Should Al Gore Enter the Race?

[Michael Tee]

<<Voting on a matter of HOPE is something I cannot fathom.>>

It only works if you're not satisfied with the way things are going now.  A war that the Democrats all deplore but most of them voted for ("He FOOLED us!!") and that none of them want to cut the funding for ("We support the troops!") and a Middle Eastern policy that is stuck on blind support of Israel no matter how badly the Jews are fucking the Arabs.  Clinton supported Israel, Bush supported Israel, Hillary supports Israel.  Hillary's supporters supported Israel.  And despite all the evidence of mounting Arab and Muslim anger, NOBODY is in the running (except Obama) who ISN'T on the record as a strong supporter of Israel.

That's why Obama represents hope.  He isn't tied in to the same tired old politicians who surrounded Bill, typified by Albright, "well worth the price" her comment on blockade policies that had KILLED about half a million innocent Iraqis.  He isn't tied to the blind support of the State of Israel, which more and more is being openly recognized as a source of much of America's problems with the Arab world. 

If you're satisfied with the way things are going and have been going, then DON'T vote for a change, don't HOPE for something better, stick with the people and the policies that have gotten you into the mess you're in.   And if you don't like the mess, then don't vote for any of the tired old faces that have been around forever and either caused or contributed to the mess or did nothing to stop it.

[modestyblase]

Ehh, you don't have to go on hope. Cold, hard analysis works just as well. So does strategic assessment, etc. Either way, its all more complex than you give it credit for. If you really think one man can, in four years, reverse all wrongs then go right ahead and believe that.

As for Israel-as-America's-baby arguments: I hear all the time about, for ex., Israel's three rockets fired at Hamas. I never hear about the ten fired at Israel before that to prompt the reaction. So fully understand, please, that much as with everything else, you don't get the full story with the media. I am critical of Israel when it is warranted, but comments like yours are a little too sensationalist and chomsky for me. : //

EDIT : 19:29 CST : Google "Qassam Roulette". I believe thats what it is called.

[Michael Tee]

<<As for Israel-as-America's-baby arguments: I hear all the time about, for ex., Israel's three rockets fired at Hamas. I never hear about the ten fired at Israel before that to prompt the reaction. >> 

With all due respect, that's a very shallow analysis of a struggle that started in 1948 and ended up with 3 million Arabs living under a military occupation for 40 years.  And you want to reduce the whole conflict down to the last rocket exchange?  Gimme a break.

Israeli propaganda has worked overtime to produce the perspective that you just gave us an example of.

It's like analyzing World War Two by picking any particular day during the war and saying "Well sure we heard about the 20,000 tons of bombs dropped on London today but nobody ever mentions the 70,000 tons dropped on Hamburg."

The injustice of the Middle East is not how many rockets were fired last week or last month.  The Arabs don't hate America because the Jews fired five rockets into Gaza last week.  The central injustice of the Middle East is the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the fact that millions of Arabs have been living under Israeli occupation for 40 years.    The Arabs are getting fucked and every fucking Arab in the world knows that.  But in America, nobody knows that.  The MSM and the politicians do not focus on the Occupation, on life under the Occupation, on houses bulldozed, on people detained for hours at checkpoints, on walls separating farmers from markets and pregnant mothers from hospitals - - they focus on bombs - five from this side, ten from that side.  The Occupation, of course, continues.

In terms of hope and change, the old-style politicians, Hillary, Bush, etc., are kind of like you; they pretend not to notice the Occupation at all; they talk about rockets, bombs, "terrorism," etc.  That three million human beings eke out a miserable existence under Israeli military occupation just doesn't register.  It's not a part of the conversation.  And that's not surprising.  Hillary, Bush, Kerry, Pelosi - - all of them have been regular speakers at Jewish events, pledged undying friendship to the people of Israel and continued a policy of military support to Israel to the tune of billions of dollars a year.

Obama really is a different man, a real break with the past.  He has not pledged undying friendship to the state of Israel, has not spoken at AIPAC dinners, has not committed; and the HOPE is that Obama will break with the old policies, will not automatically support Israel in every atrocity, such as the Lebanon war and the killing of thousands of Lebanese civilians; that maybe, just maybe, Obama can break free of domestic Zionist pressure and tell the Israelis:  No more for you.  No more for you, pal, unless you end the Occupation and give the Arabs their land and their lives back.