ABC cancels Roseanne Reboot.

[Stryker]

Um yes we are.

The naivety of you and Aggie is astounding..

For starters American Jews in general have never been labeled or regarded as Zionists, secondly any imbecile could derive from the fact that the majority of Jews vote for Zionist hating democRATS.

Thirdly, many, if not all Orthodox Jews do not believe in Israels right to exist.

Seriously you two, you want more?

Take your pick.

https://www.google.com/search?ei=8j...k1j0i20i264k1j0i20i263k1j0i10k1.0.6p34kjwQOhw

More:

https://www.google.com/search?ei=eD.......0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.OgIYx83r8M8

I think Aggie explained this much better than I could. I am not Jewish, but I do have many friends who are. The problem is these generalizations. They lead to bias and bias leads to racism. I deal with hundreds of people a week, when I work events, it's in the thousands. I deal with people as individuals, because that is what we are.

And that is what we are all here. It's why I take each post at its own merit. It's fine if we disagree on something. I'm not going to carry a disagreement to another thread, or another forum. I can argue with Coach in one thread and like his post in another, because the post has merit.

As far as links, there are quite a few very right leaning sites that are referenced. More often then not, they do get a lot of hits by creating divides among groups of people. I don't like to read those types of articles, they are too emotionally driven for me, and not very factual.

 

[IndySteel]

Forest Gump's ***** mother weighed in:

Sally Field took to Twitter -- and slammed Ivanka Trump herself.

“I like Samantha Bee a lot, but she is flat wrong to call Ivanka a c---,” she said. “C---s are powerful, beautiful, nurturing and honest.”

 

[Stryker]

Is it like a black person being able to call another black person a N, and Gays can call other gays Fs?

So I suppose women have their own word, and would probably get even madder if a man used it toward them. They already trigger if a man calls them a ***** so I'd assume the C word would be worse?

 

[Stryker]

It's pretty evident you don't know a lot about this subject Cope. It's discussed and written about frequently, how the divide between American Jews and Israel is worsening. I'd accuse your rebuttal of being ignorant.

First, more of my anecdotes: In my career I have spent 6-7 years working for Israeli companies. Not Jewish companies, Israeli companies. I also dated a Jew for a year. I know more than a little bit about the subject. In those companies, I watched American Jews and Israeli Jews interact. It was almost comical. And they'd debate and argue politics. There was a huge divide.

American Jews and Israeli Jews are vastly different. Israeli Jews live in a state driven by their religion, in a state where conscription is mandatory, in a state where the military is a necessity and a way of life. They are Conservative by every stretch. American Jews are Liberal. Many American Jews are in ways now anti-Israel due to the Dem's new policy of hating Israel and loving Iran. Many American Jews no longer believe the "State" of Israel should even exist. And alarmingly, a lot of American Jews are now Palestinian sympathizers.

And there are a tremendous amount of American Jews who've never ever stepped foot in Israel. I live in one of the largest Jewish areas of the country. I'd say 30% of my network here is Jewish. Scant few have been to Israel.

But since what I just said is all anecdotal, you can view these:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5bdaecc80059



https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...-u-s-jews-more-turned-off-to-israel-1.5751616



http://www.pewforum.org/essay/ameri...n-portraits-from-pew-research-center-surveys/

http://theconversation.com/as-israel-turns-70-many-young-american-jews-turn-away-95271



Ben Shapiro (Jewish) - Why do Jews vote Leftist? "The vast majority of Jews don't care about Judaism or Israel. They care about secular Leftism."

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/M5IqH7oJ9h4" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I always appreciate the debate and the time you take in explaining your opinion Tim. Here I just don't see eye to eye with you. The 3 sources you list are all right wing publications. The sources are biased, so it is tough to see another perspective while reading the article, because it won't be included. It's why I also can't read left wing publications. Too emotional... It seems to me, right wing publications are the ones creating the divide, because they are good at it.

I think you describing the American jews interacting with Israelis at work is more impactful of an argument, because you have first hand experience with the interactions. I don't mean to presuppose, but are these conversations taking place in America or Israel?

I also don't mean to throw around my Jew card. I spent every morning with my 'adoptive jewish mother'. She 'adopted' me because I was a 'good eater' and a 'good boy' so she could rip on her son. I spent mornings there because my best friend, who was jewish, and lived in my neighborhood, would be driven to school. We lived on the edge of walking territory, and it wasn't fun to walk a mile to school. Plus I got breakfast which never occurred in my home. My mother was an academic raising 2 new boys 3 & 1, and my Step Father was a horrible human being, so I limited all interactions with that prick. Half of my jewish family were liberal and half were conservative. Trust me the conversations between them are not only heated, but full of humor. It's gotten more heated lately, but none of them side with the Palestinians in this conflict.

Also since you were a goyim dating a jewish girl, many of my jewish friends would send their condolences.

 

[BAS]

Might have been brushed off as “locker room talk”, grab her by the pissy type stuff, etc.

Elected officials can’t be fired.

Except that 'locker room talk' was not written, produced and broadcast as a comedy bit.

 

[AggieSteel]

I don't disagree that, based on percentages, there are "more" conservative Israeli Jews than American, and "more" liberal American Jews than Israeli. The problem is when you try to generalize and simplify discussion about it and just pit Israelis and American Jews into entirely separate camps with no nuance as if they are warring factions or something. No, there is still love and solidarity between Jews across the globe, and most will be happy will argue politics with you then share a beer and laughs afterwards. I was just a groomsman in my hard-line conservative Israeli friend's wedding 6 months ago, and I love him like my brother. Imagine that?

So, with that being said, few notes on the statistics Tim posted:
-I've read those percentages and I imagine they are "true" at a 30,000 foot view. The problem is the "moderate" is misleading. Here a few reasons why:
1) Commitment to the religion is a decent predictor of where a Jew will land politically. Because Israel has a higher percentage of religious and orthodox Jews,
there are "more" conservatives.
2) Also because the existence of their country is constantly under siege, this cultivates a strong national pride and identity, and desire to defend it from its
enemies. Strong national pride and defense are hallmarks of conservative thinking. So because of consequence, many Israelis are essentially conservative
because that's the life they know.

HOWEVER, some caveats.
1) The above does not apply to every Israeli. There are many who aren't into the political discussions and just want to party, have fun, or be religious, or in some way just live life without worrying about that stuff
2) The "moderate" sections, on both sides, I think is a misleading stat. 55% of Israelis identify as moderate. If the conservative party is in power and culturally dominant, what does it mean if you are not willing to affiliate yourself with their ideology? Over half the country is not willing to label themselves conservative, and in a country with a conservative leader, with lots of religious folk and everyone served in the military, I think that's a high number. If you're not conservative in Israel, many might consider you "liberal" even if you self-identify as "centrist". So there is still a **** ton of diversity of thought, debates, back and forth just like there is here.

It is simply inaccurate and an unfair representation of the global Jewish community to simply pit Americans as liberals, Israelis as conservatives, and pretend we are all just at odds with each other. While there will always be disagreements between people (of any backgrounds) because we all have different life experiences, it is wrong to think that stereotypes and generalizations apply as hard and fast rules. This is one of my biggest problems with many of the arguments here, and many I've had with other conservatives. It's easy to put nice neat boxes around things so you can simplify and build straw man arguments and create hard and fast worldviews based on your generalizations, but that's not how the world works. There is always nuance, and you should expect to receive resistance when you have lived outside of a certain community then you try to tell it about itself or what it should care about. Whether it's black folk with police brutality, Jews with Holocaust jokes or stereotypes about American Jews and Israeli Jews hating each other, etc. I just don't see the fascination with trying to tell folks of communities they don't belong to about themselves. Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't you listen more than you preach?

 

[Steeler Pride]

And that's the problem. You think racism is lumped in with "insults". Racism is about FAR MORE than the feelings of the receiver of the racism. When racist ideologies are allowed to take hold in society, it opens up the door to entire groups of people being systematically oppressed, and often brutally. We've seen countless examples throughout history and America holds itself to a higher standard than apartheid, genocide, Nazism, etc. This is why society comes down so hard specifically on RACIST behavior. We do not want to turn into the lessons we've already learned from history plenty of times. So we nip it in the bud. I'd rather overreact, shut it down, kill the ant with a sledgehammer, than risk these types of thoughts taking hold and allowing it to affect policies. This is so much bigger than protecting the feelings of individuals on the receiving end of nasty comments.

On the other hand, hurling insults at individual people is mean, and society should condemn that as well. But that is more about civility and decency and mutual respect for our fellow countrymen. The right literally elected a president who proudly stands AGAINST these ideals, and they embraced him for exactly that. "Triggered, snowflake, **** your feelings" - remember that? Remember when Trump invited Ted Nugent to the White House despite his calling Hillary a ****, and threatening to kill Obama and Hillary? I thought the right would be the first to confirm that a society lacking civility and decency is somehow better. I mean, that's what you told us during the election, right? That we were all just sensitive snowflakes?

So can we please acknowledge that, while neither are good for society, actual racism has much more insidious and potentially damaging, dangerous consequences for the world? So no, not all insults are the same.

Again, because racism is about more than unkind words. It's about power and systematic oppression of other people. The history of our country has demonstrated that only one race has the power to take it that far. Minorities can sling racist insults, and that should be condemned as well (and is by me and many others I know) but it is foolish to think that it can translate into the power dynamic this country has had in the past, and other countries have had. Again, that is why racism is so insidious. So much more than flinging insults. But yes to your point, it is also a bad thing for society when other races say and do racist things. I will (and have) condemned that on many occasions and will continue to. Are some too quiet about that? Probably. But I wouldn't agree with those people.

So if racist ideologies are dangerous in society, why do minorities not complain when there are programs set up specifically for their skin color. Why are they not appalled that MBE (minority business enterprise) grants minority business owners tax benefits, preferential treatment on government funded and tax credit projects? If it is about equality then why do they openly accept benefits that place them above other individuals just based off of the color of their skin? You don't think that creates or pushes racism even further along it's way?

Do you honestly believe that no minorities are racist? Only the strong and powerful whites are racist? Racism has little to do with power and/or oppression.

Why do all liberals feel that they can assign priorities to offensive material? Does a white kid who is bullied and ends up shooting up his class mates think that "mean things" are not as bad as racist jokes? When people tease overweight kids and/or adults about their weight, you don't think that can be as damaging to them as a racist comment? You don't get to assign an order to what is offensive to anyone else, the fact that you keep trying to shows how little empathy you have for anyone that does not fit into your stereotypical box of oppression.

 

[Sarge]

Again, because racism is about more than unkind words. It's about power and systematic oppression of other people. The history of our country has demonstrated that only one race has the power to take it that far. Minorities can sling racist insults, and that should be condemned as well (and is by me and many others I know) but it is foolish to think that it can translate into the power dynamic this country has had in the past, and other countries have had. Again, that is why racism is so insidious. So much more than flinging insults. But yes to your point, it is also a bad thing for society when other races say and do racist things. I will (and have) condemned that on many occasions and will continue to. Are some too quiet about that? Probably. But I wouldn't agree with those people.

So are you ok with colleges offering classes and seminars about whiteness, how bad and ugly it is, having days without whitey, **** like that?

Actually I don't know about that. Maybe. We're a very partisan society - the right overreacts to the left, and vice versa. I mean Fox got on Obama for wearing a tan suit and fist bumping his wife..? That's the world we live in now. It's sad. But for your specific example, Sean Hannity (and Laura Ingraham, and plenty others) have said lots of mean things about liberals, women, etc. This happens every day on cable news. Maybe not that specific word, but they are far from civil and decent all the time. We have "town halls" and "panel discussions" and all that typically about issues on race and/or guns, from what I've seen. But not ordinary vulgarity/insults. Again, the right's hero president literally ran on an anti-PC platform, and was embraced and elected for it.

And Samantha Bee hasn't been "mentioned in passing" - it's all over the place. I'm just not seeing what you're seeing. Her apology made headlines and push notifications to my phone. She's being dragged.

First, the bolded part. You cannot be serious. Second, find me where Rush, Hannity, Ingraham or any other conservative news personality called anyone a **** in public. Your example is a vile and disgusting human being that grabbed her crotch and spit after completely butchered the national anthem. Sure, there is rhetoric on both sides. Considering the way the media covered "grab em by the *****" I am betting that if any of them used the word **** the house would have came down. Here in upstate New York, I have seen the Samantha Bee story twice. Once on ABC and once on CNN. FOX has covered it a lot, obviously.

I disagree. In fact, just a few months ago, I recall watching (don't know why I did - it ruined my day) a video of some white kid on his knees with his arms up crying, and a police officer holding a rifle to his face yelling and screaming at him for 8 minutes or so before blasting the kid's body full of holes. I'll never get those images out of my head, and I was just as furious about that than I was about any other police shooting. And do you know whose twitter account posted it? Shaun King. All the same pro-black activists/BLM folk who talk about anti-black police shootings were talking about that one JUST AS LOUDLY. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. People ARE outraged, believe me. Yes, stopping abuse at the hands of police is certainly an ultimate goal. It's just more urgent in the minds of black folks - but that doesn't mean they only want it to stop for their OWN people. I don't know if you just don't want to see that because it doesn't fit your interpretation of events, or what, but your perception of this just isn't true. This isn't a "we only want things to improve for us" situation. It is a "things have been worse for us than everyone else and that needs to change. But these events need to stop for everyone too". Maybe there isn't as much publicity from the networks about that, but best believe the people who actually care and are driving these discussions in the first place care JUST AS MUCH about dead white people

Make sure you recommend Shaun King for sainthood. This is the same guy that went on a crusade, accusing a white cop of rape, based on the accusation of one person who had no proof. Body cam showed it was a complete lie. Was that shooting of the white kid on the news? It may have been, but I surely don't remember hearing about it. And the next time I hear Shaun King say that he wants to end police violence for all people will be the first time. Black lives matter, right? Don't dare say All lives matter. You remember that whole dust up? Couldn't say All lives matter because it diminishes the fact that innocent, unarmed black people are being slaughtered in the street.

For those who I know who are feminists and specifically concerned about sexual assault as a key issue, I have never seen a single instance of selectively choosing whose rape matters. They are concerned about WOMEN, not their political affiliations. That really feels more like a projection to me, I'm sorry, I just don't see it. Just because you see right vs left in everything doesn't mean women who care about rape victims care who the victim voted for. That's just.. not congruent with what I've seen. Hell, Al Franken resigned because of his "Me Too" situation, meanwhile the president was supporting Roy Moore's run, and has 19 accusations of sexual assault of his own and still sits in the White House. I mean, what do you really want to see here?

My god, I am one of the more moderate people in this forum. I have railed against Trump the way I railed against liberalism. Don't try to pigeon hole me like you know what I am about. It's not projection. And I never said it was a widespread problem when it comes to rape. What about the women that Bill Clinton is accused of raping? Where were the feminists on that one? That is the only one I pointed out, because it is the only instance I know. Doesn't change the fact it was mostly glossed over. Those women were crucified. Was Bill Clinton investigated for those accusations? Hell, the hummer he got from his intern is referred to a "The Lewinsky Scandal" rather than "The Clinton Scandal." You think that is an accident? I can give about a dozen instances where conservative women were attacked, and outright slandered, and there was no outcry from feminists. Feminists rarely, if ever come to the defense of known conservative women. Sometimes, they are the ones doing the insulting.

As far as Al Franken, there was a photograph of him pretending or preparing to grab the boobs of a woman. While she slept. It was at the height of the me too movement, and IIRC he had to be forced to step down. He wasn't gonna do it on his own. As far as Roy Moore, I wasn't behind that guy either. Sure there were 19 accusations, but there was also no proof other than he signed some girl's yearbook when he was 35 or whatever. He lost. Mission accomplished. Who cares? I mean the 19 accusers apparently don't care anymore. Don't hear much from them about it these days. Strange. In fact, Roy more has countersued four of his accusers. That is the only news about all that mess since the election was over.

Your point was that Trump supported him. I know. Why shouldn't he? Was there proof that he did anything? No, just accusations. Regardless of whether I think he is guilty or not, you gotta meet a burden of proof. It's the law.

 

[AggieSteel]

So if racist ideologies are dangerous in society, why do minorities not complain when there are programs set up specifically for their skin color. Why are they not appalled that MBE (minority business enterprise) grants minority business owners tax benefits, preferential treatment on government funded and tax credit projects? If it is about equality then why do they openly accept benefits that place them above other individuals just based off of the color of their skin? You don't think that creates or pushes racism even further along it's way?

Because centuries-long system racism had the playing field so unequal for so long, society came together and came up with ideas about how to help those whose circumstances are the only things holding them back. Are all "affirmative action" type ideas GOOD ideas? I don't know, I don't think so. But you have to understand that these ideas are NOT about providing minorities an "advantage" it's about trying to bring them out from DISadvantage. That is something that I do not think is well understood by conservative white folks, and by Trump himself who always whines about how unfair everyone and everything is to him. Nobody is trying to give minorities a leg up just because they're minorities. Just hoping to even things out. And maybe some day, as a society, we will come up with better ideas how to do that as maybe we're floundering around a bit now.

Do you honestly believe that no minorities are racist? Only the strong and powerful whites are racist? Racism has little to do with power and/or oppression.

What? No..? I didn't say that! I clearly stated that I always condemn when minorities say and do racist things. Anyone is capable of having hateful thoughts about other people based on their skin color. But that is the smallest, least impactful element of racism, which is a much larger, much scarier institution beyond just that one small element of it. So you're wrong when you say "racism has little to do with power and/or oppression. Sorry that's simply a WRONG statement. That IS the very essence of racism, the meat and potatoes. If hateful racism is a sickness, the mean insults are a head cold. The systematic oppression is the immune system turning on itself and destroying the body from the inside until it dies. There are levels of severity here that you're not acknowledging. It is a 'white privilege' to assume that racism is nothing more than slinging insults back and forth at one another. It's just a fact that mean words have very little impact if they can never translate into an unbalanced power dynamic like we've had in this country's history, and other countries' histories. This is what every person who is an activist against racism is truly fighting against.

Why do all liberals feel that they can assign priorities to offensive material? Does a white kid who is bullied and ends up shooting up his class mates think that "mean things" are not as bad as racist jokes? When people tease overweight kids and/or adults about their weight, you don't think that can be as damaging to them as a racist comment? You don't get to assign an order to what is offensive to anyone else, the fact that you keep trying to shows how little empathy you have for anyone that does not fit into your stereotypical box of oppression.

I thought school shootings were all about "mental illness" and anti-anxiety drugs - or is it about bullying now because it's more convenient to this discussion? I thought bullying didn't have an affect because we want to defend when the president does it?

So yeah, on an individual level, a mean insult can hurt someone just as much as a racist joke can. But that's not the debate here and you are consistently trying to widdle this discussion down to the "micro" level when I've been talking "macro". If racist jokes can turn into openly racist people, which can turn into more openly racist people, which can turn into openly racist elected officials, which can turn into openly racist policies - then you're left with stories we've seen far too many times throughout history. Do you really believe that being a vulgar ******* bully to someone, which is not a thing I support and it IS harmful to people and to society, is really on that same level? I have empathy for everyone, but I am far more concerned about society as a whole than I am about one individual on the receiving end of an insult, whether it's racist or just vulgar. Please try to wrap your head around that, as you continually try to make this about 1 person vs 1 person

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

As far as links, there are quite a few very right leaning sites that are referenced. More often then not, they do get a lot of hits by creating divides among groups of people. I don't like to read those types of articles, they are too emotionally driven for me, and not very factual.

Cope, you're ignoring facts. You don't like the message, even though it is real and true, and you're simply trying to say "it can't be true" by disagreeing with the source.

I gave you the Washington Post, a Jewish media outlet, a Jew, and the Pew Research Center.

To argue that American Jews and Israelis are in lockstep politically, ideally, and religiously is comical to me.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I always appreciate the debate and the time you take in explaining your opinion Tim. Here I just don't see eye to eye with you. The 3 sources you list are all right wing publications. The sources are biased, so it is tough to see another perspective while reading the article, because it won't be included. It's why I also can't read left wing publications. Too emotional... It seems to me, right wing publications are the ones creating the divide, because they are good at it.

I think you describing the American jews interacting with Israelis at work is more impactful of an argument, because you have first hand experience with the interactions. I don't mean to presuppose, but are these conversations taking place in America or Israel?

I also don't mean to throw around my Jew card. I spent every morning with my 'adoptive jewish mother'. She 'adopted' me because I was a 'good eater' and a 'good boy' so she could rip on her son. I spent mornings there because my best friend, who was jewish, and lived in my neighborhood, would be driven to school. We lived on the edge of walking territory, and it wasn't fun to walk a mile to school. Plus I got breakfast which never occurred in my home. My mother was an academic raising 2 new boys 3 & 1, and my Step Father was a horrible human being, so I limited all interactions with that prick. Half of my jewish family were liberal and half were conservative. Trust me the conversations between them are not only heated, but full of humor. It's gotten more heated lately, but none of them side with the Palestinians in this conflict.

Also since you were a goyim dating a jewish girl, many of my jewish friends would send their condolences.

::rolls eyes::

You are quite literally serious about this? That American Jews and Israeli Jews are in lockstep? I can't even... To me this is equal to Kyrie Irving insisting the world is flat. Well...ok man.

Oh, and you outed yourself here. You don't understand media sources. You're attacking sources because you don't like the message, and your attack on the sources is wrong. Like 2+2=5 kind of wrong.

• The Washington Post is UBER Liberal.
• Pew Research is Center to Left leaning.
• Haaretz is an ISRAELI newspaper.
• And...The Conversation.com is Center to Left leaning.
• Yes Ben Shapiro is a Conservative Jew. But EVERY other source is Liberal or Left of Center.

Now what? Can we get back to the fact that American and Israeli Jews are "factually" nothing alike? Can you take off your blinders and read the articles, the surveys, see the graphs that depict this as fact?

 

[AggieSteel]

So are you ok with colleges offering classes and seminars about whiteness, how bad and ugly it is, having days without whitey, **** like that?

Of course not, that's ridiculous to teach that an entire race of people is "bad and ugly". You're taking an obscure, extreme, ridiculous example (I've never even heard of it so not even sure if this is real) that clearly is not something that most thinking people would align to, and trying to use it as justification of belief of some widespread white victimhood or something. Cut me a ******* break dude. You don't see me arguing with the most extreme examples of right-wing bs or racism that clearly aren't having any demonstrable impact on society or culture in any way. I mean, how many neo-Nazi or pedophile candidates have run for office as GOP in the past couple years? I've heard of 3 off the top of my head so there may be even more. Do you see me holding them up as examples of why all of you are full of ****?

First, the bolded part. You cannot be serious.

I am serious. I've only seen "town halls" about guns and race issues. Never because someone said a mean word. The president has the market cornered on that.

Second, find me where Rush, Hannity, Ingraham or any other conservative news personality called anyone a **** in public. Your example is a vile and disgusting human being that grabbed her crotch and spit after completely butchered the national anthem. Sure, there is rhetoric on both sides. Considering the way the media covered "grab em by the *****" I am betting that if any of them used the word **** the house would have came down. Here in upstate New York, I have seen the Samantha Bee story twice. Once on ABC and once on CNN. FOX has covered it a lot, obviously.

I didn't say they called anyone a ****. I said they are often not civil or respectful to their political opponents, and you said yourself an insult is an insult. Why does it have to be that word? They can be real dicks and you know it. It's widespread today and Fox personalities are some of the worst. They don't have to say "****" to be dicks

Make sure you recommend Shaun King for sainthood. This is the same guy that went on a crusade, accusing a white cop of rape, based on the accusation of one person who had no proof. Body cam showed it was a complete lie. Was that shooting of the white kid on the news? It may have been, but I surely don't remember hearing about it. And the next time I hear Shaun King say that he wants to end police violence for all people will be the first time. Black lives matter, right? Don't dare say All lives matter. You remember that whole dust up? Couldn't say All lives matter because it diminishes the fact that innocent, unarmed black people are being slaughtered in the street.

Sainthood? Are you high? I only said his name to point out that it's the SAME people you think only care about "black lives" who care about every life. You just don't take the time to pay attention because you see what you want to see, you draw the conclusion you want to draw, and you don't look any deeper. BLM activists care about everyone, you just choose to not see it. I didn't say he's a saint or perfect, and yes that rape accusation was a terrible tragedy for that cop and a shame for King who shared without corroborating if it was true. And lol @ "all lives matter" this goes back to what I was saying to the other guy. "Black lives matter" does not mean "Only black lives matter" it means "Black lives matter also, because it feels like they do not". Saying "all lives matter" is an insult because you're implying that those who say "black lives matter" don't think other lives matter. And that's wrong. It is simply not true. Y'all CONSISTENTLY want to twist the point of black lives matter to make it feel like black folks are trying to gain some advantage over the rest of the world, like they want to be the ONLY lives that matter. That is a willful misinterpretation of the message and you KNOW it.

Edit: and since you've never seen him mention it, here it is: https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/939014159726870530 "One of the worst I've ever witnessed" "a grave injustice"

My god, I am one of the more moderate people in this forum. I have railed against Trump the way I railed against liberalism. Don't try to pigeon hole me like you know what I am about. It's not projection. And I never said it was a widespread problem when it comes to rape. What about the women that Bill Clinton is accused of raping? Where were the feminists on that one? That is the only one I pointed out, because it is the only instance I know. Doesn't change the fact it was mostly glossed over. Those women were crucified. Was Bill Clinton investigated for those accusations? Hell, the hummer he got from his intern is referred to a "The Lewinsky Scandal" rather than "The Clinton Scandal." You think that is an accident? I can give about a dozen instances where conservative women were attacked, and outright slandered, and there was no outcry from feminists. Feminists rarely, if ever come to the defense of known conservative women. Sometimes, they are the ones doing the insulting.

If it's the only instance you know, how is it evidence of some widespread double standard? Personally I'm not all that familiar with the situation, but what I DO know is that people who truly care about sexual assault survivors take them ALL seriously. That's a fact. Anyone who doesn't is a political hack posing as someone who cares. And I can't corroborate your statement "Feminists rare, if ever ..." that is just pure conjecture you're throwing out there. I've never personally seen it, I don't agree with it, and I won't argue it any further because I do not believe it to be true.

As far as Al Franken, there was a photograph of him pretending or preparing to grab the boobs of a woman. While she slept. It was at the height of the me too movement, and IIRC he had to be forced to step down. He wasn't gonna do it on his own. As far as Roy Moore, I wasn't behind that guy either. Sure there were 19 accusations, but there was also no proof other than he signed some girl's yearbook when he was 35 or whatever. He lost. Mission accomplished. Who cares? I mean the 19 accusers apparently don't care anymore. Don't hear much from them about it these days. Strange. In fact, Roy more has countersued four of his accusers. That is the only news about all that mess since the election was over.

Your point was that Trump supported him. I know. Why shouldn't he? Was there proof that he did anything? No, just accusations. Regardless of whether I think he is guilty or not, you gotta meet a burden of proof. It's the law.

The point about Al Franken is that liberals/Democrats take sexual harassment/assault seriously EVEN IF it's one of their own doing it. People take these things very seriously because it transcends politics. It is a human issue. Clearly anyone supporting Roy Moore didn't think that way.

 

[AggieSteel]

::rolls eyes::

You are quite literally serious about this? That American Jews and Israeli Jews are in lockstep? I can't even... To me this is equal to Kyrie Irving insisting the world is flat. Well...ok man.

Oh, and you outed yourself here. You don't understand media sources. You're attacking sources because you don't like the message, and your attack on the sources is wrong. Like 2+2=5 kind of wrong.

• The Washington Post is UBER Liberal.
• Pew Research is Center to Left leaning.
• Haaretz is an ISRAELI newspaper.
• And...The Conversation.com is Center to Left leaning.
• Yes Ben Shapiro is a Conservative Jew. But EVERY other source is Liberal or Left of Center.

Now what? Can we get back to the fact that American and Israeli Jews are "factually" nothing alike? Can you take off your blinders and read the articles, the surveys, see the graphs that depict this as fact?

Do you not see how the bolded parts are invalidating your argument? All Cope (and I) is saying is that you can't generalize. You only see two camps: "in lockstep" vs "nothing alike" . Obviously neither are true, but you need your nice neat clean boxes to put everything in. Cope and I are simply saying it's not that simple and these people you claim to speak for do not belong in nice neat boxes you're creating for them

 

[Steeler Pride]

Because centuries-long system racism had the playing field so unequal for so long, society came together and came up with ideas about how to help those whose circumstances are the only things holding them back. Are all "affirmative action" type ideas GOOD ideas? I don't know, I don't think so. But you have to understand that these ideas are NOT about providing minorities an "advantage" it's about trying to bring them out from DISadvantage. That is something that I do not think is well understood by conservative white folks, and by Trump himself who always whines about how unfair everyone and everything is to him. Nobody is trying to give minorities a leg up just because they're minorities. Just hoping to even things out. And maybe some day, as a society, we will come up with better ideas how to do that as maybe we're floundering around a bit now.

So you want to be identified by your race or not. That is the only question. You can't support laws that eliminate Race/Sex/Religion..etc. as a basis for hiring someone and then turn around and support laws that give preferential treatment based off of Race/Sex/Religion. You can't tell someone to look past the color of skin and then turn around and receive preferential treatment because of the color of your skin. If you can't see how that in and of itself breeds racism then that is part of the problem. There have been numerous construction related companies that have gone out of business in the last 5 years because they can no longer get work on projects that involve HUD, FEMA, Government Buildings...etc because the incentives and/or requirements to hire MBE and/or WBE companies. Is that a level playing field to you? No matter that many of the MBE/WBE firms do not have the same qualifications or experience, they get run out of business or told they cannot work on government projects because they are not a minority or female. You wonder why racism still exists?

What? No..? I didn't say that! I clearly stated that I always condemn when minorities say and do racist things. Anyone is capable of having hateful thoughts about other people based on their skin color. But that is the smallest, least impactful element of racism, which is a much larger, much scarier institution beyond just that one small element of it. So you're wrong when you say "racism has little to do with power and/or oppression. Sorry that's simply a WRONG statement. That IS the very essence of racism, the meat and potatoes. If hateful racism is a sickness, the mean insults are a head cold. The systematic oppression is the immune system turning on itself and destroying the body from the inside until it dies. There are levels of severity here that you're not acknowledging. It is a 'white privilege' to assume that racism is nothing more than slinging insults back and forth at one another. It's just a fact that mean words have very little impact if they can never translate into an unbalanced power dynamic like we've had in this country's history, and other countries' histories. This is what every person who is an activist against racism is truly fighting against.

How can you claim that in your eyes racism is about power and/or oppression and then claim that there can be minorities that are racist? If they don't have any power or oppression over anyone then how can they be considered racist? White privilege...I would say there are as many minority privileges in this Country if not more, yet people do not take advantage of them and still cry about oppression. If you do nothing to better yourself, take advantage of all of the privileges available to you, and still want to cry about systemic racism and/or white privilege then you have nobody to blame but yourself. It also belittles every successful minority who rose out of poverty, bad neighborhoods, crime riddled areas and made something of themselves. There are SO many ways for minorities to make a better life for themselves and yet so many choose never to take advantage of them and would prefer to blame others for their hardships. How about accountability and responsibility for yourself, your actions, or your life.

I thought school shootings were all about "mental illness" and anti-anxiety drugs - or is it about bullying now because it's more convenient to this discussion? I thought bullying didn't have an affect because we want to defend when the president does it?

Again, show me where I said that school shootings are all about mental illness or drugs. You talk about cherry picking to make it convenient for your discussion? I never mentioned President Trump, President Obama, or anyone else besides kids who are bullied for reasons other than race. You were the one who criticized others in this thread for deflecting to other people yet you turn around and do the same thing.

So yeah, on an individual level, a mean insult can hurt someone just as much as a racist joke can. But that's not the debate here and you are consistently trying to widdle this discussion down to the "micro" level when I've been talking "macro". If racist jokes can turn into openly racist people, which can turn into more openly racist people, which can turn into openly racist elected officials, which can turn into openly racist policies - then you're left with stories we've seen far too many times throughout history. Do you really believe that being a vulgar ******* bully to someone, which is not a thing I support and it IS harmful to people and to society, is really on that same level? I have empathy for everyone, but I am far more concerned about society as a whole than I am about one individual on the receiving end of an insult, whether it's racist or just vulgar. Please try to wrap your head around that, as you continually try to make this about 1 person vs 1 person

There is nothing micro about insults that affect a wide group of people. When comedians, actors, or talk show hosts...etc make fun of overweight people on TV you don't think that affects millions of people across the country and/or world. Once again, you don't get to tell anyone what is more insulting to them or anyone else. What is insulting to me may have no bearing on my neighbor, friend, or anyone else. Insulting speech is still insulting speech and whether you feel that calling someone a fat pig is not as bad as calling a black person an Ape that is your prerogative, don't tell someone else what they can or should be more offended about. If you want to have empathy for society then you should empathize with insulting speech and hateful speech directed at everyone and consider it all as degrading, demeaning, and unacceptable. Anything less than that is cherry picking for your own narrative.

 

[Superman]

https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/all-that-and-a-bag-of-mail-32/

“Should Samantha Bee be fired for calling Ivanka Trump a feckless ****? How would you compare the media reaction to her insult to Roseanne and Keith Olbermann’s comments on Twitter?”

No, I don’t believe she should be fired because I’m not in favor of online lynch mobs finding some form of content they don’t like and demanding people be fired for saying or writing it. I didn’t think it made sense when liberals were mad at Laura Ingraham over her comments about the Parkland student and wanted her fired I don’t think it makes sense for Samantha Bee to be fired for her Ivanka insults either.

But I do think there are several points worth making on this Samantha Bee story: First, this was a written monologue put into the teleprompter, taped in front of a studio audience, reviewed by management, and then allowed to be aired on TBS. Furthermore, the digital clip was published online without being edited, Tweeted from the show accounts, and gleefully promoted by Samantha Bee’s staff on social media.

So this isn’t really very similar to someone saying something on live TV or live radio with no safety net and it isn’t very similar to Roseanne’s Tweet either since Roseanne was presumably Tweeting all by herself.

This is a huge staff at a national cable channel all making the decision to allow this content to be distributed. TBS should have had a long list of safeguards to keep this from happening yet still allowed this to happen. How does an entire staff miss the mark this badly?

By not having anyone on the staff who would have even thought of voting Republican.

It’s classic group think. This is why I believe intellectual diversity is more important than cosmetic diversity. Right now the country is obsessed with having a ton of people who look different, but think the same. I believe what we should be focused on is ensuring we have different perspectives, not different colors.

Because if Samantha Bee’s staff had someone on their staff who voted Republican or was even remotely moderate at all that person might have raised their hand and said, “Wait a minute, would we ever call the oldest Obama daughter a feckless ****? Would we call Michelle Obama or Laura Bush or the Bush daughters this either?” (I use the daughter and first lady comparison here because Ivanka Trump is a daughter of the president, but she’s also somewhat akin to a first lady too given she has a primarily ceremonial role in the White House).

If the answer is no, and I think the answer is 100% no, then this is an example of a clear double standard at play. Liberals, who control much of the media, vote Democratic, and believe they are “right” when it comes to all political issues aren’t considering the entirety of the country when it comes to their jokes.

I’m not a member of the joke police, never have been and never will be, but I do believe the standard for making jokes about public figures should be the same no matter what their politics are. That used to be what national comedians tried to do, they’d make fun of the Democrats and the Republicans relatively on equal footing. I remember watching these nightly shows, David Letterman in particular, during political campaigns and it was almost down to a science how even the jokes were, particularly during presidential campaigns. We got equal jokes on George Bush, Sr. and Bill Clinton, Clinton and Dole, Gore and W. Bush, and Kerry and W. Bush. All presidents have always gotten made fun of a great deal, but I think Obama got more lenient comedy treatment, by and large, because so many comedians liked him and were also terrified of being branded racist if they made a borderline joke.

Now Trump is elected and it’s like their entire comedic acts are predicated on ridiculing Trump. That means it’s hard to stand out with humor ridiculing Trump. Which means there’s a rush to be the most extreme when it comes to hating and ridiculing Trump.

Comedy is often about pushing social boundaries so that’s how you end up with writers calling Ivanka a feckless **** and with Samantha Bee delivering it to a studio audience and with the clip being posted online. The TBS writers and executives crossed a line, but they didn’t even realize they had crossed a line because this line is probably tame compared to what they all say when they’re out for beers. This was a left wing blind spot, which is why they didn’t edit the show and proudly shared it online.

What I think reasonable people should be seeking in an unreasonable era isn’t for comedians or networks to edit themselves aggressively, but just to treat everyone fairly. It’s a simple question, before you make a joke about Trump or his family ask yourself if you’d make the same joke about another politician or his family. Yes, Trump is a disrupter and you may hate his politics, but that doesn’t justify you abandoning all pretense of fairness in the way you cover him.

Trump is truly driving some members of the media insane and in their insanity, ironically, they are coming to look exactly like what they hate. Trump’s excess is rubbing off on them and they, amazingly, are actually making it more likely that he’s going to be reelected than less likely.

You don’t combat Trump by climbing into the pig sty with him, you do it by combating him on ideas and elevating discourse even when he may try to lower it. When things like Samantha Bee happen all it does is make the people who love Trump believe everything he has said and done is justified. This just confirms their belief that the system is rigged against Trump and them.

 

[Spike]

NBC should pull her plug - Jew hater

 

[AggieSteel]

So you want to be identified by your race or not. That is the only question. You can't support laws that eliminate Race/Sex/Religion..etc. as a basis for hiring someone and then turn around and support laws that give preferential treatment based off of Race/Sex/Religion. You can't tell someone to look past the color of skin and then turn around and receive preferential treatment because of the color of your skin. If you can't see how that in and of itself breeds racism then that is part of the problem. There have been numerous construction related companies that have gone out of business in the last 5 years because they can no longer get work on projects that involve HUD, FEMA, Government Buildings...etc because the incentives and/or requirements to hire MBE and/or WBE companies. Is that a level playing field to you? No matter that many of the MBE/WBE firms do not have the same qualifications or experience, they get run out of business or told they cannot work on government projects because they are not a minority or female. You wonder why racism still exists?

I think we fundamentally see a difference between "preferential treatment" and "making sure some groups aren't discriminated against". We tried leaving people to their own devices, and we saw how it turned out. The Rooney Rule isn't about forcing teams to hire minority coaches so they can get a leg up. It's about forcing teams to NOT ignore them completely, as many might do without the rule. I encourage you to try to think about these things in terms like that, not in terms of "giving out free advantages". Again, like I said, I do not think every single thing is perfect, and I hate to see people miss out on opportunities. So I understand if that causes bitterness. But shouldn't the anger be toward the government, rather than some blind racism? If someone "turns" racist because they lost a job opportunity to a black guy, I'm gonna go ahead and say he was racist already. It's just as easy (and more accurate) to blame the government. Racism exists because of hatred, and feeling superior, and believing your race belongs in a higher position in society than others. Not because a government regulation ****** you.

How can you claim that in your eyes racism is about power and/or oppression and then claim that there can be minorities that are racist? If they don't have any power or oppression over anyone then how can they be considered racist?

Like I said before, anyone can carry hatred in their hearts. That is simply one small portion of a very large and ugly institution that is racism. Only one race in this country has had the power to bring it to full on systematic practice. Again, think bigger, think macro.. get out of the micro

White privilege...I would say there are as many minority privileges in this Country if not more, yet people do not take advantage of them and still cry about oppression. If you do nothing to better yourself, take advantage of all of the privileges available to you, and still want to cry about systemic racism and/or white privilege then you have nobody to blame but yourself. It also belittles every successful minority who rose out of poverty, bad neighborhoods, crime riddled areas and made something of themselves. There are SO many ways for minorities to make a better life for themselves and yet so many choose never to take advantage of them and would prefer to blame others for their hardships. How about accountability and responsibility for yourself, your actions, or your life.

Why is it assumed that anyone who is concerned about racism doesn't want to better themselves? This is just flat wrong. You want to make it some zero-sum, "blaming whitey for my problems" situation when that's not what this is. Are there some people out there doing that? Sure, but these people do not have strong voices in society. And it is not THESE people who anti-racism activists have in mind when they speak out. It's the college grad named "Shanequa" who got her resume throw in the trash because of her name. People aren't going to bat for some hypothetical loser who doesn't even want to work or better himself.

And writers, activists, celebrities, etc. rail against racism not because it PERSONALLY holds them down, not because they do not want to better themselves.. these are successful, hard-working people. They speak on behalf of others who have been on the **** end. You see, some people actually have empathy for other people and society as a whole. Not all of us are inwardly focused on our own lives and how the world affects us personally. Sometimes, when society has a problem, you can simultaneously speak out against it and not be personally afflicted by it. It's what we do in a society that cares about each other and looks out for each other.

Again, show me where I said that school shootings are all about mental illness or drugs. You talk about cherry picking to make it convenient for your discussion? I never mentioned President Trump, President Obama, or anyone else besides kids who are bullied for reasons other than race. You were the one who criticized others in this thread for deflecting to other people yet you turn around and do the same thing.

I saw plenty of that argument in the thread about school shootings, thought you were one of them. Apologies if it wasn't you who said it, but you have to admit it's a common conservative counterargument to gun control, and I've heard plenty enough of it from folks who make the same arguments you do about racism. But again, apologies if that's not what you think.

There is nothing micro about insults that affect a wide group of people. When comedians, actors, or talk show hosts...etc make fun of overweight people on TV you don't think that affects millions of people across the country and/or world. Once again, you don't get to tell anyone what is more insulting to them or anyone else. What is insulting to me may have no bearing on my neighbor, friend, or anyone else. Insulting speech is still insulting speech and whether you feel that calling someone a fat pig is not as bad as calling a black person an Ape that is your prerogative, don't tell someone else what they can or should be more offended about. If you want to have empathy for society then you should empathize with insulting speech and hateful speech directed at everyone and consider it all as degrading, demeaning, and unacceptable. Anything less than that is cherry picking for your own narrative.

You're not wrong that people being mean and insulting to one another isn't good for society. I've never disagreed with them. I have a lot of empathy for overweight folks being fat shamed, mentally handicapped folks being called retards, etc. But there will never be a world in which fat people have resumes discarded, or forced to attend separate buildings, or arrested and sentenced harsher than skinny people, denied rights to vote or work, be forced into slavery, etc., etc. just because they are fat. There CAN and HAS BEEN worlds where these things have happened based on differences in race though. So yes, on an individual MICRO LEVEL, nobody is denying that people called fat can hurt just as much as it hurts a black person being called an ape. We all have our triggers. But history has taught us that racism can become an entire system of oppression, whereas fat shaming or name calling isn't.

 

[Steeler Pride]

I think we fundamentally see a difference between "preferential treatment" and "making sure some groups aren't discriminated against". We tried leaving people to their own devices, and we saw how it turned out. The Rooney Rule isn't about forcing teams to hire minority coaches so they can get a leg up. It's about forcing teams to NOT ignore them completely, as many might do without the rule. I encourage you to try to think about these things in terms like that, not in terms of "giving out free advantages". Again, like I said, I do not think every single thing is perfect, and I hate to see people miss out on opportunities. So I understand if that causes bitterness. But shouldn't the anger be toward the government, rather than some blind racism? If someone "turns" racist because they lost a job opportunity to a black guy, I'm gonna go ahead and say he was racist already. It's just as easy (and more accurate) to blame the government. Racism exists because of hatred, and feeling superior, and believing your race belongs in a higher position in society than others. Not because a government regulation ****** you.

If you tell one company you cannot bid on this project unless you are an MBE or WBE THAT is preferential treatment. The only person getting discriminated against is the company that can't bid on work because they are not a minority or female. So who is making sure that non WBE or MBE businesses are not discriminated against? So in your mind you want to be viewed as a minority when it benefits you to do so but don't discriminate against a minority or use their skin color as a reason to discriminate against them. When society stops seeing color and starts seeing everyone as equal is when racism will go away. As long as minorities accept programs and designations based strictly on their race it will only keep racism alive and well.

Like I said before, anyone can carry hatred in their hearts. That is simply one small portion of a very large and ugly institution that is racism. Only one race in this country has had the power to bring it to full on systematic practice. Again, think bigger, think macro.. get out of the micro

What exactly is systemic racism in your eyes? Given the number of programs that cater to minorities, how exactly do you see systemic racism in this country?

Why is it assumed that anyone who is concerned about racism doesn't want to better themselves? This is just flat wrong. You want to make it some zero-sum, "blaming whitey for my problems" situation when that's not what this is. Are there some people out there doing that? Sure, but these people do not have strong voices in society. And it is not THESE people who anti-racism activists have in mind when they speak out. It's the college grad named "Shanequa" who got her resume throw in the trash because of her name. People aren't going to bat for some hypothetical loser who doesn't even want to work or better himself.

Really, most of the people that I see on the news, doing interviews, interacting with law enforcement are not college grads named Shanequa.

And writers, activists, celebrities, etc. rail against racism not because it PERSONALLY holds them down, not because they do not want to better themselves.. these are successful, hard-working people. They speak on behalf of others who have been on the **** end. You see, some people actually have empathy for other people and society as a whole. Not all of us are inwardly focused on our own lives and how the world affects us personally. Sometimes, when society has a problem, you can simultaneously speak out against it and not be personally afflicted by it. It's what we do in a society that cares about each other and looks out for each other.

You mean empathy towards one group, towards one cause, and with one agenda. The media response and coverage to the last 3 days worth of events show plain as day that those writers, activists, celebrities, etc. only have empathy for one group of people.

You're not wrong that people being mean and insulting to one another isn't good for society. I've never disagreed with them. I have a lot of empathy for overweight folks being fat shamed, mentally handicapped folks being called retards, etc. But there will never be a world in which fat people have resumes discarded, or forced to attend separate buildings, or arrested and sentenced harsher than skinny people, denied rights to vote or work, be forced into slavery, etc., etc. just because they are fat. There CAN and HAS BEEN worlds where these things have happened based on differences in race though. So yes, on an individual MICRO LEVEL, nobody is denying that people called fat can hurt just as much as it hurts a black person being called an ape. We all have our triggers. But history has taught us that racism can become an entire system of oppression, whereas fat shaming or name calling isn't.

Again, what exactly do you define as and entire system of oppression. Again, as long as it is not geared towards minorities everything is fair game because of systemic oppression of minorities. And you wonder why racism exists.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

You are completely missing the intent of my original post. So let me clarify since you're reading things into my post that aren't there.

After being gone from the board for a few days, I noticed the following exchange between you and Indy:

You said: "Yeah and Roseanne is disgusting for doing that too. I know she's a Jew, and that doesn't make it any better. And I could give two ***** about your stance on Israel. Supporting Israel != being a friend to the Jews."

Indy replied: "And explain how supporting Israel is not being a friend to the Jews."

To which I "merely" said comparing American Jews and Israeli Jews by either of you is faulty logic. It's the same as comparing an Irishman living in Dublin to a 4th generation American citizen who hailed from Irish descendants. While the blood lines and the religion may be the same, the way they live life and see life is WHOLLY different.

Period, that's all my statement was about. It has since morphed into an argument that Jews there and here are the same or not. Silliness.

I don't disagree that, based on percentages, there are "more" conservative Israeli Jews than American, and "more" liberal American Jews than Israeli. The problem is when you try to generalize and simplify discussion about it and just pit Israelis and American Jews into entirely separate camps with no nuance as if they are warring factions or something.

If you are referring to me, read above. I'm not "pitting them into camps" like they are warring factions. I'm explaining they are wholly different people. Yes they share a common religion and ancestry. But their lives, AS YOU YOURSELF STATE, are vastly different.

No, there is still love and solidarity between Jews across the globe, and most will be happy will argue politics with you then share a beer and laughs afterwards.

No different than in any culture around the globe. No disagreement.

1) Commitment to the religion is a decent predictor of where a Jew will land politically. Because Israel has a higher percentage of religious and orthodox Jews,
there are "more" conservatives.
2) Also because the existence of their country is constantly under siege, this cultivates a strong national pride and identity, and desire to defend it from its
enemies. Strong national pride and defense are hallmarks of conservative thinking. So because of consequence, many Israelis are essentially conservative
because that's the life they know.

Exactly the point I have been trying to establish. Israeli Jews and American Jews are indeed very different due to the reasons you state and others.

It is simply inaccurate and an unfair representation of the global Jewish community to simply pit Americans as liberals, Israelis as conservatives, and pretend we are all just at odds with each other.

Facts: The majority of American Jews are Liberal. The majority of Israeli Jews are moderate to Conservative. It's not a discussion. No one is pretending global Jews are at odds with each other. See above. I'm pointing out you cannot compare American Jews and Israelis just as you can't compare the Irish Dubliner to the American Irish descendant.

However, many of the articles I posted from JEWISH newspapers, the Washington Post (Liberal) and others show that there IS a growing disagreement between American Jews and Israelis on even core issues such as whether Israel should be a state at all, or about the rights of Palestinians. A growing number of American Jews now believe the Jewish State shouldn't exist and a growing number of American Jews are highly sympathetic to Palestine.

So globally, there IS growing discord between the belief systems of those in Israel and those here.

These aren't my thoughts. These are the results of studies and publications I have shared. If you disagree with those publications and writers, so be it. I see it personally, so I believe it to be true.

...stereotypes about American Jews and Israeli Jews hating each other, etc.

I've never even inferred that the two groups hate each other. Not sure where that came from.

All Cope (and I) is saying is that you can't generalize. You only see two camps: "in lockstep" vs "nothing alike"

Me originally saying comparing American Jews to Israeli Jews has its faults is me generalizing? So if I had said all Jews around the globe think and act alike and see the world alike, wouldn't I have ALSO then been generalizing? By saying they are different, I'm generalizing. If I had said they are all the same, I would have been generalizing. Creative.

I've merely said American Jews and Israelis are different. They are not the same. If I saw one camp - that they are all the same...then I'd also be generalizing. SMH.

Bottom line, I have no idea why you or Cope think I'm attacking. Far from it. I'll repeat it. American Jews and Israelis are not the same in every way. They are vastly different peoples in many ways. They live differently and think differently for all of the reasons you have stated. Just as a California American and a Texas American share a common bond but see the world differently and act differently - based on where they live.

Not all Americans are the same. Not all Jews are the same. THAT would be generalizing.

 

[Stryker]

::rolls eyes::

You are quite literally serious about this? That American Jews and Israeli Jews are in lockstep? I can't even... To me this is equal to Kyrie Irving insisting the world is flat. Well...ok man.

Oh, and you outed yourself here. You don't understand media sources. You're attacking sources because you don't like the message, and your attack on the sources is wrong. Like 2+2=5 kind of wrong.

• The Washington Post is UBER Liberal.
• Pew Research is Center to Left leaning.
• Haaretz is an ISRAELI newspaper.
• And...The Conversation.com is Center to Left leaning.
• Yes Ben Shapiro is a Conservative Jew. But EVERY other source is Liberal or Left of Center.

Now what? Can we get back to the fact that American and Israeli Jews are "factually" nothing alike? Can you take off your blinders and read the articles, the surveys, see the graphs that depict this as fact?

I enjoy discussion Tim, It's why I don't bring emotion into these, because it's unnecessary. To me Meme posting means you don't want to discuss, you are trying to win a game no one is playing.

I'm not saying Jews in different countries are in lockstep, I'm saying they are not polar opposites as you are asserting.

There is an intentional divide being created here. For what end? And using statistical polls to create a divide? It's interesting to me since my degree is in Pyschology and my career is Marketing. You can have those stats mean any argument you want. Like 38% of Israeli Jews see terrorism as the greatest threat to the future, can be misused to say 62% of Israeli Jews don't care about their country's national security.

Sorry I assumed the headline under 'The Washington Post' link stating 'Democracy dies in darkness' as right. It is too far left and equally polarizing.
Israeli papers should be right leaning, it is a conservative nation.

The Pew research, though I can't find the amount of jews polled, or from where. It's just as interesting to see where the polls are conducted and by how many people as the results, because polling different areas can skew results. Like liberal papers polling liberal cities and seeing a democrat in the lead for a presidential election. The results are not accurate if not polled properly. Still I don't see much of an agenda in the Pew research article.

 

[AggieSteel]

You are completely missing the intent of my original post. So let me clarify since you're reading things into my post that aren't there.

After being gone from the board for a few days, I noticed the following exchange between you and Indy:

You said: "Yeah and Roseanne is disgusting for doing that too. I know she's a Jew, and that doesn't make it any better. And I could give two ***** about your stance on Israel. Supporting Israel != being a friend to the Jews."

Indy replied: "And explain how supporting Israel is not being a friend to the Jews."

To which I "merely" said comparing American Jews and Israeli Jews by either of you is faulty logic. It's the same as comparing an Irishman living in Dublin to a 4th generation American citizen who hailed from Irish descendants. While the blood lines and the religion may be the same, the way they live life and see life is WHOLLY different.

Period, that's all my statement was about. It has since morphed into an argument that Jews there and here are the same or not. Silliness.




If you are referring to me, read above. I'm not "pitting them into camps" like they are warring factions. I'm explaining they are wholly different people. Yes they share a common religion and ancestry. But their lives, AS YOU YOURSELF STATE, are vastly different.



No different than in any culture around the globe. No disagreement.



Exactly the point I have been trying to establish. Israeli Jews and American Jews are indeed very different due to the reasons you state and others.




Facts: The majority of American Jews are Liberal. The majority of Israeli Jews are moderate to Conservative. It's not a discussion. No one is pretending global Jews are at odds with each other. See above. I'm pointing out you cannot compare American Jews and Israelis just as you can't compare the Irish Dubliner to the American Irish descendant.

However, many of the articles I posted from JEWISH newspapers, the Washington Post (Liberal) and others show that there IS a growing disagreement between American Jews and Israelis on even core issues such as whether Israel should be a state at all, or about the rights of Palestinians. A growing number of American Jews now believe the Jewish State shouldn't exist and a growing number of American Jews are highly sympathetic to Palestine.

So globally, there IS growing discord between the belief systems of those in Israel and those here.

These aren't my thoughts. These are the results of studies and publications I have shared. If you disagree with those publications and writers, so be it. I see it personally, so I believe it to be true.




I've never even inferred that the two groups hate each other. Not sure where that came from.



Me originally saying comparing American Jews to Israeli Jews has its faults is me generalizing? So if I had said all Jews around the globe think and act alike and see the world alike, wouldn't I have ALSO then been generalizing? By saying they are different, I'm generalizing. If I had said they are all the same, I would have been generalizing. Creative.

I've merely said American Jews and Israelis are different. They are not the same. If I saw one camp - that they are all the same...then I'd also be generalizing. SMH.

Bottom line, I have no idea why you or Cope think I'm attacking. Far from it. I'll repeat it. American Jews and Israelis are not the same in every way. They are vastly different peoples in many ways. They live differently and think differently for all of the reasons you have stated. Just as a California American and a Texas American share a common bond but see the world differently and act differently - based on where they live.

Not all Americans are the same. Not all Jews are the same. THAT would be generalizing.

Well that's fine with me, as long as we are being honest and not creating two opposite extreme viewpoints ("in lockstep" or "nothing alike") to choose from, then I'm good. I'm a big advocate of being able to delve deeper than what things look like on the surface, so as long as that's what you're doing, then cool with me

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Ah...nuances..

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I enjoy discussion Tim, It's why I don't bring emotion into these, because it's unnecessary. To me Meme posting means you don't want to discuss, you are trying to win a game no one is playing.

I'm not saying Jews in different countries are in lockstep, I'm saying they are not polar opposites as you are asserting.

There is an intentional divide being created here. For what end? And using statistical polls to create a divide? It's interesting to me since my degree is in Pyschology and my career is Marketing. You can have those stats mean any argument you want. Like 38% of Israeli Jews see terrorism as the greatest threat to the future, can be misused to say 62% of Israeli Jews don't care about their country's national security.

Sorry I assumed the headline under 'The Washington Post' link stating 'Democracy dies in darkness' as right. It is too far left and equally polarizing.
Israeli papers should be right leaning, it is a conservative nation.

The Pew research, though I can't find the amount of jews polled, or from where. It's just as interesting to see where the polls are conducted and by how many people as the results, because polling different areas can skew results. Like liberal papers polling liberal cities and seeing a democrat in the lead for a presidential election. The results are not accurate if not polled properly. Still I don't see much of an agenda in the Pew research article.

So I'll go back to my question. I'm providing evidence of the fact that American Jews and Israelis are quite different people. You're offering opinion that they aren't based on your personal "view." If you can produce evidence that suggests they are very similar, I'll engage in the debate. It's difficult to have a discussion when your position is your conjecture, and mine is my opinion supported by evidence.

Here's an interesting article that again supports my position - that the two are very different groups. From JTS no less. The title is a dead giveaway.

Bridging the Growing Gap between Israeli and North American Jews

BY ARNOLD M. EISEN , CHANCELLOR AND PRESIDENT OF THE FACULTIES; PROFESSOR OF JEWISH THOUGHT

That’s the quality that first drew me to President Rivlin’s speech about the four “tribes” (secular, nationalist Orthodox, Haredi, and Palestinian Israelis): confidence that Israelis can and will solve the problems confronting them if only they face up to these problems and see them clearly. I was similarly pleased when the president spoke about North American Jewry at the most recent General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America as the “fifth tribe”—one no less internally divided than the four in Israel, and having the additional problem that only about 40 percent of the Jews counted as members of the North American community actually belong to any Jewish organization or institution, and only about 20 percent can be said to live a substantively Jewish life in any form. I don’t despair of the future for my community, quite the opposite. I urge you not to despair either and to appreciate the many positive developments taking place among North American Jews, even as we look squarely together at what is not positive, and at the growing gap between us.

That said, I must state my belief that there is no easy answer to either of these problems, and that they are intimately related. Without stronger attachment among North American Jews to Judaism and/or the Jewish people, those Jews will not exhibit stronger attachment to Israel.

If this Jewish Chancellor and President says there is a growing divide, and the Washington Post, and countless other sources note it, it's good enough for me.

There's tons more out there if you choose to read up on it.

American Jews and Israel – A Symposium
Never, perhaps, has criticism of the state of Israel by American Jews been so open, so widespread, and so bitter…

AMERICAN JEWS AND ISRAEL: A RELATIONSHIP IN TRANSITION

The conference was conceived six months ago amid much discussion and hand-wringing over the future relationship between American Jews and Israel, specifically concerning young, liberal Jews and whether they would evince the same support and solidarity for Israel as did their parents. The occupation, the failure of the peace process, the role of Orthodoxy in Israel and other issues are some of the many causes of a burgeoning discontent between American Jewry and Israel. This conference will explore whether that relationship is really in a state of transition. It will also probe the distinction between attachment to and criticism of Israel, and explore detailed items such as the influence of intermarriage and the rise of Orthodoxy within American Jewry upon the relationship.

 

[Spike]

MSNBC's Joy Reid Called for Ethnically Cleansing Jews from Israel

Says "move Israel to Europe"

"You believe the Jews were oppressed, why should the Palestinian Muslims have to pay the price? You oppressed them, so give a part of Europe to the Zionist regime so they can establish any government they want. We would support it. So, Germany and Austria, come and give one, two or any number of your provinces to the Zionist regime so they can create a country there... and the problem will be solved at its root."

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/...d-ethnically-cleansing-jews-daniel-greenfield

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

Being a CNN talking head is the best job in the world. No ratings, no problem. And you are allowed to say anything