Obama vs. Perry: Who Would You Vote For?

That might be a definition of TODAY'S conservative, but certainly not traditional REPUBLICAN values. In fact, traditional Republicans of yesterday more resemble Blue Dogs to me than the Tea Party folks to whom Perry panders.

Back when Texas was controlled by "conservative Democrats" -- pro business, pro tort-reform Ds -- Perry was a puppy State Rep from Haskell and yes, he was a Democrat. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

As a fellow greybeard (if I let it grow) I well remember the Great Coat Turning when all the Texas Conservative Democrats switched parties to join the ReThugs. Starting with John Connelly on down. I think it fair to say that todays Republicans are yesterdays Conservative Southern (Dixiecrats) Democrats with exactly the same very slightly concealed anti-black, anti-Hispanic, anti-immigrant, anti-union, anti-gay views. The former Everett Dirksen/Richard Nixon/Nelson Rockerfeller Republicans are gone, replaced by these Southern-accented impostors. They do differ from the former honest racist Southern Dems in that their primary allegiance is to the top 1% rich who have no particular regional loyalty or interest.

Well said. What gets me is the coat turning this year by Texas Repa Ritter (Beaumont) and Pena (Edinburg). Neither will be re elected and both borders will wind up getting fucked by the Repubs this year.

Obama just stamped his ticket back to Chicago, ain't gonna win without the Jewish vote and he can kiss the swing state Florida good bye for sure now too...He'll still carry NY and CA but his mideast policy is going to bury him in Ohio and PA. Perry would rip him apart.

Perry would never bow down to Muslim, Arab, call it whatever you want 'pressure', ever. I hope he does run, Obama is easy pickins now.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...shment-praise/

The governor of TX would not be a pussy when it comes to standing up for democracies in the middle east, no wonder Obama sat in the Oval Office with his thumb up his ass when he could have backed Syrian, Libyan and Egyptian as well as Iranian uprisings much swifter... Originally Posted by KosherCowboy

Regardless of who wins the presidency...

Here is a different response (NOT foxnews) to the same announcement on the 67 border
http://www.americantaskforce.org/dai.../1305777600_23

We had a lot of bravado with GWB going into Iraq, which ended up costing dearly. The Republicans seem to have a habit of spending on the military industrial complex without having any money in their pocket.

One can talk all one wants on the uprisings in Libya, Syria & Egypt; but what is the use of talking if we do not want to / cannot afford to get into one more costly war?

I was always a big fan of how the Israeli Haganah fought after the British left to carve out a nation for a people that had been discriminated down the ages.

However, the Palestinians are a people too & the US cannot continue to have an unjust foreign policy of only supporting one side that goes on allowing illegal settlements in the West Bank, deals with a peaceful flotilla with deadly force, etc. The US must continue to stand by Israel & be its friend, but also to do the right thing to help Palestinians find closure they have not had in over 50 years.

However, the Palestinians are a people too & the US cannot continue to have an unjust foreign policy of only supporting one side that goes on allowing illegal settlements in the West Bank, deals with a peaceful flotilla with deadly force, etc. The US must continue to stand by Israel & be its friend, but also to do the right thing to help Palestinians find closure they have not had in over 50 years. Originally Posted by shaft.drive

Excellent analogy!

I do not believe the Israeli/Palestinian situation is nearly as cut and dried as Kosher seems to think it is. It seems to me that Obama is not necessarily turning his back on the Israelis but it is obvious that a significant step has been taken toward granting a major concession to the Palestinians.

What is equally obvious is that there have been numerous administrations (mostly Republicans) in Washington that have tried to bring the Israelis and Palestinians together in the past 50 years. The one common denominator seems to be that America has consistently stood behind Israel as it relates to their fall back position on the Israeli/Palestinian border dispute. Thus, all American efforts to bring peace to the region have previously been unsuccessful. I do not know if Obama's approach will prove to be successful but it is apparent that past American approaches to mediate a settlement have not!

With that said, you may not like the President's position on the matter but it is consistent with the Obama Administrations handling of recent uprisings by those oppressed in Middle Eastern countries such as Syria and Libya. It was much easier for the President to take that position in the uprisings in Syria and Libya because neither country was particularly friendly toward the US. That obviously is not the case where Israel is concerned!

Speedracer, if you voted for Obama, then how could you call yourself a lifelong Republican? The current administration is about as far from traditional conservative principles as you can get. I understand people's frustration with Bush, I had my own as well. However, Bush was NOT a conservative. The republican party has lost it's identity and has become nothing more than a bunch of nanny-state pushing scumbags. That being said, Perry over Obama any day!! Originally Posted by austin_guy08

Okay. I WAS a lifelong Republican until I voted for Obama. My political views are a mixture or conservative and liberal. I doubt a true conservative would be on ECCIE -- family values and all that. I believe in women't rights to abortions. I believe in same-sex marriage. I believe in legalization of marijuana. And there are many conservative planks that I favor too. As I said, it came down to Obama vs McCain and I took a chance on Obama and have not regretted my choice to this point.

However, the Palestinians are a people too & the US cannot continue to have an unjust foreign policy of only supporting one side that goes on allowing illegal settlements in the West Bank, deals with a peaceful flotilla with deadly force, etc. The US must continue to stand by Israel & be its friend, but also to do the right thing to help Palestinians find closure they have not had in over 50 years. Originally Posted by shaft.drive

You mean those ships with illegal arms? That land was not Palestinian pre-1967 to the beginning of time, the land referred to was controlled not by the Palestinians but by Jordan ( West Bank), Gaza Strip ( Egypt). The Palestinians may have lived there but they were in Jordanian land. So Israel took it for Jordan, not the Palestinians. They also took it as a result of war, not expansionism, their women and children were being murdered. The settlements aren't illegal, people live in peace in them, they can be halted but why? So another terrorist on the other side of the fence can launch another rocket in to southern Israel or across the Lebanese border?

The US has supported both sides, not just one. One side continues to launch rockets over the borders in to villages and smuggles arms in via tunnels. They don't want peace, they want Israel pushed in to the sea. They still refuse the right of Israel to exist and call for death to the Jews ( and Americans) yet we should concede to them land? Shrink the borders and hand land over to people that still call for destruction. Hamas needs to go first, Fatah needs to denounce Hamas, Abbas needs to separate from Hamas before any deal can be struck, land involved or not.

Prior US Administration have not failed, the Palestinian leaders have failed their own people and the people harbor terrorists within their own border and turn a blind eye, very much like Nazi Germany. When the Palestinians learn to love their children more than they hate the Jews they might actually get a shot at a state. But once again, it was Jordan's land pre-1967. The pseudo-government the Palestinians formed in 1948 was never recognized as independent, in 1959 Nassar ' annulled' it, but refused to grant citizenship to Palestinians. By the way, Jordan didn't want the Palestinian people either, the other Arab countries in 1967 wanted the land back for Arabs, not Palestinians. And 0% of Jerusalem shall revert back, never will..

Obama first needs to call for the Palestinians to settle down...The issue goes beyond settlements, that is just $$ and relocation, the bigger problem is the rocket launches and innocent murders of women and children just over and within the borders of Israel and once that stops perhaps peace can be talked about. Simply put, Israel should not nor will it sit down for peace talks with a people who refuse to denounce Hammas who still calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, still does deals with Iran, Hezbollah and Syria that also call for the destruction of the Jewish state, launch rockets, smuggle arms in, the list goes on and on. The Palestinians don't deserve another inch of land, at least not yet. Not until they can prove they can live in peace, recognize Israel's right to exist and disband Hammas in the land they do have now. They can't even govern themselves in the land they have now, their own government is split, one of them a known terror group also elected by the very people that would run, operate and manage this ' statehood.'

God forbid they get an airport ( the US or the UN would have to operate any airport or water control plants in any Palestinian state for obvious reasons); imagine Travis County and Williamson County at war and the fear the people of Austin would have over a Williamson County controlled airport in Georgetown just miles north of the peaceful people and Wilco having control over any water that flows in to Austin. By the way, Georgetown Airport is further from Austin than a Palestinian Airport would be from sleeping children.

Same thing over there, the PLO has already tried to in the past poison Israel's water and if they had an airport right on the border, well they won't. That is one thing Obama as fickle as he is wouldn't concede to a terror run government.

God forbid it ever happens, but another ' 9/11' would wake Americans up to what is really going on over there and make them understand. In Israel 9/11 is known as 24/7/365. And for that reason, there can be no retraction to the pre-1967 borders.

I've been to Israel, I've seen the border and looked in to the neighbors territories, you can see miles of buffer zones, fences etc. Terrorists would have opportunity if returned to the pre 1967 borders to launch their bullets towards women and children miles and miles closer than now and literally hit Haifa, Te Aviv, cities in the Golan Heights with much ease. They could also ' sneak' in much easier to conduct terror on Israel's streets and they would. The answer is ' no.'

No this doesn't really have anything to do with Obama vs Perry because Perry does not hold any office now nor is he running so any thoughts of how he would handle this is pure speculation, what is not speculation is that the 4%-5% of the Broward County/Miami-Dade Jewish voters are enough to easily swing Florida red, the more Obama spews nonsense towards the Israelis the more votes he is going to lose in the other swing states, but with Florida now in the bag ( economy in shambles too, foreclosures going up), all any Republican needs to do is wrap up Ohio, PA would guarantee it and if one of those falls to the Blues than Virginia and New Jersey should push Obama out the door back to Chicago. Whether it is Perry or not, Florida is now where the election will be won or lose.

Obama is well aware he can't lose the Jewish vote, for this reason all of the above won't matter as the Palestinians now head to the UN for a resolution but I'm 99.9% sure the US with their security counsel vote will veto whatever garbage is presented, it will stink so bad in lower Manhatten when they give their proposal that the landfills in New Jersey will smell like roses...

Great documentary... "Life In OCCUPIED pALESTINE" www. AnnaIn TheMiddleEast. Produced by Jewish Anna, PLEASE view this Kosher. If Perry wants to really buck the feds and help TX he needs to put the natl. gaurd on our border!

Great documentary... "Life In OCCUPIED pALESTINE" www. AnnaIn TheMiddleEast. Produced by Jewish Anna, PLEASE view this Kosher. If Perry wants to really buck the feds and help TX he needs to put the natl. gaurd on our border! Originally Posted by S O B

She shares the opinions of a small segment ( albeit growing) of Israelis as well, but her opinions are considered far to one side and has also drank the col aid made by several leaders considered anti-Zionist. She does have a following but in every society and religion there are ' defectors' and they also exist within the Palestinian people who are peace loving, want statehood and want the terror to stop. They exist on both sides..

One could publish Tim McVeigh's view on politics or the Una-bomber's, but they'd be discounted. Anna tells one side, her views are held by a very small # of Jews and Israeli's worldwide, I respect her opinion and experiences but she spews garbage, much of it ironically regenerated garbage that echoes sentiments from anti-Zionists in Iran, Syra, Saudi Arabia; ironically some places she has ' travelled' extensively.

I'd be biased too if I spent 95% of my time in areas where there were victims ( often of themselves and their own refusal to not harbor terrorists) and 5% of my time in the Hadassah Hospital observing her own people maimed and dead and handicapped from terror acts. I don't see ( yet) where she has mentioned how Israeli doctors treat ( on the Israeli's taxpayers money) many children that are Palestinian caught in the gunfire. Just because she is Jewish and has many ( mainly students) supporters doesn't make her anywhere near mainstream..

Radical ( not to the point of terror) views she has.

Obama stabbed Israel in the back, no way getting around that, I'd trust Perry to be less apt to have done so. I also notice one poster who I know is pro-Israeli and actively posting on the failures of Republicans past and present has been silent on Obama's back stabbing. Very quiet...I am sure he could spin it but I'd love to hear how Perry would not be a friend to Israel.

Palestinian children "caught in the gunfire" should be treated at Israeli expense. Heck we treat, educate, house and feed many, many people from across our borders. (hijack) deportation not education!

I'll add that "Israeli expense" ultimately means US taxpayer expense. A large part of Rick Perry's potential base is not going to like that. Perry would be under massive pressure to cut back on aid to Israel and everyone else.

Palestinian children "caught in the gunfire" should be treated at Israeli expense. Heck we treat, educate, house and feed many, many people from across our borders. (hijack) deportation not education! Originally Posted by S O B

Palestinian children "caught in the gunfire" should be treated at Israeli expense. Heck we treat, educate, house and feed many, many people from across our borders. Originally Posted by S O B

I agree, the kids are innocent and are injured and maimed as a result of their parents hating Israel so much they they allow weapons to be stored in and around their homes. As a result the only way to destroy those weapons of murder sadly has victims, but if nothing were done than the attacks on Israel would increase. Hamas ( elected by the Palestinian people willingly) in their charter calls for Israel's destruction. Pre-1967 Israeli homes and kibutzes were bombed daily in the Golan Heights. That is why so many bomb shelters exist. And it should be given back????

Any Palestinian state would need to be demilitarized. Regardless, Obama will ( via the UN) veto the vote, which is the right move.

Perry would do the same.

I have no issue with Israel treating and paying for the children victimized by their parents own racist hatred of the Jewish people, no issue at all. The kids deserve medical attention at some top notch facilities.

Ah the race card, I thought you were above that. Demilitarised? It's illegal to own guns in Palestine. The children will hate because of the "settlements". If an Israeli moves to a 'SEYYLEMENT", THEY GET A GRANT OF $10,000. Our money as Booth mentioned. I do not hate Jews but, the state of Israel should never had been invented by the UN. dON'T YOU HAVE TO BE jEWISH TO BE iSRAELI?

Ah the race card, I thought you were above that. Demilitarised? It's illegal to own guns in Palestine. The children will hate because of the "settlements". If an Israeli moves to a 'SEYYLEMENT", THEY GET A GRANT OF $10,000. Our money as Booth mentioned. Originally Posted by S O B

The people overwhelmingly elected a party that wants the Jewish state destroyed and pushed in to the sea. No race card played, read the charter of Hamas, view their actions and listen to their rhetoric, view the results of the Palestinian elections, racism exists. By the way, they hate us too, yes that means me and you alike. Just a refresher, on 9/11, Palestinians danced in the streets and handed and tossed the kids candy, a custom of celebration in their culture. Thousands of Americans ( our people) died that day, that is what they celebrated.

Illegal to own guns in Palestine but 'morally ok' to hide weapons and harbor terrorist and have tunnels enter your home for weapons to be smuggled in. Hence demilitarized. The Palestinians since 1948 have justified terror as a way to get statehood, once they have statehood no need for a single bullet in Palestine. No one will attack them, Israel can defend them if need be as a peaceful neighbor can and they have the means. I believe the US did that at the end of some wars.

And a joint Israeli/Palestinian economy would thrive, both states would benefit greatly, the need for US Aid to either side would be less. I am proud Obama just said US aid to Israel will continue and Israel will continue to be secured the best military in the region, as it should.

Now my guess is we are getting a little off topic, but I've expressed my thoughts, and as I think Booth said previously ( perhaps it was another thread) let's not bash each other. Please read the Hamas Charter, look at current events and you'll see your accusation of pulling the race card is unjust. That being said, I'll bow out and let others debate or start a new thread.

oNE LAST POST... isn't a " Jewish state" racist? Or at least exclusionary?

As established by the UN in 1948, Israel was intended to be an independent Jewish state. However in its history, people of all religious beliefs have lived there and participated in all forms of Israeli life.

From Wikipedia:

"For the ongoing debate as to the nature of the State of Israel, see Jewish state. A homeland for the Jewish people was an idea that rose to the fore in the 19th century in the wake of growing anti-Semitism and Jewish assimilation. Jewish emancipation in Europe paved the way for two ideological solutions to the Jewish Question: cultural assimilation, as envisaged by Moses Mendelssohn, and Zionism, promoted by Theodore Herzl. In the late 19th century, Herzl set out his vision of a Jewish state and homeland for the Jewish people in his book Der Judenstaat. Herzl was later hailed as the founding father of the State of Israel. In the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the United Kingdom became the first world power to endorse the establishment in Palestine of a "national home for the Jewish people." The British government confirmed this commitment by accepting the British Mandate for Palestine in 1922. In 1948, the State of Israel was established as a Jewish state."