portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states


Howard Dean's likes AIPAC? Look again!

Dean is being criticized by LIE-berman, Kerry, Gephardt, etc. about his remark that he doesn't support either Israel or Palistine and that a true peace maker should be neutral
So Dean shows his true colors....


Everyone who left Dean because of his "support of Isreal" please come back!

Speak Out 2004: Dean Speaks Out on Middle East 10.Sep.2003 16:34

Arab American Institute aai@aaiusa.org

from the Arab American Institute's website:

Last week, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean told supporters in New Mexico "it's not our [the United States] place to take sides" in the Palestinian and Israeli conflict. Since, Dean has been harshly criticized by two of his rivals for the Democratic nomination, Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Responding to their criticism, Dean stated, "Israel has always been a longtime ally with a special relationship with the United States, but if we are going to bargain by being in the middle of the negotiations then we are going to have to take an evenhanded role."

Now it's your turn!
Please write to Governor Dean and express your support for a fair and balanced approach to the Palestinian -- Israeli conflict. (see AAI's form letter below)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dear Governor Dean:

Thank you for expressing your support for a balanced U.S. policy in the Middle East. If peace is to be achieved between Israelis and Palestinians, it is essential that the United States be an unbiased arbiter. I hope that your commitment to fairness in U.S. Middle East policy will continue. Thank you again.

Best regards,
[ insert your name here ]

Dean is a Maggot Gagger 10.Sep.2003 16:54


The Arab American Institute backed the Chimp in 2000. What were they thinking? Don't make another mistake with the disingenous Dean. BTW- Dean is not a Governor.

Dean changes his toons every other second 10.Sep.2003 18:14


As soon as reporters finish writing a sentence about Dean's stance, he's already moved onto whatever else seems to be more popular.

No one knows what Dean stands for.

The other candidates are probably having to hire a full time researcher to keep up with Dean's non-stop shifting of positions . . . pretty soon the debate audiences will have no clue of his position, as it will keep morphing with every debate, every article.

Dean is an idiot.

Yes! Of Course! Another brilliant Dean campaign move! 10.Sep.2003 18:21


Thanks Fred, for pointing out yet another BrilliantDeanCampaignMove.

This time, the sinister geniuses at Dean for America came up with a real doozy! Show some opposition towards current US policy towards Israel, and spend the rest of the campaign fending off attack from every other candidate, excepting Kucinich and Sharpton.

Unbelievable that the other contenders didn't think of it first.

Your biases are completely transparent, Fred. Anyone with the slightest inkling of common sense would have said "Welcome aboard, partner." (And perhaps pointed out their other remaining gripes). But no, not Fred. Fred continues his jihad, and criticizes Dean for embracing a more even-handed approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Thanks, Fred. We know your true colors.

Dean is plutocracy's choice 10.Sep.2003 18:47

Jimmy Row

Dean's position here is merely tactical. He is probably correct that the US would better promote its interests and Isreal's from a apparent position of "neutrality". The other democratic party opportunists try to exploit this by implying that Dean would not back Israel. Which is not true.

I'm supposed to support Dean for this? Israel is a viscious, racist oppressive state. Dean offers only a more rational and softer head for the US Empire.

Grasp the key issue of our time: Oppose the Empire!

Bush, the PNAC and the neoconservatives have shown themselves to be too careless, shortsighted and stupid to lead the empire. There are many indications that, following a pattern well established by history, the plutocracy is changing horses. A new face (probably Dean) could more effectively lead the Empire free from the neo-conservative baggage. Dean will claim that the "mistakes" of Bush put the US in the position of occupying two or three colonies, but that it would be "irresponsible" to just withdraw.

Dean is the best choice for the Empire. Bush is not the enemy. He is a despensible. The empire is the enemy. "Anybody but Bush" works just fine for the plutocracy.

Road Map: Reassuring Findings of a Poll 10.Sep.2003 21:13

James J. Zogby

...As in our earlier poll of October 2002 we found that both communities shared somewhat similar views and would both support a two-state solution based on the formula that was being negotiated before the election of Ariel Sharon in January 2001.

These results should not be viewed as surprising given the characteristics of the two communities. While each side may include some hard-line elements and while, at least on the Jewish side, their hard-liners have formed a powerful lobby that has pressed US officials to oppose most Palestinian concerns, the views of the overwhelming majority of Arab-American and American Jews are moderate and supportive of a balanced solution that recognizes the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians...

Source: The Palestine Chronicle - www.palestinechronicle.com. Also see:  http://www.aaiusa.org

First, Oppose the Empire 11.Sep.2003 02:21


Not the American empire ... the multinational corporate capitalist empire. The U.S. may rightly be called the "mother" of this empire [I'll leave it to others to name the "father"], but now it is certainly the empire's primary puppet.

Fight whatever cause you choose in the interim.

But first, and in the end, Oppose the Empire.

DIdn't I tell you? Dean switches again . . . 11.Sep.2003 10:42


"Last week, Dean said the United States should not "take sides" in the Middle East conflict and said that an "enormous" number of Israeli settlements would have to be dismantled as part of a peace agreement. Yesterday, Dean shifted course, saying the settlements should be left to negotiators."

What negotiators are those?

Guess Dean bowed to pro-Israel hawk and Zionist shill Nancy Pelosi, who attacked him for his latest change, which was 180 degrees from his last position, which was 180 degrees from . . .

about the governor title 11.Sep.2003 13:27

obvious guy

the title of governor is kept after one leaves office, much the same as president.

thus it is still "governor dean".

I-C 11.Sep.2003 13:34


Kinda like Governor Bush.

Et tu, Fred? 11.Sep.2003 17:24


Unbelievable. Fred is still criticizing Dean over this flap, adding to the chorus of negative press orchestrated by the Israel lobby and the DLC. The attacks from the JADL, House leadership, Lieberman, Kerry and Gephardt, Free Republic, Rush Limbaugh and countless others was not enough for Fred. Our own little Brutus, Fred, joins in their smear campaign.

It's clear what's happened here, Fred. Dean spoke his mind, as he is apt to do, whereupon an army raised by the Israel lobby attacked him roundly for it. They saw a moment of weakness in the front-runner's campaign. He dared to utter words out-of-sync with popular American sentiment, and so they attack him for stating the obvious.

Nanci Pelosi and her likeminded hacks in the House circulate an open-letter, signed by Kerry, Gephardt and Lieberman supporters, going so far as to say:

"It is unacceptable for the U.S. to be `evenhanded' on these fundamental issues"

Meanwhile, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League contacts the Dean campaign to tell them that if Dean doesn't tone down the settlement-busting talk, they'll use their considerable lobbying weight to label Dean anti-semitic.

The whole thing is a massive embarassment for Dean, that much is sure. I can't believe how poorly the campaign handled it. But you should be supportive, Fred -- why are you wasting your time criticizing Dean, when you should be criticizing the likes of Nanci Pelosi, who claims it's "unacceptable" to be even-handed? Where is your outrage at Lieberman, Fred?

Thus, dean accedes to the wishes of the Anti-Defamation League, and tones down his political panderings. Kucinich is in a nice spot; he's been saying the exact same things for a long time, but you didn't see the JADL or Nanci Pelosi come out and call Kucinich anti-semitic.

The whole thing disgusts me. The anti-semitic label could easily have killed the entire campaign, so Dean was rightly afraid.

precious 12.Sep.2003 17:14

yo fred

fred likes to side with the zionists.

Dean calls Hamas "soldiers" 12.Sep.2003 17:23

the sharks smell blood

Dean found himself under fire on another front Friday as Kerry skewered him for calling members of the Palestinian Hamas group "soldiers."

In an interview on CNN Wednesday, Dean said, "there is a war going on in the Middle East, and members of Hamas are soldiers in that war, and, therefore ... they are going to be casualties if they are going to make war."

Kerry said, "Dean insults the memory of every innocent man, woman, and child killed by these suicidal murderers. Hamas militants are not soldiers in a war - they are terrorists who need to be stopped."

Sorry James, I'm not supporting Zionists 12.Sep.2003 17:35


What I'm critizing is Dean's constant shifting of policy. If he was lying to get votes by saying his views were closer to AIPAC and then "spoke his mind," then his lie to them was exposed.

If Dean is lying to AIPAC, he's lying to us.

What else will Dean 'speak his mind' about, after he's taken one position and suddenly switches?

Israel is a racist state. Zionism = Racism.

No 'democracy' should be based on what religion you are. Imagine people coming from all over the world to the US and getting instant citizenship if they were of a certain religion. This is a theocratic state, not a Democracy. A Democracy is about equal rights for all.

Dean sold out to the zionists. Now he pays the price.

BTW . . .Kerry = also an idiot 12.Sep.2003 17:39


Hamas is resisting the Zionist encroachment on their homes, the missiles slamming apartment buildings, the targetted assassinations, the racism against the Palestinians. They're wrong to kill civilians. But so is Israel. If Hamas are not soldiers, neither are the IDF who have murdered over 400 Palestinian children since the intifada began. This is war crime.

I said no such thing 12.Sep.2003 18:48


I didn't say you were supporting the zionists. I wondered why you were attacking Dean, when you should have been focusing your energy on Lieberman, Pelosi, JADL, et al.

Obviously it's a position shift. In The Forward interview, he said terrorism needed to stop for negotiations to continue. Now he says they don't, that talks should continue unabated. He also said in The Forward interview, in effect, that he used to support the Peace Now position, but had come closer to the AIPAC view. Now he seems to have come back to the Peace Now view.

And one certainly wonders why he flaps around so much.

But it's a position shift, not a lie.

Why aren't you criticizing the Grand Flap Master, Mr. Kucinich?

Was Kucinich lying when he said he was pro-life? Or is he lying now when he says he's pro-choice?
Was Kucinich deceiving the public when he voted to militarize the border with Mexico? Or was he deceiving the public when he voted against it later?

People experience changes of heart. Dean apparently has, and has moved closer to the Peace Now position, (even with the recent back-pedalling after the numerous attacks).

Zionists Turn on Dean - Read it and Weep, Dean is Through 12.Sep.2003 20:18


This is what Zionism is all about - if someone says Israel shouldn't jam Palestinian areas full of hundreds of thousands of settlers it's a 'threat to Israel!' As though the building of the illegal settlements are something they have no control over and that everyone who tries to stop them is trying to 'push Israel into the sea.' Dean was insane to mess with them the same way he's messing with everyone else. AIPAC is bigger than the NRA. They're literally called 'The Lobby,' in DC. Some call DC a Zionist Occupied Government. But I didn't say that first. I'm just pointing out what others have said.

Anyway, now I can sit back and put my feet up finally while the Zionists roast Dean over the coals. No more work for me to bother with. I can focus on other issues now.

The wheels are beginning to come off Howard's bandwagon.
by Rachael Wang Friday September 12, 2003 at 07:50 PM

Dean's Two-Step

"IT'S NOT OUR PLACE TO TAKE SIDES" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, said Democratic presidential frontrunner Howard Dean days ago in Albuquerque, New Mexico. But then he promptly took sides, saying that peace would require the dismantling of an "enormous number" of Jewish settlements.

This, historians may record, was the moment the wheels started to come off the bandwagon that had been speeding the former Vermont Governor to his party's nomination... .and perhaps into the White House.

"Howard Dean's statements break a 50-year record in which presidents, Republican and Democrat, members of Congress of both parties, have supported our relationship with Israel based on shared values and common strategic interests," said Dean's rival Senator Joseph Lieberman (D.-Conn.) in this week's Baltimore Democratic candidate debate.

In the verbal fistfights that happened during and after this debate, Dean accused Senator Lieberman of trying "to demagogue this issue" in a "despicable" attempt to divide the Democratic Party.

Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post reports that Senator Lieberman afterwards released to the press this statement: "While Dean claims he's 'not taking sides,' he specifically called for Israelis to leave the West Bank."

"To dictate to Israel the terms of concessions on any issue [like settlements] is inappropriate," read a Fax sent to Dean by the Anti-Defamation League asking for clarification of his position. As of Thursday, September 11, reported Deborah Orin of the New York Post, the ADL had received "no response from Dean-land."

Both the ADL and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, reports Orin, have called Dean's remarks on Israel "'troubling' and a break with U.S. policy."

"This is not a time to be sending mixed messages," read a letter signed by more than two dozen Democratic Members of Congress (several of whom support Dean rivals), including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.).

"On the contrary," the Congressional letter continued, "in these difficult times we must reaffirm our unyielding commitment to Israel's survival and raise our voices against all forms of terrorism and incitement... .It is unacceptable for the U.S. to be 'evenhanded' on these fundamental issues."

"My position on Israel is exactly the same as Bill Clinton's," insisted Dean. "I think America needs to be an honest broker. We desperately need peace in the Middle East."

Following the Baltimore debate this week, Dean called on President Bush to "swallow his pride" and dispatch former President Bill Clinton to the Middle East as a peace envoy.

"I think Bill Clinton is the president who has come the closest to bringing Israelis and Palestinians together," Dean said. "Bill Clinton may just be the person we need to put those negotiations back on track."

Is it any wonder that supporters of Israel are repulsed and made to feel insecure by Howard Dean? Bill Clinton is the President who had Yasser Arafat at the White House 13 times, more than any other foreign leader, and who in his lust for a Nobel Peace Prize exerted tremendous pressure on Israel to make dangerous concessions to Arafat.

Hillary Clinton as co-President kissed Sua Arafat and gave her a supportive embrace before the world's TV cameras moments after the Palestinian "First Lady" gave a speech accusing Israelis of poisoning Palestinian children. Hillary has been an eager fundraiser for the PLO and has repeatedly exhibited anti-Semitic behavior.

Imagine being a supporter of Israel and facing the possibility of Howard Dean as America's President and Bill Clinton as his "evenhanded" peace negotiator.

Perhaps Howard Dean secretly recognizes that major factions within the Democratic Party nowadays are marinated with anti-Semitism. Hispanic politicians such as California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante imbibed their political values from MEChA, a racist organization whose motto is: "For the race, everything. For those outside the race, nothing." Those outside the "bronze" Hispanic race include Jews. Many young Mechistas find themselves being seduced by the sizeable anti-Semitic Hispanic subculture that surfaces in websites of toxic virulence such as La Voz de Aztlan, a sample of whose writing from this week you can read here.

When the now-Chairman of California's Democratic Party "Art" Torres expressed his glee at what he called the "last gasp of White America in California," rest assured that he includes Jews among the whites whose power he and his racist Mechista allies are scheming to take away.

For a leader of African-American anti-Semitism, say his critics, Howard Dean needs to look no farther across the debate floor than his rival candidate Rev. Al Sharpton. As this column documented, Sharpton has called Jews "diamond merchants," led a protest at a Jewish store that hours later was fatally burned down, and led a march through a New York Jewish neighborhood during which some of his incited followers smashed windows in a mini-Kristalnacht of hate.

The Democratic Party has done more than tolerate anti-Semitism. It has effectively condoned and coddled it. During its 1984 National Convention, the Rev. Jesse (New York City is "hymietown") Jackson was a serious Presidential contender, bolstered by his campaign co-manager Rev. Louis ("Judaism is a gutter religion") Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.

When a handful of delegates asked to present a short resolution for a vote that read simply "The Democratic Party condemns anti-Semitism," they were denied the right to present it or have any vote. The reason, they were told, is that any such resolution might "offend" the Reverends Jackson and Farrakhan and their followers.

The Democratic Party - whose very success is proof that half the American population has an I.Q. of 100 or below - continues to appeal to the simple-minded, which is probably why it lobbies for votes for those in mental institutions. Among such traditional Democratic simpletons are those who joined the Ku Klux Klan, an organization that long has preached hatred not only of African-Americans but also of Jews. Prominent Democratic members of the Klan have ranged in our time from President Harry Truman to current Senator Robert Byrd (D.-West Virginia). The terminally stupid, easily controlled by emotional demagoguery and appeals to hate and envy, are perhaps the largest part of the Democratic Party constituency.

But this columnist doubts that Howard Dean is angling for the anti-Semite vote. One reason seems obvious - his wife and two children are Jewish.

His own wife and children, therefore, are de facto citizens of the Jewish State with the right to make Aliyah to Israel, the ultimate refuge of the Jewish People. About risking the survival of Israel he feels "evenhanded?"

His wife Judith Steinberg, 49, from Long Island, New York, is a Princeton-educated physician and the daughter of two doctors. She and her fellow Medical Doctor husband, like the Clintons a graduate of Yale but also of the Albert Einstein Medical School, used to practice medicine together.

"I'm a very methodical person; I do all the tests," she told New York Magazine's Meryl Gordon. Howard tends to jump to conclusions. He's usually right, but he just leaps."

"Dean was baptized Catholic (as was his mother), was raised Episcopalian (his father's denomination), and became a Congregationalist. ("I don't go to church a lot, but I pray at night."), writes Gordon. "But because Judaism is important to his wife, the family celebrates Jewish holidays... the kids consider themselves Jewish... [and] A menorah is perched on a living-room shelf."

How odd it is that son Paul weeks ago acknowledged his role as getaway driver in a burglary. Apparently he took more after his father than his mother.

Stranger yet, Howard Brush Dean III is in many ways the ultimate WASP. Unlike working class Democrats, he "is the proud patrician product of Park Avenue and 85th Street," writes Gordon, "the son, grandson, and great-grandson of investment bankers." (Joe Lieberman's father, by contrast, was a liquor store owner.) He, however, says he was never obsessed with money. His and his wife's estimated personal net worth today is about $4 million.

Howard, incidentally, is an aristocratic British name that in Anglo-Saxon originally meant "guardian of the home," a classic White Anglo-Saxon Protestant name.

As a Yale undergraduate Dean was a Political Science major. After he and his wife moved to the State of Ben & Jerry's, tiny Vermont where the only member of Congress is self-proclaimed Socialist Bernie Sanders, Dean dabbled in politics enough to get himself elected to the irrelevant post of Lt. Governor that almost nobody else wanted.

In a government whose total annual budget would fund the Federal Government for only a few hours, this all seemed like a hobby. But then on a day in 1991 while examining a patient he was interrupted. Republican Governor Richard Snelling had just died of a heart attack, Dean was told, and he was now Governor of Vermont.

Dean likes to depict his years as Vermont's Chief Executive as successful and reflective of the state's independent spirit. He was liberal and imposed something akin to socialized medicine, yes, but he also balanced budgets, cut taxes, and defended the rights of gun owners. For a more critical, "evenhanded" picture of Dean's shortcomings and high-handedness as Governor, read what rival Vermont politician John McClaughry wrote in the September 6th Wall Street Journal.

Having developed a taste for political power, Dean has spent years making himself available for national TV talks shows on CNN and elsewhere. Congressional Democrats at first tried grooming him as a healthcare expert, but their enthusiasm cooled when he proved arrogant, abrasive, and less than cooperative in advancing their political games.

But Dean persisted, putting all his chips on a strong anti-war stance in Iraq while other ambitious Democrats voted to authorize the war. In winning over the leftist hard-core of Democratic activists, Dean until now seems to have won with his high-stakes gamble.

Dean's anti-war feeling might be sincere. He avoided service in Vietnam via a medical deferment. In 1974 his younger brother Charlie, then 24, was taken prisoner by Communists in Laos and has never been seen since. Dean traveled to Laos in February 2002 and talked to a witness who says he saw Charlie's body dumped into a foxhole.

"It gave me closure," he told Gordon in a voice choked with emotion. "It never goes away. It gets better, but it never goes away." One is left wondering if he thinks Charlie somehow died in his place in Southeast Asia. God only knows what distorting demons haunt the soul, mind, heart and dreams of hard-eyed Howard Dean.

Lately, as he glimpses a possibility of seeking the votes of America's centrists, Dean has been starting to smooth the sharp edges of his extreme positions on a variety of issues, much to the consternation of his most zealous leftist supporters. He is, e.g., no longer so eager to lift the embargo against Communist Cuba, knowing he might need votes of Cuban-Americans in Florida. He has backed off his proposal to save Social Security by raising the retirement age to 70. And although he opposed war in Iraq, he now says we should not risk "losing the peace" by bringing our troops home too precipitously.

And under pressure he has begun to back away from his intemperate remarks about Israel and the Middle East, now saying he supports our "special relationship" with Israel. He was not only under fire from Democrats and Republicans alike, but was faced with the even heavier burden of being praised by an Arab-American leader who applauded his call for dismantling Jewish settlements.

"I have since learned that [even-handed] is a sensitive word to use in certain communities," says Dean. "So perhaps I could have used a different euphemism. But the fact of the matter is, at the negotiating table, we have to have the trust of both sides."

He was raised and educated in New York City and married for decades to a devout Jewish wife from Long Island. And Howard Dean now says he "did not know" that advocating the tearing down an "enormous number" of Jewish settlements and ending America's special relationship with our democratic ally Israel would irritate the sensitivities of Israel's supporters? How gullible does Governor Dean think his fellow Americans are?

This much we know - he is neither steadfast nor reliable nor principled enough to stick by his views (or allies like Israel) when doing so becomes politically inconvenient. Nor is he willing to order troops into battle against those like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden who support terrorism against Israel and the rest of the civilized world.

He seems feisty and hot-tempered, perhaps as a substitute for courage or as compensation when 5'8" tall Howard Dean must stand on a box to appear the equal of 6'4" Senator John F. Kerry (D.-Mass.). Is Dean now trying to recruit Gen. Wesley Clark as his Vice President to make himself appear taller, stronger, or more reliable? Or is this because Dean is beginning to sense that his 15 minutes of fame are running out?

In reality, Howard Dean is a WASP who lost his sting. A more honest name for him might be Coward Dean, a man unsuited to wage or win the life-and-death struggle of our ongoing War on Terrorism.

With friends like Howard Dean, Israel does not need enemies. No wonder so many Jews are now becoming Republicans. No wonder that even former Democratic Mayor of New York City Ed Koch now urges his fellow Jews, for the sake of Israel's safety and survival, to support President George W. Bush and "never again to walk in lockstep with a single party."

Nah, Dean has recovered 12.Sep.2003 21:36


It took a couple days, but the Dean campaign is starting to get some traction again. Their responses and counter-attacks are getting press, and they have a cohesive message.

In any event, there's nowhere for Dean's support to go, unless Clark enters the race. Bush and Lieberman have completely collapsed. I doubt Lieberman will even make it to South Carolina now. He never had any solid support in the key early states. Nationwide numbers are terribly bad at predicting primary winners, but even in nationwide polling, Lieberman has lost 10 points in the past 2 weeks.

His attacks on Dean have completely backfired, and he's killed whatever miniscule chance he might have had. (Though a Clark candidacy may change things).

Kerry is losing in the polls, Graham, Sharpton, Braun, Edwards and Kucinich can't make anything happen. Dick "miserable failure" Gephardt has been gaining strongly nationwide of late though, but he's now far behind Dean in Iowa which is crucial for him.

This flap won't end up hurting Dean much in the primaries, anyway. Dean has backpedalled enough from the "enormous number of settlements" comment that he'll emerge pretty unscathed.

(Note: I write this not in support of Dean, but just as my political analysis).

I think you may need to pursue your jihad further, Sheik Fred.

"House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean have cleared the air and decided they agree about the United States' role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"Dean, a former Vermont governor, called Pelosi Thursday after hearing that she had signed a letter objecting to his comment that the United States should "not take sides" in the Middle East dispute. Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the two agreed that the United States should be an honest broker, but must remain committed to Israel's right to exist."


No need to kill each other 12.Sep.2003 23:09

a friend

I'd vote for either Kucinich or Dean if they were up against BUSH.

'nuff said.

who is the biggest threat against bush? 13.Sep.2003 13:45

yo fred

<i>Anyway, now I can sit back and put my feet up finally while the Zionists roast Dean over the coals. No more work for me to bother with. I can focus on other issues now. </I>

that's because fred's job is to get bush elected.

Save it for Joe/NancyCo for Now ... 17.Sep.2003 23:24



Stop chipping away at Dean on this and support his provocative (lol) statements, for god sakes! (Even if youre not voting for him.) Help spread the word on our failed ME policies. In fact, back up ANYTHING positive ANY politician says, like he did in the NM debate, on the I/P issue. Show encouragement instead of simply airing peevishness, adding to the retro-critical din and letting the opportunity slip by.

After all, its only about the SCARIEST thing a person in the US can do -- dare to CRITICIZE ISRAEL. {{{Shiver me timbers!}}

Talk about backlash! His much cussed E-words, statements about the need for "EVENHANDEDness" and the ending of "ENORMOUS" (illegal) settlements (the gall!) were music to my ears. A check mark in my plus column. Yes, I fear the political ass-covering too -- he seems to have done some already with Our Lady of the House (with the plaster smile) -- but we must not let them win. And that means showing politicians we support them in their saner moments.

Nancy Pelosi is a thoroughly AIPAC-embedded, hypocritical dolt when it comes to this issue. ("Progressive" ??? Big cracks in the supporting structures of that plaster smile). Rallying around this grotesque occupier with the rest of the bought-and-paid-for in Congress is pathetic. (For hypocrisy, see: Nancy goes kissing the Dalai Lama's robes, the day after championing UNfairness for Palestinians -- Look Ma, No AIPAC against Tibet! -- while Joe preaches to African-Americans that he is their Numero Uno champion of civil rights, equality, FAIRness ... Vomit bag on hand?)

Our co-dependence is with that increasingly frightful and failed nation, Israel, which subjugates/occupies its neighbor, inflames the entire neighborhood and paints itself into a shrinking corner with further destructive measures as the only option left to its fanatical and opportunistic hawks and assorted Do-Nothings. Israel's bad behavior is THE major NEGATIVE for the overwhelming majority in every nation in the Mideast. Put our lone, unconditional, lopsided support for it -- that traditional thingie Joe and Nancy scold us to uphold --in the files marked "UNethical" "Hypocritical" and "US National Security ... Huh???"

What will it take for our country to wake up and see the ugly, naked emperor to which weve been shackled and conditioned to unconditionally support? It's so bad, its got me thinking, if Israel used those undeclared NUKEs of theirs to blow up the world one day and we miraculously had a few survivors, including Nancy Pelosi, she would still be warbling AIPAC love songs and nodding her googley grin in Israel's direction like a dashboard dog.

(Psssst! Nancy, Joe, Fellow Congressional Dregs: Support Israel's right to exist, not DESTROY!)