Piano World Home Page Forums Restricted and Archives The Coffee Room Has Anyone Else Considered Leaving?

I can only imagine. Hope no family members were present when you hit enter.

Jodi

Mhr, I referred elsewhere, to my having reservations about some of your ideas,,,

Considering the contents of my first post here, I’ll bet you know what it’s about .

I appreciate many of your points about the mythological aspect of the “American Dream”, including your concerns about “out-sourcing”. I t seems like one more short-term “solution” promoted today, with untenable long-term consequences - in this case, a :solution” to revenue shortfalls of large corporate entities,. It seems ruthless and unethical to the point where it ought to be illegal, to fire highly specialized senior employees (especially those too old to relocate or reeducate themselves). Equally important, it promises to be more expensive in the long-term, because of lost taxes on higher salaries and the payment of unemployment benefits - possibly even other social welfare. I was just reading that 40% of the current population in Homeless Shelters in New York are there purely from job losses including many whole families.

Much if what you said resonated with me even though I am far from figuring out solutions to many of the long-term problems, connected with a global economy and security concerns

However, I have grave fears about some of the explanations you - and apparently many others - appear to be finding for these ills.

I am referring especially to the Buchanan article you posted.

I have expressed in another thread, the fear that Jews are due for a major backlash because of the current economic and other difficulties, especially with the rise of fundamentalist Islam. Justme and others here have already asked the question which has been asked often in the wake of 9/11 - “Why should we go through so much for Israel?” It’s almost as if there were a calculation that said, well, right or wrong, if these terrorists hate this one little country so much, why not just throw them to the dogs?”- especially if it will mean economic and physical security for us and our children. And then folllow a lot of rationalizations and second looks at the relationship between Israel and the US with the expectable finger-pointing. There has even been the growth of a perverse group of pro-Palestinian sympathizers even though in one of its manifestations, this led to 9/11!

Truthfully, I do not know why America SHOULD support Israel. Even if Israel is seen as the “good guy” by America, I’m not sure what the US hopes to get out of the relationship. Right and Wrong do not seem to be a customary motivation in establishing foreign policy.

However, I do know that supposing that powerful Jewish interests are dictating foreign policy to the president is both untrue and a dangerous. defamation.

Every time there has been a major outbreak of anti-Semitism, it has followed some kind of serious internal problems in the country where it arose. Blaming Jews, the perpetual “outsiders”, was convenient - it became almost a hobby. In Russia it took the minds of the muzhiks and Cossacks off the excesses of Imperial rule and so was encouraged by the Aristocracy - all the more so when it seemed that a large number of the “intelligentsia” devising theories and tentative plans for revolt, were Jewish.

Jews have always been in the vanguard of change and figure prominently among “liberal” thinkers in every country - there pro-Revolution, here (currently) against corporate greed and governmental collusion. It’s no accident that three of the vocal members of the Coffee Room who fell in behind your comments about emigration are Jewish - though two are Jews purely in the cultural and ethnic sense (one, Benedict, is not American, but has - naturally an international perspective)...To suppose that a powerful international Jewish conspiracy is manipulating America to act contrary to her national self-interest is a scary fabrication - that, in fact, these powerful Jews are behind the “neo-con" movement and the PNAC. The exact opposite of what these Forumites have espoused!

I know an accusation of anti-Semitism is a serious charge, and can be used to stifle open-mindedness and free discussion.

In the case of Buchanan, however, the thought seems entirely legitimate.. Whether or not it applies to your own thinking depends on your reason for posting the article and your views of his hypotheses.

I was somewhat concerned when among the many links you posted, I saw at least two Arabic sources. So far so good. Al-Jazeera and others were already among my own news links, referred to most during the Iraqi War for perspective, along with other national and international news sources (including Right-Wing publications in the US). I know from surfing, however, that these Arabic news-sites do spout a lot of drivel about Israel: propaganda , distortions and most of all hate links. I may be accused of bias, but I believe it is incontrovertible that Israeli publications are much more bi-partisan, and even now, open to exploring the Arab point of view. Until recently I subscribed to the Jerusalem Post. and so I witnessed this first hand.

When I read the long Buchanan article my heart sank.

It was just like “old times”, as I said - the Jewish conspiracy! In this case, another conspiracy Theory alleging that an international Jewish-Zionist “cabal” is dictating foreign policy to Bush. And this cabal is master-minded by American Jewish businessmen, journalists, government officials - all in turn, acting on behalf of Israel! This cabal is supposedly forcing a polarization of the globe, into pro and anti-Islamic forces, equivalent to Good and Evil - and aims at bringing about an absolute clash, a clash which risks a cataclysm capable of ending the human race. Here is a quote representative of Buchanan‘s “Eureka“ about what lies behind America‘s present problems:

Cui Bono? For whose benefit these endless wars in a region that holds nothing vital to America save oil, which the Arabs must sell us to survive? Who would benefit from a war of civilizations between the West and Islam?

Answer: one nation, one leader, one party. Israel, Sharon, Likud!

This was, however, not more chilling (though expectable) than reading that Buchanan, has written what he himself calls his “best journalism” in praise of Hitler, and most sickening, that he is a so-called “Holocaust Revisionist” - the filthiest liars of the century in my book. The Holocaust according to Buchanan, wasn’t “that bad”, exaggerated by Jews for ulterior motives. Stomach turning examples of alleged fabrications are given by Buchanan - even the gas used wasn't strong enough to kill so many people, for example.

I think most of the members here have not read this article, and I am dismayed that John Andrew seems favorably impressed with it (I may have misunderstood this, John, and I hope so. ?) I am still more dismayed if you tell me that you posted it because you are in sympathy with his conspiracy explanations of the economic and other problems in the USA today.

Ariel

Ariel:

There is a synonym in English for what Buchanan and others like him spew- FLATULENCE.

why all the pussy-footing diplomacy, ariel? there is virulent, if somewhat subterranean, anti-semitism on this board. it was here before you arrived, and it persists to the present. it doesn't change it to give it the benefit of the doubt.

I haven't got a clue what you are talking about, Pique. Why not stop pussy-footing around and identify these "anti-semites"?

I have been quite busy the last several days, and haven't had the time to post. This thread has gotten ridiculous.

Pique, I have been here longer than you, and I've never seen anything remotely antisemitic here. In fact, it has been the opposite. I certainly am not antisemitic, and I haven't seen a single one of the others who identify themselves as Conservatives say anything that could be taken that way.

Ariel, you asked me if I thought liberals were incapable of thinking, or something along those lines. No, I think liberals can think, I just don't think they can think very deeply. I also think most of them cannot follow logic, and lack any semblance of wisdom. I think they consider themselves to be "intellectually superior" to conservatives, viewing conservatives as poor unfortunates who suffer from closed minds, narrow range of views, and unable to see the "big picture" - which is precisely what I see with many liberals. Evidence of this is exploding from this thread alone.

For instance, in another thread you said "May I request that you hard core "Bushies" read this with as open a mind as you can muster" implying that we conservatives had a problem keeping an open mind, or focusing. Well, let me use this thread to show many examples of closed minds, and an inability to focus.

Not one of the liberals who posted in this thread noticed, or at least bothered to mention, that mhr's list of links were nothing more than a bunch of conspiracy theorist, fanatic fringe loonies. His news sources list was pure lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist crap. If a conservative had rattled off a list of lunatic fringe right wing crap like that, the house would have fallen in on us. His links to news articles were mostly all biased leftist crap as well. Next, he rattled off a long list of links regarding the Project for a New American Century, which is nothing more than a think tank, but has become a lightning rod for conspiracy theorists and half witted people looking for ufos and little green men. Yet instead of noticing this, every liberal on the board jumped in with relish to defend him, happy to have another "kickass liberal" here to "turn those conservatives into a quivering bowl of jelly". None of you used logic, none of you thought it through, and none of you showed a dime's worth of wisdom.

It was the same thing as having a conservative post a list of links to KKK sites and the Trilateral commission. The PNAC upsets the lunatic fringe on the Left, because that fringe left openly admits what the less fringe among the Left doesn't like to address - they admit they want to see the USA fall. The fact is, the PNAC is simply a think tank organization designed to discuss ways for the USA to continue being the USA, and to keep the country safe through strength. Here is a quote from their "Statement of Principles"" Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future; • we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values; • we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; • we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Boiled down, they just want to see the USA do its part in creating world peace. And isn't that what liberals keep screaming they want? It's what conservatives want too. But to a lunatic fringe Leftist, it is a terrible thing for anyone to think that a good way to aid in world peace is to have the evil USA do things toward that end. The only solution in their way of thinking, is for the US to fall, and to be punished for all the "evil" they have done around the world. Do you think that shows wisdom? Deep thought? Open mind?

Now, to Pat Buchanan. Pat Buchanan is *not* a Conservative. He is a lunatic fringe nutcase who will jump to whichever side suits him at the moment. He is antisemitic, antiblack, a bigot, a racist, and no Conservative I know would give the man the time of day. Yet bringing him up gives me an opening to make a point:

If a Conservative speaks up for Jews, he is accused of doing so simply because he is a "religious fundamentalist", painted as a nutcase who supports Israel and Jews out of some misguided view of the apocolypse. If he speaks negatively, it's because he is a "religious fundamentalist" bigot. Yet a Liberal can shout to the rafters about how evil the Jews are in the way they treat the "Palestinians", and all the other liberals will rally around him. Now, after all you liberals have rushed to mhr's side, you finally notice that one of his links, one he repeatedly tried to get a conservative to bite at, is from an antisemitic bigot, a lunatic fringe. So you dare to mention it, and immediately we are told by Pique how she has "seen" antisemitism on this forum - obviously from us stupid conservatives, since no liberal would *ever* do such a thing. Well, the facts are, the only case of antisemitism I've seen cross these boards was the Pat Buchanan link. But now it has been brought around and through the back door to leave the impression that the Conservatives here have engaged in antisemitic language.

And none of the liberals have *yet* to notice that mhr posted nothing more than lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist crap. Yet watch the responses that will come from some of your liberal friends.

I assure you that if I, or anyone else on the Right, were to post a list of links equivalent to mhr's list, from the lunatic fringe on the Right, not one Conservative on this board would let it stand. They would rip the poster apart. Yet not only have all the liberals been silent about mhr's list, they have rushed to his defense! Not only that, as I've already said - now the only antisemitic post ever made on this message board has been turned around to attack conservatives as having engaged in it all along.

How intellectually dishonest, how shallow, how poorly thought out, and how lacking in wisdom that is.

No Ariel, I do not see any reason to think that most liberals have thought things through. I have no reason to believe they think things through deeply. I have no reason to believe they possess wisdom. Every liberal I've ever known who thought things through became a Conservative. For example - I am now a Conservative. I used to be a liberal. But I began to notice all the groups that fall under the "liberal umbrella" - and I just will not be associated with them. I don't want to be associated with the lunatic fringe on the Right either. But Conservatives have no problem distancing themselves from their fringe elements. Liberals on the other hand not only won't distance themselves from their fringe groups, they embrace and defend them - both of which we have all witnessed in this thread alone.

I have a lot more to say, but this is too long already, and unlike mhr who has sat on his ass for a year and a half doing nothing but complaining, I have built 5 different businesses and emplyed over 50 people in the last 10 months alone, and I have things to do.

no pussy-footing necessary, jbryan. two instances:

fmelliot posted his opinion that the u.s. rescued the jews from hitler and we should be grateful to have been allowed into this country after WWII. he used the term "your people" as if there had never been any jews in the u.s. prior to hitler, as if the jews had not been a part of the colonization and founding of this country. he made it clear that jews were only tolerated in this country by the good graces of others.

that post was part of a thread in which several posters betrayed anti-semitic tendencies.

jolly posted a fraudulent nazi propaganda tract about benjamin franklin's anti-semitism, then refused to delete that garbage, despite being repeatedly told how offensive it is.

jolly's refusal to delete that post and his standing up for it was overlooked and accepted by many people here. that is anti-semitism tolerated, if not endorsed, by enough people that it is tolerated overall.

overall:
hate speech against jews has been accepted and tolerated here, if not actively participated in.

i have never stated expressly, or otherwise, that conservatives are anti-semites, larry. i don't divide the world into the categories of conservative and liberal, as the distinction isn't particularly meaningful to me.

Ariel, I don't want to throw Israel to the dogs. But, I do believe we are spending way too much money over there when we have plenty of needs here. I hope you're exaggerating.

edit: I believe we're spending way too much money in a lot of places. But, your post may infer that I'm anti-Semite, which I am not. I pray for a peaceful solution but I'm not optimistic.

I have known a lot of people over the years, and a lot of them were undoubtedly Jewish. But, there are some that are hung up about being Jewish, and look for any opportunity to bring this up, looking for any potential slip that someone might make, so they can point a finger and scream "ANTI-SEMITE!!!!"

I don't get it. Why are some people so obsessed and defensive about being Jewish?

I remember once at a Union meeting, a young woman attorney (later became a good friend) asked to see me in private. We stepped aside, and she said in a rather defiant tone, "I just wanted to let you know that I am a lesbian, and I am Jewish."

I looked at her, not quite sure what I was suppose to say. So, I said the only thing that was an honest response on my part:
"Oh, I thought you were just a person, like the rest of us."

evidently, rvaga, you said something publicly that caused that woman to believe that you are anti-gay and anti-semitic. if you have no clue what it was you said, and you can't understand why people who have been systematically discriminated against might be sensitive about it, then perhaps it would do you some good to do some honest soul-searching.

pique,
You know how much I enjoy our exchanges. Can you tell me, (and I'm not being facetious) why if I express concern about monies going to Israel, someone would call me anti-Semite.
I could see them thinking or presuming I was anti-Zion (which I'm not) but ANTI-SEMITE.
Two of my Catholic sisters married Jewish boys. I dated a Jewish boy (it was his family who had the problem when we started to get serious.)
Thanx in advance.

Pique:

It is time you went back on your medications. Your hostilities are getting the better of you.

First let me state I do not dislike Jewish People. I have many Jewish friends who seem to like me as well.

What I dislike is a small subset of folks who feel complelled to try to represent this country as a non Christian creation of multiculturalism. That is simply not true.

Please do not continue to use me as some sort of boogeyman. It is unbecoming. It is particularly unseemly since I refused to argue with you and even apologized for upsetting you. I have not said anything in return to the torrent of hateful things your supporters unleashed on me. Do you know when to let things go? Please learn!

Final note on the subject I hope!!!!

That's complete nonsense, but quite typical. You have NO IDEA what was said, yet you turn it around so that it was my fault, and tell me to "do some honest soul-searching."

Yes, you are exactly the type of "I'm so hung up on being Jewish" that I was asking about. Why are you so defensive that you would not answer the question, but would rather fix blame?

As a new union official, I was introduced to her right before the meeting, as our lawyer. The issues on the table had nothing to do with being Jewish, or being a lesbian. For her, this was a statement that she made up front to people (so I learned) that she would be working with. Why, I dunno. I guess in her experience, she thought this clarified who she was as a person. Or frankly, as I got to know her, I think she also enjoyed hearing what response she would get.

OK, did the "soul-searching." A-OK, pure as the driven snow. . .

This is not at all in order of importance, but of association.

First, Peggy (justme), I did not in the slightest mean to imply that you are anti-Semitic nor that you share that "throw Israel to the dogs" sentiment. It is unfortunate that your name appears in the same sentence with that thought. I do not think you think it.

I know it is all too easy to dismiss ideas and stifle free thinking by accusations of racism or other prejudice. I view your conjecture (and that of kluurs, and to some extent rvaga) in the category of honest questioning rather than bigotry.

I began my earlier post/tirade against "stifling dissent" by saying I was addressing Forumites of all political stripes and that there were indeed "some strange bed-fellows in the making". That's because I had developed these concerns about the Buchanan article even as I penned my earlier post. In fact, I wrote this post at the same time, but held it in reserve.

Larry, as I wrote earlier to JBryan in a different connection "The Right does not have a monopoly on being Wrong.". It seems self-evident, but he apparently needed to hear me acknowledge that I was not dividing the world into black and white hats, as he put it elsewhere.

So, I will repeat it again. Idiots come in all flavors. May I ask you if YOU believe that yourself. When you write it sounds like you consider all "Liberals" brainless, as you said it earlier so often that the term "brainless" and "Liberal" began to appear to be synonyms.

Now, before beginning I want to remind all of you that although I have certainly formed my opinion of Buchanan, I am holding in reserve any judgment about the posting of his article - or for that matter the links. For one thing, there were 144 links (I just counted). No one in their right mind except an investigative reporter being paid to do so, would check all of them out. I do note, however, that it is actually not so much the "mother publication" which is of interest in all these cases, but the actual article being showcased...

I hesitated posting this (and as you see I deliberately delayed it until after the earlier one) because I do not want there to be a rush to judgment. Let's wait and hear what the motive for posting it was and how much individuals who have already commented on it, share any of Buchanan's thinking. I doubt very much that more than one or two members (including me) read the article at all. It was well over 5000 words!

I also do not want this possible scary connection, to be used as just more ammunition to defame either mhr or the "Left" (and as I said earlier using these terms sticks in my gorge). It seems to me, as the article appeared in a publication called the American Conservative, that one could certainly associate Buchanan with the Conservative movement. I'll bet you anything, all of his supporters voted for Bush (if they didn't vote for the American Nazi Party).

This is just one more example - and a good one - to remind everyone on the Forum of the blurry lines separating left from right (sick of typing quotation marks) - which is why I reprinted the "Political Compass". With all its limits, it at least reminds us that these are multi-dimensional terms, and we are all individuals who may agree on some political issues and disagree about others. We don't wear our Party membership (or predominant sympathies) like a badge - although it seems sometimes that reactions to comments from different posters, are just that partisan.

The strange bedfellows I am seeing are - yes, to some extent - between elements of the extreme "Left" (ala Rachel Corrie, sorry Shantinik) and this particular fringe of the "Right". By the same token the members of Hamas and the Religious Party in Israel could often form a coalition in their platform to derail Peace talks! Sometimes it's hard to guess which side planted a bomb, isn't it? It was also hard to guess initially who might have assassinated Rabin and Sadat - left or right.

Extremists generally have a lot in common. Ever seen that book called The True Believer?

What scares me here (stepping back from the incidental issues under discussions) is that I think given the history of major anti-Semitic movements - I mean the murderous, extreme kinds - the stage is definitely set for one right now. And so, Renauda, flatulence or not, I consider Buchanan as just as dangerous as Hitler (whom - no surprise - he greatly admires).

Signs point to "yes". It's the one issue which could unite the world now, ironically (besides a major epidemic or invasion from Outer Space or whatever) - both Muslim extremists and the West.

Look at the UN vote equating Zionism with Racism! EVERY country voted in favor of the condemnation - except Israel and the US!

The worse things get economically, the more appealing explanations such as Buchanan's will seem to everyone in the West, and the more appealing HE will seem. And as he says about Hitler, Buchanan himself is no dummy and also a brilliant strategist.

The stepped-up anti-Semitic acts and movements in Germany, France and England (aggravated, of course, by the Arab immigration as well as how they are discriminated against) is another sign of the times. And they have been intensifying for the last ten years. How it is elsewhere I don't know.

So I am alarmed at this man and even more, the fertile ground for the emergence of a leader such as himself - especially given not just the economic crises building (and due to worsen by the aging of populations in the West, and the pension and medical care crises - as well as unemployment). I'm not a historian, but - hey - doesn't this sound familiar? Something like the situation in Germany after WWI and before the rise of Hitler?

Add to this poisonous brew, the on-going, expensive impasse with Israel in the Middle East and the human need for simple explanations...and the stage seems set for a scape=goating movement right here in the US. After 9/11 especially. At first I thought it would do Israel good. I assumed USians/Americans would turn more against the Palestinians, who seemed connected to this monumental act of terror - plus empathize with what Israel has been experiencing so long. Now it seems, incredibly, to be going the other way.

I am not one of your paranoid Jews seeing aniti-Semitism under every rock (and there are plenty of them - I think many use it as a tool to discourage assimilation ), but the situation doesn't look good. In general, I mean, but also in such a way that it seems conducive to a major fanatical movement. One which people will say about later (if there is a later) "How could we have believed something so crazy?"

I would really hate to see this topic just turn into another excuse for the "Liberal" and "Conservative" camps here to engage in more finger pointing and personal vendettas. I realize everyone is pretty defensive at this point, but hopefully we can discuss some of my observations and thoughts and not merely who is worse than whom.

Ariel

And by the way, Larry, when I said in my new thread, try to read it with "as open a mind as you can muster" I was not being insulting. I think the same kind of plea would be apt if you published a speech by Bush you wanted us to read with care, rather than a knee-jerk dismissal.
Gore is not someone the "Right" on this Forum regards as a great philosopher, I would say.

There are some members here who turn off their minds as soon as they hear the name of a suspect columnist or even a publication (like - to my amazement - The New York Times. Then all thinking stops about the actual ideas presented.

Sorry, Ariel, but if The Grey Lady ran a headline saying the sun would rise at 6:15 AM, I'd look out my window to check.

That is how much I think their standards of journalism have fallen.

The editorial page is meant to persuade, cajole, or castigate, depending upon the editor's perspective. Op-eds are fine, in their place.

But when conjecture is presented as hard news(and in your news link, that is exactly what was happening), please do not be aghast when someone sees it for exactly what it is - news with spin.

Yet even NWS is fine, if the publication is upfront about its' spin. NYT is not.

"Howling at her jewishness".

I wrote that a few weeks ago, and it rings no less true today.

I started to get a might testy with pique, but then though better of it. Not because it didn't deserve to be swiped, but because I feel a bit sorry for her.

I remember the fmelliot episode well, and I never thought it amounted to anything remotely approaching anti-semitism.

I well remember the other thread mentioned, and the link that I posted. I gave a caveat with the link, and expressed some distrust of the authenticity. Yet I did post it, and unlike some on the board who will make statements, and then delete them willy-nilly, I've learned to leave my stuff up.

What is said, is said, what is written, is written.

What I find so puzzling is someone who has said there "is no God", or who admittedly has rejected her Jewish roots in the past, but exhibits hyper-sensitivity to anything that she can remotely label as anti-semitic bigotry, or racism.

I was born and raised in the South. As most who really know can tell you, those of us in the post-Civil Rights Movement South, have some of the most attuned noses for racism that exist in the country. We do try to walk a line, and not offend, but their are extremists on both sides of the equation. Hyper-sensitivity about one's color, or creed, is as much a problem to public understanding as any hooded Klansman ever was.

There is a middle ground where common folk show much more understanding than intelligentsia could ever muster. Where speech that is not hateful, is not twisted to make it appear so. Where those with a handful of tinder, do not search endlessly for a match.

I believe right, wrong and 'profit' factor into the equation determining our involvement. Israel is (or is close to) a democracy. Capitalism flourishes where human rights are defended, and people can vote. Our long term goals in the middle East are both self serving and mankind serving. Israel is very important to the world's future.

Pique,

I have to commend you for stepping up and putting names with your previous nameless accusation. However, upon examining your case for there being antisemitism on this board, I find it uncompelling.

Spin is spin, upfront or subtle. Spin can contain valid facts and information or lies and misinformation. Editorial/ Op-Ed pieces while presenting the writer's point of view can and do contain references to fact and statistics.

As an example, an article that I see referred to in many pieces is the WSJ article that outlined just who benefited from the Bush administration tax-cuts. Unfortunately, I don't subscribe to the the web site journal. Too expensive. But those facts and figures have been referenced by many writers, both for and against the tax-cuts.

Personally, I like the editorials and op-ed pieces, otherwise news is nothing more than Bush said, DeLay said, Gore said, whats-his-name said. A lot of times these writers are pointing out what wasn't said. They point out falacies and accuracies in an argument or mis/information, whether they agree or disagree.

Just like people on this forum! :p

I don't think Jolly was complaining about editorials or op-ed pieces. Those are expected to be fact and opinion. The problem at the Times is that what is presented as front-page news often slips into the op-ed category without being categorized as such (or even acknowledged as such) by the paper.