To all of The Lobby members, and even the rest of you sad folks who are excluded from The Lobby, I wish you a shabbat shalom.
Latest posts by themiddle (see all)
You may also like
About the author
A Big Bad Jewish Lobby Shabbat
To all of The Lobby members, and even the rest of you sad folks who are excluded from The Lobby, I wish you a shabbat shalom.
DK, just because you wouldn’t marry TM himself, (yes, I know he is already married) you still might like his friends. They are not clones of him.
You seem a little worried; don’t be, just enjoy being adorable, because it really is fun, and it passes.
Waterproof Lancome black mascara is one of the four food groups, in spite of being expensive; it comes off with a lump of vaseline, so you don’t absolutely have to buy their Remover; get a Maybelline Concealer stick, because everybody has some dark circles, and get some gel into your hair, so it will stay off your thin, little, straight, delicately curved swan neck, bless it. I recommend a shiny black barrette, loose black T- shirts and comfortable, but not Earth Motherish, interesting sandals. I have nothing against metallic strap sandals on the young such as yourself. Silver is in.
Someday I will tell you about using up your perfume fast, then hurling the empty bottle into the surf while giggling and singing or incantationing, but you are too young.
And I hear they have poor hygeine habits. It not surprising at all TM, NY Jews are famous for their liberalism, and I must say that they have done some good on a lot of issues with it, but I just wouldn’t want another Jimmy Carter in the White House.
Now that’s surprising. I think there’s a huge constituency out there for politically- conservative women. Though not here on the outskirts of the People’s Republic of Cambridge.
Earthy-crunchy lefty women tend to be lousy cooks.
Yeah Jewish Mother, you go out on a date and tell a man you voted for Bush and see if you get asked out again. I’ve been lucky to only be verbally assaulted and not physically assaulted for my support of the Republican Jewish Coalition in the Liberal cesspools we call NY and NJ.
In general I have heard that men of marriageable age are politically to the right, at least a little bit, of women of marriageable age, and that this causes problems. I have no idea if this is true. Men have to lead the charge after the babies come and they are less rose-colored-glasses, at least that might have been the theory.
A young woman who is a weensy bit right of center will get all the dinner invitations from tired, battle scarred men.
Who knows.
Who cooks better, lefty or leftish women, or more conservative types? I don’t know that either.
The secret is fresh cilantro and dill, in my opinion.
Kelsey, is it true about those failed dates? Cuz I have some ideas for you…
I thought your comment about me disapproving of Jonas Salk curing polio was the best joke on this thread. Thanks for that…it’s been a long day.
hahahaahahaha!!! I’m a neo-Con!!! Hee hee. 😆
You are a Straw Man addict.
What was done in Iraq, in fact, hurt plenty of people, and is still hurting plenty of people, and will hurt plenty, plenty more.
You dare to compare promoting the Iraq War to curing polio, or Wolfowitz’s debacle to the very fine senatorship of Schumer?
You really are a Neocon.
No Kelsey, you want to live in a way that’s beneath what all humans should aspire to. Why should anybody who can have an impact live differently? What you perceive as negative, that person may perceive as positive. He may think he’s doing the world a great favor, whether it is because he can contribute to science, to medicine, to cinema, to his family’s income, and yes, to politics. What you expect is not only stupid, in the sense that, for example, it might well have prevented a Jonas Salk from doing what he did or a Louis Kahn from doing what he did or Spielberg from doing what he did or Kissinger from doing what he did. Did I mention Einstein? It is foolish because it goes not only against human nature but against what some people do naturally. You think what Spielberg does comes hard to him? You think what Wolfowitz does comes hard to him? They do it because they have some natural abilities.
Should Emanuel Rahm or Charles Schumer quit politics because David Kelsey would like Jews to stay huddled in their little homes and not make waves? Cuz you know, right now there are lots of people who think those guys (Rahm and Schumer) work against America’s interests. The point is, Kelsey, that this society and any society should offer people the opportunity to be anything they want to be as long as they do not cause harm to others in an illegal fashion. It should do so regardless of their faith, color or sex. Period. Just because there are people out there with deep-seated hatred, I don’t think that should make anybody try any less hard. I mean, how do you know when you’re making the wrong choice? You do your best and you try your best.
You want to live in fear and darkness? Okay. You want people not to try their utmost to have an impact and succeed? Okay. Good for you. Enjoy.
PS this ain’t a straw man, this is what you are saying.
Bullshit. Complete straw man lies. What a surprise. Why do I only get that from you over here, TM?
You wrote,
“People live their lives and sometimes they achieve success and sometimes they don’t.”
So what? You can say no. My dates frequently do, and so could Wolfowitz.
It’s about not being Hoffjuden for The Man, and not confusing our own communal and ethnic issues for national ones. It means not doing the foreign policy cheerleading bidding of an idiot like Bush or trusting him anymore than the Polish Count who asked us to collect taxes and debts. Because he is that same guy.
And they didn’t see it. And now the shit’s hit the fan. For a change.
I actually want to avoid the old paradigms. You simply feel you can declare they no longer exist, and they will no longer exist. You are wrong.
Kelsey, you aren’t reading very carefully before going on and on with your comments. Wolfy may have a love for Israel, but that doesn’t mean that he would want to attack Iraq because of Israel. Besides, not all the Jewish neo-Cons have similar backgrounds or affinities for Israel. Some explicitly say so, by the way. The point was “super-Americanism” and their philosophies in general which have nothing to do with Israel. For the same reason, you can find a ton of neo-Cons who have no connection, religious or otherwise, to Israel or Judaism. They are also hyper super-America supporters.
Jewish neo-Cons as tools of the nefarious non-Jewish leadership of this country and perfectly placed to become scapegoats: interesting. Now you’re calling them stupid. I’m a little confused but I commend you for originality.
The rest of it is cute but leads us back to the shtetl Jew. Or the little field mouse Jew. I don’t think people who go into academia, like Wolfowitz, for example, plan to become involved in politics to the extent that he had. People live their lives and sometimes they achieve success and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes that success takes on a meaningful role in society and sometimes it doesn’t. According to the Kelsey Philosophy of Being A Jew In Any Society, we all need to shoot for the middle, the quiet, the unobtrusive, the uninteresting. If we’re janitors, we should be careful not to get involved in wage strikes. If we’re artists, we should stick to mediocre output that won’t reach a large audience. If we’re in business, we should be careful not to succeed but make just enough to not have too much. If we want to go into academia, we should write derivative scholarship and refrain from any activity that may get us noticed. If we’re in politics, we should get out of politics. Should I continue or is the absurdity of what you propose sufficiently clear?
“As you know, I reject accusations that the Jewish background of many neo-Cons has anything to do with their political views particularly as they relate to their super-America positions as well as the resulting policies of this Administration, namely with respect to the Iraq war.”
Well, that’s rediculous! Of course it does. Wolfy’s family’s past and his concern about The Holocaust http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/041101fa_fact certainly affected his thinking, and his love for Israel. And Elliot Abrams is as affected by his Judaism as Natan Sharansky. And Bush is affected by his brand of Christianity, and Nixon’s family’s Quaker abolitionist roots was critical in his adoration and attempts to emulate Lincoln.
You said,
“In order for your conspiracy to work, you have to convince me that despite the fact that far more of the neo-Cons are NOT Jewish, including in positions of power, that somehow people like Cheney, Rumsfeld or non-administration bigwigs like Woolsey and Armitage aren’t confident, powerful, intelligent individuals who can and do think for themselves and make decisions accordingly.”
But I don’t blame them primarily for the war, and see no conspiracy. They were tools. They were fucking Hoffjuden.
And they were too naive to understand they were nothing else.
And just as the Jews were the scapegoat for collecting debts and taxes for the king and noblemen, so too hakhie nami (that’s Aramaic for “here also”, for anyone unfamiliar with the term or my lousy transliteration).
There are many Jews in every generation since the Enlightenment that have insisted that the dynamics of Jewish history have altered; that today is a New Generation, with New Rules of inclusion at the highest levels.
And it never works quite like that.
Your insistence on calling me a conspiracist is really your own lack of acceptance that the Jews don’t have to be the primary guilty party for us to receive the brunt of the blame and resentment. You are wrong. Look outside. Little has changed in this regard.
Things are heating up.
We were forced into usury, but we didn’t need to do this miserable despot’s bidding. There were other options.
But they did so anyway because of pride and naivete — not need. Much less excusable.
And this is the reason for my anger at them.
So drop your “conspiracy” bullshit. I am no conspiracist. You are just too big a believer that the State of Israel or the fact that we are in a Democracy significantly changes the rules for all Jews in their entirety. I don’t see it that way. It would be great if you were right. It would be great if they were right.
They were terribly wrong.
Um, I never said neo-Cons weren’t disproportionately Jewish. Considering that we’re 2.5% of the population, of course they are. Then again, so is the faculty at Harvard, the percentage of Jews involved in NGOs that promote peace and welfare of others around the world, filmmakers, top 50 individual donors to charities in the United States and authors short-listed by the NY Times as having written the best books of the past quarter century. Did I mention Nobel prize winners?
Sorry.
The problem is that those who speak about the neo-Cons as a group often bring up the Jewish background of some of the better-known neo-Cons. There’s no question that it’s hard to ignore these attacks in light of the entire “The Lobby” issue.
As you know, I reject accusations that the Jewish background of many neo-Cons has anything to do with their political views particularly as they relate to their super-America positions as well as the resulting policies of this Administration, namely with respect to the Iraq war.
In order for your conspiracy to work, you have to convince me that despite the fact that far more of the neo-Cons are NOT Jewish, including in positions of power, that somehow people like Cheney, Rumsfeld or non-administration bigwigs like Woolsey and Armitage aren’t confident, powerful, intelligent individuals who can and do think for themselves and make decisions accordingly. Blaming Jewish neo-Cons is just a convenient way to blame Jews again even as the majority of Jews support Democrats and opposed the Iraq War.
Well, agreeing on 2 out of 3 is more than we do usually, and you are correct that these two issues are all too often conveniently overlooked by anti-Zionist conspiracists. And I, for one, certainly trusted Sharon more than American Jews or even Rummy to determine what was best for Israel, and found Israeli wariness towards the war (including a massive protest) an ominous sign.
Btw– Are you finally implicitly conceding that the Neocons are disproportionately Jewish?
Um, DK, we happen to agree that the neo-Cons think they know better about what’s good for Israel than the Israelis. Which, of course, flies in the face of one of the Mearsheimer and Walt claims…which was the point of my joking comment to which you’re responding.
We also agree that the neo-Cons were far more enthusiastic about the Iraq war than the Israelis who didn’t really care. The Israeli government supported the war more as a show of support for and unity with the US administration than anything else. They actually went on a campaign to convince Israelis that the war would be a good thing because the public was not on board or completely indifferent.
Of course where we disagree is about the Big Bad Lobby part…
No, TM. The Neocons think they know better than Israeli leaders about what’s good for her. Just look at their support for the Iraq War! They were quite sure this was going to help Israel, and I have the old Commentaries to prove it when you accuse me of making this up. Most Israelis weren’t as optimistic nor as outspoken as the Neocons were about imposing Democracy in Iraq. I wonder why…
I try to stick to images of Israel in my shabbat image series. Besides, isn’t that the home office of The Lobby?
You should have had a picture of Foggy Bottom.