel later Friday support included Cyprus, Egypt, Jordan, France, U.K., Croatia, Russia, Spain, and Romania. Overall, more than 20 fire-fighting planes are expected to arrive in Israel, with New York's fire department also agreeing to send a firefighting airplane to Israel. ..." http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/carmel-fire-disaster-pm-thanks-international-community-for-aid-1.328651 [whatever will Peretz have to say about this? 17,000 people have been evacuated from Haifa so far, plus one Druse community. No word on the Circassians. And, kudos to New York for also sending a firefighting airplane. The Jewish National Fund launched an emergency fundraising effort yesterday, to complement what the JNF has been doing since 2006 to modernize Israel's fire-fighting capabilities.]

- K2K

December 3, 2010 at 12:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"whatever will Peretz have to say about this?" Headline: "And Muslim Arab to the rescue? You won't see this in the MSM but their planes didn't work; they had to borrow Israeli trucks; they 'pious' Arabs frequented Tel Aviv brothels instead of firefighting; and the fires just bellowed higher each time an Arab got close - the smell of sulfur and brimstone, no doubt. And let me tell you one more thing ..." The body will then refer to something someone wrote about bad the Arab's smelled after three days in the bush (of either variety) and why Muslims are good at blowing things up but can't fight a fire to save their lives.

- icarusr

December 3, 2010 at 12:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Turks are Muslim, icarus, not Arabs. And I can assure you that no Turk will ever thank you for making such a mistake.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 1:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

12/02/2010 - 11:58pm EDT | K2K “My understanding is the GOP senators want to make dealing with the Bush tax cuts a priority, not "making them permanent", before considering other legislation. I do not consider Mike Pence a rigid ideological extremist - in fact, I am willing to vote for him for President despite his social conservatism, but that is based on listening to him in committee hearings, not the sound bites. Pelosi has been a disaster.” “GOP's DeMint and Pence Tout Permanent-Tax-Cuts-For-All Bill” “A pair of prominent Republicans -- one from the Senate, the other from the House – on Thursday called for a permanent extension of tax cuts at all income levels, just as a vigorous floor debate was under way about Democratic legislation to extend tax relief for just the middle class.” http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/02/gops-demint-and-pence-tout-permanent-tax-cuts-for-all-bill/ 12/03/2010 - 11:39am EDT | K2K “jackson: I know the GOP wants to make all the Bush43 tax cuts permanent. Duh. My point was that they wanted to put that debate and vote as a priority before they would even consider Harry Reid's agenda of DREAM Act first,…”

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 1:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: "Turks are Muslim, icarus, not Arabs. And I can assure you that no Turk will ever thank you for making such a mistake." K2K: "Other countries sending aid to arrive at Israel later Friday support included Cyprus, Egypt, Jordan, France, U.K., Croatia, Russia, Spain, and Romania." Er ... the French and the English - along with Russians, Spaniards and Romanians - are also not Arabs, by and large, or Muslims. Jordanians and Egyptians are, or at least purport to be. Both Arabs and Muslims. I was referring to these two. Thanks, though, for the cultural lesson about a country that, from what I understand, you have not yet visited, and that I have been to seven times. As they say, one learns something new - "Turks are ... not Arabs" - every day.

- icarusr

December 3, 2010 at 1:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Thanks, though, for the cultural lesson about a country that, from what I understand, you have not yet visited, and that I have been to seven times. As they say, one learns something new - "Turks are ... not Arabs" - every day." That may well be but I doubt you know Turkey as well as I do. You know, having been born and raised by Turkish parents. Albeit Jewish, which might mean that they are not really Turkish and therefore their experience can be easily dismissed... by someone who actually VISITED Turkey and knows what little needs to be known about it.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 1:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here is an interesting article from a Russian journalist about the wikileaks: http://simplyjews.blogspot.com/2010/12/julian-almighty-and-wikileaks-vs.html "And it turns out that this [American] regime, no matter how you expose it, looks exactly the same inside as it does from the outside. Inside goals are the same as the outside ones. Inside methods - the same as the outside ones. Assange has dug up 300 thousand documents about Iraq - and among them there is not a single one that carries the information that Bush is going to drink up the Iraqi oil. He has dug up 92 thousand pages about Afghanistan - and among them there is not a single one with the directive to massacre civilians. 250 thousand documents of diplomatic correspondence - and ... lo and behold! There is not a word that the bloody American regime, using its puppet Saakashvili, performed genocide against the Ossetian people. And nothing about the bloody Americans training torturers who slaughter freedom fighters in the Colombian jungle (as was told recently in a filmed reportage by Russia Today). Assange came up with three quarters of a million documents - and all together they refute that drivel, which is spewed about American foreign and military policy by the extreme left, Islamists, African cannibals, Latin American dictators, general Nagovitsyn and "Nashi" from Lake Seliger. And, by the way, Assange himself. In this sense, as I said, all paranoias in the world are equal. There are no different paranoias - there is one and the same paranoia."

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 1:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What is the Russian journalist's comment suppose to prove?

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 2:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Prove? Is everything posted here supposed to "prove" anything? Isn't a Russian perspective something that broad minded highly educated Americans might find of interest, just for interest's sake?

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 2:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 "Isn't a Russian perspective something that broad minded highly educated Americans might find of interest, just for interest's sake?" Only if the perspective is being offered by a broad minded highly educated Russian. Thay's not the case, here. Russia has been targeting their reporters and we are supposed to accept the anti-American views of some Russian hack?

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 2:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"anti-American views"?? Where are they? Have you read the article?

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 3:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Israel will do whatever it deems necessary for its own interests (which involve more than mere survival)." Oooooooh. Such bravado. But those big-shot Israeli right-wingnuts who love this sort of boast seem to imagine that, while Israel does whatever it deems necessary for its own interests, as Israel itself defines them without regard to the rest of the world, the rest of the world is not going to do what it deems in its interests if those should conflict with the interests of Israel, as Israel itself defines them. Hence, merely by pursuing its own interests, Israel shall succeed, the world shall kowtow, and, as long as we are at it, the Red Sea shall part. When somehow the world appears not to be behaving according to script, we get foot-stamping, teeth-gnashing, accusations of anti-semitism rampant (whether it is the on the part of the particular state actor in question or some Arab fanatic somewhere matters not), and even wilder boasts that the world is completely powerless in the face of Israeli might. This is an utterly juvenile view of the world. But that is characteristic of the right and its wingnuts -- childish pomposity ("Bring 'em on"). It would be ridiculous, the stuff of movie westerns and Sylvester Stallone flicks, if the stakes weren't so high.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 3:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I also despise Roid’s nastiness and delusions of grandeur. He courts hostility." This is even funnier than jackson's delusion that he knows the difference between an idiot and a savant. You were a puffed up bully long before I arrived here, jackson, bludgeoning anyone whose politics you don't like. And you still are and you still do. What I looooovvee to do is court your hostility, because I love smacking you down on behalf of those who don't have the stomach or the skill for combat with you. And you are such easy pickin's, as most bullies are. I could smack you around all day without so much as cocking an eyelid. My introduction to TNR blogs was courtesy of this self-same jackasson. Observing one of his attacks on a poster, I noted, mildly, that his argument might be more forceful if he maintained a civil tone and avoided ad hominem. Didn't take long before jackasson trained his pea-shooter on me. It has been my delight ever since to give him a periodic paddling. He is such a child, paddling is just right.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 3:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I remain anonymous even though revealing my identity would highlight my successful, published, economic forecasting and analysis 1993-2002, before my former industry got offshored to China." How is this possible if you don't understand even rudimentary, under-graduate economics?

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 3:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: "That may well be but I doubt you know Turkey as well as I do. You know, having been born and raised by Turkish parents. Albeit Jewish, which might mean that they are not really Turkish and therefore their experience can be easily dismissed ... by someone who actually VISITED Turkey and knows what little needs to be known about it." Please save your false martyrdom for a different occasion. I was not dismissing your parents' experience as Turks or Jews or Israelis or Ottomans or whatever. You proposed to lecture me on a pedestrian point about Turks and Arabs in response to what I can only assume was a misunderstanding of my post in response to K2K (Egypt and Jordan, and not Turkey), and I gently rebuffed it. My comment was fairly light and was meant to be taken that way, hence the closing. And, frankly, we were not talking about the finer minutiae of Turkish society - of which your parents would no doubt have better, first hand knowledge - but actual knowledge of a simple point - Turks are not Arabs - that even the thickest German Arbeiter can learn on his first visit to Antaliya. Instead of accepting that you misread my comment and made an unnecessary point, you go on the attack - and on a Jewish point that no one had raised. This is simply uncalled for and pointless.

- icarusr

December 3, 2010 at 3:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid: "How is this possible if you don't understand even rudimentary, under-graduate economics?" Come now. As the Chairman of Goldman's said, "we're not that smart". One can make hundreds of millions running an investment bank and be a self-confessed moron in forecasting economic cycles; it is equally possible to be a successful economist without knowing economics.

- icarusr

December 3, 2010 at 3:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I suppose you are right, icarus. But something about that still depresses me.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 3:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think that what we are seeing in the German diplomatic cables is a sudden wobbling of the distinction between German foreign policy -- pro-Israel, but constructive when it comes to potential peace arrangements and the like -- and German public opinion -- covertly/mildly anti-Israel and more overtly pro-Palestinian. There is a lot of formalized positioning in German public discourse about Israel and the Middle East, but it doesn't necessarily reflect the deeper streams of opinion. There are some fairly open and robust supporters of Israel there too, of course, in politics, journalism, academia.

- ironyroad

December 3, 2010 at 3:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Instead of accepting that you misread my comment and made an unnecessary point, you go on the attack - and on a Jewish point that no one had raised. This is simply uncalled for and pointless." Nu? Why should today be different than any other day?

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 3:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad “I think that what we are seeing in the German diplomatic cables is a sudden wobbling of the distinction between German foreign policy -- pro-Israel, but constructive when it comes to potential peace arrangements and the like -- and German public opinion -- covertly/mildly anti-Israel and more overtly pro-Palestinian.” Where is German “public opinion” mentioned in the cables? “There is a lot of formalized positioning in German public discourse about Israel and the Middle East, but it doesn't necessarily reflect the deeper streams of opinion. There are some fairly open and robust supporters of Israel there too, of course, in politics, journalism, academia.” Does that deeper stream of opinion include deep seated animosity towards Jews which the official point of view seeks to counter? German animosity towards Israel, given the hundreds of years of the history of Germany’s relation to Jewry, is not and cannot be innocent.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 4:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Last time I looked this thread was the mid sized city of Toronto. When did it become New York?

- basman

December 3, 2010 at 4:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat, if you are still here: our new girl friend Esperenza Spaulding is the first jazz singer to be nominated for best artist of the year grammy!

- basman

December 3, 2010 at 5:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"... you go on the attack - and on a Jewish point that no one had raised. This is simply uncalled for and pointless." (icarus) "12/03/2010 - 12:43pm EDT | icarusr "whatever will Peretz have to say about this?" Headline: "And Muslim Arab to the rescue? You won't see this in the MSM but their planes didn't work; they had to borrow Israeli trucks; they 'pious' Arabs frequented Tel Aviv brothels instead of firefighting; and the fires just bellowed higher each time an Arab got close - the smell of sulfur and brimstone, no doubt. And let me tell you one more thing ..." The body will then refer to something someone wrote about bad the Arab's smelled after three days in the bush (of either variety) and why Muslims are good at blowing things up but can't fight a fire to save their lives."

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 5:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." Pravilno Tovarish Roi! Davay! To the Gulags all of them, the enemies of humanity, the wild dogs of capitalism, colonialism and imperialism.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 5:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2k: it is not pragmatic centrism to be in toto against such health care reform as Obama has thus far wrought and wanting it repealed. It is a species of delusion on a par with the deluded ideological nuttiness of inveighing against the death tax (as I explained above) or drawing a line in the sand for permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. Discrete criticisms, the ugliness of the sausage making, the need for incremental improvements, are one sort of thing, the outright call for repeal is something delusionally else again. If Mike Pence is your man: so much the worse for what that says about you. Read what the supply sider Bartlett had to say about him. The tragedy of your health care reform is that the constraints of political reality in your great, complicated country prevented it from going further, and bringing your country in this respect in line with the rest of the enlightened, developed world. It's not that the Ds went too far, they didn't go far enough because they couldn't. There is no equivalence, none, between the Ds's liberal standard bearers and the troglodyte right speaking for the Rs these days. What's the matter with you?

- basman

December 3, 2010 at 5:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover: The same thought occurred to me but I didn't really want to spell it out. I doubt roi will be able to understand your point. (He is "not a fascist", after all...) It is a comfort to know that he is only a "semi professional politician". What's most baffling is why people like to huddle so close to him.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 5:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga: Who cares what roi understands? By the way Malahat, I checked out Esperanza. Fabulous!

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 5:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jackson, That was a very interesting reply. Especially when you wrote about what makes war more likely. How you wrote it sounded to me like an aphorism. And aphorisms are frequently correct. It definitely brings World War II and Chamberlain to mind. But I'm not so sure there are many parallels to the current situation in the middle-East. Anyhoo, enough people here seem to be annoyed/dismissive/hostile/threatened about Obama's attempt to court that country, so I'm back to where I began. Whether or not you think Obama's trip was a good idea, what else should you do? Because you may well be wrong about Erdogan. Noga thinks he wants to turn it into a sharia mecca. There seem to be enough people concerned about the shifting alliances. If Turkey wasn't of such strategic importance, would Marty be bothering to this post? At the end of the day, what may be dividing people is whether or not we should be so openly courting the Arab world. His trip to Turkey was mostly just a make-nice with the region/propaganda move. So here's a thought: Are you saying that visiting Turkey is making us look weak? I'm not sure it's your argument, but it is a valid point. So there we are back to where we began. Well, every Jew in the world has an opinion. And there are enough opinions here to fill a theater. I don't think I wished you a happy Chanukah. So happy Chanuka--and don't go too crazy with the latkes.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 3, 2010 at 5:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

By the way, I meant aphorism as a good thing!

- MOLLYSIMON

December 3, 2010 at 5:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...but constructive when it comes to potential peace arrangements and the like -- and German public opinion -- covertly/mildly anti-Israel and more overtly pro-Palestinian.” Constructive? How? http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/51926/bleak-house/ "The first, the one that American and European officials never express and—if impolitely mentioned in their presence—turn away from in distaste, is that Palestinian political elites, of both the so-called “secular” and Islamist varieties, are dead set against partitioning the Land of Israel/Palestine with the Jews. They regard all of Palestine as their patrimony and believe that it will eventually be theirs. History, because of demography and the steady empowerment of the Arab and Islamic worlds and the West’s growing alienation from Israel, and because of Allah’s wishes, is, they believe, on their side. They do not want a permanent two-state solution, with a Palestinian Arab state co-existing alongside a (larger) Jewish state; they will not compromise on this core belief and do not believe, on moral or practical grounds, that they should. This basic Palestinian rejectionism, amounting to a Weltanschauung, is routinely ignored or denied by most Western commentators and officials...." This is from Benny Morris.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 5:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Noga thinks he wants to turn it into a sharia mecca." Really? Now where exactly did I say that? An accurate quote and its location in this thread (or elsewhere) will be much appreciated.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 5:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Pravilno Tovarish Roi! Davay! To the Gulags all of them, the enemies of humanity, the wild dogs of capitalism, colonialism and imperialism." Of course, makover, since you are another Israeli right wingnut like your friend noga, your slutty mind immediately runs to gulags. Nor does it occur to you that wingnuts such as yourself could be a threat to society. But it is true! You are. Because you are delusional. And we are living in a dangerous world that will not pause over rightwing delusions. They result in disaster upon disaster because reality is indifferent to rightwing lies and slanders. Still, the proper way to contest with political opponents is politically, not with political persecution. I understand that is almost unimaginable to a totalitarian mind such as yours. You want to kill enemies, imprison them, torture them, all of the horrors you applaud. But that's not the way we do things in a democracy, even an ailing democracy. Even when we think they are dangerous nuts, demagogues, and declared enemies of the democracy we seek to preserve.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 5:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The proper quote, noga, is that you, noga, are a fascist and I am not. But Goebbels little girl knows her job and does it with gusto.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 5:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Really? Now where exactly did I say that? An accurate quote and its location in this thread (or elsewhere) will be much appreciated." Oh, this is precious. Peretz's minister of propaganda, who never found a thought that she would not and could not stand on its head in her re-telling, is suddenly desirous of accurate quotation. Having been misquoted and misstated by this vicious liar and goon more times than I can count, an experience that others here have had as well, I find this fabulously entertaining. That really is the best part about the Spine. You can find the crackpots, of whom noga is the chief after Peretz himself, cavorting and frolicking with abandon oblivious to the spectacle the make of themselves.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 5:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: Interesting article in the Tablet. However, as all of Israel is sitting glued to radios and TV watching the unraveling of a disaster in the North we contemplate the incompetence of our elected leaders. מִצָּפוֹן תִּפָּתַח הָרָעָה עַל כָּל יֹשְׁבֵי הָאָרֶץ

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have been telling you about the incompetence of your elected leaders for quite some time. You elected them. They are your responsibility. But a raging out of control brush fire is nothing compared to the holocaust they are courting for you. You, however, don't give a shit because you can wrap yourself in your comforting jingoistic ideology and sleep well all night. Your imagined virtue will protect you even if your incompetent leaders will not.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 6:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I take your point about the Palestinian "covert narrative," for want of a better term, Noga, but all I meant was that Germany is usually first or second in the queue to pony up funds for Palestinian civil engineering or economc development projects, and the like, as these presumably are meant to contribute to stabilizing Palestinian society (as the U.S. supports the PA security and police set-up).

- ironyroad

December 3, 2010 at 6:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

MOLLYSIMON “Jackson, That was a very interesting reply. Especially when you wrote about what makes war more likely. How you wrote it sounded to me like an aphorism. And aphorisms are frequently correct. It definitely brings World War II and Chamberlain to mind. But I'm not so sure there are many parallels to the current situation in the middle-East.” I wasn’t thinking of Chamberlain at all. Nor was it meant as an aphorism. It was comment based on historical knowledge as well as first hand observation. Often in human history when societies get fixated on some ideal, be it equality, peace, brotherhood (camaraderie), economic justice, human rights, peace, etc, they end up embracing the opposite. France brought us the guillotine, the Soviets, the gulags, America commodity slavery, human rights organizations, embrace tyrannical regimes, Islam (the religion of peace) jihad), Christianity the religion of love, hatred of non Christians and heretics, etc. I am not very sanguine about States embracing peace as an end in itself. We tried it with President Wilson and then we got WW2. Speaking of aphorisms do you know the Chinese saying (I think it’s Chinese) 'Be careful what you wish for because it might just come true.’ Wanting peace is a good thing, but you will not get there if you are not ready for conflict. North Korea ought to have taught us, at least, that recently. Thanks for Chanukah well wishes. To me it’s a time more for illumination (literally) and not just latkes. In our house we a good time turning off the lights and watching the candles go out one by one. (even the smallest candle creates a lot of light, and it’s a joy seeing these small candles accumulate.) And a happy Chanukah to you, Molly.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 6:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Of course, makover, since you are another Israeli right wingnut like your friend noga, your slutty mind immediately runs to gulags." Wow, doesn't roi sounds just like Pravda? But you are wrong roi. My slutty mind is on some other "slutty" subjects. Like your sanity. So I completed your thoughts for you Tovarish. Is it correct or do I need to make some changes?: "The wild dogs of imperialism and colonialism are biting again. The Israeli soldateska is again threatening the Sun of Nations, our Beloved Dear Leader Barak Obama. Only a fight to the death might save the proletariat from the machination of the Zionist Neocon beasts and their slave minions, the Republicans." Is that good bubaleh?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi says: "... that's not the way we do things in a democracy," According to roi, this is the way Democrats, like roi, solve problems; they make these kinds of statements: " What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." ______________ "In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group. The law may identify a protected individual or a protected group by race, gender, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, or other characteristic.[3] "

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 6:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah, we elected those leaders, and you elected your leaders. Till now, your leader succeeded in screwing the world. Our leader succeeded in screwing Haifa. There is some difference don't you think?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi "I have been telling you about the incompetence of your elected leaders for quite some time. You elected them. They are your responsibility. But a raging out of control brush fire is nothing compared to the holocaust they are courting for you. You, however, don't give a shit because you can wrap yourself in your comforting jingoistic ideology and sleep well all night. Your imagined virtue will protect you even if your incompetent leaders will not." Roid is ignorant about the recent oil disaster in the US (under the competent Bush) and the handling of Katrina (under Bush). No country or party has a monopoly on incompetence. But, Roid proves again that self-righteousness is next to insanity.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 6:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...unraveling of a disaster in the North we contemplate the incompetence of our elected leaders." Yes, pretty depressing, especially since mass fires happened in the past in exactly the same locations and you would think there would be some preparation for re-occurrence. Big surprise that roi is dancing on the burnt bodies of Israelis. Now his dear leader handled the oil leak disaster with all due speed and preparedness, we all know. So we shouldn't begrudge roi's little dance of schadenfreude.

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 6:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Till now, your leader succeeded in screwing the world. Our leader succeeded in screwing Haifa. There is some difference don't you think?" I at least have the good taste and sense to object and to try to call attention to the threat that these people represent. You on the other hand applaud and defend. You even applaud and defend our incompetents so long as they are on and of the right. That is why you are a problem. Cosseted in ideology, indifferent to reality.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 6:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." roi Josef Visarionovich Stalin

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I at least have the good taste and sense to object and to try to call attention to the threat that these people represent." Which people? The Chicago mafia?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Our dear leader, not being an ideologically-driven drone, has the sense to learn from mistakes, even if they are not his mistakes. Hence, a ban on Gulf drilling until it can be shown to be safe. We shall see, won't we, what Israeli leadership learns from its mistakes. There is no reason for optimism. And it is makover, after all, who took the opportunity to point out the incompetence of Israeli elected officials. You will no doubt continue to follow them blindly over every cliff. You love that sort of thing, demonstrating your loyalty to ideology over the safety and security of your nation. And then you have the typical bad taste to consider the warning of the obvious as schadenfreude.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 6:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"self-righteousness is next to insanity" That is so true!

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Which people, makover? Haven't you been paying any attention? Why, the rightwing of course. The same people who stripped us of the regulations intended to prevent disaster such as those in the Gulf. The same people who . . . oh well, no point in reciting the litany of the disasters they have brought upon us. Or the disasters they will continue to bring upon you. You prefer your totalitarian fantasies to life itself. "They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all."

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 6:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"self-righteousness is next to insanity" That is so true! Has your demi-god, Martin Peretz, heard about this news?

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 6:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You are right roi. We Israelis are the masters of "bad taste". We come to nice, liberal parties in New York, LA and San Francisco and burst laughing when rois talk nonsense. You are right 100%. We don't pretend we see "emperor's new clothes". We tell it like it is. And the rois of the world don't like it.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Our dear leader, not being an ideologically-driven drone, has the sense to learn from mistakes" Haven't seen any learning yet. Who knows, maybe if Iran will sends a missile toward DC maybe. If N. Korea will attack an American frigate, maybe although I doubt it. He will just "unclench his fist" and bow deeply.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 6:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sure, makover, you are the great truth teller. Tell it like it is? You don't even know what is is. You are just one more of the fantasists who defends rightwing lunacy no matter what disaster it brings upon us, and yearns for the left to visit some comparable tragedy on the world so that you can indulge your schadenfreude. Burnt bodies? Are you yearning for a nuclear attack on the US so that you can consider yourself right? You are just another wackjob, makover. Keep on telling it like it is.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 6:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

People should ignore Roid. He is fatuous and full of impotent fury.

- jdyer

December 3, 2010 at 6:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

jdyer: You are right. But I just enjoy this. It's like Eugene Ionesco, theater of the absurd. "The Rhinoceros". Shadenfraude, burn bodies? I am yearning for a nuclear attack on the US? Wow, that is crazy, crazy! I think roi has a very small penis. Anyway, I need to catch some sleep. Good night jdyer, good night roi, good night everybody.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 3, 2010 at 7:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...all I meant was that Germany is usually first or second in the queue to pony up funds for Palestinian civil engineering or economc development projects, and the like, as these presumably are meant to contribute to stabilizing Palestinian society (as the U.S. supports the PA security and police set-up)." (ironyroad) I know what you meant. But what I wanted to point out is the obvious disappointment that Germans must be getting from the rejectionist Palestinians and how they deal with it. Instead of facing squarely to the real cause why there is no peace, they pretend, to themselves, to the Arabs and to the world, that it's Israel's fault. The excerpt from Benny Morris's piece goes to the heart of the problem. As long as the West keeps coddling the Palestinians and pouring money in their pockets in the hope that the caresses and the good will will sway them from their final programme, there will not be peace. What are they really afraid of?

- noga1

December 3, 2010 at 9:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"People should ignore Roid. He is fatuous and full of impotent fury." Potent enough to smack you around jackasson. Wanna place a bet on just how long you are going to be able to ignore me? As for makover, who's best witticism is to fantasize about the size of my penis -- well, now we know what's really on your pea-sized mind, don't we? And here you wanted us all to believe that you are a deep thinker, a truth teller, telling the liberal world how it really is. How long did it take you to run out of ideas and reveal yourself to have the mentality of a semi-literate 12-year old boy? Not very. What a pathetic piece of dreck you are. I never would have thought that it could take less effort to show one of you buffoons to be an idiot than it requires with jackson. That's a pretty low standard. Yet, here you are makover. The new record holder. A bigger jackass than jackasson himself. Sleep tight little boy. You are going to need every synapse in that speck you use for a mind to face a new day. Oh, and if you are offended that someone should speak of your appetite for burned bodies and the like, talk to your pal, the ghoulish, bloodthirsty, nauseating, repellent noga. The imagery is all hers, as you will see if you but scroll up a bit. I was simply demonstrating how easy it is to apply her little Goebbels-y propaganda tricks to one of you. And you just ate it right up. Push the button. There you are. The three of you together, the Three Stooges.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 10:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What ever happened to Israel, to the Zionist dream, that it could produce two such benighted spectacles as noga and makover? If this is what Israel produces, the Jewish people would have been far better off in perpetual diaspora.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 10:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am so glad I went to see "Love and Other Drugs" this afternoon whilst this thread wandered through the minefields. [absolutely priceless] 12/03/2010 - 6:27pm EDT | makover "They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." roi Josef Visarionovich Stalin http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Death-Toll-Rises-in-Israeli-Forest-Fire-111257104.html? American tax dollars at work, where the Federally Funded Voice of America New has a moderator approving all comments. Dear Leader Obama rejected unsolicited offers of foreign assistance/technology such as skimmers from the Netherlands on day 4 of the Deepwater spill. So many Federal regulations got in the way. Only after a Canadian newspaper revealed this complete dereliction of duty were the offers of foreign equipment accepted, maybe three months and tens of millions of gallons of oil later. Sorry, too busy to retrieve those references for the specific number of days that elapsed between the offers and the acceptance. Obama was too busy figuring out how to make BP the new emblem of evil instead of focussing on containing and cleaning the oil. Probably how he will handle North Korea and Iran - find a corporation to blame for the mess. cynical registered Democrat who always votes signing off.

- K2K

December 3, 2010 at 10:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://thepage.time.com/2010/12/02/donkey-doozy/ "The Democratic Party spirals unidirectionally." [Mark] Halperin's Take [which precedes, and excludes, supporting evidence of comment 12/03/2010 - 10:04pm EDT | roidubouloi ] "Is it hyperbolic to say the Democratic Party is in the midst of a nervous breakdown? I have been covering national politics since 1988, and I don't remember a situation quite like this. The signs of a crack-up are everywhere. Democrats still think they can somehow win a news cycle by demonizing John Boehner. Chuck Schumer goes on the Senate floor and suggests Democrats are getting the same political mileage out of "millionaires tax" that Republicans have gotten over the years from using "death tax." Politico has a story with blind quotes from Hill Democrats who are furious that the White House isn't using some sort of mythical leverage over Republicans to extract concessions in exchange for extending all the Bush tax cuts -- including continuing to try to trade for DADT and the Dream Act (rather than things dealing with jobs). Two members in good standing of the Professional Left -- moveon and the PCCC -- are spending its members' money on TV ads demanding that the president exercise this same mythical leverage to stand up to the GOP. (Read more: The Democrats' rhetorical failure in the tax debate.) Democrats are understandably -- and largely justified in being -- frustrated that they lost an election based on Republicans defending tax cuts for the wealthy that are only expiring because of a budget gimmick championed by George Bush -- and based on criticism of their apparent lack of concern over the deficit, by a party that has shown no past or current seriousness about deficit reduction and the hard choices involved. Losing those political fights was as inexplicable as it was hard for the Democrats. Maybe that's why Thursday seemed to have donkeys melting down all over the place."

- K2K

December 3, 2010 at 10:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.tnr.com/article/liars-poker Liar's Poker Why McCain just can't tell the truth. Jonathan Chait, Senior Editor About a week after John McCain's campaign unveiled a vice-presidential nominee who incessantly boasted about her decision to turn down federal funding for a notoriously pointless bridge ("I told Congress 'thanks, but no thanks' on that Bridge to Nowhere"), the press corps began to notice that Sarah Palin had, in fact, vigorously championed the project until it was no longer tenable. Political fibs, even brazen ones such as this, are hardly unprecedented. What happened next, though, was somewhat unusual. Despite having its claim exposed in nearly every media outlet, the McCain campaign continued to assert it anyway, day after day, dozens of times in all. It was as if Bill Clinton had persisted in his claim that he did not have sexual relations with that woman even after the appearance of the semen-stained dress. But what happened after that was even more unusual, and possibly without precedent: McCain's supporters simply suggested that the truth or falsity of their statements didn't matter. McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said this to Politico about the increased media scrutiny of the campaign's factual claims: "We're running a campaign to win. And we're not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say about it." Republican strategist John Feehery made the point even more bluntly, telling The Washington Post: "The more The New York Times and The Washington Post go after Sarah Palin, the better off she is, because there's a bigger truth out there, and the bigger truths are: She's new, she's popular in Alaska, and she is an insurgent." Then, he added, "As long as those are out there, these little facts don't really matter." Here we have the distilled essence of the McCain campaign's ethos: Perception is reality. Facts don't matter. McCain has presented himself as the grizzled champion of timeworn values. But the defining trait of his candidacy turns out to be a postmodern disdain for truth. How could McCain--a man widely regarded, not so long ago, as one of the country's most honor-bound politicians, and therefore an unusually honest one--have descended to this ignominious low? * * * Last February, political scientists Brendan Nyhan of Duke and Jason Reifler of Georgia State published the results of an experiment designed to test the effects of political untruths. The results would unsettle any idealist. The first conclusion they found was that lies work. When subjects were confronted with an untrue political claim (President Bush banned stem-cell research; weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq) respondents naturally moved toward those positions. When the lie was corrected, however, the effect of the untruth in moving opinions largely remained. The truth, in other words, is no antidote for a lie. Their second conclusion was even more disturbing. Subjects who identified as politically conservative were not only immune to the effects of having a lie corrected, the correction made them even more likely to believe a lie. So, for instance, one group of conservative subjects was presented with a news story that depicted President Bush claiming weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq. A second group of conservatives was presented with the same thing, along with a paragraph noting that Bush's statement was untrue. The second group was more likely than the first to believe that Iraq possessed WMDs. The very fact of the press challenging their beliefs seems to have made conservatives more likely to embrace them. ____________________ K2K, why do you bother to post here? You ramble on endlessly and incoherently and you NEVER know what you are talking about.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 10:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Republican Senators are busy now making a prophet out of me. To quote what I said in full: What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right. * * * Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 10:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Basman, We are now the size of Karachi.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 3, 2010 at 11:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Having set the record straight, I note again that, while Republicans openly declare their intention to do damage to our nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, noga and makover (cheered on by the addled K2K) liken my call for "ratcheting up the rhetoric" and "political warfare" with the right to Stalin, gulags, and murder. This is first and foremost because they have a totalitarian mindset. In their perverted world, if one has a political enemy then one must persecute or even murder that enemy. The very notion of political, rhetorical contest is alien to them. But, more important, they want us to believe that even to contest with the crazy right-wing to which they belong is to be a Stalinist. One can only conclude that noga, makover, and the their pet boy K2K hate America as much as the Republicans do. They wish us harm. They wish us ill. They wish us disaster, a nuclear attack in the case of makover, if only they can vindicate their extremist ideology. If America will not kowtow to Israel, if America will not put itself at risk to save Israel from its own fecklessness, the fecklessness of its insane right wing, then they wish to see us suffer for it. And most of all, they wish for us not to fight back, to be the passive victims of the insane right wing to which they belong. To be too embarrassed, too timid to do what is necessary to achieve their political defeat. Well, screw them. It's our country. They should be content with destroying Israel.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 11:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We seemed to have moved a little far from Turkey -- while becoming the size of Sao Paolo -- but one point even at this stage seems worth making. We are in the middle of a cultural war against the Obama presidency, not entirely because Obama is black/of mixed parentage, but that is the symbolic organizing motif that drives the intensity of the craziness that this last election brought to the surface. This does not cancel out in any way the effects of the economic depression that we find ourselves in, or even deny that the White House has (a) failed to grasp the economic issue as central and (b) become shockingly willing to give away the store after it has negotiated primarily with itself, but, BUT, anyone who believes that the same kind of mid-term election would have happened if, say, John Kerry were president is engaging in an act of naked denial. In fact, one of the reasons for the lower turnout on the Dem side last month seems to me to be partly explained by that very fact. A lot of people in the U.S. are very happy with the Obama presidency in a symbolic way, in a kind of mirror-image of the Right, and they are simply impervious to the wild spiralling hatreds that have turned the fringe of the Republican Party into a something like a national paranoid echo-chamber. They did not vote because they felt no urgency.

- ironyroad

December 3, 2010 at 11:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Low turnout on the left because it is "happy with the Obama presidency?" "the fringe of the Republican Party?" This doesn't sound at all like the America I am living in. The left is disappointed, and about to be crushed with disappointment, in Obama. The wild spiraling hatreds and national paranoid echo-chamber are hardly confined to the fringe of the Republican party. They define the Republican party. They are the Republican party. Whether that is principally because of Obama's race is a lot less clear than the fact that the Republican party has become a party almost entirely of extremists. The fringe has consumed the center as always happens when extremist movements are burgeoning.

- roidubouloi

December 3, 2010 at 11:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/79642/the-bargaining-advantages-not-caring-about-policy The Bargaining Advantages of Not Caring About Policy Jonathan Bernstein "Yes, I should point out, it’s a generalization that doesn’t always hold, and probably an exaggeration. Nevertheless, I think it accounts for some key differences. In lots of policy areas, Republicans simply don’t care very much what happens. And while that has a lot of limitations, it also can at times give them strong bargaining power."

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 12:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...Turkey came in for more than its fair share, No. 2 among all countries. According to a graphic on the WikiLeaks website, the roughly 11,000 cables about Turkey were outstripped only by those on Iraq (15,365)...." [including the docs about U.S. spy planes over Turkey in 2008] http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2010/11/turkey-wikileaks.html with photo of Hillary shaking hands with FM Davotoglu on Nov. 29. No wonder she now says SecState will be her last public office.

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 12:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

perhaps low turnout on the left had something to do with "... The New York City Board of Elections also misplaced something important last month — ... A month after the Nov. 2 election, the board this week formally certified the results of a canvass of ballots cast on voting machines and counted about 1.3 million of them, 195,055 more — or about 17 percent more — than were counted on election night. ..." So difficult for the patronage-riddled NYC BOE to actually count votes - why should anyone bother with even the illusion of democracy...

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 12:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi says: "This is first and foremost because they have a totalitarian mindset. In their perverted world, if one has a political enemy then one must persecute or even murder that enemy. The very notion of political, rhetorical contest is alien to them." "One can only conclude that noga, makover, and the their pet boy K2K hate America as much as the Republicans do. They wish us harm. They wish us ill. They wish us disaster, a nuclear attack in the case of makover, if only they can vindicate their extremist ideology." roi said: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies... And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." ("Because we know how difficult things would be, if today in every city during the bomb attacks, the burdens of war and the privations, we still had Jews as secret saboteurs, agitators and instigators.") _______________ "PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom." ("And then along they all come, all the 80 million upright Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. They say: all the others are swine, but here is a first-class Jew." __________ To conclude, here is roi, again: "noga, makover, and the their pet boy K2K hate America as much as the Republicans do. They wish us harm. They wish us ill. They wish us disaster, a nuclear attack in the case of makover, if only they can vindicate their extremist ideology. If America will not kowtow to Israel, if America will not put itself at risk to save Israel from its own fecklessness, the fecklessness of its insane right wing, then they wish to see us suffer for it." ("We have the moral right, we had the duty to our people to do it, to kill this people who wanted to kill us.") _______________ I'll ask roi again: When you say these things, do you misspeak? Is it because you get so carried away with your emotions that your mind simply cannot resist spewing forth this kind of incitement and slander? Are you standing behind each and every word that I have quoted here from your own comments? Was it someone else making these comments in your name?

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 6:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat says: "However, pace Irony's thought train, perhaps Germany helping to finance and develop basic Palestinian infrastructure is simply motivated by the desire to help to create income, output and employment. By creating opportunity and reducing poverty and hopelessness, perhaps that in turn also promotes the desire for stability and peace. Is that in concept so different from Netanyahu's enlightened self-interest in promoting economic growth in the West Bank?" If Germans want to help Palestinians get over their poverty they can do so and no one should mind that at all. However, I take umbrage at the fact that the failure of these policies to elicit from the Palestinians "the desire for stability and peace" is laid at Israel's door. And that is exactly what the leaks suggest. As if the Germans, having invested in the Palestinians their good will are upset that it doesn't work as they planned it, which would or should have been the RATIONAL thing to happen. So someone must be blamed for this absence of rational yield from the Palestinians. As Benny Morris says about it: "—if impolitely mentioned in their presence—turn away from in distaste, is that Palestinian political elites, of both the so-called “secular” and Islamist varieties, are dead set against partitioning the Land of Israel/Palestine with the Jews. They regard all of Palestine as their patrimony and believe that it will eventually be theirs." They avoid confronting the real obstacle to peace and then, because it is so irrational, they look for the nearest excuse to blame Israel for it. Because something must be blamed for why Palestinians seem to be so adamantly opposed to their own statehood. It's easier to blame Israel, on several levels: This has become the standard fallback in Western academia, it solicits smiles from the Arab world and it gains them some respite from the wrath of the Muslim world. I would say this is a shameful position, either open or underhanded, for Germany to take.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 7:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I stand behind every one of my words, noga, most certainly including your loathing for America and your wish that we suffer if we will not prostrate ourselves before Netanyahu and the Likud, but you have inserted your own words amidst mine in such a manner that it is not at all clear what I have said and what is your own malign addition. So, we must extract yours. They are these: ("Because we know how difficult things would be, if today in every city during the bomb attacks, the burdens of war and the privations, we still had Jews as secret saboteurs, agitators and instigators.") ("And then along they all come, all the 80 million upright Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. They say: all the others are swine, but here is a first-class Jew." ("We have the moral right, we had the duty to our people to do it, to kill this people who wanted to kill us.") ____________________ You see, it is only you, not I, who thinks that what you do with political enemies is kill them. I think you defeat them politically. It is only you, not I, who thinks the very first thing you ought to do with real enemies is try to kill them. I think violence is your last resort, and that you refrain from gratuitous provocation in order not to render a non-violent solution impossible. You, on the other hand, constantly urge that America and Obama do just the reverse, be as provocative as possible so that every political opponent becomes a mortal threat who must then be killed. It is you, not I, who thinks that, if you have enemies who want to kill you, it no longer matters what you do to them, how you behave toward them. You think that if they hate you, their lives, their childrens's lives, are forfeit. For you, they become game animals, no longer human beings who may even have some claims to justice (what you call their "false narrative"). It is you, not I, who believes that everyone in the world, the Germans, the French, the English, the Americans, Obama, Thomas Friedman, is an enemy of Israel, your enemy, because they abhor Israel's colonization of the Palestinian Arabs and see it as a constant provocation. And then you wish harm to befall them because they too are your enemy. This is why you are Goebbels little girl, noga. You not only harbor the most vicious intentions toward humanity other than the Jews -- and toward plenty of them too once they are defined as your enemies -- but you gleefully impute your own vicious intentions to others as slander and propaganda. I have no trouble standing behind my own words. But any human being with a shred of decency would want to get as far away from you and yours as possible. As I have said many times, and cannot repeat often enough, you are morally debased.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 8:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga says: "Because something must be blamed for why Palestinians seem to be so adamantly opposed to their own statehood. It's easier to blame Israel, on several levels." And yet, in the past, when I have suggested that the smartest thing for the Palestinians to do in their own interest would be to go ahead and declare their own state even while occupied by Israel, noga has, of course, branded me an enemy of Israel, a shill for the Palestinians. For Goebbels little girl, hypocrisy has no meaning at all because truth has no meaning at all. There are only useful lies and useless lies.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 8:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I should have noted again, noga, that not only do you interpolate your own words amongst mine, but you elide my words in which I make it quite apparent that what I call for is political and rhetorical contest with the right, not violence. By omitting the language that makes obvious I have no interest in violence and then inserting your own violent thoughts, you achieve your slanderous propaganda purpose in the image of Goebbels, your mentor. How in god's name do you look in the mirror every day without being overcome by grief?

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 8:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga: The position of Germany's liberal elites as well as governing circles are well described in Paul Berman's "Terror and Liberalism" as: "When apocalyptic mass movements commit violence, it must be in response to grievances: exploitation by the rich, domination and humiliation by the powerful. Violence that makes no sense in those terms -- if it's aimed at random civilians, or Jews, or women who show their faces in the street; if it's suicidal as well as murderous -- only shows that its perpetrators are unhinged by oppression. In those circumstances, the irrational is rational. But totalitarian movements, Berman argues, do not fit this liberal calculus; they are wholly pathological, a nihilistic romance with death." Thus the "standard fallback" as you describe. roi vissarionovich: It is not possible to respond rationally to your hysterical ravings. Take two valiums and post again in the morning. Maybe you will make sense then (though I doubt it).

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 9:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Go back to your adolescent penis fantasies, makover. It is the best you are capable of. Come back when you manage, likely about the age of 60 in your case, to get out of junior high school.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 9:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi: These words: ("Because we know how difficult things would be, if today in every city during the bomb attacks, the burdens of war and the privations, we still had Jews as secret saboteurs, agitators and instigators.") ("And then along they all come, all the 80 million upright Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. They say: all the others are swine, but here is a first-class Jew." ("We have the moral right, we had the duty to our people to do it, to kill this people who wanted to kill us.") are not mine. Their source should have been known to any "humanity lover" like yourself. I have not "interpolated" these words amongst yours. I provided these quotes in brackets, separately from yours by way of drawing attention to the similarity between them. It appears I still tend to underestimate the extent of your moral and historical illiteracy.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 9:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Take two valiums" No. Valiums won't do the job. ___________ I asked roi: "When you say these things, do you misspeak? Is it because you get so carried away with your emotions that your mind simply cannot resist spewing forth this kind of incitement and slander? Are you standing behind each and every word that I have quoted here from your own comments? Was it someone else making these comments in your name?" roi answered: "I stand behind every one of my words, noga," (12/04/2010 - 8:43am EDT | roidubouloi) Here are the words he stands behind: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all."

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 9:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Irony: "We are in the middle of a cultural war against the Obama presidency, not entirely because Obama is black/of mixed parentage, but that is the symbolic organizing motif that drives the intensity of the craziness that this last election brought to the surface." I don't claim to be an expert on US electoral politics but what is it that you are suggesting? Are you claiming that race is the main factor? You don't think that the horrible economic situation, 10% unemployment, the president "fiddling while Rome is burning" is not a major factor contributing to the resentment? Are you not a little unfair to the country that after all elected Obama by a landslide? You must admit that there are objective factors related to this resentment. roi vissarionovich: It is not possible to respond rationally to your hysterical ravings. Take two valiums and post again in the morning.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 9:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Go back to your adolescent penis fantasies, makover. It is the best you are capable of. Come back when you manage, likely about the age of 60 in your case, to get out of junior high school.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 9:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here again are my words -- not my words as edited by noga to omit whatever will not serve her malicious purpose and without her insertion of Nazi propaganda of which noga approves. Noga wishes falsely to attribute to me her desire to murder enemies. My words will not sustain such an interpretation. This is the sort of malignant behavior that makes her a propagandist in the school of Goebbels. ____________________ "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right. * * * Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom."

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 9:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." Against the wall with all of them, the enemies of the proletariat! roi Vissarionovich Stalin

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi is trying to claim that these paragraphs: "I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer." can actually explain and excuse these paragraphs: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right. * * * Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." "PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom." Left with nowhere to hide from his own words, he turns to the oldest trick in the book, used by each and every tyrant and genocidal ruler in histor having run out of legitimate grievances: It's not him , it's those people. But he cannot. The words were said, written, repeated by him and his faith in them re-interated. Every decent human who voted for Obama should distance him or herself from such a supporter of Obama. He presents, in his unconstrained verbal militancy, the very mirror image of the hard core opposition to Obama that ironyroad identified: "... the symbolic organizing motif that drives the intensity of the craziness that this last election brought to the surface." Frankly, nothing illustrates "the craziness that this last election brought to the surface" better than roidubouloi's Stalinist demagoguery.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 10:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Frankly, nothing illustrates "the craziness that this last election brought to the surface" better than roidubouloi's Stalinist demagoguery." Very well said.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 10:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What is on display here in microcosm are the inversions of reality typical of extremists, of both the left and of the right. However, left-wing extremism barely exists today. The threat to our democracy, our security, and our prosperity in our era is entirely from the extremist right. makover, when he is not worrying himself over the size of my penis, his version of political thought, quotes Paul Berman. (One supposes that quoting Berman is makover's attempt to cover up the fact that his own "thinking" on these matters is indistinguishable from that of sexually needy adolescent.) Berman's thesis, amongst others, is that the left fails to appreciate the totalitarian roots of Islamic extremism and is thus insufficiently zealous in its use of violence to combat it. "Berman argues that the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and the 2003 invasion of Iraq were justified by the doctrine of "liberal interventionism": intervention to safeguard and promote liberal democratic freedoms. Berman has defended the Iraq war as "a logical place to begin" the "war on terrorism".[6] In 2004, he wrote in Dissent, "If only people like you would wake up, you would see that war against the radical Islamist and Baathist movements, in Afghanistan exactly as in Iraq, is war against fascism."[7] While critical of the Bush administration's justification of the Iraq war on the grounds of weapons of mass destruction, he warned "[Saddam's] weapons programs are not a fiction."[8] In 2003, addressing criticism of George Bush's articulation of the reasons for going to war, he urged liberals, "And a cold analysis, I believe, ought to lead liberals and people on the left to support the effort to overthrow Saddam, and to push for a genuine campaign to establish a liberal society in Iraq and elsewhere, in countries that have fallen into the totalitarian trough."[9] Over concerns that the Iraq war would mean breaching international law, Berman wrote, "We have had to choose between supporting the war, or opposing it—supporting the war in the name of antifascism, or opposing it in the name of some kind of concept of international law. Antifascism without international law; or international law without antifascism. A miserable choice—but one does have to choose, unfortunately.[7]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Berman makover and noga approve the idea that, once we have sufficiently identified some party as the enemy, or the right sort of enemy, then we must kill them. Of course, in a standard ploy of extremist propaganda, they also wish to distance themselves from their own repellent immorality by then attributing these same sentiments to others, to me for example. But I don't share their appetite for violence at all. __________________________ What is missing from Berman and from his admirers is any sort of moral calculus, including that embodied in the international law that they all disparage. Iraq was not in fact "a logical place to begin" the "war on terrorism." It harbored neither terrorists nor weapons of mass destruction. The moral basis for war is not "logical" but factual, whether that war is legitimately defensive. International law and morality do not allow for war, with the attendant and inevitable loss of the lives and limbs of thousands or even millions who don't do much more than live ordinary lives, in the absence of imminent threat. This implies a strong moral obligation both to obtain the facts, as far as possible within the limits of morally acceptable risk, and to pursue alternatives to violence, as far as possible within the limits of acceptable risk. This also requires some discernment as to the source of threat. One cannot proceed willy-nilly, as Berman and his ilk would do, to make war on people merely because they think totalitarian thoughts. Also completely missing from the thinking of the extremist right (no matter the soothing words and values with which they attempt to cloak themselves) are any considerations of prudence. We did not start World War III with the Soviet Union although it was a totalitarian state. Always a factor in the liberal (non-Bermanite) doctrine of just warfare is the consideration of practical necessity, or prudence. Is this truly necessary? Is it likely to achieve the defensive objective? Is the destruction that will be caused disproportionate to the level of the threat? Hence, using drone aircraft to decapitate terrorists, as Obama has shown himself very willing to do, is a proportionate response. Going to war with a nation that poses absolutely no imminent threat, no matter how noxious its government and ideology, is not. When Thomas Friedman labeled the war in Iraq "a war of choice" of which he approved because of what he imagined to be its potential salutory political benefits for the Moslem world (none of which have been realized), he was in fact labeling that war as illegal and immoral. War is not a choice from a menu. It is the last resort in defense of self. It is ironic, although typical of the inversions of extremists, that Berman identifies the urge for "moral purity" as one of the telltale signs of a totalitarian movement. That observation is, I think, correct. But Berman fails to observe that both he and the political tendency that he wishes to inspire suffer from this. Martin Peretz and the headline of this post are both examples. Obama's "failure" is not that his efforts to conciliate such as the Turks have not achieved their goals to anyone's satisfaction. Because neither Peretz nor anyone else here is ever able to muster either a causal argument as to how Obama has made things worse or an alternative policy that suggests there is a high opportunity cost for Obama's pursuit of conciliation (at least in the complete absence of any other plausible alternative). No, what outrages these zealots is the lack of moral purity in treating in an ostensibly friendly manner with "enemies." They yearn for the moral purity of ritual denunciation of these enemies, regardless of whether that is likely to lead to a worse outcome, certainly indifferent to it as they are never willing so much as to address to likely or possible consequences of the bombast they seek. If a regime such as that of Saddam Hussein can be successfully identified as "totalitarian," then "logically" we must war upon it. Any ideology that thinks it can derive war as the necessary "logical" outcome of anything is itself of a totalitarian tendency. There is no limit to what logic can suggest or justify, torture for example, once it is stripped of prudence and the messy necessity to discern facts, risks, possibilities, probabilities. _________________ On the other hand, we have now in America an extremist right-wing that has consumed what used to be the center-right. It no longer believes in the democratic enterprise as understood in our country for more than 200 years. It does not believe that it has a responsibility to pursue in good faith solutions to the nation's problems. It declares openly that obtaining political power is its objective rather than the pursuit of solutions to the nation's problems. Worse, it is openly willing to side with our rivals, such as China, in opposing measures intended to address the appalling problem of high unemployment, because they may improve the situation and thus frustrate the right's goal of a return to power. They no longer believe that winning an election and control of both the executive branch entitles the winner to govern, if that is the winner is the left, but that it is free to use any and every means -- including grotesque slander and lies -- to obstruct elected government if that is a government of the left. It is unwilling to consider policy compromise, because it has no interest at all in policy that might benefit the nation, only in its own pursuit of power. I have no problem in labeling this movement an "enemy" of our nation because it wishes us harm, or is at the very least indifferent to harm to the nation, its prosperity, its security, if that harm will help return it to power by discrediting the present administration. It is quite open about this. In response, I think we must abandon efforts to negotiate with, compromise with, or conciliate this extremist movement. Those have been tried with no success at all. Instead, they have been but the occasion for more of the slander and lies that undermine the ability of the administration to govern successfully. In this case, there is a very high opportunity cost to the pursuit of conciliation. Not only is it futile, but we fail to take the alternative course of exerting ourselves to the utmost in the political contest to defeat extremism by all legal means. This is what we must do. The totalitarians and extremists here, such as noga and makover, immediately equate the call for political and rhetorical contest to the violence that they typically advocate as the first solution to any problem. That has nothing whatsoever to do with me. It merely reflects that they are part of the same extremist movement that disparages means -- such as democratic political contest -- that are not violent or that oppose in any manner their own extremism. Like the extremist right of which they are a part, there is no lie or slander that they will not deploy in order to discourage the will to oppose them by democratic means.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 10:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber-bullying: "Cyber-bullying "involves the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others." ...Unlike physical bullying, electronic bullies can remain virtually anonymous using ...pseudonyms in chat rooms, ... and other Internet venues to mask their identity; this perhaps frees them from normative and social constraints on their behavior. ...In June, 2008, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) and Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R-Mo.) proposed a federal law that would criminalize acts of cyberbullying. ... The proposed federal law would make it illegal to use electronic means to "coerce, intimidate, harass or cause other substantial emotional distress." ..."

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 10:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover and noga, both it seems propagandists in the image of Goebbels, continue to amuse themselves by selectively quoting me, stripping from what I said language that makes it impossible to interpret my words in the way they would like. Since this is a failure, because they are also both rather stupid, noga now wishes to spin the inclusion of all of my words, written together, as if this were my effort to "excuse" one paragraph with another. The one requires no excuse. They were written of a piece. Their meaning in their entirety is clear and will not permit of the construction that noga and makover wish to place on it that I advocate the persecution, imprisonment in a gulag, torture, or murder of political enemies. I advocate that we use rhetoric and political theater suited to the task of defeating them politically, nothing more, nothing less, and that we get on about it straight away. The fantasies of murder, torture, and persecution are entirely those of noga and makover, typical indeed of noga and makover. In their world, there exist only two kinds of people, Israelis, and everyone else who is bent on murdering Israelis and must therefore be murdered first.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 10:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here is a delightful bit of noga's blubbering, sputtering incoherence, her rage because her juvenile propaganda tricks are unsuccessful: "Left with nowhere to hide from his own words, he turns to the oldest trick in the book, used by each and every tyrant and genocidal ruler in history having run out of legitimate grievances: It's not him , it's those people. But he cannot. The words were said, written, repeated by him and his faith in them re-interated." She manages to contradict herself in the space of two sentences. I am, it seems, both repeating and affirming my faith in my own words -- I do and I am -- and engaging in some sort of trick to run away from them. What the loathsome noga cannot abide is that I will not permit her to edit my words and intertwine them with the ravings of Nazis so as to mean something that they do not mean. And all I have to do for that purpose is quote them in full. That alone elicits more paroxysms from her. The horror!, that I insist that what I say be quoted in full so that all of its parts can be understood in relation to one another. Such a dastardly trick on my part. Akin to genocide according to noga. These are the ravings of an unhinged lunatic, a severely depressed, nearly psychotic individual.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"In their world, there exist only two kinds of people, Israelis, and everyone else who is bent on murdering Israelis and must therefore be murdered first." roi vissarionovich: Did you stop taking your medication? Very dangerous.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 11:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If anyone wants to comment on American politics, Jennifer Rubin poses this open question of the week at her new blog, Right-Turn, at Washington Post: "What should each party have learned from the 2010 midterms and what incorrect conclusion are they most likely to extract?" http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2010/12/friday_question_--_open_thread.html#comments "Friday Question -- open thread By Jennifer Rubin Every Friday about this time I'll pose a question and throw it out to the readers. You have until Sunday at 6 p.m. ET to add comments. I promise to read them all, pick the most interesting and discuss it on Monday. I have a preference for comments that don't necessarily agree with me ideologically, but that make smart points. You get extra credit for humor. If you write in ALL CAPS, you're disqualified. Today's question: What should each party have learned from the 2010 midterms and what incorrect conclusion are they most likely to extract? Go for it." [She reads every comment on every blogpost, a habit that should be copied by someone in TNR.com]

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 11:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh dear. A 1566 word post to explain and exonerate what roi now re-names his earlier and oft-repeated "call for political and rhetorical contest". That's the sterilized language he applies to this exemplary sample of classical hate speech: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." __________ A charitable view would be to consider these 1566 words as a kind of de-facto repudiation of the words quoted above. Earlier today I asked roi: "When you say these things, do you misspeak? Is it because you get so carried away with your emotions that your mind simply cannot resist spewing forth this kind of incitement and slander? Are you standing behind each and every word that I have quoted here from your own comments? Was it someone else making these comments in your name?" And this is roi's way of answering that, as a matter of fact, yes, he did misspeak, that he did not mean to incite and slander and that when he calls at least 50% of Americans "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America", his comment should be seen as no more and no less than an invitation for a "political and rhetorical contest". And may the best man win. I am convinced.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 11:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The only medication you approve of makover is sarin. I don't consider that a good idea. I leave you to your adolescent sexual frustrations and your yearnings for violence (how often the two go together).

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover: roi vissarionovich's stated purpose is to disrupt Martin Peretz's blog, The Spine. roi vissarionovich's ravings HERE ARE HIS MEDICATION. BTW, two milligrams of Valium is the dose for a ten-pound cat or dog. My cat has decided he no longer wants to live in, or travel to, New York. Two milligrams of valium is what it takes to keep him from spitting, choking on his spit, throwing up, and choking on his vomit, just as we cross the border from Yonkers into New York City. My cat is clearly allergic to raving liberalism :)

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 11:14am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

full text of copyrighted Wall Street Journal op-ed copied from link at RealClearPolitics: "DECEMBER 4, 2010. Liberalism: An Autopsy The heirs of the New Deal are down to 20% of the electorate. By R. EMMETT TYRRELL JR. In the tumultuous history of postwar American liberalism, there has been a slow but steady decline of which liberals have been steadfastly oblivious. The heirs of the New Deal are down to around 20% of the electorate, according to recent Gallup polls. Conservatives account for 42% of the vote, and in the recent election the independents, the second most numerous group at 29% of the electorate, broke the conservatives' way. They were alarmed by the deficit. They will be alarmed for a long time. Liberalism's decline might appear, at first glance, to have begun with the 1961 inauguration of President John F. Kennedy—when historians noted the first glimmerings of what was to become liberalism's distinctive trait, overreach. Kennedy's soaring oratory was infectious and admirable and even impressed a later generation of conservatives. But it was a bit dishonest. There never was a missile gap with the Soviet Union, as he claimed, or any other cause for histrionics. On the domestic side, the oratory set in motion President Lyndon Johnson's catastrophic War on Poverty. JFK's stirring language represented a break with the Burkean understanding of President Dwight Eisenhower. Ike, whether he articulated it or not, wanted to put the Great Depression and the dangerous confrontations of the early Cold War period behind us. He wanted to return to normalcy. Yet Kennedy's inaugural put America on a different path, one that led to the Cuban missile crisis and ultimately to Vietnam. It fixed America's stance in the world, and with that stance we were on the road to Iraq and Afghanistan. Domestically it set us on the path to a behemoth big government. Still, in tracing liberalism's decline, one cannot ignore an earlier event: the civil war that broke out in the aftermath of World War II. The conflict pitted what we might call the radicals led by Henry Wallace against the advocates of what Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. would call in his book, "The Vital Center," more practical liberals like Hubert Humphrey, Joseph L. Rauh and Walter Reuther. They were hard-headed and patriotic, and their desiderata were reasonable by comparison with the radicals' utopian ideas about the Soviet Union. Practical liberals won in the late 1940s, but by 1972 civil war had broken out anew. .The practical liberals won in the late 1940s, but in 1972 civil war broke out anew. This time the radicals won. In the meantime, LBJ's Great Society caused even some liberals to warn against the "unintended consequences" of government programs. These were to be the first new recruits to modern conservatism. Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol and, for a time, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, were in Kristol's words liberals "who were mugged by reality." The radicals were seeking refuge from reality in a self-regarding fantasy. Only a crisis in the leadership of President Richard Nixon, Watergate, allowed them to hide from the American electorate their fantastic delusions. Conservatives have had Edmund Burke and the Founding Fathers as their cynosures. Sometimes they have provided discipline; sometimes conservatives have followed their own star. The problem for liberals is they have been denied a cynosure. Some had looked to the British Fabian Socialists and some to Karl Marx, but since the late 1940s liberals became coy about their intellectual mentors. From the Nixon administration on, the numbers have not been good for liberals. In 1972 only one state went for presidential candidate George McGovern, who even lost the youth vote. In 1976 liberalism did better, but Jimmy Carter ran as a moderate. Then came 1980. Ronald Reagan benefitted from the ongoing electoral accretions that modern conservatism has attracted: the neocons, the evangelicals (aka the Christian Right), the Reagan Democrats. Liberals could claim nothing new. During his eight years in office, Reagan changed the political center for years to come. As the Old Cowboy headed back to California, the political center was center-right: vigilance about big government, balanced budgets, low taxes and peace through strength. In 1992, after 12 years of conservatives in the White House, Bill Clinton beat George Herbert Walker Bush. Yet he too ran as a moderate. Once in office he tried to push a big government agenda and was trounced in the midterm election. The rest of Clinton's presidency was defined by his pronouncement that "The era of big government is over." The Reagan revolution was secured. In 2000, Clinton's vice president lost to the governor of Texas despite prosperity and peace. George W. Bush won the midterms in 2002. Then came the Republicans' wilderness years in 2006 and 2008—but not conservatism's. Conservatives remained more popular than liberals by about a 2-1 margin. Conservatism has steadily spread through the country since its larval days in the 1950s, and the reason is that the vast majority of Americans favor free enterprise and personal liberty. Note the tea party movement. The Republicans just took the House of Representatives by over 60 seats and gained six seats in the Senate. The social democrat in the White House has been routed. Over the past two years the Democrats showed their true colors. Faced with an entitlement crisis, they rang up trillion dollar deficits. We now face an entitlement crisis and a budget crisis—and liberals have no answer for it beyond tax and spend. They still have support in the media, but even here they are faced with opposition from Fox News, talk radio and the Internet. As a political movement liberalism is dead. They do not have the numbers. They do not have the policies. They have 23 seats in the Senate to defend in 2012 (against the Republicans' 10) and Republican control of state houses and legislatures will give them even more seats in the future. Liberalism R.I.P." "Mr. Tyrrell, a syndicated columnist, is editor in chief of The American Spectator. His current book is "After The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery," published by Thomas Nelson."

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 11:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And once more into the breach: Here is noga for the nth time, once again selectively editing my words, and then insisting that I am struggling, for "a kind of de-facto repudiation" says she, of my own words. But I don't repudiate them. I embrace them. It is just that I embrace my own words all together, as I wrote them, not noga's edited version or the patently impossible meaning that she attempts to impute to them. According to noga, I am falsely attempting to claim in retrospect that what I advocated is "political and rhetorical contest" rather than the murder of political enemies that she lusts for. I was clear the first time in calling for political and rhetorical contest. Therefore, noga keeps omitting from her edited version the paragraph in which I do so. My words cannot admit of the meaning noga attempts to impose on them. Hence, she must edit them to mean what she wants them to mean. That I point this out and re-quote them in their entirety does not stop her from doing it again. She is exactly like the rest of the right wingnuts, described in the piece by Chait quoted above, who, confronted with their own lies, simply repeat the same lie again, and again, and again. I on the other hand keep repeating what I said the first time and affirming that what I said the first time is both what I said and what I meant. I do not repudiate those words. And I don't elaborate upon them. They are fine the way I wrote them. I do spend considerable effort elucidating just how and why noga and makover are but part and parcel of the extremist right that we must defeat -- politically.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What preposterous garbage K2K quotes: "Yet Kennedy's inaugural put America on a different path, one that led to the Cuban missile crisis and ultimately to Vietnam. It fixed America's stance in the world, and with that stance we were on the road to Iraq and Afghanistan." * * * "During his eight years in office, Reagan changed the political center for years to come. As the Old Cowboy headed back to California, the political center was center-right: vigilance about big government, balanced budgets, low taxes and peace through strength." ____________________________ Big Brother couldn't have said it better. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not the project of the right, led by George W. Bush, Reagan's heir. They were the project of liberals! The typical propaganda, the Big Lie, of the right these days is that every disaster that the insane rightwing ideology, that started with Reagan, has visited upon our nation was actually the work of liberals. Peace through strength? Do they mean the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? "Balanced budgets?" Do they care that every administration after World War II other than Reagan and Bush (and Obama still laboring with Bush's economic disaster and Bush's tax policy) saw national debt decline as a percentage of GDP? Only Reagan and Bush, whether in good times or bad, pushed the national debt up as a percent of GDP. The Wall Street Journal, home of thieves, liars, and scoundrels. Screw reality. But why does K2K quote this garbage with approval? Does he actually believe this stuff?

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The only medication you approve of makover is sarin." Sarin is good. So are adolescent sexual frustrations. Did you every read "Portnoy's complaint" roi Vissarionovich?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 11:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I am, it seems, both repeating and affirming my faith in my own words -- I do and I am -- and engaging in some sort of trick to run away from them." That's why, roi, you are so besides yourself with frustration and rage. You have tied yourself up in your own words and are struggling to get free of them, by changing their meaning. Now you claim that when you said: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." But I prefer the more charitable view of your words: You did not mean "enemies of America" (such "as the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such") but you meant ""enemies of America" (such "as the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such"). It all depends on how the word "enemy" is interpreted. Of course anyone reading your words in good faith and familiar with your civilized thinking, would know right away that you did not at all mean it that way. Let's look at what the dictionary tells us: Enemy: 1. [n] any hostile group of people; "he viewed lawyers as the real enemy" 2. [n] an opposing military force; "the enemy attacked at dawn" 3. [n] an armed adversary (especially a member of an opposing military force); "a soldier must be prepared to kill his enemies" 4. [n] a personal enemy; "they had been political foes for years" It appears that when roi wrote "enemies" he actually meant to use the word in its (1) or (4) meanings but because he misspoke, and used the same one word "enemies" to designate this group "Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such" as well as this group "the entire American right." But of course these are two different kinds of enemies and no one should suspect roi of conflating the latter with the former. He is as we all know (and admire) a genuine humanitarian in search for justice and a little decency in this world and is doing whatever he can to promote these values, as a semi-professional politician. It is just as I thought.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 11:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"makover: roi vissarionovich's stated purpose is to disrupt Martin Peretz's blog, The Spine." Of course, intellectual incompetents cannot abide the fact that anyone should contest Martin Peretz's vile spew. They want their propaganda pure and unadulterated. The nerve of anyone to come here and take issue with the nonsense, garbage, and lies. Yet again, we see that the extremists have no tolerance for the contest of ideas. If they cannot bludgeon their opposition into silence, they want to medicate or murder them into silence. Whatever it takes. Just as long as their opposition shuts up.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You don't have to go to the dictionary to find out just why I described the right-wing as "enemies" of America. I explained it explicitly: "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." Your problem, noga (apart from your psychiatric problem that is), is that the meaning of my words is quite plain. You, therefore, in order to impose upon them the violent interpretation that is consistent with your own extremism and bloodlust keep searching for other people's words and meanings to attribute to me. It is by no means "just as you thought," because you are not capable of rational thought. You are a raging, emotional wreck, beset on all sides, and can only spew, twisting and turning to try and find some rational footing that constantly eludes you. If you will notice, it is you who have to keep explaining your words. I don't. I just keep insisting that what I said the first time is exactly what I meant, if that is one takes all of the words together. Bottom line, you are absolutely freaking nuts, noga. A total headcase.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Yet again, we see that the extremists have no tolerance for the contest of ideas." Unlike a thoughtful Democratic centrist like roi here, who says thoughtful things about such extremists as Paul Berman: "What is missing from Berman and from his admirers is any sort of moral calculus, including that embodied in the international law that they all disparage."

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

But roi, as the newly minted authority on Berman's extremism, is in good company: “I know I have readers among the followers of Syed Qutb, about whom I have written—one of the great philosophers of the Muslim Brotherhood, hanged by Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1956. I see that they’re writing in response to me, and denouncing me on a variety of blogs. I’ve found myself described as someone ‘continuing the Zionist project to crush Islam that began in Medina in the 7th century.’ " http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-05-26/paul-berman-interview-the-flight-of-the-intellectuals/2/

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 11:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Of course, noga, you don't see any difference between commenting critically on someone's ideas, even extremely critically, and insisting that they shut up or be imprisoned. When you contest ideas, you contest them with ideas, with words. This is, as you have demonstrated over and over and over gain, completely unacceptable to you. Today is no different than all the other days in that regard. And there is no reason to expect that any day ever will be. It is just as I thought.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-05-26/paul-berman-interview-the-flight-of-the-intellectuals/2/ _________ And here is another extremist on the problematics of international Law: http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2010/11/one-step-forward-one-step-back.html Only roi fully understands and appreciates the subject in its proper context and desired applications. All the rest are extremists.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 11:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Quickly followed by more of noga's fascist propaganda in which -- exactly as I said she routinely does -- she endeavors to associate someone whose politics she loathes with Moslem extremists, on whatever pretext. That they both, for example, abhor George Bush, or, on vastly different grounds, have little regard for Paul Berman's thought, is sufficient. You are so predictable it is almost painful. Whenever you lose, whenever you are shown up for the vicious, empty, liar that you are, you invariably retreat to the same little bag of Goebbels-y tricks. But, what else should we expect from Goebbels little girl? And what a good little girl you are! You are sick, noga. Really, really sick.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover, I made it clear that I don't regard the economic crisis as unimportant -- quite the contrary -- but I do see it in the final analysis as an inadequate explanation for the degree and intensity of the hatred and paranoia directed at Obama. I'm not married to the phrase "cultural war" but it seems to be the one that at least communicates the sense of a political struggle driven by emotions outside the remit of normal politics.

- ironyroad

December 4, 2010 at 12:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45934.html on the language of governance: "...“Do you allow yourself to be held hostage and get something done for the sake of getting something done, when in fact it might be perverse in its ultimate results?” Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said, when asked whether he and other Democrats would compromise with Republicans. “It’s almost like the question of do you negotiate with terrorists.” [sound bite for today] ... [and, from what remains of the Harry S. Truman wing of the Democratic Party] “I’m trying to figure out how anyone can keep a straight face and say they are for deficit reduction when they insist on a permanent tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, completely unpaid for,” Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri said. “If they think it is OK to raise taxes for the embattled middle class because they are going to pout if we don’t give more money to millionaires, it really is time for the people of America to take up pitchforks.” She said the Republican Party isn’t looking after the interests of the tea party activists who proved so important to the midterm election victories. “All those people out there in the tea party who are angry about the economics of Washington, they really need to look at this, pull back the curtain and realize that you’ve got a Republican Party that is not worried about people in the tea party,” she said. “They’re worried about people who can’t decide which home to go to over the Christmas holidays. “They’re not worried about the people packing those town halls,” she added. “Those folks are the middle class.” " [Dems need More McCaskill, Less Menendez]

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 12:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"When you contest ideas, you contest them with ideas, with words." Here is how roi contests ideas with ideas: "... the entire American right... Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." Or: "Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America..." Or: "This is why you are Goebbels little girl, noga." Or: "The Wall Street Journal, home of thieves, liars, and scoundrels. Screw reality." There is more. But the interested reader, if there is such one, cannot help but step on these examples as he or she wades through roi's numerous posts.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 12:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We have, of course, been over your selective editing ad nauseum noga. You are a pretty nauseating character to begin with, but that you can keep on repeating the same propaganda tricks endlessly no matter how many times you are corrected gives a whole new meaning to nausea. The third one, of course, pretty much stands on its own. It no longer needs context. You are enough. In the last case, you have carefully omitted the preceding paragraph in which I explained just what The Wall Street Journal was lying about, and just what reality they are screwing. This is typical for you. You can only cut and paste. You cannot think. You cannot argue. You have no ideas. You are an empty head with an electronic scissors and a pot of electronic paste.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 12:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You cannot think. You cannot argue. You have no ideas. " roi can think. roi can argue. roi has ideas. "" What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom." roi has been arguing that by calling the Republican party "enemies of the United States" he merely engages in a war of ideas. What idea is he invoking by the reference to Sodom? What's to be the fate of all Americans who do not share his faith in Obama?

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 12:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga: "What's to be the fate of all Americans who do not share his faith in Obama?" My guess is the other 80% of Americans are reading and/or re-reading Mike Pence's October, 2010 speech on "The Presidency and the Constitution": "...Whereas the president must be cautious, dutiful, and deferential at home, his character must change abroad. Were he to ask for a primer on how to act in relation to other states, which no holder of the office has needed to this point, and were that primer to be written by the American people, whether of 1776 or 2010, you can be confident that it would contain the following instructions: You do not bow to kings. Outside our shores, the President of the United States of America bows to no man. When in foreign lands, you do not criticize your own country. You do not argue the case against the United States, but the case for it. You do not apologize to the enemies of the United States. Should you be confused, a country, people, or region that harbors, shelters, supports, encourages, or cheers attacks upon our country or the slaughter of our friends and families are enemies of the United States. And, to repeat, you do not apologize to them. ..." “Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.” http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=10 [not necessarily the best part, but certainly the part relevant to Obama and Erdogan, once upon a time, the topic of this thread]

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 1:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You do not argue the case against the United States, but the case for it." Firstly, that's exactly what Obama has been doing. But Mike Pence is one of those guys who thinks that patriotism is what you have when you wear a lapel pin. Secondly, to admit mistakes or injustices where appropriate is not weakening the United States, but strengthening it. But no doubt Pence, as the new kind of Republican, exults in mistakes and injustices. Thirdly, any bowing issues should be seen in the light of George Bush's strolling hand-in-hand issues. If one wants to be balanced, that is.

- ironyroad

December 4, 2010 at 1:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Thirdly, any bowing issues should be seen in the light of George Bush's strolling hand-in-hand issues. If one wants to be balanced, that is." Indeed. What does bowing mean? What does strolling hand-in-hand mean?

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 2:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi, A while ago I watched this not-very-good, straight-to-DVD movie called, I think, "God on Trial." Anyway, it took place in an Auschwitz prison block, and the Jews put God on a mock trial. But your incredible prosecution of the Right Wing thinks that perhaps you could base a play on the very same concept. Have a few symbolic, archetypal Republican types in the dock having to answer for themselves. This play wouldn't take you long to write because pretty much every argument you've made here (in beyond brilliant writing, by the way. I have no idea how you write like this in a matter of minutes) could form the basis of the dialogue. My typical thinking is never to believe entirely in one view--that I'm just practicing juvenile debate club polemics if I can't see a hole in my own side's arguments. But no one here in the past couple of days has been able to out-argue you. You're amazing. And just in case anyone is thinking otherwise, I am not being a whit sarcastic. In each face-off (Jackson excluded), your comebacks have blown me away. If you don't write it, you should seriously pitch the idea to Aaron Sorkin.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 4, 2010 at 2:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You're amazing. And just in case anyone is thinking otherwise, I am not being a whit sarcastic." Why would anyone think you are being even one whit sarcastic, if roi's performance here is as unambiguously spectacular as you declare it to be? Aren't you shooting you own praise in the foot, by providing this additional reassurance that you are totally serious and not kidding about it? Surely his long and many posts here are all the proof that's needed for the taste of his pudding? Yes, I'm sure Sorkin will have a field day with: " What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all."

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 2:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga writes: "roi has been arguing that by calling the Republican party "enemies of the United States" he merely engages in a war of ideas. What idea is he invoking by the reference to Sodom? What's to be the fate of all Americans who do not share his faith in Obama?" This is something of an improvement. At least she quotes me properly first, without her edits or interpolations. However, this is a question that by itself betrays an illiberal mind, as one might expect from someone who comes from Israel, an illiberal democracy. Why should Americans who do not share what noga takes to be my "faith in Obama" have some sort of separate fate that awaits them? In America, the liberties of minorities, particularly political minorities, are protected. They are not persecuted, they do not become outcasts. Laws are not written so as to apply differently to different classes of persons. Unlike Israel, we do not have separate classes of citizens, some of whom can vote, some of whom cannot, some of whom live under one set of laws, some under another. Our governments, at all levels, are not permitted to subsidize particular religious sects or ethnic sub-groups in preference to others. Our governments cannot create housing that is then segregated, de jure or de facto, to have "pure" religious or ethnic sub-groups. So, the proper answer to her question here in America is, "What kind of question is that? Nothing special happens to them. They remain citizens like everyone else." This is the reality that noga does not even imagine. For her, what you do with enemies is kill them or persecute them or subject them to debilitating conditions and legal liabilities. Moreover, as a purported biblical scholar, noga should know that the one righteous person in Sodom was to be the reason for God to spare that city of iniquity. So, whatever twisted metaphor she is trying to apply to my suggestion that right-wing moderates are a vanishingly small number (perfectly clear from the context) doesn't work on its own terms. _______________ I have read Portnoy's Complaint, makover, but it was a very long time ago and, unlike you, I did not take it as a manual for how to live. _______________ Molly, :-)

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 2:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"... Israel, an illiberal democracy." What's an "illiberal democracy"? The kind of one-party democracy you urge in your exhortations here? "PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom." How do you "ignore" 50% of the population?

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 2:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah, right, let's imagine Obama had walked hand-in-hand with a Saudi Prince instead of stooping over the sitting Saudi King! Then everything would be been fine.

- ironyroad

December 4, 2010 at 3:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

An illiberal democracy is one that fails to have one or more of the characteristics we associate with liberal democracy, such as non-discrimination amongst persons based on religion, ethnicity, or national origin. "How do you "ignore" 50% of the population?" I have no idea to which 50% you are referring, but surely not to the 50% who are moderates or centrists of the right as they do not exist. As for ignoring the voters who didn't vote for you, Bush got fewer votes than Gore. What regard, exactly, did Bush show the majority who voted against him? He screwed them economically, stripped the country of regulations designed to protect them, wrecked their pensions and savings, mired then in debt, more the nation in debt, sent their children off to die in pointless wars. I guess that's one way to do it.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 3:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, malahat, as pointed out above, this is not Eisenhower's GOP. Nor are many people who happen to be persuaded by the lie of the moment ideologically committed. But we are not talking about presumption. We are talking about a party that has made obstructing progress on serious problems that face the nation, in the realms of both economics and national security, its strategy for returning to power. They want affirmatively to make things worse and then do their best to pin the blame on the current administration for failing to make things better. This is no longer a disagreement about the best means or about priorities or about what bade side effects are acceptable in one area for progress in another.. It is something new in American political life -- a major party captured by extremists. I think failing to recognize who these people have become is a mistake. Who is buried at Arlington does not illuminate that question.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 5:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Yeah, right, let's imagine Obama had walked hand-in-hand with a Saudi Prince instead of stooping over the sitting Saudi King!" Is the Saudi king sitting? He must be a very tall man, a very, very tall man! http://throatpunch.com/images/obama_saudi.jpg I'm not sure what exactly prevents you from noticing the difference between the two gestures. One man bowing (deeply) to another - a gesture of veneration, or grovelling. (Does the Saudi deserve such veneration? ) One man holding hands with another - an unusual gesture of (homoerotic?) affection. Is that your point? That Bush might be secretly lusting after the handsome and oh-so- lovable Saudi?

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 5:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, Do you have any familiarity with Sorkin's work? Because your reply makes absolutely no sense. You are clearly not at all familiar with liberal Hollywood and its outrage at Republicans. I do agree his rhetoric can be overblown. But my suspicion is that he's having a lot of fun, and at the same time feeling frustrated. It's maddening to get no answers when you make every effort ask very pointed, very clear questions. As I've said before, he backs up of his statements of facts with original sourcing. He does not link to partisan nuts. In the meantime you and your fellow Bushies neo-cons have wrecked this country. They prattle and preach on and on about cutting government waste and entitlements, but then they all have tantrums if you dare suggest taking a look at defense. Or that war in the Middle-East is draining our coffers. Not to mention the toddler fits your fellow Becks throw if you even mention the possibility of means-testing medicare. And all the while China is quietly investing in education and infra-structure while our kids rank with Lithuania in education. So, just for fun's sake, I'm going to ask the question you so far refuse to answer, no matter how many times and ways it's been asked: How exactly would a Republican like, say, McCain, have managed the mess we're in, domestically and abroad.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 4, 2010 at 6:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony: Then in your opinion "the degree and intensity of the hatred and paranoia directed at Obama" must be a result of racism?. How would you explain then the "the degree and intensity of the hatred and paranoia directed at" George W. I am sure that you would assign it to the many errors, mistakes and policies which were unpopular to the electorate in general and the Democratic left in particular. Obama policies and his governing style are clearly to the left of center. US electorate seems to be right of center so why the surprise? In addition, there clearly seems to be serious errors, miscalculations, gaffes, screw-ups confused priorities and other such sundry problems which when combined with almost unlimited expectations and promises (remember "yes we can") and self attributed near omnipotence guarantee disappointment. The Nobel peace price and the constant adulation of the masses in Europe, his appeasement of the Muslims, his unnecessary conflict with Israel, all this added to the distrust. Yes, the public perceives this as Kultur Kampf whether right or wrong. roi: "I have read Portnoy's Complaint, makover, but it was a very long time ago and, unlike you, I did not take it as a manual for how to live." You sure fooled me roi visarionovich.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 6:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Do you have any familiarity with Sorkin's work?" Unfortunately for you, yes. "In the meantime you and your fellow Bushies neo-cons have wrecked this country." I have wrecked your country? Do you see why I don't bother with you? Your understanding and knowledge wouldn't fill an empty nutshell. Excuse me for being blunt, but there is no delicate way of phrasing it.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 6:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mike Pence on the perils of one-party rule, including Bush43: "...Without proper adherence to the role contemplated in the Constitution for the presidency, the checks and balances in the constitutional plan become weakened. This has been most obvious in recent years when the three branches of government have been subject to the tutelage of a single party. Under either party, presidents have often forgotten that they are intended to restrain the Congress at times, and that the Congress is independent of their desires. And thus fused in unholy unity, the political class has raged forward in a drunken expansion of powers and prerogatives, mistakenly assuming that to exercise power is by default to do good. ..." “Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.” Gee, Molly, if you have seen Aaron Sorkin's "The Social Network", it would be difficult to claim that he represents "liberal Hollywood". The scene where the Winklevoss twins meet with then-Harvard President Larry Summers, who unexpectedly resigned from Obama's team when the film opened, is a scene that is a fascinating morality play wherein Summers exhibits disdain for the concepts of ethical behaviour and fairness. People really have to stop calling a Canadian citizen, noga, and a registered Democrat, K2K, "Bushie neo-cons" and worse. Neither of us ever voted for Bush, I never supported the Iraq War, and was truly appalled at Bush43s legacy from the very first tax cuts. Laura Bush was a lovely First Lady. If there was any credible evidence that Pelosi-Reid-Obama remember the Clinton legacy of fiscal discipline, feel free to offer such evidence. The wreckage of America's economy was a truly bi-partisan affair over thirty years, enabled as much by Dems like Robert Rubin and Chuck Schumer as any Republicans, except for Dick Cheney and Grover Norquist, who did possibly irreparable damage. Snap out of 2000-2008. It is 2010, and the Democrats had two years to prove themselves responsible for one-party rule. Just like Bush, 2000-2006, the ObamaDems blew it. I have never listened to either Glenn Beck, nor Rush Limbaugh. But, I also never succumbed to either Bush nor Obama Derangement Syndrome. One party rule corrupts. THAT was one of the main reasons the GOP re-took the House. Liberalism is a shrinking minority. Everywhere in the world. Why is that? and why do American liberals feel so compelled to demonize all Evangelical Christians? I assume that is why Mike Pence is so unpalatable here. No need to answer. I am watching "The Pacific", but wanted a break after Guadalcanal.

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 6:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"MOLLYSIMON "Do you have any familiarity with Sorkin's work?" Actually I do but are the ideas of this "crackhead" significant enough to provide the script for Obama's administration? Is there anything profound or significant this dope written that one must be familiar with his "work?"

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 6:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good reply Noga and K2K: But it's late and I have to work tomorrow so Manana.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 4, 2010 at 7:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Once again, Noga uses a petty technicalities (well-I'M-not-an-American) to avoid answering this very basic question: How would a Republican president have fared any better.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 4, 2010 at 7:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, Makover, Sorkin is a recovering addict. And we all know that recovering addicts are incapable of embracing any truth. I also find it hilarious, Noga, that your friend Makover any of Sorkin's ideas because he once smoked crack. Don't remember months ago going on and on and on when I mentioned that Oliver Stone had once been a crack-head? How that personal detail invalidated what I'd added to the conversation and was really pretty crude on my part? You managed to voice your disapproval several times.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 4, 2010 at 7:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I didn't know Sorkin was a "crackhead" and now that I do, it doesn't change my opinion about him one little bit. He wrote an almost Shakespearean-quality script for the Social Network, turning Zuckerberg into a very interesting and conflicted character. I have little doubt that under his literary talent he could produce a nearly Shakespearean Obama. What I find incomprehensible is how Molly can even begin to imagine that roi's talents are comparable. Has he ever exhibited the slightest understanding or empathy, or humour, needed to imagine the life and thoughts of other human beings? And what's Sorkin got to do with roi's fulminations, such as " What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." beats me. Does Molly believe that Hollywood would promote this kind of deliberate incitement to vile internecine hatred that would outrage at least 50% of its expected audiences and a few millions genuine Democrats who would be shocked by the kind of messages uttered by so-called "liberals"?

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 8:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3994175,00.html for an update on which countries are sending help and aircraft to Israel as the Carmel fire continues. The Russians really stepped up: "...The Russian aid to Israel included two Illyushin II-76 firefighting aircraft and a B200 plane. Two firefighting helicopters are expected to go into action on Sunday. "We believe we can help you gain control of the fire," said a senior Russian army officer. Twenty-two Russian aerial and fire experts arrived in Israel as well. The senior Russian officials arrived at the fire command post at Haifa University, where they met with Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch. The minister praised the Russian delegation for "changing the balance". ..." Molly: every president has a different Cabinet and team of advisors. Any Republican president as of January 20, 2009 would have included some people with private industry experience, something Obama has yet to do. You ask a hypothetical question that can not really be answered - did the House and Senate still get the same solid majorities of Democrats in your question? At least McCain had the sense to have Douglas Holz-Eakin on his economics team, and wanted to de-link health insurance from employment. Which, BTW, is why more than one million US manufacturing jobs migrated to Canada after 1999. Comparable salaries, but lower labor cost because health insurance is not an employment benefit in Canada. I am fairly certain that North Korea and Iran would be less prone to military provocation. But, we shall never know. We are where we are. Strange technique here in TNR.com Anyone who is not a kneejerk liberal Dem is always being challenged to answer questions that the questioner has no intention of accepting as valid. Or trying to persuade the skeptics that it is always eithor/or the lesser of two evils.

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 8:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I thought Sorkin used powder cocaine in the past, not crack. Years ago. Noga makes a good point. One of my favorite episode sequences of the "West Wing" was when Zoe was kidnapped, Bartlet steps down, and, because the VP had not yet been replaced (sex scandal), the House Speaker becomes temporary President. Played by John Goodman as a Republican from Texas who seemed more like LBJ than Tom Delay. The usual Hollywood script is an iteration of "Enemy of the State" or "Shooter", where some part of the FEDERAL government is contolled by either a rogue military and/or intelligence careerist, or a secret cabal, usually with a corrupt Senator and/or President as the head of the snake within. Or, as in "Salt", a foreign plot using moles trained from childhood. Or mega-monolithic global corporation - always a crowd-pleaser. Another Hollywood favorite is that, when the President is a hero, he usually is a former Marine or Navy pilot with a Congressional Medal of Honor, e.g. "Independence Day" and "Air Force One". Sorkin had his hero-ish Presidents as a former history professor ("The American President") and Nobel-prize in economics ("West Wing"), but they also were both former governors who had served their terms with accomplishments.

- K2K

December 4, 2010 at 8:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Once again, you take everything out of context. It's the only way you know.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 4, 2010 at 9:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And also turning the debate into something complete extraneous. Because you can't possibly answer the question I've now asked of you three times. You don't like it when Roi or Basman or anybody else does it. And you deal with it in the same, predictable way any time you are called to account.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 4, 2010 at 9:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Because you can't possibly answer the question I've now asked of you three times. " I'm afraid after this ""In the meantime you and your fellow Bushies neo-cons have wrecked this country." it's hard to take anything you say or ask with even a modicum of seriousness. It's not so different from roi's "They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." as far as grotesque fantasies go.

- noga1

December 4, 2010 at 10:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If there was any credible evidence that Pelosi-Reid-Obama remember the Clinton legacy of fiscal discipline, feel free to offer such evidence." The economic boobocracy weighs in a again. The proper way to manage the economy is to run surpluses when we are at full employment, as Clinton did, and deficits when there is a significant gap between output and capacity as there has been since 2008. The reason the American economy is so fucked is that Bush the Idiot ran deficits in boom years -- what are referred to as structural deficits as opposed to cyclical deficits. This had an important role int he epic asset bubble and bust because there was too much money in the hands of the investor class and not enough in the hands of consumers. Once the bubble burst, stimulus required that we increase the deficit further (or tax the hell out of the rich) as you have to INCREASE government spending to have a stimulative impact. Thus, the Bush/Republican fiscal insanity screwed us twice, by producing the bubble and then by reducing the impact of deficits. The structural deficit was already in the economy. Increasing it, as was necessary to avoid a depression, has resulted in near record deficits. Anyone who insists that what Obama, Reid, Pelosi or anyone else should have been doing in the past two years is trying to reduce government spending or reduce deficits is an economic ignoramus summa cum laude. The perverted right-wing, whatever their formal party affiliation, will continue to lash Obama and the Democrats for doing what was necessary to rescue the nation from the complete fucking disaster produced by the insanity of Republican stupidity, cupidity, and overwhelming ignorance about the most basic facts about how the real world operates. We would have been as well off, probably better, if a class of fifth-graders had been running the country during the eight years of Bush the Idiot.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"In the meantime you and your fellow Bushies neo-cons have wrecked this country." This is the literal truth. Only because noga too is a complete ignoramus about all factual matters other than romantic literature could she possibly respond with, "it's hard to take anything you say or ask with even a modicum of seriousness." I swear, the only thing that is even more sickening than this women's demented lies and fascist propaganda is when she actually attempts to opine about the real world. Even on those rare occasions when her dementia lifts, she knows less than an average teenager about the functioning of the world. Apparently, she has had no education whatsoever outside of English romantic literature of the 18th and 19th centuries. It is like listening to Chauncey Gardner: "Keynesian economics reminds me of when Darcy held hands with Madeline and Mrs. Hoopersnatch secretly observed them in the garden at Blubber's End . . . " Can you drive a car noga? Can you dress yourself? Can you boil water?

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"At least McCain had the sense to have Douglas Holz-Eakin on his economics team, and wanted to de-link health insurance from employment." More from the boobocracy. Are we supposed to believe that the Republicans would have stood for de-linking health insurance from employment? In fact, they fiercely resisted a public option, let alone single-payer. There is no limit to how high this boob will pile his bullshit. Is he another extremist, right-wing liar, or simply stupider than a post? Hard to say.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Does Molly believe that Hollywood would promote this kind of deliberate incitement to vile internecine hatred that would outrage at least 50% of its expected audiences and a few millions genuine Democrats who would be shocked by the kind of messages uttered by so-called "liberals"?" This kind of message is uttered daily, in multiple media outlets, by so-called conservatives, to the point where no one even reacts any more. They are inured to it. It would be great if liberals would respond in kind so that there would be a reaction and a political contest. That is precisely the reason why liberal rhetoric needs to become as hyperbolic as conservative rhetoric. Either it will be neutralized, or public disgust will render all such rhetoric politically unacceptable. What is appalling is that the right is permitted to use rhetorical nuclear weapons while the left feels bound by some rules of civility. Of course, this is precisely what a fascist propagandist like noga wants. Goebbels little girl. Always hard at work.

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, Peretz. Go fuck yourself you America-hating moron and your hate-filled headlines. Those Americans who actually give a damn about this country can read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/weekinreview/05wikileaks-sanger.html?_r=1&hp Week in Review: Cables Depict Range of Obama Diplomacy By DAVID E. SANGER Published: December 4, 2010, The New York Times BEIJING — Barack Obama came to office vowing to restore “engagement” — talking and listening to America’s most troubling adversaries and reluctant partners — as a central feature of American foreign policy. But engagement can take many forms, from friendly to wary, naïve to cunning, and it was never quite clear how the term would translate from a campaign sound-bite to a practical approach to the world. Now we know, from the granular picture of engagement-in-action that emerges from that trove of 250,000 WikiLeaks cables, many from the first 13 months of the Obama presidency. Mr. Obama’s style seems to be: Engage, yes, but wield a club as well — and try to counter the global doubts that he is willing to use it. The cables suggest that Mr. Obama’s form of engagement is a complicated mixture of openness to negotiation, constantly escalating pressure and a series of deadlines, some explicit, some vague. In the cables, the administration uses all of these tools to try to prevent the mullahs in Iran from dragging out an endless series of feints and talks until they have a bomb. The July 2011 deadline to begin withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan is a whip to get President Hamid Karzai to train his troops — so that the United States can start to leave. This policy is tailored to the needs of a new president trying to demonstrate that he is neither too inexperienced nor too soft to face the menaces of the world. In a handful of cases, the approach shows some early signs of success. But in dealing with some of the world’s most intractable governments — from the Middle Kingdom to the Middle East — Mr. Obama inevitably hits some real-world limitations. In Russia, the policy of engagement yielded results. The cables tell a fascinating tale of intelligence-sharing on missile threats, with reasoned debates about what the Iranians and the North Koreans are capable of building. The cable traffic hints at horse trading: The Obama administration killed a missile defense site in Poland, seemingly to win Moscow’s support for sanctions on Iran. In the case of Yemen, the cables suggest engagement of a different form, with both countries agreeing to a mutually convenient cover story. Yemen’s president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, tells Gen. David Petraeus that he is free to bomb Al Qaeda — as long as Mr. Saleh can say that it was his own forces, not the Americans, striking the militant strongholds. General Petraeus takes that deal; now, critics of the leaks argue that the disclosure may unravel it. Engagement, however, has its limits. Here in Beijing, a once-promising effort to engage the world’s greatest rising power has gone badly off track. Chinese officials welcomed Mr. Obama’s outreach in 2009. But increasingly, they are determined to show they will not be pushed around by a country they view as a fading superpower. They have declared much of the South China Sea as a zone of “vital interest,” and ignored American arguments for letting China’s currency float to resolve a huge trade imbalance. And cables show repeated, often successful hacking attacks on the United States government."

- roidubouloi

December 4, 2010 at 11:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I googled "limbaugh on youtube" and I didn't even need to search through anything. The very first thing that came up is this: "Rush Limbaugh on Greta (1 of 5): Obama Destroying the Economy on Purpose" Didn't take Limbaugh more than a minute or two to say that "Obama is lying through his teeth." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1EWtguwOTI This is daily fare for millions upon millions of people watching and listening to conservative media. And noga fulminates about calling conservatives "thieves, liars, scoundrels, and traitors." It is a standard fascist propaganda technique noisily to accuse the opposition of exactly the abuse that the fascists are at the time themselves engaging in. As it is a standard fascist propaganda technique, noga of course employs it. Goebbels little girl. Always hard at work. Meanwhile, the Republicans actually are trying to prevent anyone, including the Fed, from doing anything to turn the economy around in the hope that making things worse will return them to power. Thieves, liars, scoundrels, and traitors. What else should one call such people?

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 12:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Okay, I think that brings me up to date with the latest from the extremist right-wingnuts of the Spine, including the wingnut in chief. Good night moon.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 12:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey Molly, is what you like? roidubouloi "Hey, Peretz. Go fuck yourself you America-hating moron and your hate-filled headlines." I'd be careful whom you embrace. Roid seems polite as long as you agree with him on everything, the moment you offer a different opinon no matter how small and he's ready to decapitate you. However, it's you head, if you can keep it.

- jdyer

December 5, 2010 at 12:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"the moment you offer a different opinion no matter how small and he's ready to decapitate you." Not hardly, but the moment the members of the jackal pack, including jackasson, start in with their bullying ad hominem, I am delighted to give them much worse than they are capable of dishing out. Their ability to bully depends entirely on most people being too civil or simply unequipped to engage them in kind. But if you do, they cry, cry, cry all the way home. You are a whiny sissy, jackasson, just like more or less every bully who ever lived the moment he cannot get away with it.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 12:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So now you think you're too good for me to answer any questions. But my question could have been/has been asked by many others, and even to those you use flip your hair and stomp off in a huff. My kids are under the weather this weekend, but I have to say watching Roi' fillet you is not a bad consolation for having had to cancel a Hannukah party.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 12:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If there was any credible evidence that Pelosi-Reid-Obama, IN NOVEMBER, 2010, remember the Clinton legacy of fiscal discipline, feel free to offer such evidence. Why is it impossible to re-allocate unspent TARP and/or CRRA Stimulus funds for the extension of unemployment insurance and the other desperately needed programs in the Geithner-Lew (now the Obama ultimatum) $150BIL package? Just because the Republicans are idiots in wanting to make the irresponsible Bush43 tax cuts permanent does not mean the Democrats have to be so stubborn. The Dems could not even give up $16BIL in pork-marks. The unemployed do not care about high speed rail for the future. from Bloomberg News: "President Barack Obama issued his first demands in negotiations to sustain Bush-era tax cuts, saying any legislation must also extend federal jobless aid and his own soon-to-expire tax policies. An administration official said Obama told Democratic leaders in Congress he’d reject even a temporary extension of the Bush-era tax cuts if the legislation doesn’t include his own policies, which include the “Making Work Pay” tax credit that adds up to $800 per year in a married couple’s paycheck. Obama also wants more generous credits for the working poor, college students and adoptive parents enacted in 2009 to be renewed. The ultimatum ratchets up the stakes as negotiators race the calendar before the tax cuts expire; the jobless aid expired Nov. 30 and the Bush tax-cuts expire Dec. 31. Obama’s demands also would add about $150 billion in cost to the bill, all of which would be financed by deficits. ..." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-05/obama-says-tax-cut-extension-must-include-jobless-benefits-credit-plans.html [No spines at all in Congress. Maybe they have a secret plan to sell California to China.]

- K2K

December 5, 2010 at 12:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid, you can attack whomever you want, but if you'll recall, a few months ago I told you that Basman is a pretty great guy. I feel this same way about Jackson. I've "known" him for years. I often disagree with him, but there's not a day that goes by that I don't check into the Spine to check up on him. Even on vacation where I have no internet access and am forced to trudge over to the local library. And that sometimes involves waiting in line, mind you. I live in Los Angeles and my husband is in the entertainment business. We know some pretty brilliant people--graduates of Harvard who've gotten PhDs in computer silence, but left the field because they were bored or found academia too stifling. So, it's not like I'm in a desert of fatuousness. But Jackson and his dialogues are my daily slice of chocolate cake. And this is where I'll finish: Mr. Cookie. He's a great guy who has his own history with Jackson. The two have had some pretty nasty fights. Cookie has even told Jackson that if the two were in a ring, Cookie would beat the crap out of him. But Cookie would be the first to admit that you can't stay mad at Jackson. And that's because Jackson is nice. Not always on the Spine, but certainly at his core.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 1:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"So now you think you're too good for me to answer any questions." Let's just say the sort of acumen and intelligence you display here do not stimulate me to make the slightest effort for you. "...watching Roi' fillet you is not a bad consolation for having had to cancel a Hannukah party." That's a bit vulgar, isn't it? What are you, a fishwife? I think roi knows by now he has made a big booboo and has to create a great deal of noise and diversion from the comments he made, like: ""Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all." Let's hope that Tovarish Kaganovich wannabe here will restrain his revolutionary spirit a little from now on, and his total submission to his manufactured "liberal" gods.

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 7:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Roid, you can attack whomever you want, but if you'll recall, a few months ago I told you that Basman is a pretty great guy. I feel this same way about Jackson....it's not like I'm in a desert of fatuousness. But Jackson and his dialogues are my daily slice of chocolate cake. " Ugh. What a sight. Molly is doing her kittenish routine, resorting to what we call in Hebrew (inspired from Yiddish), cheindalach . . . It is probably best translated as trying to curry favour, soliciting some goodwill from someone who is in a position of power, and is known to be implacably rigid and ostensibly austere. Think Nora from Ibsen's "Doll's House" and how she tries, in her desperation, to ward off her husband Torvarld's anticipated asperity over what he considers her gross deviation from the norm, which he set.

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 7:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I just mean that whatever Obama did -- and in particular the Bush hand-holding thing with Prince Abdullah -- he would have been excoriated by the right-wing hate machine for it. Is that such a startling and baseless assertion?

- ironyroad

December 5, 2010 at 8:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good Golly Miss Molly: Now she is giving awards! To Tovarish Kaganovich no less. Because Hollywood has such "brilliant people" just like him. Precious! "I also find it hilarious, Noga, that your friend Makover any of Sorkin's ideas because he once smoked crack." Well, I guess in Hollywood this passes as normal. It must be OK then, sorry. Noga: I have another word for this in lieu of cheindalach however, I don't think it is proper in this setting... roi Kaganovich: "Hey, Peretz. Go fuck yourself you America-hating moron and your hate-filled headlines." Oy vey, roi Kaganovich gets all worked out! Look, he is using rough language again! How many times did I tell you yingaleh not to use the word F...K? And then, and then he googled "Limbaugh"... Oh the horror, the horror!

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 5, 2010 at 8:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good Golly Miss Molly: Now she is giving awards! To Tovarish Kaganovich no less. Because Hollywood has such "brilliant people" just like him. Precious! "I also find it hilarious, Noga, that your friend Makover any of Sorkin's ideas because he once smoked crack." Well, I guess in Hollywood this passes as normal. It must be OK then, sorry. Noga: I have another word for this in lieu of cheindalach however, I don't think it is proper in this setting... roi Kaganovich: "Hey, Peretz. Go fuck yourself you America-hating moron and your hate-filled headlines." Oy vey, roi Kaganovich gets all worked out! Look, he is using rough language again! How many times did I tell you yingaleh not to use the word F...K? And then, and then he googled "Limbaugh"... Oh the horror, the horror!

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 5, 2010 at 8:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Is that such a startling and baseless assertion?" Did I say it was? "startling and baseless" I mean? I wouldn't disagree with you if you could bring yourself to at least accept that the difference I pointed to (between bowing and holding hands, oh dear) was a real difference, not something I dreamed up because I've got it in for Obama. Why Obama did it we don't know because no journalist had the guts to ask him. As long as we don't know, it will remain a source of curiosity for me and I daresay I will return to it from time to time, much to your displeasure..

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 8:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Think Nora from Ibsen's "Doll's House" and how she tries, in her desperation, to ward off her husband Torvarld's anticipated asperity over what he considers her gross deviation from the norm, which he set." We can all be grateful that noga is back in her comfort zone, regaling us with her literary analogies and her clueless psychologizing. This is merely banal and harmless, even occasionally diverting. It is when she ventures into public affairs and is compelled to defend her surpassing ignorance with venom that the trouble starts.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 9:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, molly, basman and I have composed our differences, which pleases me. I never had a gripe with Mr. Cookie. Jackson is sort of a special case, and a bit baffling. Noga really has nothing to say. She cannot compose a coherent argument or sustain a train of thought (once we get past her stock of literary analogies). The reason she never responds to any question, although she poses them constantly, is that she can't. Her own incapacity is the driver for her hostility. Unable to marshal anything persuasive to argue with what she doesn't like, well, you know what we get, mostly smears and slanders and bottomless rage and bathos. In contrast, I cannot figure out why jackson so quickly resorts with ad hominem. It doesn't seem necessary. I don't actually dislike him, but I also don't have much patience for his crap without responding in kind. ________________ reb makover, you know how I admire you. I will surely consider all your rhetorical advice carefully. After all, one should always try to learn from a master.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 9:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"After all, one should always try to learn from a master." So why don't you yingaleh? Why do you persist in error?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 5, 2010 at 9:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

makover, Molly is harmless. A leaf trembling in the wind, the most reasonable kind of poster here who would swear allegiance to roi. Every schoolyard bully is surrounded by weak and frightened kids. She reminds me of a frog in Aesop's fable: "The Frogs Asking for a King THE FROGS, grieved at having no established Ruler, sent ambassadors to Jupiter entreating for a King. Perceiving their simplicity, he cast down a huge log into the lake. The Frogs were terrified at the splash occasioned by its fall and hid themselves in the depths of the pool. But as soon as they realized that the huge log was motionless, they swam again to the top of the water, dismissed their fears, climbed up, and began squatting on it in contempt. After some time they began to think themselves ill-treated in the appointment of so inert a Ruler, and sent a second deputation to Jupiter to pray that he would set over them another sovereign. He then gave them an Eel to govern them. When the Frogs discovered his easy good nature, they sent yet a third time to Jupiter to beg him to choose for them still another King. Jupiter, displeased with all their complaints, sent a Heron, who preyed upon the Frogs day by day till there were none left to croak upon the lake. " *** Here is what our own Heron sounds like: " What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right." "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all."

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 9:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Gosh you are boring, noga. But then, that is what we ought to expect from someone so utterly banal. As you are back to furnishing your expurgated text, here is the unexpurgated text, yet again: "What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right. * * * Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom." _____________________ You seem to think (I use that word very loosely of course) that your repetitious quotation of me is supposed to embarrass me, even while, as I said earlier, Republican senators are busy proving me prophetic. You know nothing and you learn nothing. Though, I will admit to a certain surprise at the variety of ways you have of demonstrating how little you understand about most everything, including rhetoric. As I also said earlier, it would embarrass me endlessly to quote myself in this manner. However, as you are doing it for me, I get the pleasure of seeing myself quoted while you get all the embarrassment. And then, every time you post one of your edited versions, I get to post the whole thing again. So, be my guest, keep on quoting me. The Aesop's fable is nice. When you stick to this sort of thing, you are on the safest ground for yourself.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 10:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You seem to think (I use that word very loosely of course) that your repetitious quotation of me is supposed to embarrass me, even while, as I said earlier, Republican senators are busy proving me prophetic. " Interesting. I look at this text, which you so generously provided: _______________ "Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom." _____ And I don't see any qualifying criteria such as "Republican senators" anywhere in it. You mention ""Every last one of them [Republicans and those who vote for them]is an enemy of the United States of America". You do not clarify that your revolutionary zeal is directed only towards those "Republican senators". I asked you, at least three times, whether you misspoke. To which you reiterated, most emphatically, that you did not. Now you are trying to reverse your repeated confirmation of your original intention by pretending that, all of a sudden, it is those ""Republican senators" whom you were referring to in your now locally-famous hate piece. So I'll ask you once again: Did you misspeak when you tarred all Americans who vote Republicans with the label "Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all"?? Are you now recanting from your original position?

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 11:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Isn't it ironic that roi Vissarionovich, the same person that accuses 50% of all Americans as "Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all" speaks in Stalinistic, totalitarian speech calling for class warfare?

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

December 5, 2010 at 12:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, Makover, I'm bored.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

They are boring, molly. I said, noga, that Republican senators are proving me prophetic. That does not mean my observation should be limited to them. Armies have an officer corps and political leadership that bear a much greater moral responsibility for what they do. They also have foot soldiers. The foot-soldiers of the extremist conservative ideology, who are in their small way willing to do damage to the nation for the sake of political power, are still enemies. We have class warfare in this country, makover. It is being fought relentlessly by the plutocratic wealthy against the rest of us, using all their wealth and power to serve their own insatiable greed at the expense of the myriad. Time for the rest of us to recognize this for what it is and stand up and fight back. That, in a nutshell, is pretty much the only point I am ever making in a variety of contexts, as the war they fight against us is fought everywhere, all the time.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 12:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi, if you're still here, for Jackson the arguments about Israel aren't just arguments. He cares deeply about the fate of Israel. He's also experienced a lot of anti-Semitism, much of it overseas, and so one could say he's seen more of the real world. I've only experienced two very minor instances of anti-Semitism, so I think he has a broader and more urgent outlook. And Noga, I do have a kittenish act, but not in this case. As Jackson has figured out and asserted more than once, I'm in therapy. And in quite a few sessions, I've discussed Jackson, usually after we've had a falling out. And in each case I have realized that my friendship with him isn't silly and trivial. That it is possible to form an attachment to someone you only know only through cyber-space and that these attachments should not be dismissed. You and Irony seem to have a real friendship. I can see how you would think my posts here are an "act." I do sometimes get flirty. But in this instance the feelings are very genuine and very earnest. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 1:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree your analysis Roi. I'm starting to think we are never going to recover from this period of political nihilism.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 1:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Molly, When Bush stole the 2000 election, due to a judicial coup by Scalia, a friend of mine was in a state of despair. I said to her, "Don't worry. The Republicans will over-reach, they always do, and be thrown out. It is only a question of how much damage they will do before that happens." In my wildest dreams, I never imagined the scale of the damage they would do before being thrown out. And when Obama was elected, I thought to myself, "Okay, people finally do see what dangerous predators these people are. Now we have some time to clean up their horrific messes and get the country back on track." Obviously, I was much too optimistic, in part, in my opinion, because Obama has believed his own conciliator shtick and completely failed to see what the Republicans are doing to him and why. I don't have much hope that he is going to pick up the gantlet and lead the political battle. For whatever reason, he seems not to have it in him. As a result, I am afraid we are going to endure another period of Republican-created disaster, at least by obstruction of any progress at a time when we desperately need to make progress. We may even have to endure another, or maybe more than another, round of Republican governance before the evidence of their insanity, the reality of the depredation that they bring upon us always, sinks in with the public. I do believe that that time will come and that we will see the end of this Republican party, replaced by I do not know what. The Democrats have been here since the dawn of the Republic, the Republicans are at least the third iteration of the right-wing opposition to the American project. They will not be the last. The problem, sadly, is that this is like racing a train. How much damage will the Republicans do before they are finally repudiated? Will we manage to race ahead and beat the train or will the train of Republican disaster run us down before the public wakes up? I am not totally despairing (and oddly see the Tea party as having some tendency in the right direction -- at least they are mad even if too ignorant as yet to understand what they should be mad about). On the other hand, I cannot say that I am optimistic either. I think that the Republicans are causing and will yet cause a tremendous amount of additional damage to both our prosperity and our security before they are finished off by their next Herbert Hoover moment. We are also always at some risk for a reactionary military coup. It seems remote, I know, but a significant fraction of these peoples have fantasies about taking to the streets with guns. Not clear where that leads or what a Republican government might do in the face of right-wing violence by way of martial law. I do not regard it as certain, particularly after the 2000 election, that Republicans will reliably yield power when they lose an election. Rudolph Giuliani's bid to remain mayor past his term in 2001 was quite chilling. And there is persistent danger of right-wing terrorism in our country (the only sort we have seen since at least the 1920s).

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 1:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I'm bored." It's a law of nature that bored people are boring people.

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 2:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I'm in therapy. And in quite a few sessions, I've discussed Jackson, usually after we've had a falling out" Do we really need to know about the inner life of your psyche? I wish you speedy recovery from whatever it is that ails you but please, be a little discreet about it.

- noga1

December 5, 2010 at 2:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid, Never mind Giuliani when we've got Bloomberg the billionaire. He paid his way into power, then more or less purchased the right to extend his term. And I'm not so sure he's been a great mayor. The myth of the businessman savior is still allowed to linger. He installs his fellow corporate pashas to run the education department and it pretty much tanks. Friends of mine who live in Manhattan say that he made things a bigger a mess. He can claim victory if he wants, but the Times recently did a piece that negated claims that the vast improvements he touted were pretty much fictitious. I suppose I shouldn't be too pessimistic. Californians said no to Meg Whitman. But it wasn't resentment of her money that lost her the race. She was just a terrible candidate. Here's a woman who's run a zillion dollar company having to answer to a her former I don't think Obama's quite as weak as you do. He managed get some health care reform. There's still plenty wrong with, but for seventy years, presidents have tried and he finally broke through. Maybe he overspent his capital and will lose out on his next term, but I can't understand anyone saying he hasn't been an effective president. Even if he doesn't make it in 2012, that alone puts him with the greats. What comes after I haven't a clue, but I'm not optimistic. We may have spent our way into obsolescence. If there's one thing I could do right now it would be to cut the defense budget in half. I see that as our only salvation. As it is, we are not going to be able to afford an educated work force. Finally, my thoughts lead me here: that there has been a steady erosion of our civil rights, so that we hardly notice anymore. You talk about a possible coup, but I think it happened years ago, with the Scalia decision.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 3:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Toronto then New York and now North America and looking southwards.

- basman

December 5, 2010 at 3:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Toronto then New York and now North America and looking southwards.

- basman

December 5, 2010 at 3:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You don't have to persuade me, molly. I am no fan of Bloomberg. His New York is certainly more difficult for me. I used to think, well, I should accept that since he is improving the public schools (where I do not send my children) and that is of surpassing importance. But then, as you say, it turns out that the improvement there may be a fiction. Withal, I don't think he has the slightest idea what it is like to live here as a non-billionaire. I don't really give Obama much credit for health care reform. His tactics, as far as I can tell, almost blew it altogether. I give Nancy Pelosi the lion's share of the credit. I was never a particular fan of hers, and when the whole thing started was disposed to believe all the bests of Obama. In the course of that effort, I came to admire her greatly as a tough, shrewd politician with some fight in her and lost faith in Obama's interest in the same. I am prepared to accept that Obama cannot win every battle and cannot even fight every battle. I am not prepared to accept that he will not fight (and not with empty rhetoric) for the progressive point of view. I am even less willing to accept that he just allows the Republicans to have their way without even negotiating to get something. The endless and pointless with Republican senators over HCR were absurd. Yes, we have had a coup. AaronW thinks we have not recovered and may never recover. He might be right.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 4:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"endless and pointless negotiations with Republican senators"

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 4:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/magazine/05Dimon-t.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=all "Jamie Dimon: America’s Least-Hated Banker" By ROGER LOWENSTEIN a very interesting read, just in case you are still bored, Molly. as to Bloomberg? Term 1 was good - I shudder to think of Mark Green as mayor. Mike's 311 system works well enough. The big dilemma is that professional politicians rarely make effective managers, especially when it comes it to managing budgets of extremely complex organizations that bear the burden of providing public safety and other essential services. I do wish Mayor Mike had stopped with two terms. And hope Bill Thompson finally gets his chance, not that I shall be around to vote in 2013.

- K2K

December 5, 2010 at 4:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The greatest problem we face is the fact that telling people we have a problem is greeted with either disbelief or hostility or both. Most Americans haven't traveled abroad, so they don't understand, for example, that an energetic capitalist economy can also provide universal health care, to take one of the major issues today. Nor does the government choose your doctor, a complete and utter fantasy about, say, Germany that folks here believe. A few brave figures have tried to tell Americans that there are significant international scales and rankings in which we don't do any way as well as we should, but the standard response in this country is to deny the validity of the international comparision because we're "exceptional," or we believe in freedom and they don't, or some such nonsense. I am afraid not only that American leadership in the world will spiral unstoppably into decline but that, while it's happening, most Americans will continue to believe we're a globally respected model that others want to copy.

- ironyroad

December 5, 2010 at 7:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good for you Ironyroad for saying the sane things like this that need to be said against the mountains of ideological bullshit encasing this issue.

- basman

December 5, 2010 at 7:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I see your point about Pelosi. Do you ever get at all nostalgic for Bill Clinton? I sometimes ask myself whether he would have done a better job than Obama of handling the tea party freaks and their right wing enablers. Or would he have fared just as poorly? I wonder whether it's simply a matter of nerve. Did Clinton simply have more nerve? Was the other side of his recklessness a kind of fearlessness?

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 8:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K, two things: 1. "Not that I shall be around to vote in 2013." You cannot lob a grenade like that and casually walk away. What do you mean by this? 2. I get the Sunday Times and will definitely read the Dimon article. I wasn't so curious today and was going to stick with just the puzzle. Thanks for recommending.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K, I'm sorry, that was incredibly rude and insensitive of me.

- MOLLYSIMON

December 5, 2010 at 8:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hard to say about Clinton. He could have been a brilliant president, but he was unable to untangle his marital life from his professional life. Even the appointment of Hillary as his health care czarina despite her complete lack of political skills -- which led directly to the disastrous 1994 election, was a payoff to her for "standing by her man" in the Gennifer Flowers affair. I am not convinced that Clinton was not better at self-preservation under fire than at doing his job despite his many personal problems. But, yes, his recklessness had the aspect of fearlessness. I used to marvel that after the Monica Lewinsky revelations the man could stand up before a public audience and not wither.

- roidubouloi

December 5, 2010 at 8:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close