So do you think that the money changer episode was anti-Semetic?
I imagine that Jesus was a champion of the poorer Jews from the small towns and farms who was enraged that the moneychangers in the Temple were overcharging for their money changing and sacrificial animal selling monopoly.
I don't think that "supporting" a government was the way that Jesus would have thought of the Roman government. The deal was pretty well understood: those with Roman citizenship were first-class citizens and had a few rights others did not have: everyone else was seen by the Romans more or less as a farmer regards his livestock: if you obeyed the Romans and paid your taxes, they left you alone, unless you were in their way. Otherwise, you would be punished as an example to everyone else that the Romans had complete power. Crucifixion was painful, it took forever to die, and was ideal as a way of convincing rebellious subjects to comply.
Jesus did not want to be crucified, he only accepted it as what he understood was necessary to spread his gospel. At the moment in which he was questioned about "rendering unto Caesar" he was not ready or was unaware of the necessity of his crucifixion.
Together with the ritual cannibalism of the Last Supper and the sacrifice of Jesus, this was a powerful message to his followers, and combined with the Resurrection, it is how the story of Jesus survived and the tales of many other would be prophets did not. Of course, Paul was essential to spreading the word. It was effective because it incorporated religious symbolism of many of the religions extant at the time. Cannibalism, even ritual cannibalism is clearly unkosher. Drinking any sort of blood is about as trayf as one can get.
