Perry: Bernanke is 'Almost Treasonous,' Obama Doesn't Love America

Perry: Bernanke is ‘Almost Treasonous,’ Obama Doesn’t Love America

‘We’d treat him pretty ugly down in Texas’

PoliticsAugust 2011 • Views: 27,740

Rick Perry’s going to deny he was suggesting violence, of course, but yesterday he said about Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke:

“If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I dunno what y’all would do to him in Iowa but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treasonous in my opinion.”

Wow.

And that wasn’t all. To top off his day of unforced errors, Perry also suggested that President Obama does not love America.

Both of these degrading, moronic statements will go over well with the Tea Party crowd, but if this is how Rick Perry sounds two days after announcing his candidacy, he’s going to lose whatever moderates remain in the GOP. (If there are any left.)

Jump to bottom

140 comments

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 8:58:28am

> Perry also suggested that President Obama does not love America

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

wrenchwench Tue, Aug 16, 2011 8:59:19am

Since the philosophy of Luap Nor has really caught on, Perry has to outdo him at his own game.

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:00:10am

he’s going to lose whatever moderates remain in the GOP

What moderates? There aren't any, unless they're just not paying attention.

Kronocide Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:01:39am

No matter how pretty his hair is these statements will come back to bite him. If I'm a DNC strategist I'd be giddy inside.

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:02:59am

re: #2 wrenchwench

Since the philosophy of Luap Nor has really caught on, Perry has to outdo him at his own game.

Which is hilarious if you've ever kept up with Texas politics, because just a few years ago, Luap Nor was dismissed as a kook and a crank by the Texas GOP. They hate him, but tolerate him because he keeps winning.

Watching Rick Perry try to channel Luap Nor makes me laugh. He never would have done such a thing five years ago.

Interesting Times Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:03:02am

Given Ben Bernanke is Jewish, it's hard not to at least suspect Perry's comment was a dog whistle of the most insidious kind...

wrenchwench Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:03:17am

The whine of cicadas in that video clip gives it a creepy feel. Or maybe it's the guy holding the mike.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:03:49am

re: #6 publicityStunted

That's taking it too far.

makeitstop Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:04:59am

I'm wondering what he's got on the agenda for today.

Torturing cats?
Challenging Joe Biden to a fist fight?
Siccing his security detail on the reporter from the New York Times?
Shooting up Romney's tour bus?

When you set the bar for crazy/stupid so high on your first day of campaigning, there's a lot of pressure to keep it at a level that will make Michele Bachmann look serene by comparison.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:06:19am

re: #1 Sergey Romanov

> Perry also suggested that President Obama does not love America

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Patriotism is first-person nationalism.

Flounder Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:06:51am

re: #9 makeitstop

Perry or Obama?!
/

makeitstop Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:07:32am

re: #11 Shropshire_Slasher

Perry or Obama?!
/

As far as I know, Obama doesn't brag about carrying a pistol. :)

Killgore Trout Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:08:00am

om nom nom....
Image: 610x.jpg

Dark_Falcon Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:08:06am

re: #8 Sergey Romanov

That's taking it too far.

Agreed. Perry's never reached out to anti-Semites, and even wackos like Alex Jones tend to avoid anti-Semetic dog whistles entirely. It's unlikely Rick Perry was making the "dual loyalties" charge.

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:08:09am

re: #12 makeitstop

As far as I know, Obama doesn't brag about carrying a pistol. :)

He doesn't have to. All those armed Secret Service agents around him get the point across. ;)

Gus Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:08:21am

Rick Perry is trotting out the same old tired memes from 2008 such as "Obama does not love America."

Bulworth Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:09:12am

And to think Bernanke was appointed Fed chair just a few short years ago by none other than George W. Bush.

The teabagging of America is near full bloom.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:09:30am

re: #13 Killgore Trout

om nom nom...
Image: 610x.jpg

C'mon, lick that sausage baby, yeah. /

wrenchwench Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:09:35am

re: #6 publicityStunted

Given Ben Bernanke is Jewish, it's hard not to at least suspect Perry's comment was a dog whistle of the most insidious kind...

re: #8 Sergey Romanov

That's taking it too far.

I'm not so sure.

The major players in the "End the Fed" campaign do NOT think it is a coincidence that a Jew holds that position. Why is his religion listed on his Wikipedia profile, and those of his predecessors are not? Perry may not mean anything by it, but he's parroting those that do.

Gus Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:10:42am

Just think though. We're going to get a little more than a year of this crap from the right wingers. Get ready for Obama derangement to go to 11.

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:10:43am

re: #14 Dark_Falcon

Agreed. Perry's never reached out to anti-Semites, and even wackos like Alex Jones tend to avoid anti-Semetic dog whistles entirely. It's unlikely Rick Perry was making the "dual loyalties" charge.

You've never listened to Alex Jones on the radio. He's constantly ranting about "the bankers" and "the Bilderberg Group" (i.e., the Jews) in his shows.

makeitstop Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:10:56am

re: #16 Gus 802

Rick Perry is trotting out the same old tired memes from 2008 such as "Obama does not love America."

That's what I don't get. Wasn't this all settled during Obama vs. McCain?

Perry's running McCain's campaign all over again. All he needs is Bachmann as his VP candidate and it'll be the Mutant Offspring of Republican Campaign 2008.

Renaissance_Man Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:11:06am

re: #3 Lidane

What moderates? There aren't any, unless they're just not paying attention.

Actually, there are loads. The Conservative hate cult is a minority.

However, the rest are most definitely not paying attention. And this is because they've never really paid attention - they catch a few bits of news here and there, but mostly they vote (R) or (D) because that's what they've always done and everyone they know has always done. This is always going to be the bulk of the electorate, and what they know is what we might call 'common knowledge'.

This, however, is where the real damage of the cult-controlled media is done. It's not in claims of the Obama Youth or secret Muslim infiltrators or any of that rubbish - that only reinforces the hate of the minority cult. However, the noise machine reinforces their more subtle message through endless repetition, and once those myths enter 'common knowledge', they do not budge. Witness, for instance, such memes as 'the USA is broke' and 'tax and spend liberals ruining Congress', and so forth. The cult media pushes these incessantly, and after a time, they become common knowledge. The average voter might say, 'oh, I don't believe all that rubbish about death panels, but we definitely can't afford health care'. Or something similar. Too late. Game over. Like guns, the battle over health care is lost, because once these ideas become entrenched in the US electorate, only a media intervention of similar scale can move them.

It is these voters, and those that believe that by voting (R) they are somehow supporting only 'moderate' Republicans, that may well push Perry over the edge in 2012.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:11:31am

re: #19 wrenchwench

re: #8 Sergey Romanov

I'm not so sure.

The major players in the "End the Fed" campaign do NOT think it is a coincidence that a Jew holds that position.

Maybe some do, but surely others don't.

Why is his religion listed on his Wikipedia profile, and those of his predecessors are not?

That's the question for Wikipedia editors.

Gus Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:12:02am

re: #22 makeitstop

That's what I don't get. Wasn't this all settled during Obama vs. McCain?

Perry's running McCain's campaign all over again. All he needs is Bachmann as his VP candidate and it'll be the Mutant Offspring of Republican Campaign 2008.

Yep. Everything is going to be rehashed. And I mean everything.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:13:04am

re: #19 wrenchwench

Previous is Greenspan. Need I? ;)

jaunte Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:13:17am

re: #25 Gus 802

Terrorist fist jab.

Gus Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:13:52am

re: #27 jaunte

Terrorist fist jab.

William Ayers!!11ty

muddydog Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:14:10am

History is not going to be kind on this generation.

When we have such massive issues to tackel and this is what we STILL have to deal with...

I am starting to think the time is passing for the US as a great power.

We are turning into the country of buffoons.

Kronocide Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:14:26am

Haven't we had enough of the Politics of Personal Destruction?

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:14:43am

re: #25 Gus 802

Yep. Everything is going to be rehashed. And I mean everything.

BIRTH CERTIFICATE!
ACORN!
AYERS!
SEEKRIT MOOSLIM!

If Obama manages to win a second term, the head explosions on the right will be epic.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:15:01am

re: #20 Gus 802

Just think though. We're going to get a little more than a year of this crap from the right wingers. Get ready for Obama derangement to go to 11.

That, we are.

Expect the dumb conformists in the rest of the GOP to sit around and let it happen, too, even to their own detriment.

lawhawk Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:15:10am

RT: Fitch reiterates AAA rating for US, but warns that US is falling behind some of its AAA peers in dealing with its financial house.

"The affirmation of the US 'AAA' sovereign rating reflects the fact that the key pillars of US's exceptional creditworthiness remains intact: its pivotal role in the global financial system and the flexible, diversified and wealthy economy that provides its revenue base," Fitch said in its statement.
"Monetary and exchange rate flexibility further enhances the capacity of the economy to absorb and adjust to 'shocks'."

Financial markets showed little reaction to the news, which also coincided with the release of industrial output data.

U.S. government bonds pared some price gains slightly and the dollar edged up to the day's highs against the yen.

However, Fitch warned the outlook for the rating depended on the economy and the ability of the political process in Washington to reduce the public debt.

"S&P had a very specific basis for their concern which was that there was no long-run plan for budget control," said Pierre Ellis, senior economist, Decision Economics, New York.

"Fitch certainly is correct with respect to the breadth of the United States' potential revenue sources...it is putting a little more faith in the common sense of Congress and the Administration with respect to getting the budget situation under control."

Fitch said an upward revision to medium- to long-term projections for public debt either as a result of weaker than expected economic recovery or failure of the joint committee to agree on at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction would likely put the United States on negative outlook.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:15:21am

re: #21 Lidane

You've never listened to Alex Jones on the radio. He's constantly ranting about "the bankers" and "the Bilderberg Group" (i.e., the Jews) in his shows.

Errrr. Alex Jones makes it pretty clear that he is not an antisemite (and I don't think "the Bilderberg Group" is a big thing in antisemitic circles). Of course his anti-elitism often takes up the same tropes that antisemites have used for millenia, so it's no surprise his fans have hated on him for these vids:

Youtube Video

Shiplord Kirel Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:15:31am

We're going to have fun with Perry. I can imagine him winning the nomination and trying to take his ante-bellum economics and dark age social crusade to states with large contingents of actual liberals.

jaunte Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:15:54am

I can imagine the interview with Perry on this:

"Did you intend to threaten Ben Bernanke?"
"Well, you'll just have to ask him if he felt threatened."

garhighway Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:17:23am

re: #14 Dark_Falcon

Agreed. Perry's never reached out to anti-Semites, and even wackos like Alex Jones tend to avoid anti-Semetic dog whistles entirely. It's unlikely Rick Perry was making the "dual loyalties" charge.

Give it time.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:17:34am

re: #25 Gus 802

Yep. Everything is going to be rehashed. And I mean everything.

There are countdowns and bets being taken on which of the rightwing shriek factory is going to be the first one to finally call him a n***** in the press or in the media. But namecalling is the least of it.

They have no ideas anyway, this is all they've got. It's going to be a lot worse than 2008.

Obdicut Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:17:36am

re: #35 Shiplord Kirel

We're going to have fun with Perry. I can imagine him winning the nomination and trying to take his ante-bellum economics and dark age social crusade to states with large contingents of actual liberals.

How about explaining why he was a Democrat who worked for Gore?

Of course, a lot of GOP voters like the 'come to jesus' aspect of an ex-Dem.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:17:56am

re: #36 jaunte

I can imagine the interview with Perry on this:

That's what I am looking forward to: National TV interviews with Perry (sans Fox). Should be fun.

Gus Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:18:32am

re: #32 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

That, we are.

Expect the dumb conformists in the rest of the GOP to sit around and let it happen, too, even to their own detriment.

Yep. I gave up on the establishment GOP 2 years ago. I was hoping they'd prevent the party from falling into the hands of the Tea Party crazies and worse but they just let it happen. Once Dick Armey took the reigns of the Tea Party movement for the GOP it was all downhill from there. The GOP has a serious problem on their hands. Our nation has a serious problem on our hands because of these feeble minded tools.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:18:45am

re: #30 BigPapa

Haven't we had enough of the Politics of Personal Destruction?

That's all the rightwing has anymore. They are completely out of real ideas.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:19:11am

re: #39 Obdicut

How about explaining why he was a Democrat who worked for Gore?

Of course, a lot of GOP voters like the 'come to jesus' aspect of an ex-Dem.

There's nobody as plausible in his or her zeal as a convert.

RadicalModerate Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:19:21am

re: #8 Sergey Romanov

That's taking it too far.

No, it isn't.
Perry was spearheading the effort to get Texas Legislature House Speaker Joe Strauss removed because he is Jewish - to be replaced with a Christian conservative.

[Link: www.dallasnews.com...]

Charles Johnson Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:19:23am

re: #34 000G

Errr. Alex Jones makes it pretty clear that he is not an antisemite (and I don't think "the Bilderberg Group" is a big thing in antisemitic circles.

One of the ways antisemites get away with spreading their hatred is by loudly denying they're antisemites. They'll often loudly proclaim allegiance to Israel. It's a bad idea to take their statements at face value.

In my opinion, Alex Jones is one of the most insidious antisemites currently spewing hatred in America. And yes, the 'Bilderberg' conspiracy theory is huge in antisemitic circles.

Killgore Trout Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:20:12am

re: #33 lawhawk

RT: Fitch reiterates AAA rating for US, but warns that US is falling behind some of its AAA peers in dealing with its financial house.

Interesting. I'm not overly hopeful. It's going to be very difficult for the Republicans to change course especially in an election cycle when they have so much already invested in insane financial policies. It's only going to get worse.

Gus Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:20:18am

re: #38 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

There are countdowns and bets being taken on which of the rightwing shriek factory is going to be the first one to finally call him a n***** in the press or in the media. But namecalling is the least of it.

They have no ideas anyway, this is all they've got. It's going to be a lot worse than 2008.

Swift Boating Version 9.0

Yep. That would be the conservative thing to do. Conservative as in the conservation of pre-established political tricks. They don't have much else to go on other than fear, hysteria, self-loathing, paranoia...

RadicalModerate Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:20:44am

re: #44 RadicalModerate

House Speaker's name is Joe Straus, not Strauss.

Obdicut Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:20:53am

re: #41 Gus 802

I've had a few very honest and cool conservative friends of mine admit to me that they'd held out false hope that somehow the GOP could just use the crazies for one more election and then somehow get ride of them.

While I appreciate the apology from them, I still do not understand how any GOP supporter did not see this coming. It wasn't like everyone, including quite a few Bush I administration people, weren't ringing the warning bells.

And that's just about the financial/fiscal crazies. The social conservatives have been pandered to for a long time, and it's always prevented me from supporting the GOP on any national level.

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:22:06am

re: #34 000G

Errr. Alex Jones makes it pretty clear that he is not an antisemite (and I don't think "the Bilderberg Group" is a big thing in antisemitic circles).

He also makes it pretty clear that he's absolutely bugfuck insane. His show is nothing but incoherent rants about the banks, the Bilderbergs, buying gold, the New World Order, and every other conspiracy you can think of. The guy's a crank.

It galls me that just a few years ago, Alex Jones was marginalized on all sides for his 9/11 truther shit and his FEMA concentration camps, but now he's a hero on the right because Obama got elected. What. The. Fuck.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:23:24am

re: #45 Charles

One of the ways antisemites get away with spreading their hatred is by loudly denying they're antisemites. They'll often loudly proclaim allegiance to Israel. It's a bad idea to take their statements at face value.

Well, Jones doesn't fit that profile. He doesn't proclaim it often (only when he gets antisemitic callers) and in recent years he has gotten pretty anti-Israel. I am not taking his statements at face value. And I do know that paranoid and rabid anti-elitism often enough incites antisemitsm, so the end result often is the same, and therefore the paranoid rabid anti-elitism should be shunned as well. But it's just not the same as hating on a certain set of people for their religion or "race" (heritage), Jones just doesn't do the latter.

In my opinion, Alex Jones is one of the most insidious antisemites currently spewing hatred in America. And yes, the 'Bilderberg' conspiracy theory is huge in antisemitic circles.

Well, all conspiracies are huge in antisemitic circles. That's the number reason for the big overlap.

garhighway Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:23:35am

re: #38 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

There are countdowns and bets being taken on which of the rightwing shriek factory is going to be the first one to finally call him a n***** in the press or in the media. But namecalling is the least of it.

They have no ideas anyway, this is all they've got. It's going to be a lot worse than 2008.

There's a fun idea! We should have an LGF pool on which candidate does that and when. You choose a candidate and a month and throw in $20 per entry. I'd play.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:24:18am

re: #44 RadicalModerate

No, it isn't.
Perry was spearheading the effort to get Texas Legislature House Speaker Joe Strauss removed because he is Jewish - to be replaced with a Christian conservative.

[Link: www.dallasnews.com...]

I don't doubt this in the least. Is there a link that specifies Perry spearheading it? I would think he would be more careful than to let it hit the press.

Ming Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:24:39am

When will more "moderate Republicans" speak up against right-wing lunacy? I was a registered Republican for 25 years, until 2009. There are plenty of sane Republicans, and I wish they would make their voices heard. Alan Simpson, Richard Lugar, Colin Powell, Bob Dole... these people, like Ronald Reagan, have NOTHING in common with the wannabe-theocrats who (apparently) control the GOP today. It's long past time for "moderate Republicans" to speak up about this.

Shiplord Kirel Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:24:43am

The whole Swift boat thing was a wonder to behold. Whatever else I thought about John Kerry over the years, I respected his military record. He really did see combat, very personally at times (he admitted shooting a fleeing VC in the back, for instance) and he really was wounded. Comes 2004 and the GOP attack machine manages to convert him into a fraud and a peacenik ringer, facts not withstanding.

Bulworth Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:25:03am

re: #35 Shiplord Kirel

We're going to have fun with Perry. I can imagine him winning the nomination and trying to take his ante-bellum economics and dark age social crusade to states with large contingents of actual liberals.

Voter ID laws.

wrenchwench Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:25:43am

re: #29 muddydog

Welcome, hatchling.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:26:11am

re: #44 RadicalModerate

No, it isn't.
Perry was spearheading the effort to get Texas Legislature House Speaker Joe Strauss removed because he is Jewish - to be replaced with a Christian conservative.

[Link: www.dallasnews.com...]

Um, still no.

1. I've seen no evidence that Perry supported that e-mail.

2. We aren't talking about Strauss. We're talking about whether anything in Perry's words about Bernanke can be considered as a dog whistle merely because Bernanke is Jewish. There isn't.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:27:02am

re: #50 Lidane

He also makes it pretty clear that he's absolutely bugfuck insane. His show is nothing but incoherent rants about the banks, the Bilderbergs, buying gold, the New World Order, and every other conspiracy you can think of. The guy's a crank.

It's paranoid crank fodder, yes. Utter and sheer paranoia. But a very coherent world view, I would say. Just very removed from reality. Guy has a whole religious narrative going on.

It galls me that just a few years ago, Alex Jones was marginalized on all sides for his 9/11 truther shit and his FEMA concentration camps, but now he's a hero on the right because Obama got elected. What. The. Fuck.

Yeah, that one is something that deserves more exposure. I still don't think he's gotten anywhere near to being a "Fox News regular" as you called him recently.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:27:22am

re: #21 Lidane

You've never listened to Alex Jones on the radio. He's constantly ranting about "the bankers" and "the Bilderberg Group" (i.e., the Jews) in his shows.

And the shyt he's allowed in Prison Planet/Infowars comments sections is straight off of NATVAN and Stormfront.

garhighway Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:27:44am

re: #54 Ming

It's long past time for "moderate Republicans" to speak up about this.

Both of them.

Alexzander Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:27:55am

re: #60 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

What is NATVAN?

lawhawk Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:28:56am

re: #45 Charles

He's got the Zionist conspiracies to 9/11 thing down pat.

He isn't hiding it. He is an anti-Semite, to go along with the trooferism and all the other conspiracy crap he peddles.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:29:03am

re: #62 Alexzander

What is NATVAN?

National Vanguard. Don't look. You'll be sorry

Alexzander Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:29:46am

re: #64 Sergey Romanov

Thanks I really didn't want to google it.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:30:44am

re: #56 Bulworth

Voter ID laws.

Gutting the 14th Amendment
Gutting Roe v Wade
States rights rule
Local control
Political correctness ruining our schools
Recruitment of our children

The rightwing dupes have been primed for this, overtly, for the past three years but far, far longer. Perry is going to do very well.

Charles Johnson Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:31:09am

re: #51 000G

But it's just not the same as hating on a certain set of people for their religion or "race" (heritage), Jones just doesn't do the latter.

I could not possibly disagree more.

Well, all conspiracies are huge in antisemitic circles. That's the number reason for the big overlap.

You're ignoring the very strong historic antisemitic tradition of secret Jewish banking conspiracies. The Bilderberg conspiracy theory is a prime example of antisemitic thinking. Maybe not everyone who buys it is antisemitic, but it's just wrong to say it doesn't have a strong antisemitic component.

Lidane Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:31:40am

re: #59 000G

It's paranoid crank fodder, yes. Utter and sheer paranoia. But a very coherent world view, I would say. Just very removed from reality. Guy has a whole religious narrative going on.

I can't reconcile "paranoid" and "coherent" in my head. Does not compute.

He's a crank. A homegrown Texas crank, just like Luap Nor. I simply cannot and will not give him any credence. I've endured his radio show when stuck in cabs and seen his face on the local access channels for years. Just... no. He's crazy.

Yeah, that one is something that deserves more exposure. I still don't think he's gotten anywhere near to being a "Fox News regular" as you called him recently.

The fact that he's on there at all speaks volumes. The guy spent all of Dubya's presidency ranting about 9/11 being an inside job and Bush having FEMA concentration camps, and now they let him on the air because a Democrat is POTUS? WTF.

Alexzander Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:31:56am

For an inside look at Alex Jones (and two other conspiracy theorists), check out the documentary New World Order (used ironically). Its a pretty impartical observation of their lives. Jones comes across as well-meaning, but manic.

[Link: newworldorderthemovie.com...]

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:31:59am

re: #62 Alexzander

What is NATVAN?

Sorry - National Vanguard, offshoot of National Alliance [Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:32:44am

re: #63 lawhawk

He's got the Zionist conspiracies to 9/11 thing down pat.

He isn't hiding it. He is an anti-Semite, to go along with the trooferism and all the other conspiracy crap he peddles.

You could call him a functional antisemite, which all antizionists are, but eh… He isn't even a principled antizionist, to him zionism is just another facet of the global conspiracy. If you look at the search results or the comments for that video, there are a lot of conspiracy nuts who call Jones out for being a Jew, being too friendly with Jews, etc.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:34:22am

re: #67 Charles

That's why I wondered here aloud a couple of times as to how Jones manages to keep inside the "bankster do it" frame, without going full "Jews do it". I think he can only do it either by deliberately hiding antisemitism or maybe it's all just an act.

lawhawk Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:34:47am

re: #71 000G

They're calling him out for not being sufficiently anti-Semitic. He's not open enough with his anti-Semitism, even though he's got it laced throughout quite a few of his pet crank theories.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:34:50am

re: #71 000G

You could call him a functional antisemite, which all antizionists are, but eh… He isn't even a principled antizionist, to him zionism is just another facet of the global conspiracy. If you look at the search results or the comments for that video, there are a lot of conspiracy nuts who call Jones out for being a Jew, being too friendly with Jews, etc.

> functional antisemite, which all antizionists are

How is that?

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:35:47am

re: #54 Ming

When will more "moderate Republicans" speak up against right-wing lunacy? I was a registered Republican for 25 years, until 2009. There are plenty of sane Republicans, and I wish they would make their voices heard. Alan Simpson, Richard Lugar, Colin Powell, Bob Dole...

Probably never. Too much conformity.

Meghan McCain is trying, bless her. But they just put her back in her place by harping on her weight and her chest.

Colin Powell (and Condi Rice) got the anti-n***** treatment, years ago.

I still want to know who she voted for, personally :p

RadicalModerate Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:36:28am

re: #53 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

I don't doubt this in the least. Is there a link that specifies Perry spearheading it? I would think he would be more careful than to let it hit the press.

Perry doesn't seem to have been named directly, but his right-hand people have been all over it, including one of his most trusted friends David Barton, whose Anti-Semitic views have been well-documented here.

The Bigger Story Behind Anti-Semitism in Texas

One of Straus's most high-profile opponents has been David Barton, founder of Wallbuilders, an organization dedicated to advancing the notion that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. Sound familiar? if you subscribe to the idea that America is an exceptional nation, borne out of a divine set of principles and established by a core of devoutly Christian Founding Fathers, blessed by God at every critical juncture in its history (save for this one, perhaps), you'd be nuts not to want to stock the government with people who share your views.

Alexzander Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:37:33am

re: #74 Sergey Romanov

> functional antisemite, which all antizionists are

How is that?

By this standard, Martin Buber would be an antisemite which is beyond absurd.
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Our Precious Bodily Fluids Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:37:38am

re: #13 Killgore Trout

om nom nom...
Image: 610x.jpg

I'll just go ahead and assume that the 4chan Photoshop brigade is already on the case.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:38:04am

re: #67 Charles

I could not possibly disagree more.

I am not sure what you disagree with: that rabid, paranoid anti-elitism is different from antisemitism, or that Jones does not go after Jews for their religion or their heritage/race?

You're ignoring the very strong historic antisemitic tradition of secret Jewish banking conspiracies. The Bilderberg conspiracy theory is a prime example of antisemitic thinking. Maybe not everyone who buys it is antisemitic, but it's just wrong to say it doesn't have a strong antisemitic component.

I am not ignoring the antisemitic tradition of jewish banking conspiracy theories. I just don't think it applies, since Jones doesn't evoke any specifically antisemitic stuff (unlike, say, Jeff Rense). Bilderberg conspiracy does often feature in antisemitic circles, and it often contains antisemitic features when formulated, but it is entirely possible to formulate it without antisemitic references, which is what Jones does. It still carries antisemitic connotations, but that's different from saying that it has essentially antisemitic components.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:39:05am

re: #77 Alexzander

Indeed. While anti-Zionist rhetoric is widely used by antisemites, that doesn't make anti-Zionism/anti-Israelism per se a form of antisemitism, functional or otherwise.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:40:12am

re: #76 RadicalModerate

Perry doesn't seem to have been named directly, but his right-hand people have been all over it, including one of his most trusted friends David Barton, whose Anti-Semitic views have been well-documented here.

The Bigger Story Behind Anti-Semitism in Texas

Yeah, plausible deniability. Cynthia McKlanny pulls something similar...lets everyone else around her say the overtly antisemtic things, never quite does herself, outside of dogwhistles like "stringpullers" and etc. AJones - more of the same.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:41:46am

re: #68 Lidane

I can't reconcile "paranoid" and "coherent" in my head. Does not compute.

Paranoia is highly compatible with coherence. Not coherence with the real world, but internally. That's what Jones offers.

He's a crank. A homegrown Texas crank, just like Luap Nor. I simply cannot and will not give him any credence. I've endured his radio show when stuck in cabs and seen his face on the local access channels for years. Just... no. He's crazy.

Agreed.

The fact that he's on there at all speaks volumes. The guy spent all of Dubya's presidency ranting about 9/11 being an inside job and Bush having FEMA concentration camps, and now they let him on the air because a Democrat is POTUS? WTF.

Yes, I agree with you here. Should get more exposure.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:43:00am

re: #80 Sergey Romanov

Indeed. While anti-Zionist rhetoric is widely used by antisemites, that doesn't make anti-Zionism/anti-Israelism per se a form of antisemitism, functional or otherwise.

Usually, I don't go for "gateway" talk. But in the case of anti-Zionism I can make an exception. I think it's rare that most anti-Zionism doesn't lapse into antisemitism.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:43:04am

re: #73 lawhawk

They're calling him out for not being sufficiently anti-Semitic. He's not open enough with his anti-Semitism, even though he's got it laced throughout quite a few of his pet crank theories.

They also call him out for having a wife with a jewish heritage, etc.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:45:04am

re: #83 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

This may or may not be true, I don't have stats on that. But no way Chomsky or others like him are antisemites, even if they're clueless.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:46:18am

re: #74 Sergey Romanov

> functional antisemite, which all antizionists are

How is that?

From the rants of Stokely Carmichael to Neturei Karta and Durban I, I think it should be pretty clear.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:46:42am

re: #86 000G

From the rants of Stokely Carmichael to Neturei Karta and Durban I, I think it should be pretty clear.

Non sequitur.

Charles Johnson Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:47:03am

re: #73 lawhawk

They're calling him out for not being sufficiently anti-Semitic. He's not open enough with his anti-Semitism, even though he's got it laced throughout quite a few of his pet crank theories.

Exactly -- this is standard hate group behavior.

Alex Jones understands that in order to continue publicly spreading this hatred, he can't be overt in his antisemitism, and this pisses off the really stupid antisemites who don't understand or care about public appearances.

But his websites absolutely reek of antisemitism (in addition to all the other sick crap). There's a reason why he attracts so many Jew-haters, and it's not an accident.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:48:34am

re: #80 Sergey Romanov

Indeed. While anti-Zionist rhetoric is widely used by antisemites, that doesn't make anti-Zionism/anti-Israelism per se a form of antisemitism, functional or otherwise.

I think if you are against Israel as a safe haven for Jews (which is always what it was intended to be), you are pretty much politically, functionally indistinguishable from an antisemite.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:49:09am

re: #87 Sergey Romanov

Non sequitur.

There wasn't even an inference, so there cannot be a non sequitur.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:50:26am

re: #85 Sergey Romanov

This may or may not be true, I don't have stats on that. But no way Chomsky or others like him are antisemites, even if they're clueless.

Well, since we're talking about "calling out", they do get "called out" for not being anti-Zionist/anti-Israel enough. Same for Finkelstein, but mainly by people just mad that they won't denounce Judaism or sufficiently try to revoke their own Jewishness.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 9:54:01am

re: #88 Charles

Exactly -- this is standard hate group behavior.

Alex Jones understands that in order to continue publicly spreading this hatred, he can't be overt in his antisemitism, and this pisses off the really stupid antisemites who don't understand or care about public appearances.

Sorry, I just don't see any evidence for that. I don't know of any incidence in Jones' past where he "let his mask down" or was too stupid to keep the pretense up for a second. I think assuming that he is playing a very elaborate game of hiding his antisemitism is giving him too much credit.

He hates "elites", alright – whoever happens to be at the top of the power structure, whether in reality or as it is portrayed in the popular conspiracy theories. And that will often coincide with standard antisemitic tropes popular among his audience. That's as far as I can see the rabbit hole going.

But his websites absolutely reek of antisemitism (in addition to all the other sick crap). There's a reason why he attracts so many Jew-haters, and it's not an accident.

It's not an accident, but that doesn't mean that it's intentional (as in "hey, I need to keep all those Jew haters happy as my audience"). It's just that antisemitism is "naturally" popular among conspiracy nuts.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:00:19am

re: #89 000G

I think if you are against Israel as a safe haven for Jews (which is always what it was intended to be), you are pretty much politically, functionally indistinguishable from an antisemite.

To expand on that: I don't think you can be "anti-Israel" without being perfectly fine with very bad things happening to a lot of Jews (namely the ones living there). Which is functionally indistinct from outright wanting very bad things to happen to a lot of Jews.

Zionism is an important aspect of keeping Israel alive, hence etc. I know a lot of "anti-zionism" is more of an attack against "US Imperialism" and "Bankers" but even then it never fails to devolve into antisemitism.

I think this is a problem all specific anti-nationalists have. If your anti-nationalism isn't truly universal, chances are you are being a bigot.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:01:12am

re: #89 000G

I think if you are against Israel as a safe haven for Jews (which is always what it was intended to be), you are pretty much politically, functionally indistinguishable from an antisemite.

First of all, people who are anti-Zionist are such for a variety of reasons, which may include antisemitism, or which may stem from various ideological roots having nothing to do with antisemitism. This "equation" of them with antisemites is just a political demagoguery.

Second, you seem to equate Zionism and "intention for Israel to be a safe heaven for Jews", and thus anti-Zionism with being anti-that noble intention. Your mistake: you seem to think that self-professed anti-Zionists define anti-Zionism in the very same way that you do. Which they don't. They certainly don't necessarily think of themselves as wishing to deprive anyone of a safe haven or put them in harm's risk.

For example, there are lots of people arguing for the one-state solution. I think we can agree that they're both anti-Zionist and foolish (one-state solution doesn't mesh with reality). But no matter their foolishness on this issue, to call them antisemites because we know that one-state solution will "functionally" put Jewish Israelis' in harms' way is still shameful because that wish doesn't (necessarily) stem from an antisemitic intent, but rather (mostly) from feel-good hippie/internationalist stuff.

Charles Johnson Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:02:10am

re: #92 000G

Sorry, I think you're just wrong. I don't know why you're refusing to see it, but I've been following Alex Jones for years and I have absolutely no doubt that antisemitism is one of the things he espouses. Apparently, he's doing it cleverly enough to fool you.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:03:16am

re: #74 Sergey Romanov

> functional antisemite, which all antizionists are

How is that?

re: #86 000G

From the rants of Stokely Carmichael to Neturei Karta and Durban I, I think it should be pretty clear.

re: #87 Sergey Romanov

Non sequitur.

re: #90 000G

There wasn't even an inference, so there cannot be a non sequitur.

Huh?

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:06:29am

re: #93 000G

To expand on that: I don't think you can be "anti-Israel" without being perfectly fine with very bad things happening to a lot of Jews (namely the ones living there).

Uh, non sequitur again.

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:16:42am

re: #94 Sergey Romanov

First of all, people who are anti-Zionist are such for a variety of reasons, which may include antisemitism, or which may stem from various ideological roots having nothing to do with antisemitism. This "equation" of them with antisemites is just a political demagoguery.

Their "reason" doesn't matter.

Second, you seem to equate Zionism and "intention for Israel to be a safe heaven for Jews", and thus anti-Zionism with being anti-that noble intention. Your mistake: you seem to think that self-professed anti-Zionists define anti-Zionism in the very same way that you do. Which they don't. They certainly don't necessarily think of themselves as wishing to deprive anyone of a safe haven or put them in harm's risk.

What they "think" is irrelevant. All of their "thinking" ammounts to the same.

For example, there are lots of people arguing for the one-state solution. I think we can agree that they're both anti-Zionist and foolish (one-state solution doesn't mesh with reality). But no matter their foolishness on this issue, to call them antisemites because we know that one-state solution will "functionally" put Jewish Israelis' in harms' way is still shameful because that wish doesn't (necessarily) stem from an antisemitic intent, but rather (mostly) from feel-good hippie/internationalist stuff.

"Good intent" does not matter. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. It's not my fault that other people are too stupid to recognize their own evil.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:17:18am

re: #98 000G

Yes, they all matter.

100

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:20:53am

re: #95 Charles

Sorry, I think you're just wrong. I don't know why you're refusing to see it, but I've been following Alex Jones for years and I have absolutely no doubt that antisemitism is one of the things he espouses. Apparently, he's doing it cleverly enough to fool you.

I have been "following" him for some times as well and never saw "the mask drop" or anything. With actual antisemities, usually over the years the facade breaks or they will at least make snide, offhand remarks directly against Jews, etc. He is just feeding the conspiracy nuts, that's all there is to it. That the average conspiracy nut is more likely to be an antisemite is not really Jones' fault but just the way that conspiracy theories and their tropes evolved throughout human history. Nor does he exploit it like Rense. And the only way in which he fools people is by pretending to have actual explanations to real events with his paranoid crap.

101

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:21:41am

re: #96 Sergey Romanov

re: #87 Sergey Romanov

re: #90 000G

Huh?

Non sequitur is a fallacy in a logical argument, an inference. I wasn't making an inference, I was just giving what I thought were very demonstrative examples.

102

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:22:13am

re: #99 Sergey Romanov

Yes, they all matter.

I don't think the dead Jews and their relatives matter much whether the people who got them killed had good intentions or not.

103

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:22:28am

re: #102 000G

I don't think the dead Jews and their relatives ~~matter~~ much whether the people who got them killed had good intentions or not.

care, not matter

PIMF

104

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:22:30am

re: #100 000G

> He is just feeding the conspiracy nuts, that's all there is to it.

Wait, I thought intentions don't matter, so if what Jones does feeds antisemitism, isn't he a "functional antisemite" or whatever was that word du jour? ;)

105

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:22:58am

re: #97 Sergey Romanov

Uh, non sequitur again.

Nope.

106

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:24:58am

re: #102 000G

I don't think the dead Jews and their relatives matter much whether the people who got them killed had good intentions or not.

People who killed them had antisemitic intent. Which is why we call them antisemites. Calling, say, one-staters antisemites is not only foolish, but also degrades the term to such an extent that it becomes useless.

107

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:26:16am

re: #104 Sergey Romanov

> He is just feeding the conspiracy nuts, that's all there is to it.

Wait, I thought intentions don't matter, so if what Jones does feeds antisemitism, isn't he a "functional antisemite" or whatever was that word du jour? ;)

I guess if you thought that him espousing conspiracy theories and thus getting more and more of an audience of which a sizeable portion uses him like a gateway drug to get to the harder, truly antisemitic stuff, then yes, he would be a functional antisemite. However, I don't think that that was the charge.

Functional antisemitism I don't think is very much different from average racism in that regard. It's much more prevalent than is acknowledged, however, it is also usually not as toxic and lethal as the version held dear by the guys with the swastikas.

108

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:26:38am

re: #105 000G

Nope.

It sure is. You have never shown your claim to be true. Is to be anti-American equals being OK with bad things happening to Americans? No. Anti-Israeli being equal with bad things happening to Jews? No. Anti-Russia with bad things happening to Russians? No.

109

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:27:01am

re: #106 Sergey Romanov

People who killed them had antisemitic intent. Which is why we call them antisemites. Calling, say, one-staters antisemites is not only foolish, but also degrades the term to such an extent that it becomes useless.

If the logical result of one-statism is killed Jews even if said one-staters did not kill them with their own bare hands, then…

110

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:28:45am

re: #108 Sergey Romanov

It sure is. You have never shown your claim to be true. Is to be anti-American equals being OK with bad things happening to Americans? No. Anti-Israeli being equal with bad things happening to Jews? No. Anti-Russia with bad things happening to Russians? No.

Uh, no, you are wrong. You might feel bad when you actually see actual bad things happening to individual Americans, Jews, or Russians – but the logical consequence of your ideology is that that happens. Are you not familiar with the typical Nazi argument that one must not be sentimental and get their feelings for individual Jews get in the way of cultivating a true and effective, political antisemitism?

111

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:33:10am

re: #109 000G

If the logical result of one-statism is killed Jews even if said one-staters did not kill them with their own bare hands, then…

Antisemite at a basic level is someone who either intends to harm all or most Jews as Jews or who hates/dislikes all or most Jews as Jews. Those one-staters whose position does not stem from hatred of Jews as Jews or a desire to harm them are not antisemites.

112

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:35:09am

re: #110 000G

Uh, no, you are wrong. You might feel bad when you actually see actual bad things happening to individual Americans, Jews, or Russians – but the logical consequence of your ideology is that that happens. Are you not familiar with the typical Nazi argument that one must not be sentimental and get their feelings for individual Jews get in the way of cultivating a true and effective, political antisemitism?

Um, again, you don't get it. "Anti-Israel" doesn't even mean "against existence of Israel", much less "for harm to Israeli Jews". You must have some private definition in mind.

113

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:36:41am

re: #111 Sergey Romanov

Antisemite at a basic level is someone who either intends to harm all or most Jews as Jews or who hates/dislikes all or most Jews as Jews. Those one-staters whose position does not stem from hatred of Jews as Jews or a desire to harm them are not antisemites.

I don't think a definition from "intent" is sufficient or operational. One, intent is insanely hard to truly prove while you can much easier prove what kind of policies or behaviour is harmful to Jews.

Also, it focuses on the perp instead of the victim. Again: What difference does it make to the killed Jew and his family whether his death was brought about by well-meaning hippies or hateful Nazis?

114

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:37:43am

re: #112 Sergey Romanov

Um, again, you don't get it. "Anti-Israel" doesn't even mean "against existence of Israel", much less "for harm to Israeli Jews". You must have some private definition in mind.

Then how about you tell me your private definition. Tell me what "Anti-Israel" truly means.

115

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:39:31am

re: #113 000G

I don't think a definition from "intent" is sufficient or operational.

I do see that you think that.

Again: What difference does it make to the killed Jew and his family whether his death was brought about by well-meaning hippies or hateful Nazis?

I don't see how a difference to the killed Jew and his family is relevant to the discussion of definitions.

116

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:40:39am

re: #115 Sergey Romanov

I do see that you think that.

Yes, I even explained it. You seem to ignore that.

I don't see how a difference to the killed Jew and his family is relevant to the discussion of definitions.

You don't see how actual harm done to Jews is relevant to a definition of antisemitism?

117

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:43:21am

More specifically: If reckless neglect and malicious intent produce the same result, why exclude one from the definition? Because the reckless neglect was a result of praiseworthy idealism?

118

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:43:34am

re: #114 000G

Then how about you tell me your private definition. Tell me what "Anti-Israel" truly means.

It's a continuum of opinions, ranging from the bad attitude to the state of Israel (like one would have to another state one perceives to be "bad") to the wish for its destruction. We often say that this or that person is anti-Israel without meaning that (s)he wants to see Israel destroyed.

119

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:47:10am

re: #118 Sergey Romanov

It's a continuum of opinions, ranging from the bad attitude to the state of Israel (like one would have to another state one perceives to be "bad") to the wish for its destruction.

What's a "bad attitude to the state of Israel"?

We often say that this or that person is anti-Israel without meaning that (s)he wants to see Israel destroyed.

Because of disregard for consequences.

120

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:47:53am

re: #116 000G

Yes, I even explained it. You seem to ignore that.

Yes, but just because you want to introduce a new definition and think that the old one is insufficient doesn't really mean much.

You don't see how actual harm done to Jews is relevant to a definition of antisemitism?

Since antisemitism is an ideological term, no. A robber shooting a passerby who happens to be Jewish is not necessarily antisemitic, while a neo-Nazi killing a Jew is, but the end result is the same. I find your attempt to divorce def of antisemitism from ideological roots of hatred for the Jews as the Jews weird and ahistorical.

121

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:48:59am

re: #119 000G

What's a "bad attitude to the state of Israel"?

Because of disregard for consequences.

Is/was George bush anti-Iraqi?

122

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:51:25am

re: #120 Sergey Romanov

Yes, but just because you want to introduce a new definition and think that the old one is insufficient doesn't really mean much.

What old one? You just came up with one. I explained myself, you didN't (up to that point), that was the point.

Since antisemitism is an ideological term, no.

Yes, since it is not just that.

A robber shooting a passerby who happens to be Jewish is not necessarily antisemitic, while a neo-Nazi killing a Jew is, but the end result is the same.

I did not say results were sufficient.

I find your attempt to divorce def of antisemitism from ideological roots of hatred for the Jews as the Jews weird and ahistorical.

If you think that is what I am attempting, then you did not read my statements well enough.

123

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:52:17am

re: #121 Sergey Romanov

Is/was George bush anti-Iraqi?

Do you think he was?

124

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:53:18am

re: #122 000G

I did not say results were sufficient.

How so?

"Again: What difference does it make to the killed Jew and his family whether his death was brought about by well-meaning hippies or hateful Nazis?"

125

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:54:22am

re: #123 000G

Do you think he was?

Of course not. However, by what you seem to me to be arguing, he is, since, his actions/decisions eventually led to death of at the very least 100,000 Iraqis.

126

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:55:20am

re: #124 Sergey Romanov

How so?

"Again: What difference does it make to the killed Jew and his family whether his death was brought about by well-meaning hippies or hateful Nazis?"

See my post on reckless neglect.

127

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:55:48am

re: #125 Sergey Romanov

Of course not. However, by what you seem to me to be arguing, he is, since, his actions/decisions eventually led to death of at the very least 100,000 Iraqis.

Oh, but I am not arguing that.

128

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:56:54am

re: #127 000G

Oh, but I am not arguing that.

But in effect, you're. Bush committed reckless neglect by going to the war, so by your criterion he is "functionally anti-Iraqi".

129

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:57:47am

re: #128 Sergey Romanov

But in effect, you're. Bush committed reckless neglect by going to the war, so by your criterion he is "functionally anti-Iraqi".

If you want to accuse him of reckless neglect, which I am not.

130

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 10:59:10am

re: #126 000G

See my post on reckless neglect.

That's not really something you can put against someone who is not in charge of things, even if we agreed on that.

131

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:00:34am

re: #129 000G

If you want to accuse him of reckless neglect, which I am not.

So, Bush's decisions lead to at least 100,000 Iraqi deaths - but Bush is not anti-Iraqi. Silly one-staters dream of a an Jewish-Palestinian state and they're antisemites because of that. Pfeh, believe this, if you want.

132

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:01:45am

re: #131 Sergey Romanov

So, Bush's decisions lead to at least 100,000 Iraqi deaths - but Bush is not anti-Iraqi. Silly one-staters dream of a an Jewish-Palestinian state and they're antisemites because of that. Pfeh, believe this, if you want.

I don't see a problem with it.

133

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:02:03am

re: #130 Sergey Romanov

That's not really something you can put against someone who is not in charge of things, even if we agreed on that.

You are in charge of your own thoughts.

134

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:05:28am

re: #77 Alexzander

By this standard, Martin Buber would be an antisemite which is beyond absurd.
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Uh, no. Buber's attitude towards a possible state of Israel was different than his attitude towards the actual state of Israel. Also, the epistemic context was different. You have to include knowledge available in the 1920s and compare it to knowledge available after WWII in regards to the plight of the Jewish people.

135

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:06:32am

re: #133 000G

You are in charge of your own thoughts.

By having those thoughts they're not committing any sort of reckless neglect since they don't have any relevant influence (nobody who is in charge takes one-state seriously).

136

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:07:48am

re: #132 000G

I don't see a problem with it.

Well, that's good. Since your logical conclusions lead to such absurdities (you're entitled to think otherwise, of course), this is where we can end this conversation.

137

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:08:16am

re: #135 Sergey Romanov

By having those thoughts they're not committing any sort of reckless neglect since they don't have any relevant influence (nobody who is in charge takes one-state seriously).

They're sizeable enough to be in the way, to get noticed, etc. Essentially they are instrumental in prolonging the dangerous stalemate.

To disregard them all as non-influential is foolish.

138

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Tue, Aug 16, 2011 11:08:54am

re: #136 Sergey Romanov

Well, that's good. Since your logical conclusions lead to such absurdities (you're entitled to think otherwise, of course), this is where we can end this conversation.

Suit yourself.

139

(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Wed, Aug 17, 2011 1:30:54am

Another round of downdings without debate. Nice. :-)

140

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Wed, Aug 17, 2011 1:36:22am

What is there to debate, when you don't even think that Bush committed "reckless neglect" by invading Iraq under pretense of there being WMDs when it was painfully clear even from Powell's speech that there was no evidence of such?

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Perry: Bernanke is ‘Almost Treasonous,’ Obama Doesn’t Love America

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud