But but but the people on the TV say if I pull the right lever on election day like a good doggie everything will be all right!

This is why I want Nader in the debate.
He talks about things the other candidates won't touch.

The are not going to touch this with a ten foot pole. Any mention of Palestine, even concern for civilian casualties would be instantly controversial. We've reached a point where we can't even talk about Palestinians as human beings, and there is no mainstream politician who has the courage to address this issue fair and square. It's hugely demoralizing for those looking for some iota of change, but I guess we should have realized long ago, that on issues of Empire and the Middle East, there is little difference between the candidates.

Moreover, Obama has successfully suppressed his past concern for Palestine. For someone banking on hope and change, he certainly has shown extreme cowardice on this issue. Hillary is a lost case altogether.

Israel will invade Lebanon this summer--and it may be used as a pretext to attack iran--since no one in the US(and Europe) will say anything against Israel.

It is bizarre--especially when many of those countries have large Muslim populations.

Supporting suicidal idiots like the Israelis doesnt make much sense domestically.

Israel: the great global trouble maker(the US is first but since Israel is so tiny the amount of trouble it causes is extraordinary).

The terrible Israeli raids on Gaza look very like that militant government seizing a last opportunity to inflict major damage before the rules begin to change - that's my most hopeful assessment of a bloody and onesided battle. It is truly sickening to see all of the major tv news, including the BBC taking a pro-Israel stance in this carnage; they have no shame.

Our Zionists made sure of that.

This, among other reasons is why I will not vote for Obama, Billary, nor McCain. They are bought and paid for by AIPAC. To me it is tragic that no one will hold Israel accountable for war crimes, like its corrupt cohort, the United States.

So much for Obama the bringer of hope and change.

We could solve this crisis in one day if the US simply told Israel that their special status was over and they would henceforth be treated as just another country.

But, with US help and with the generous checks from millions of US Jews in thousands of synagogues, Israel has the Palestinians under their thumb, and their 60-year ethnic cleansing/genocide project is nearing completion. So why should Israel negotiate???

In light of Obama's pro-Israel statements last week, I absolutely could never vote for him, or any other candidate.

Due to Pennsylvania's profoundly undemocratic, onerous ballot-petition system, and dirty tricks on the part of the democrats, there is little hope of Nader being on the ballot, and only slightly better odds of McKinney appearing on the ballot. But I will be making a few phone calls to some Green party organizers and will work like hell collecting signatures so we have a shot of at least getting McKinney on the ballot.

Israeli policy is off limits to candidates. Only the president can talk about it. Everyone else must just accept and be happy. Our current Congress is occupied Israeli territory.
Hoa binh

Watch Al Jazerra to get another perspective. If you can't get it go to the web site. Tell your friends.

Yes John, there seems to be no concern by the three front running candidates on the fate of the Palestinians, or the moral issue of simple human rights, no questions are asked of them, that is verboten, or of the apartheid and racist state of Israel.
As an American Jew I am appalled that in the state of Israel there seems to be no difference between what was known as
"the master race" and "the chosen people".
Yet there remains the number one question in America for the candidates that is unasked and unanswered, it is the subject that has recieved more air time, print and on-line
space: What is their take on BRITTANY SPEARS?
I am a concerned citizen and I want to know!

USAn

Is this a hoax? Is this for real? Why would Obama publicly align himself with belligerent assholes when he's trying to go after the peace vote? I doubt whether this is a geniune letter. Can anyone confirm it?

That's one reason I'll not be voting for either Hillary or Obama. Of course no question about McCain.

Instead of thinking lesser of the two evils think

"NEITHER OF THE TWO EVILS"

As an American Jew I am appalled that in the state of Israel there seems to be no difference between what was known as
"the master race" and "the chosen people".

As a non-Jew, I myself have trouble with such a distinction. If someone of a particular ethnic group believed that they are a "God chosen people, it must follow that God would choose them for some kind of superior racial characteristics; right? Or alternatively, being a God-chosen people would lead one to conclude that ones opinion on a matter is more important than someone from a non-chosen group, since being chosen by God would basically make one a spokesman for God; correct?

So perhaps, just as Christians have a lot of nonsense they could get rid of that get in the way of Jesus's simple humanistic teachings, maybe Jews should consider quietly dropping this "God chosen poeple" stuff.

It's completely genuine...the truth is, there is no way to tell what Obama's true feelings are about the Palestinians, or even if he would be able to do anything about it. As some have mentioned here before, it would be impossible for Obama to stand up for Palestinians and win the election, that's just the truth, so he can't. Even if he tries if he becomes president, there is no way of telling if he will be able to accomplish anything...sad situation, but the only hope is for Muslims, Arabs, all third world nations etc. to unite and force change.

This may be the defining question of foreign policy. Can a US President not be a servant to right wing Israeli and militaristist foreign policy? Israeli human rights abuses are plain to see for most of the world. Yet they continue to be ignored as shown in this article. Two days ago there was a Hollywood celebrity event in solidarity with the suffering people of Sderot. Sylvester Stallone and Jon Voigt etc.. McCain, Hillary and Obama all sent their video salutes to the event. In the absence of a word of empathy for the vastly greater suffering by Gazans, this is racism and hypocrisy. The pressure is being cranked up on Obama ... and it is plain to see at www.haaretz.com The coming weeks and months will show whether he really has character and integrity or not. If he plays it smart, he will start associating himself with pro peace and progressive Jews and Israelis ... and start to question Israeli human rights abuses and crimes.

voxclanamtis,

Yes, it is legitimate. The letter is dated January 22 when the UN security council was trying to get a resolution condemning the Israeli blockade. It has been spread widely around US Jewish web sites as evidence that Obama is on their side. While I can's cite the story, I read a story (in Al Jazeera's website, it think) where a spokesperson from Obama Senate office confirmed it.

It is also very credible simply in that there is nothing remarkable about it - it is merely reiterating the viewpoints of the overwhelming majority of the US congress.

Since when is Obama trying to get the Peace vote?

He is going after the "bring the troops home - only from Iraq - and only the combat troops" vote. Like most of the US Congress he is all for Peace in Palestrine - the peace of complete Israeli subjugation, like say, the peace that finally prevailed over Pine Ridge Reservation after the Wounded Knee Massacre.

Don't forget McCain or his daddy Admiral McCain who was complicint in the USS Liberty incident.

Are any protest planned at israeli embassies?

As a group, voters who desire peace - not more wars or a sustained effort of the status quo, and are also anti-empire building - we have no candidate to choose from for the office of President of the United States in either of the major political parties. Green or Independent votes will not amount to a winning ticket, and that being said, we have no electable candidate! After Kucinich dropped out to concentrate on his congressional race, I still cast my vote for him in the California primary. I contributed to both of his campaigns because he represents my convictions and concerns. I worry now that big money will knock him out of Congress, with the result we the people being even less represented. Come November, I may make the same choice, to vote for Kucinich, to voice my protest, or I may leave the selection of a president of our empire blank. As a natural born citizen, and a voter for the past 43 years, I have never felt more despair for my country or for the citizens of the United States. The audacity of hope does not play out in my neighborhood.

USAn, the "chosen" question has nothing to do with racial superiority. Your arguments are illogical and make unwarranted assumptions.

It has to do with a moral superiority, or the development of a moral consciousness based on a contract with a Guy-in-the-sky. The OT is an elaborate contract with gd, with accompanying anecdotes to demonstrate what happens when you break your end of the contract. And the rewards when you follow the rules properly.

Where I have a problem is in that song from "Exodus", "This land is mine, gd gave this land to me." Stirring music, but gd gave this land to everybody.

Israel and the U.S. are the same thing. This is a problem for anyone who cares about human rights.

Maybe the candidates (and the electee in January) need to hear from MILLIONS of Americans who are appalled at the way our tax dollars are used by Israel to kill and maim innocent Gazans, withhold access to medical care for the wounded (www.guardian.co.uk 03/02/2008), cut their electrical power so their water treatment plant quits and raw sewage runs in the streets. We have NO idea how bad life is for Gaza.

Pretending that a few homemade rockets are "intolerable" but that wholesale attacks by air and tank that wipe out homes and entire families is merely "self defense" is to call what looks like attempted genocide by a false name.

If theUN's Security Council is paralyzed by the US, can't the General Assembly act without it to come to the defense of Gaza and, surely before long, the West Bank and Lebanon?????

Whaddisup with that? This Israeli aggression against Palestinians is what drove our CIA agent OBL to be so angry as to blow US up on 9/11.

Where are all the bleeding hearts, neo-cons, state department feminists, etc? These folks were raring to go for Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur. But on the Israeli attack on Gazans, not a word. Where is Wesley Clark and his planes? Say Bill Kristol, how about invading Israel? Bleeding heats, where are you?

Is there some neo-con with the balls of a Winston Churchill calling for a NATO force to bomb back Israel?

Dont talk about the ELEPHANT indeed.

Thanks, Common Dreams, for being one web site which carries articles from the press outside the US, as well as the even fewer North American reporters like John Nichols who are concerned about the deepening crisis in Gaza and dare to write about it with a real historical awareness.

It looks as though his article will be published in this week's Nation Magazine, where we occasionally find good critiques like this.

However, this is the first article I've seen on this issue which aims to ask the American voter why neither of the possible Democratic Presidential candidates, nor the US press, mentions anything about this and other long-term and tragic issues of Imperialism. How many Americans, other than the comparatively small number who read the alternative press, even know the background of this issue and why we Americans should be concerned about it, and the future of its influence on the entire middle east imbroglio, or the history of European and US Imperialism.

Thank you John, and Common Dreams, for reminding us of one of the biggest elephants in the living room!

Medusa:

I want to dialogue with you on this, but I believe you are wrong about you idea about what Jews' chosenness signifies. The Babylonian Talmud does indeed have what we would call racist and supremacist verses in it.

Here is a link for example to Sanhedrin 57a, from the Babylonian Talmud:

http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_57.html

In these verses, we are taught that Israelites may steal from "Cutheans" without any punishment, that Israelites may kill "Cutheans" without suffering the death penalty (which would occur if they killed another Israelite), and that an Israelite can withhold wages from a Cuthean. In the notes, the editor says that a later censor substituted the word "Cuthean" for the original "goy." Look at note 33. I assume you know the meaning of the word "goy."

Your first accusation, I am certain, will be that I got this off of some anti-Semetic site. But no, this is from "Come and Hear" which is a Jewish group that argues for religious tolerance. I have had friends who told me repeatedly that the Talmud is very racist against non-Jews. I abhor white supremacists, and will not look at their sites, so I looked only at Jewish, or philo-Semitic, sources for the Talmud.

To be fair to you, I will also link to the site of a Rabbi who is trying to explain the context of such quotations in the Talmud:
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/kill.html

I have read his explanations of what I think are in fact very racist verses, and I don't buy his explanations.

Keep in mind that Jews in this country are no longer an oppressed minority. In fact, according to the latest Pew Forum Research Survey, Jews have the highest income of any religious ethnicity in the US, (and I would not be suprised if the same held for Europe): http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/table-income-by-denomination.pdf

Given their elite status, they have a duty and a responsibility to challenge the racism in their own tradition (as Christians have spent the past 40 years doing).

Since it is political suicide to question NaziIsrael, for Barack to do so now would insure Hillary's nomination.

If they both questioned Israel McInsane would win by a landslide.

Politicians don't commit political suicide. How about questioning why in this free country this subject, NaziIzrael is so sacred? That would take more courage than pot-shotting politicians; always easy work.

Obama '08.

How does the Jewish lobby wield so much power given they only make up 2% of the world's population? I've put some ideas together on my blog. Take a look. You may be surprised. You may also be scared!

Meanwhile the farcical Presidential election goes forth. I don't know how you stand it, all the hype, all the lies, all the pretending. While the Democs destroy themselves, the Repubs are laughing.

No one in Australia is laughing!

www.dangerouscreation.com

First candidate who promises to nuke Israel has my vote.

Nader '08. Hilamacain is a dangerous animal - If all those who intend to give up on peace, ignore human rights, increase the military budget, forget about universal health care, continue the growing wealth disparity, hide in fear from various evil monsters under our beds, and prop up our failing electoral process wish to vote for either of the Republicrat candidates, be my guest.

If any of you have the wisdom to see that only by spliting this race in three does any of us have a chance to see a change in the perilous direction the empire is heading, then put aside your fears and join me in making a statement to our single party exploiters.

If all the Democrats who held their noses and voted for Kerry in 2004 would have voted for Nader, we would now be on our way to real change. That damn Kerry; egomaniac, spoiler, why, oh why did he have to stay in the race? This time make your vote count, don't waste it on a demogogue, excuse me democrap, er democ-RAT. Vote for real change - NADER '08. Don't let a Republican take the Whorehouse, er Whitehouse again.

There is another reason the pols are so much in favor of killing Semites (Palestinians) so others can steal their land. Israel has a huge nuclear arsenal, several hundred. This number is all out of whack with their opponents, who have none. (Pakistan has never attacked Israel, and doesn't have nearly that many.) What is the size of this arsenal for? The only use I can think of is to intimidate the US.

With the help of the US Navy, Israel has had the ability to covertly nuke a coastal city anywhere in the world (including the US) for about 5 years.

When this was announced, Israel statements indicated that they were intended as a threat to Iran. Which is why, of course, Iran wants a viable nuclear weapons program. Whether they have an underground program or not, they do need the weapon unless a champion steps in.

So, John, why did The Nation endorse Obama?

What a foolish move. Same goes for the commentary by Matt Rothschild at The Progressive magazine site and all the other progressives who are endorsing Obama over Hillary as if he's going to represent some kind of change. He's not.

He's for the criminal sanctions on Cuba, too.

All these progressives giving, giving and giving and asking nothing in return. Well they, and we, are going to get nothing.

Help Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez instead.
votenader.org

And I say that as a former Nader voter who sees that I have to return to Ralph's agenda cuz the Democratic Party doesn't work.

mikepeters March 2nd, 2008 4:52 pm
"Politicians don't commit political suicide"

Good argument. I wish you could have emailed that one to Dr. Martin Luther King. If he would have taken your advice he might still be alive today. Rosa Parks should have just given up her seat and avoided the embarrassing arrest. Come to think about it, I wish you would have been alive around 2000 years ago so you could have given Jesus the same advice. He might never have taken a stand against Cesar and he wouldn't have suffered the crucification. Always do what is politically advantageous. Avoid taking tough stands that although principled and moral could be used against you. Good point.

You make a good argument for us all to become political cowards sitting in the back of the bus. No balls no glory.

formernadervoter March 2nd, 2008 6:07 pm
Here is a link about The Nation endorsing Obama:
WSWS
The "circularity" of hope: The Nation endorses Barack Obama
By Patrick Martin
15 February 2008

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/feb2008/obam-f15.shtml

Who wants to bite the hand that bribes them?

Does anyone seriously think anyone named Barak Hussein Obama can afford to be seen as sympathetic towards the Palestians?

Got it. What we need are focus groups in foreign and domestic areas. The focus groups will state what they are in favor of and what they oppose in order for the "leader" to get elected. The "leader" then follows their wishes in order to get elected. There is one complication; when the leader's masters oppose what people approve of, for example in the case of the Iraq war the wishes of the people must take a back seat to the wishes of the masters. A good "leader" always checks with his focus groups before making a decision in order to ensure he will not lose any votes. The "leader" then proceeds to follow the followers for the next four years. The focus groups then help him get reelected and the cycle repeats.

tailcap; you insult Rosa Parks, Jesus Christ and Dr. Martin Luther King when you call them politicians.

Who told you Jesus was a Politician tailcap?

Or that only your opinion was valid?

And where did you learn to insult those with opinions which differ from yours?

Rosa Parks was not a politician.

Nor was Dr. King; He was a God.

But to reitterate: Politicians don't commit political suicide. logic 101A.

Beyond Empire:

I like McClinbama

Things you cannot say if you want to be president:

1. The US is the most destructive force in the world
2. I do not believe in God
3. 9-11 was the work of Mossad
4. Global warming is mostly a natural phenomenon
5. Israel is a rogue nation
6. The president and vice-president are war criminals
7. The cuban embargo should be lifted
8. The US is a plutocracy
9. The defense budget should be slashed
10.Reduce the number of bases at home and abroad
11.Israel is an illegal entity
12.Treason has been committed by members of the government

Sorry for any offense or if you feel insulted. We all have a right to express our opinions and I will respect yours. I will be more careful posting to avoid this happening again. Insulting others is not cool. Sorry.

The topic is leadership. The fact is they were all leaders and a person whose sole concern is getting elected is not a leader and that is the subtext of the article in my opinion.

It is precisely these type of excuses for "leaders" that will cause them to lose elections. Unwilling to take tough stands or risk anything. They play it as safe as possible. Calculating all the way to the bank. They lose. Risking is what makes heroes.

The cowardice of the Democratic Party may come to haunt them as they may just lose to McCain because at least to middle America they know where he stands. We need principled and courageous leaders. The Democrats are not. That is my opinion.

Whoa tailcap, I am humbled by that post.

The system, the political process, is so corrupt, as are all the major players.

Many CD'rs disagree about what form hope might take, but I feel most want the same things. We are just so checkmated.

Well, it will be interesting.

Thanks Mike, I agree. I think we both want a fair and peaceful society. As one poster noted change will need to come from us not the leaders. Their hands are tied. If we could all unite like the colonist did against England we can certainly succeed. Maybe thats our real task. Coming together.

Ric Abreu

TAILCAP -- You've got that spot on, that"The cowardice of the Democratic Party may come to haunt them …"

I'm envisioning a new political map, whereas previously the battle of red/blue colors predominated, shifting in July dramatically toward the _ G R E E N _ color of PEACE and allowing

Namaste
… … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … & … ML King … … Inspiration … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed »
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — MLK

namaste March 2nd, 2008 10:11 pm
Hi Namaste! Thanks! By Green are you referring to the Green Party of Peace?

Madrid March - good points - thanks for all the references I will look at them.

The bible was written when people did identify more with tribes, clans, specific bits of land, but I wouldn't overplay the actual racist element nowadays. That was a long time ago. It's more a nationalism based on cultural identity. I haven't yet heard a Jew say s/he was superior because of his/her race. In fact, race is something Jews I've talked to/lived among have denied, always saying that there is no such thing as a Jewish race. And when you look at all the places Jews have lived and come from, you have to see that's true. Jewish identity is based on family ties through the mother - a little archaic, but a throwback to less patriarchal times. And through culture/ritual. The battle in Israel is a battle over land and water.

The Palestinians aren't a race either - or even of a single religion. What freaks me out is that this vicious campaign, this push to annihilate the Palestinians is even possible after the horrors of 1940+. The world stood idly by then, even assisted and made money off the time that Jews were being wiped out - now they're doing the same thing to the Palestinians and again the world is callously standing by and making business off it. I don't get it. If it was wrong then, why isn't it wrong now?

And enough already with the Qasam excuse - if you came on my land, cut down my tomato plants, poisoned my dog, cut my electrical cable, shot at my kid, bulldozed my garage, and dumped all your sewage in my yard, I'd be tempted to fire at you with my BB gun, too.

drwu,

Thanks for re-posting my Obama letter post - which for some reason, has disappeared! Next time, however, please properly cite the author of the post and link...