They're coming out of the woodwork: Russert, Buchanan and Moran

Jewish World Review ^ | March 13, 2003 | Tony Blankley

[Chancellor Palpatine]

...[T]he LP welcomes immigrants: black, brown, or white, Jew, Christian, or Muslim.

Talk is cheap, and actions speak louder than words. There is "the official stance" all prettied up, and then the reality of how welcome one of those people actually is at an event.

In other words, when you can show me that the LP is more than a conglomeration of angry, disaffected white failures, I'll believe you.

[taxed2death]

.....support that statement"

What would be good for America, specifically regarding the middle east, would be to stop the massive amounts of my (tax) money given to both Egypt and Israel.

This, I'm sure would upset many people.

[SJackson]

I understand opposition to foreign aid, but given the overwhelming support for foreign aid from a multitude of quarters, I don't see where the stattement Jews fail to realize that sometimes what's good for America may not be good for Israel. So be it. is at all justified.

[taxed2death]

Opinions differ.

[nkycincinnatikid]

I carefuly read your remark and agree totally that the debt you speak of is that of the Europeans. And I agree. For the unresolvable mess in the Holy Land , first prize goes to the Germans who murdered their own citizens and bankrolled the zionists, Second prize to the British who wrote checks to the zionists which they could not cash. Russians who laid the holocaust blueprint, French ,and so it goes. Of these only the British seem to acknowledge the debt of blood which America has taken up.

[FourtySeven]

Buchanan's anti-semitism is somewhat up for debate, imo; Moran, clearly anti-semetic. But Tim Russert?!?

Tim Russert is one of the last beacons of truly unbaised reporting in the mainstream media! Forget about putting his question to Perle in context of the whole interview, let's look at the question itself: "And what would be the link in terms of Israel?"

Maybe all he was asking was, "Wouldn't Israel also benefit from Saddam's removal?" That's a VALID question! Israel is right next to Iraq; Israel is a key ally to the US. If it were a non-Jewish state that was being asked about, would it STILL be an invalid question? It says nothing about whether or not it's "right" to remove Saddam. It's just asking, "Are we doing it for Israel ALSO, or is it just for our own interests that we want to remove Saddam?" Hardly an anti-semetic question.

We know that there's liberal bias in the media; let's not squander that by trying to look for bias anywhere and everywhere.

[tm22721]

It will NOT be 'dog eat dog' without the UN.

It will be the 'US dog eating all of the other dogs'.

BUMP

[SJackson]

Forget about putting his question to Perle in context of the whole interview, let's look at the question itself: "And what would be the link in terms of Israel?"

The reason I added the context was that Russert referred to Perle's past work with an Israeli think tank, which puts the question in context, he didn't pull it out of thin air. Perle wan't offended, answered it, and Russert was done. Quite different that Buchanan and Moran.

[Optimist]

bump for later read