Buerger Bites

good info..nice article
laptop prices in pakistan

Bobby:

Thanks for your posts. We may disagree on our solutions (and our favorite networks…I’m CNN guy) and it’s nice to have civil conversations with people like you. 

Our world has many challenges, and we need dialogue from all parties to overcome them. I appreciate your wiliness to engage in them.

Again Stuart, unfortunately, people like yourself that have so much to offer in their passionate views, lose their message due to their delivery. I am not sure if you will ever understand this but one can make points without resorting to belittling the opposing view. I have seen enough of MSNBC (sorry Andy, they are far more non balanced then Fox) to know that even though offending and name calling gets ratings, to the really informed, it only diminishes their opinions and who they are. I only wonder when an Ed Schultz crosses that line, if he really does it because he is a crazy man or he “needs” to morph into a sub human (as many of his viewers want that sort of craziness) (prior diatribe misspelling came from an iphone) to get ratings and keep his job.

Hopefully, you can make your points by remaining civil. It’s the least we can try to do.

Bobby, I hope you understand my diatribe (not “diatrible,” as most Harvard and YU grads surely ought to know) was not at all directed towards your initial comment.

In your second comment, you seem to say you agree with the substance of my remarks, but you find what I wrote intolerant and disrespectful. I’m sorry, but in the absence of any specific examples from you, I do not quite get your point.

I’ll restate a few of mine:

The Jewish Times is in my view primarily the propaganda mouth piece of the left wing of the Democratic Party, and, as such, puts its political bias far ahead of any responsibility to provide the Baltimore Jewish community with accurate news and serious, informed opinion.

My contention is supported by their coverage of the 2008 election, as I have briefly documented with quotations from Andrew Buerger and Neil Rubin.

Finally, I would reiterate that, with Israel potentially in existential danger, we all need to be well-informed and thoughtful voters in 2012. I do not believe this kind of education can be provided by The Jewish Times.

Fortunately, there are many competent reporters and thoughtful commentators on issues concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict and the US-Israeli relationship who write for quality and trustworthy publications.

If you are unaware of them, I’ll be happy to provide you with a list of web sites. I guarantee you that none of them will demand, as Neil Rubin does, that you simply shut your mouth about Obama.

I can’t believe my eyes. I see a post listed from Senator Cardin, that I write critically on and then see the diatrible by Stuart. Stuart, you and I likely agree on many topics but ones thing is for sure, in the art of tolerant and respectful communication, you are no Harvard or YU (quite a diversity there) grad for sure.

Congratulations to Andrew Buerger!

Even though the amount of intellectual effort required to copy and paste Ben Cardin’s statement wasn’t so great, this blog entry, unlike the vast majority of Young Andrew’s narcissistic scribbling, doesn’t contain “I” or “me” in the first paragraph. Surely this act of almost unprecedented self-abnegation is a major accomplishment for him, and worthy of note!!

Still, one wonders what prevented the publisher of an ostensibly Jewish publication from writing something of substance himself, against the background of major speeches by both the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the State of Israel in Washington over the past several days.

The answer is clear. The Jewish Times is a “Jewish” publication in name only. Buerger and his colleagues are, first and foremost, local satraps and sycophants for the Democratic Party and especially for its leftist wing.

Reflecting on Obama’s stunning disregard for Israel’s security as well as his deplorable personal treatment of Benjamin Netanyahu, Young Andrew was driven into silence.

Why?

Not because he disagrees with Obama (he agrees with the Obama agenda of extracting dangerous concessions from Israel while making no corresponding demands of the arabs), but because he can’t get around the word “Jewish” in his publication’s title. It should be noted that Young Andrew’s paragon of the journalist-hero, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, faces no such constraint, as his recent ridiculous columns on Israel and the falsely-named “Arab Spring” amply show.

Still, I want to give Young Andrew that “pat on the back” and “attaboy” recognition that he craves above all else; at least he had the good sense to keep quiet this week, unlike Neil Rubin, who frequently tries too hard to mitigate the psychological pain he feels of being born a Jew but who now worships at the altar of the Democratic Party.

Recently Rubin attempted to portray J Street as something far less malignant than the deceitful anti-Israel, Soros-funded lobbying organization that it is. His desire to misrepresent and lie about J street’s true agenda was corrected by a few readers who took the time to write a Letter to the Editor. Here is how one Letter began: “Your coverage of the recent J Street Conference in Washington DC was quite a Pollyanna-ish distortion of its mood, proceedings and attendees.”  This is all true, and “Pollyanna-ish” is an appropriate term in this context

But this much is now clear, and it should be shouted from the roof-tops from now until after the 2012 election: everything this supposedly Jewish publication wrote about candidate Obama’s approach to Israel in 2008 was false. 

It turns out that it does matter, especially given his extremely limited experience in elected office, who influences and advises Obama. On the Middle East and Israel, Obama has for years if not decades relied upon the views of radicals such as Rashid Khalidi, William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Samantha Power (who advocates the direct use of American military force AGAINST Israel). The noxious anti-Israel/anti-Semitic views corresponding to each of these names should not be unfamiliar to anyone who cares about the future of Israel. Conversely, if you don’t know who Obama’s most trusted advisers are and what they believe about Israel, you won’t find that information in this “Jewish” publication.

It was the “editorial line” of The Jewish Times in 2008 that Obama represented no radical break vis a vis previous American chief executives, and would continue to maintain this country’s relationship with Israel uninterrupted. In late October of that election year, Buerger wrote, “It seems to me that Democratic administrations have done a better job of protecting Israel [a dubious but arguable proposition]. Even the inept Carter team managed a very successful peace with Egypt [Buerger greatly overstates the importance of Carter’s role, but the treaty is now effectively dead, thanks largely to Obama‘s Carteresque policy of removing Hosni Mubarak]....Obama will employ the same people Clinton used to bring the prosperous Jordanian treaty. Bush never talked with terrorist [sic], but we got nowhere with Israeli/Palestinian peace….From where I sit [the lofty perch of his incredibly elevated ego must afford some dizzying views], I think an Obama administration would benefit Israel and the Middle East.”  On the same day, Rubin wrote, “But Mr. Obama, with the counsel of Mr. Biden and long-time Mideast peace negotiator Ambassador Dennis Ross, will not sell out Israel.”

It should now be understood beyond all journalistic attempts to spin and obfuscate that Obama has been a disaster for the Middle East (as can be most readily seen by the recent diplomatic activities of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia), and the notion that Obama would “sell out Israel” is no longer a vague suspicion but a very real and frightening possibility.

In light of these truths, the citizens of this country, including its Jewish community, are more than entitled to discuss and debate both Obama’s capabilities as a leader and his intentions towards Israel.

However, doing so requires entirely setting aside the opinions regularly expressed by this publication’s publisher and editors. Not only have they been staggeringly unwilling to consider Obama’s radical background, but also they demand silence in the face of Obama’s unmistakable animus to Israel and American Jewish concerns about its security. A year ago, Rubin wrote this: “it remains unacceptable to belittle Mr. Obama’s intellect, let alone call him ‘hostile’ toward Israel or an anti-Semite. He’s neither stupid nor an enemy of the Jewish state.”

Unacceptable? Really Neil? Why? Because you say so?

What is absolutely unacceptable in our blessedly - and still - free republic is the likes of Neil Rubin and this de-Judiazed publication demanding that people shut up. Who do these guys think they are?

The stakes are simply too high for silence or an “ignorance is bliss“ attitude. Israel is this country’s only real ally in the Middle East, and the relationship is based upon shared values, principles, and beliefs about social and political decency, equality, liberty, and freedom.

The vast majority of Americans understands, even if the geniuses of The Jewish Times do not, that there are more important national priorities than being cheerleaders for Barack Hussein Obama’s personal political advancement. This is the real meaning and importance of Senator Cardin’s remarks, as well as those of other leading Democrats, up to and including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

All of this should be borne in mind between now and the election of 2012. I predict this publication will shill for Obama no less ardently than they did in 2008. Expect in 2012 to be called a “racist” if you object to any Obama policy. No doubt Andrew Buerger will repeat the filthy anecdote he allegedly heard in 2008 and attributed to an unnamed Rabbi about Jews using the term “schvartze.” This will all be misdirection of the kind the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan called “boob bait for the bubbas,” and Jewish voters should not fall for it a second time.

In the interim, Young Andrew would be doing his greatest public service if deleted the word “Jewish” from his publication’s title. It would be the honest thing to do, and it will permit Mr. Rubin and the other wannabe J Streeters, Code Pinkos and Patrick Buchanans to embrace, finally and without hypocrisy or embarrassment, all of the policies, from the “Auschwitz borders” to the “Palestinian right of return,” designed to murder the single Jewish state in the world.

This all sound so well written Senator Cardin and I understand the perceptions of negotiations. I am a Democrat for many years and have consistantly voted for you year after year although i consider myself much more independent then Democrat today. The President unfortunately when he made his original talk to the masses (which he moderated for more partisan audiences) set a 1967 borders pre condition no other President has while at the same time never setting a minimum recognition of israel pre condition for the Palestinians. That was the speech that counted and the President clearly showed his bias against Israel. I pray each day that your conscience as a Jew first and a politician second does not corrupt your decision making and leave the state of israel in peril. Putting aside all the rhetoric and politics, the President is very scary when it comes to his outward support for israel. My future voting for you will rest on the President supporting israel fairly and you calling it as you should when he doesn’t.