Sam Seder just said that Rabbi Marc Gellman refused...

[Eric J in MN]

..to come on "The Majority Report" radio show to defend his piece saying that Jews should have been loyal to Lieberman because he's Jewish:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14308339/site/newsweek/

[JuniperLea]

1. I'm sick of people treating life like it's a freaking football team!!

Hooray for our side... Jebus!

[johnnydrama]

2. so what if

Someone running in my district is a black/female/jew.

I'm a white/male/jew

So which am i first? White, male or Jewish?

Do i just need to sit out all races until someone of my EXACT type is running?

[Eric J in MN]

Rabbi Marc Gellman implies you should vote for her., based on religion.

NT

[regnaD kciN]

13. Pot, meet kettle...

A question for Rabbi Gellman: If Jews should feel obligated to vote for Lieberman simply because they're of the same religion, doesn't it follow that it should be legitimate for Christians to be told that they should always vote for a Christian candidate rather than a Jewish one, for the exact same reason? :shrug:

Somehow, I think Gellman would be the first to scream prejudice under that scenario.

Of course, Lieberman supporters who assert that fellow Jews have a moral obligation to support him also have a long track record of accusing his critics of anti-Semitism if even they so much as make a passing mention of his religion...and, for that matter, even if they don't. :eyes:

[Eric J in MN]

15. Yes, Lieberman would never have been elected in the first place,

...if everyone in CT voted for someone of their own religion.

[JuniperLea]

16. That pretty much sums it up!

Yes. People have to realize that what's good for them is good for everyone else.

Anyone who votes for a woman because they are a woman, a black person because they are black, a Jewish person because they are Jewish, a Christian because they are Christian, is just stupid imho.

This is not choosing sides in your elementary school softball league.

[ikojo]

6. Also, what if that person's blood type is different

from your own, would the rabbi have us not support that candidate?

[JuniperLea]

10. None of that should matter n/t

[JuniperLea]

8. A real, genuine person

Would not care what color, race or religion another person is. A real, true, genuine human being would only care about the candidate's point of view and promises.

You shouldn't be any of those things first. You should be an honorable human being.

[regnaD kciN]

14. It would seem to me...

...that it would depend on the other candidate. If they're white and male, but not Jewish, they would seem to deserve your vote by a "matching" score of 2-1. :sarcasm:

[AX10]

3. Question to Rabbi Gellerman:

Should all Jews be "loyal" to Russ Feingold, Barbara Boxer, and Ron Wyden; all whom are Jewish, Liberal, and opposed to the war in Iraq?

[ikojo]

4. HELLO!! I am Jewish and refuse to support

someone ONLY because they are Jewish. Wow! So, if a Jew mistreats his/her employees and does not pay a living wage Rabbi Gellman would say it was wrong to criticize that person because he/she is Jewish.



WRONG Buck-O!! I don't think I should support women because I am a woman nor do I think I should reactively support a Jewish candidate only because that candidate is Jewish.


As a Jew I feel Jews should hold ourselves to a higher standard because that's what is demanded of us in the Torah...Justice, justice shall you pursue.

Once at shul a rabbi said that one of the first questions a Jew is asked upon judgement day is "were you honest in your business dealings?"

[AspenRose]

5. He refused to go on because Sam would have eaten his lunch.

Can you blame him....? I wouldn't go if I were in his shoes. Sam's good at that sort of thing.

[Eric J in MN]

9. And Joe Lieberman wouldn't go on "The Al Franken Show"...

...during the primary season, maybe because he thought Franken would be too tough on him.

[VP505]

7. It's disappointing that

Rabbi Marc would take such a position, voting for someone because of their religious beliefs might be OK down at the local fraternal organization, but not for Congress.

[calico1]

11. Well, I guess based on Rabbi Gellman's view, I

should be enthusiastically supporting our dear Atty. General.


I think not.....

[RB TexLa]

12. everyone choses why they vote for who they vote for

For some religion plays a big part. I know many people that did not vote in 1992 and 1996 because they were not going to vote for two Baptists but weren't going to vote GOP.

[sandyd921]

17. Hey Rabbi

I vote my self-interest as an American and a member of the human race and not based on my identity as a Jew (of which I am proud and not ashamed as the Rabbi seems to imply). Human beings will be immeasurably better off when waging pre-emptive and illegal wars across the planet and death and destruction in place of the hard work needed to fight terrorism, as well as robbing the rest of us blind so the rich can get richer are no longer the official policies of the US government. Lieberman's support of the Iraq occupation and of * (the Rabbi is also clueless as to why more Jews do not support the * regime) make support of Lamont over Lieberman a no-brainer for those Jews who aren't brain-dead and who don't buy into some idiotic group-think ideology. Get a clue Rabbi Gellman. :rofl:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

18. I'm an Indian atheist, so I'll vote for nobody then.

:eyes:

[CrushTheDLC]

19. Rabbi Gellman contradicts himself

A caller just brought this to Sam's attention, and it's online. The Rabbi's views on Lieberman and "voting for Jews" seems to have changed a bit since 2000.....

http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft0012/opinion/gellman.html

Another consequence of this historic selection is that it now frees Jews to vote against Lieberman even though he is Jewish. His selection is the historic moment that marks full Jewish acceptance in America—not the rise of Henry Kissinger, not the movies of Steven Spielberg, not the corporate mastery of Michael Eisner. None of them have done and none of them mean what Lieberman has done and what Lieberman means. True acceptance means that we as Jews can be delighted that he was nominated and then vote against him because we do not agree with his politics. Voting for Lieberman because he is Jewish is just as wrong as voting against Lieberman because he is Jewish. Acceptance means being considered for public office because of where you stand on the issues, not where you stand on the sabbath. Politics isn’t baseball. There is no room in politics for irrational rooting for the hometown team. If you believe in Lieberman’s political views, then you should vote for him; if you don’t, then you shouldn’t, and you should not feel as if you have betrayed Judaism or the Jewish people or God by your vote. And if you vote for him, it better be for more substantial reasons than simply the fact that he can pronounce a chaf and layn torah. I guarantee you that Jesse Jackson would not vote for Colin Powell just because he’s black.

[sandyd921]

20. What a creep!

n/t

[Peace Patriot]

21. I saw an interesting side bit to the Condi Rice nomination. Andy Young

(yes, THE Andy Young, former M.L. King lieutenant), with two black women leaders on his arms, was interviewed in the Senate corridor (on C-Span), and the three of them implied that the Democrats inside who were challenging the Rice nomination were racist and sexist. They were pushing the same "talking points" as the Bushite "pod people" were spouting on the floor of the Senate. Upshot: you should support someone--no matter who they are--because they are black and female.

I was utterly shocked, to say the least, to see how far Andy Young had fallen. I don't know the women he had with him--but they, too, were playing this rotten game.

The fascists cultivate racial and sexual tokens (Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio also comes to mind), and we're supposed to FALL FOR THIS CRAP?!

Bought and paid for corporatists. Bought and paid for class warriors, rich against poor. If we oppose them, we are racist, or sexist--or, in the case of Lieberman, anti-semitic. What twisted stuff this is!

Lieberman's case is a little more complicated, in that he seems to genuinely believe that NeoCons stomping all over the Middle East will help Israel. He couldn't be more wrong, but that is what he seems to think. He has a double allegiance, as do many Jews, no different from, say, Irish Americans' love for Ireland (and support of a free and independent Ireland), or the ties of any immigrant group to the mother land, with the added pull of the reasons for the founding of Israel (among them, the Holocaust), and Israel's vulnerability (--a tiny country amidst hostile neighbors). I don't fault him for his double allegiance, but I DO fault him for his utterly mistaken--and possibly DISASTROUS--policy of supporting an alliance between Israel and the despised Bush junta, and fomenting the militarism of the rightwing factions of both. To call my opposition to him on these grounds anti-semitism is the height of sophistry! THERE's a word we need to make current again. Sophistry! False arguments--unrelated to reality--that seem to make sense, but are in truth bullshit. The Bushites are real good at it.

So, if we are progressives, then we will fall into line behind Condi Rice, Kenneth Blackwell, Colin Powell and Joe Lieberman, so as not to be sexist, racist and anti-semitic. Right. It seems to me I read something along those lines in "Alice in Wonderland" (something about the Red Queen insisting that the white roses be PAINTED red!).