Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Not all Democrats are anti-Israel, but almost all anti-Israelis are Democrats

Not all Democrats are anti-Israel, but almost all anti-Israelis are Democrats

Dems platform changes worse for Israel than originally thought.

All the attention this week was focused on the removal of “God” and reference to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital from the DNC platform.  Those terms were reinserted based on the rused that two-thirds of delegates approved, when it was clear that there was not the-thirds support on the voice vote.

But the initial removal of Jerusalem from the platform was not the only problem, as reported by The Times of Israel, Jewish Democrats still unhappy with corrected party platform, which omits clauses on Hamas, refugees and borders:

The platform was handled “by children,” one Jewish leader in Charlotte who asked to remain anonymous told The Times of Israel.

In the kind of scathing critique that reporters heard from multiple sources this week, the longtime Jewish activist said, “The people responsible for the platform did such a terrible job working on the wording because they did not conduct an inclusive process with members of the [pro-Israel] community. That’s what leud to this problem, and those people should be held responsible.”

What’s more, some pro-Israel activists are far from satisfied even with the corrected language in the platform.

Said longtime Democrat and prominent law professor Alan Dershowitz: “I would like to see the president make statements over the course of the coming weeks which re-affirm what was said in the 2008 platform, not only with regards to Jerusalem, but in regard to the borders, the refugees and with regard to Hamas,” he said. Off-the-record, other Jewish Democratic insiders echo the objections.

The 2008 platform had demanded “the isolation of Hamas until that organization renounces terrorism and accepts other requirements of the peace process,” insisted that “any settlement of the so-called ‘refugees’ question in a final settlement make a future Palestinian state, not Israel, the destination for Palestinian ‘refugees,’” and noted “that it’s not realistic to expect [the] outcome of negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”

But not to worry, Debbie “Alternative Universe” Wasserman-Shultz say all the controversy arose from a mere technical oversight:

Actually, the real universe is that the Democratic Party is the home to antil-Israelis.  Not all Democrats are anti-Israel, but almost all anti-Israelis are Democrats.

Update: Joel Engel reminds me of this column he wrote before the 2004 election for The Weekly Standard:

The evidence is overwhelming that acceptable anti-Semitism has moved from right to left on the political continuum, and that its philosophical home now resides in the Democratic party, which has become less the party of liberals than of leftists. Even before Al Sharpton stood as a presidential candidate last year, Democratic politicians genuflecting for black votes–Al Gore, Bill Bradley, and Hillary Clinton, for example–often trekked up to Harlem to kiss his ring. And yet, this was a man who in previous years had either led or instigated two anti-Jewish demonstrations, one in Crown Heights and one in Harlem, which together resulted in the deaths of eight people. Does that matter to Democrats and John Kerry? Apparently not. Sharpton was rewarded with a choice slot at the Democratic National Convention, something that is impossible to imagine being given to the likes of former Republican David Duke, whose incitements have frankly born far less blood than Sharpton’s.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Alan Dershowitz: “I would like to see the president make statements over the course of the coming weeks which re-affirm what was said in the 2008 platform…”

Really? That would make the Dersh all warm and fuzzy again?!?

This is not how you assure “Never again”.

Debbie is a lying parrot…

The platform was handled “by children,”

Give that guy a cheroot. Our entire government has been handled by children for the past four years.

    After watching TV, you always seem to come away wondering if there are any “grown-ups” in DC.
    It sort of seems like they all must be retired or on food stamps.

This does suggest a response to the question “what about that anti-abortion-no-exceptions plank in the Republican platform,” doesn’t it?

Democrats are famous for their projection-ism of all things terrible onto Republicans, when in point of fact it is they who think and act in all manner and means against traditional American values, most notably that the quaint notion of limited government is just so dated and passe and that modern thinking believes that having big government and more of it is the end all of everything meaningful in life. Julia, anyone?

Robert Spencer has today a story on a real dog whistle, coded language example,
Interviewer, Mr. Awad, let’s first talk about the Democrats’ removal of the sentence “Jerusalem is the capital of Israel” from their political platform. What significance do you attribute to this omission?

Nihad Awad (head of CAIR, Hamas’s fifth column in North America): This is an indication that the Democratic Party’s political platform with regard to the Middle East is developing.

Yeah, “developing,” Of course the Democrat/socialist/totalitarian/Islamic platform is not developing at all. Rather, it’s fully developed and fully in line with Muslim thinking that Israel has no right to exist. It just isn’t quite the right time to bring that fact out into the open. But if you’re paying attention, the Muslim-Democratic connection was revealed the other day.

It’s far more than just “anti-Israeli”. (What does that really mean, anyway — what are the implications and subtexts of being politically “anti-Israeli”? It doesn’t take a lot of imagination — and it takes very little exposure to the Leftist establishment in this country and its affiliations around the world — to know that it means support of policies and people which would lead to the literal end of Israel).

It is about a profound and pernicious radicalization of the democrat party being pretty much sidestepped by the republican party. Stanley Kurtz has an edifying and unfortunately depressing piece in NRO about how Republican disregard of (or fear of confronting) this broader and deeper Leftist agenda (specifically the Romney team’s avoidance of it in the interest of wooing disaffected Obama democrats) may be a gross political miscalculation. I think it’s worse — narrowing this election down to the issue of “jobs” is gross moral dereliction. What’s going on this country at the hands of the democrat party (aka the Left in a very effective disguise) simply cannot be ignored by the other major political party whose supposed banner is liberty and the individual.

What is or isn’t in the platform is somewhat secondary to the fact that Obama will do whatever he feels like doing anyway. It is a window into the soul of the Democrat Party, but so too was their penchant for viciously attacking anyone who opposed gay marriage, except Barack Obama, because they were perfectly comfortable with the notion that his opposition was a pure political ploy. The only thing that’s reliable about lefties is their loathsomeness.

Democrat Jews are being pushed out of the tent by Muslims and insist on clinging bitterly to the end waiting for a few meaningless words from a man whose every promise comes with an expiration date.

The GOP should take note: Muslim involvement and financial activity in the party come with a price, the destruction of the Jews. That’s a price that no American or any one else should be willing to pay.

Democrat Jews are willing to hate themselves just to remain residents of the plantation.

The “children” get the blame for something the “adults” could not stop. Durbin and Schultz are all too prepared in their deflection of the question, with their assault on FOX News. (Apparently the FOX card has gained clout like the race card, misogynist card, bigot card.)

These children represent a very real part of the Democrats. The powers in the world that promote and fund these children certainly have a powerful block behind them, and managed to win the battle over what language would be used. Durbin could not answer Baier’s question.

Democrats under Obama

Isn’t Debbie’s great-great-great grandpa the developer of anti body test for syphilis?

Nah, he had two N’s, right?

Democrats under Obama

Isn’t Debbie’s great-great-great grandpa the developer of anti body test for syphilis?

Nah, he had two N’s, right?

oforchristsakes, double post. DAMN!

The war is on traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs, and Western Civilization in general. The PC progressive religion is taking its place. Julia is their Jesus, the perfect child of their God (which is PC/Progressive Government). (her brown shirted brother Jack might be born later, if the revolution doesn’t go down peacefully).

The Middle East radical Muslim war on Israel is a secondary front, so Democrats have allied with Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in their Arab Spring. It is an unholy alliance, but one Democrat power brokers are willing to make, to weaken the West.

Most politicians, (but especially Democrats I think), often look foolish because they serve two masters. They have their money from lobbyists, but they have to get votes by pretending to represent a “godly” platform to their constituents. They cannot serve god and mammon, and they win by serving mammon, but mouthing service to godly principles (except maybe some Tea partiers).

Some lobbyists just hide their lust for money … Goldman Sachs, Unions, anyone directly getting monetary payback. Others are more ideological or anti-American. These probably include radical Muslims, foreign nations, or various subversives.

But the politician generally has to hide his true supporters, though he is going to vote as they direct. This makes them sound foolish at times, as they must contradict their voting record. But often their stupidity accentuates their conflictions.

at least that is my current estimate …

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Midwest Rhino. | September 8, 2012 at 1:30 pm

    the point I was getting to … Durbin is upset that the “children” don’t understand how important it is to hide their true alliances. Some “children” are so ideological, they forget the battle depends on constant lies, and their emotion spews out some truth.

acceptable anti-Semitism has moved from right to left on the political continuum

This is not a rhetorical question, but when was anti-Semitism ever “acceptable” by the right? (David Dukes was an anomaly and never embraced by the right.)

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Kitty. | September 8, 2012 at 1:39 pm

    “Vote for the Crook … It’s Important”

    That was the bumper sticker I remember. But Duke did make it that far. Of course he had tried to hide his KKK associations, and was busy saying conservative things. Extremists are motivated.

    But as we are headed over a cliff, the majority will hopefully get equally motivated. I think Duke got in because regular Republicans didn’t think they could beat Edwards, so didn’t have the backing. It took the FBI to stop him.

    Cassandra Lite in reply to Kitty. | September 8, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    The classic example would be Connecticut country club Republicans of the 1950s. And back when academia was run by people far more on the right than on the left. Watch Kazan’s Gentleman’s Agreement for a primer on this.

      LukeHandCool in reply to Cassandra Lite. | September 8, 2012 at 4:36 pm

      Very true, but you still had your anti-Semitism among then Democrats, too.

      I remember my dad telling me one story about his days at the University of Illinois. He was a staunch FDR Democrat back then. He recounted how he and some buddies would stand outside the Jewish fraternity and drunkenly yell anti-Semitic slurs.

      He thought it was all in good fun. I just kept thinking, “Why would that seem like fun? Where is the fun in that?”

      I much preferred his stories of being on drunken dates. Like the time he was driving home drunk with his date and he stopped to buy some condoms. Being drunk, he took a very long time. When he came back to the car, the girl was gone. He was in disbelief that she would forgo the night of her life and so drunk … he opened up the hood of the car to see if she was hiding there! Now there’s a Kennedy-esque Democrat!

      That was my dad! He was a Democrat through and through!

Great piece by Joel!

“Put aside his disgraceful role in the Tawana Brawley hoax. The fact that Democratic candidate Sharpton never had to answer questions during primary season from either the press or the other contenders about his anti-Semitic statements (to wit: “diamond merchants” whose hands bear “the blood of innocent babies”) should tell Jewish Democrats something important about their party.”

—And it tells us something very important about the media. Who among us, back in 2004 when Joel wrote this, could have imagined that the vile Al Sharpton would one day have his own news opinion show on a major TV news channel?

It beggars belief! We really have to wake up. In 2004, Al Sharpton having his own TV show would’ve seemed like something from an alternative universe. But just like the recipe of time and incrementalism has made PC absurdities that would’ve elicited choking gasps just a couple of decades ago now cause us just to shrug and roll our eyes, anti-Semitism (often dressed up as concern for the Palestinians) is slowly being accepted into public discourse.

Al Sharpton is nothing more than a criminal to me. Jimmy Carter’s words on Israel should render him a laughingstock (overkill?).

I had never heard Michael Moore’s opinions about Israel (I refuse to watch his films) and so I learned something important (if not surprising at all) from Joel’s piece.

The last time I saw my oldest childhood friend (and previously my best friend … but, because of politics, he hasn’t talked to me for the last couple of years) we talked about the Democratic Party and Israel.

He said that I, a Gentile, had come to sound like a radical right-wing Rabbi because of my staunch support of Israel!

I asked him how he, a Jew, could feel comfortable being a Democrat these days.

I asked, “When you see leftist demonstrations, don’t you see the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic signs?”

His answer?

“Yeah. I just give those guys the finger as I’m driving by.”

Whatever gets you through the night … s’alright, s’alright.

Baruk Hashem. Israel is forever! America IS NOT the G-d of Israel. America needs the blessings of the G-d of Israel more than Israel needs the military help of America. Israelis have the eternal covenant recorded in the Holy Tanakh whereas America only has the promise of blessing when America blesses Israel. The covenant of Abraham is over 5,000 years old and still legally valid. For the week prior to the D convention there was outreach to Muslims. The Muslims were the NO voices heard when the amendment to restore phrase “Jerusalem is capital of Israel”. All Muslims are anti-Israeli!

Wasserman-Schultz is a Jewess with a large constituency of Jews in Broward County. Someone explain what is up with that woman? Self-hatred? Ethnic hatred? I don’t get it.

    Frank Scarn in reply to beloved2. | September 8, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    I think the more penetrating question is, What’s up with the voters in her district?

    My answer. When Democrats are elected – and they’ve all become looney lefties now, not just the obvious ones like Schumer, Pelosi, Durbin, Jackson Lee, Waters et alia – it is a testament to just how well public schooling has succeeded. From the statist’s POV, it is very successful. For the constitutionalist, not so much.

      They fail to recognize they will necessarily exchange their liberty for submission with benefits. Unfortunately, a large minority of people would voluntarily accept the latter. They are not strictly American or they are the product of corrupted culture.

      Interesting note about Schumer, is that his perception of reality in private differs from his public expression. For example, he recognizes the merits of evolutionary fitness, and promotes it among his female staff. Perhaps not every Democrat supports evolutionary suicide.

First, the Catholics supported greater government intervention in medical provision and funding. The Democrats exploited their good intentions to attack their faith. Second, the Jews supported policies of redistributive change, social justice, evolutionary dysfunction, etc. The Democrats exploited their “good” intentions to undermine their support. Whether it is good or “good” intentions, their principles in practice engender progressive (i.e. cultural) corruption. Both groups failed to recognize that the left is guided by an ideology which seeks to gain leverage through the exploitation of human weakness and divergence. Both the Catholics and Jews contributed their wealth, and voices, and are no longer required to sustain the movement. They have become disposable and interchangeable as every other human being, from conception to grave.

[…] Not all Democrats are anti-Israel, but almost all anti-Israelis are Democrats […]