Screed by screedster
posted by Ben Wattenberg at 6:16 PM
Saturday, November 11, 2006
2 Comments:
-
said...
-
Mr Wattenberg, your impressive refutation of the 'screed', i.e. your persuasive argument as to why unconditional support for Israel really is in the best interest of the US, despite the fact such support 1) often appears to offend against common decency and a justified sense of moral outrage (e.g. the recent shelling deaths followed by a US veto of a resolution condemning them), 2) results in widespread hatred of the US in the much larger muslim world, and 3) is a prime motivator of terrorism.
Not.
(I just saw the Borat movie, so I felt compelled to make a 'Not' joke, even in this apparently in appropriate context, in true Borat fashion. BTW, wouldn't especially recommend the movie.)
Suggestion: Make a counterargument. For a change. -
said...
-
Point out the 'anti-Semitism', please.
About Me
- Name: Ben Wattenberg
- Location: Washington, D.C., United States
Ben J. Wattenberg is a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. He is the moderator of the weekly PBS television program Think Tank with Ben Wattenberg, which is now being expanded to include a new one hour program Think Talk . He has served as a presidential speechwriter and advisor for president Lyndon Johnson. Ben also served as an aide and speech-writer to "Scoop" Jackson and VP Hubert Humphrey. He is currently working on a forthcoming book Tales of a Neo-Con ,an accompanying volume of selected posts from this blog, and highlights from the best of Think Tank.
Previous Posts
- Uh, no...
- Perhaps I can explain it...
- Nor the for time nor probably not the last
- The Census Bureau
- The markets
- This is what I really like about the new Infor wor...
- Wrong message...
- Exit polls --- ???
- Speed reading --- Speed viewing
- When Turner praises Gates
Such a screed, by such a screedster, deserves more than an annoymous handle.
Yuk !
* * *
Gee, what a surprise: You're a Jew and you don't think the 'narrow' unconditional US support of Israel is not in the best interest of the country, even though it is the prime reason for the poor image of the US in the muslim world, and one of the prime motivators of terrorism.
And here is the latest reason why so many muslims hate the US: US vetoes motion on Gaza attack.
Let's ask a couple of questions here: What did the Israeli military think was going to happen when they fired tank/artillery shells into a crowded urban area? Do they think such shelling is some sort of modern, precision weapon? Or do they have a nearly complete disregard for Palestinian civilian life? Preferring to shoot first and issue perfunctory apologies later? -- i.e. after the civilians, almost always including women and children, are dead.
It is so obvious that such support of Israel is not in the best interest of the US that suggesting otherwise shows the depth of your dishonest and irrational bias.