<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: They think he still cares</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139</link>
	<description>Cutting straight to the point</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:21:52 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Herschel</title>
		<link>http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139/comment-page-1#comment-36880</link>
		<dc:creator>Herschel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yourish.com/?p=8139#comment-36880</guid>
		<description>With a reported 78% of Jews knee jerk voting for democrats, Obama feels very little concern that his harsh Israel policy will make a difference in his reelection in 2012. I believe he is in for a rude awakening! 
First, I really do not believe that 78% of Jews voting for him is an accurate percentage, and most importantly, I am hearing more and more concern that will translate into additional voter shifts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With a reported 78% of Jews knee jerk voting for democrats, Obama feels very little concern that his harsh Israel policy will make a difference in his reelection in 2012. I believe he is in for a rude awakening!<br />
First, I really do not believe that 78% of Jews voting for him is an accurate percentage, and most importantly, I am hearing more and more concern that will translate into additional voter shifts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Bensky</title>
		<link>http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139/comment-page-1#comment-36878</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Bensky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yourish.com/?p=8139#comment-36878</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think you&#039;re being quite fair, Eric. It reminds me of something a knowledgeable friend from Chicago once wrote about Jesse Jackson. He said Jackson would be sincerely and genuinely pained at being called an anti-Semite, because he probably knew a lot of Jews but they were almost all radical and/or deracinated Jews. His famous remark about Zionism being &quot;a poisonous weed&quot; in Judaism was undoubtedly based on what he&#039;d heard from Jews. Jackson surely knew a lot of Jews socially, said the friend, but it was unlikely that he had as a genuine social friend any Jew who, for example, was actived in a synagogue.

His associations for twenty years are well-known although it&#039;s considered racist to bring some of those up.

By the way, Obama does buy into that &quot;just anti-Lukud&quot; line. You see it a lot and it&#039;s mostly balderdash. It&#039;s used to show that by golly you are certainly pro-Israel, you just don&#039;t approve of those bloodthirsty, landgrabbing right wingers who are the obstacle to peace. If the expression actually meant anything it wouldn&#039;t not have been used during the years that Likud wasn&#039;t in the government, but of course it was.

A parenthetical note: The pre-1967 borders at one point stopped being merely cease-fire lines and became sacrosanct because it&#039;s unacceptable to acquire territory by violence. Everyone reading this blog knows that statement comes under the Bensky Corollary to Everything, which Meryl persists in calling &quot;the Exception Clause,&quot; namely that every statement and principle carries with it the tacit proviso &quot;except Jews.&quot; 

But prior to 1948 the Etzion bloc was Jewish owned and occupied and fell to the Arabs through military operations. Gosh and golly, I wonder why no one seems to think that it&#039;s only fair to restore it to Israel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think you&#8217;re being quite fair, Eric. It reminds me of something a knowledgeable friend from Chicago once wrote about Jesse Jackson. He said Jackson would be sincerely and genuinely pained at being called an anti-Semite, because he probably knew a lot of Jews but they were almost all radical and/or deracinated Jews. His famous remark about Zionism being &#8220;a poisonous weed&#8221; in Judaism was undoubtedly based on what he&#8217;d heard from Jews. Jackson surely knew a lot of Jews socially, said the friend, but it was unlikely that he had as a genuine social friend any Jew who, for example, was actived in a synagogue.</p>
<p>His associations for twenty years are well-known although it&#8217;s considered racist to bring some of those up.</p>
<p>By the way, Obama does buy into that &#8220;just anti-Lukud&#8221; line. You see it a lot and it&#8217;s mostly balderdash. It&#8217;s used to show that by golly you are certainly pro-Israel, you just don&#8217;t approve of those bloodthirsty, landgrabbing right wingers who are the obstacle to peace. If the expression actually meant anything it wouldn&#8217;t not have been used during the years that Likud wasn&#8217;t in the government, but of course it was.</p>
<p>A parenthetical note: The pre-1967 borders at one point stopped being merely cease-fire lines and became sacrosanct because it&#8217;s unacceptable to acquire territory by violence. Everyone reading this blog knows that statement comes under the Bensky Corollary to Everything, which Meryl persists in calling &#8220;the Exception Clause,&#8221; namely that every statement and principle carries with it the tacit proviso &#8220;except Jews.&#8221; </p>
<p>But prior to 1948 the Etzion bloc was Jewish owned and occupied and fell to the Arabs through military operations. Gosh and golly, I wonder why no one seems to think that it&#8217;s only fair to restore it to Israel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric J</title>
		<link>http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139/comment-page-1#comment-36866</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yourish.com/?p=8139#comment-36866</guid>
		<description>Barack Obama doesn&#039;t care about Jewish people!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barack Obama doesn&#8217;t care about Jewish people!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sabba Hillel</title>
		<link>http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139/comment-page-1#comment-36864</link>
		<dc:creator>Sabba Hillel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:11:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yourish.com/?p=8139#comment-36864</guid>
		<description>http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098853.html
&lt;blockquote&gt;He is convinced that the media are after him, that his aides are leaking information against him and that the American administration wants him out of office.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

This reminds me of the statement &quot;It is not paranoia when they are really out to get you&quot;.  Of the three attitudes that Haaretz uses to claim that he is &quot;suffering from confusion and paranoia&quot;, two are definitely true (and obvious even from the United States) and the middle one is probable.  If I were Israeli and actively following the details, it would probably be obviously true as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098853.html" rel="nofollow">http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098853.html</a></p>
<blockquote><p>He is convinced that the media are after him, that his aides are leaking information against him and that the American administration wants him out of office.</p></blockquote>
<p>This reminds me of the statement &#8220;It is not paranoia when they are really out to get you&#8221;.  Of the three attitudes that Haaretz uses to claim that he is &#8220;suffering from confusion and paranoia&#8221;, two are definitely true (and obvious even from the United States) and the middle one is probable.  If I were Israeli and actively following the details, it would probably be obviously true as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sabba Hillel</title>
		<link>http://www.yourish.com/2009/07/10/8139/comment-page-1#comment-36863</link>
		<dc:creator>Sabba Hillel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:04:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yourish.com/?p=8139#comment-36863</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;It’s safe to say that President Obama doesn’t much care about Israeli politics - or Israelis.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I woud say that instead of &quot;Israelis&quot; you should say &quot;Zionists&quot; where &quot;Zionist&quot; is defined in the same way that the rest of the hard left defines it.  In spite of the fact that Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod work for him, I would say that he regards them as useful tools but would lump them in with the rest of us &quot;Zionists&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>It’s safe to say that President Obama doesn’t much care about Israeli politics &#8211; or Israelis.</p></blockquote>
<p>I woud say that instead of &#8220;Israelis&#8221; you should say &#8220;Zionists&#8221; where &#8220;Zionist&#8221; is defined in the same way that the rest of the hard left defines it.  In spite of the fact that Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod work for him, I would say that he regards them as useful tools but would lump them in with the rest of us &#8220;Zionists&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
