Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:14 AM ET, 01/28/2011

Rand Paul neo-isolationism widely condemned

By Jennifer Rubin

During the 2010 campaign I repeatedly raised concerns that Rand Paul, now the Republican senator from Kentucky, was a proponent of a neo-isolationist foreign policy. That concern has now been borne out. In an interview on CNN he proposed cutting off aid to Israel. Ha'aretz reports:

In an interview to CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday Paul said that "Reuters did a poll, 71 percent of American people agree with me that when we're short of money, where we can't do the things we need to do in our country, we certainly shouldn't be shipping the money overseas."

When asked by Blitzer if he wants to halt an annual $3 billion that go to Israel, Paul replied affirmatively, explaining that Egypt gets almost the same amount adding that "you have to ask yourself, are we funding an arms race on both sides? I have a lot of sympathy and respect for Israel as a democratic nation, as, you know, a fountain of peace and a fountain of democracy within the Middle East. But at the same time, I don't think funding both sides of the arm race, particularly when we have to borrow the money from China to send it to someone else. We just can't do it anymore. The debt is all-consuming, and it threatens our well-being as a country."

Groups ranging from J Street to the Republican Jewish Coalition have raised the alarm. That is a good sign that Israel enjoys widespread political support across the political spectrum. (J Street's position is a bit confusing, however. J Street wants to give Israel money but condemn the Jewish state in the U.N.? Can't quite fathom that one.)

Paul is outside the mainstream of elected leaders and the American public. Both are overwhelmingly supportive of the aid we supply to our democratic ally and understand that the U.S. cannot withdraw from the region. A final note, Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) attempted to fan partisan fires by asking "whether Rand Paul speaks for the Tea Party, the Republican Party, or simply himself." He surely doesn't speak for Republicans (in fact is not on the Foreign Affairs, Appropriations or Budget Committees) on this, just as Democrats like Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), Rep. John Conyers (D- Mich.), and Rep. Jim McDermott (D.-Wash.) don't represent mainstream Democrats on Israel. Shame on her.

By Jennifer Rubin  | January 28, 2011; 9:14 AM ET
Categories:  Senate GOP  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Bits
Next: Mike Pence passes on a presidential run

Comments

Doesn't Rand Paul doesn't realize that most of the American money sent to Israel is actually spent in the United States on American made arms, planes, tanks, and ammunition. Perhaps not, but this sort of populism seems to be the stock in trade of certain politicians. Of course Rand Paul can deprive Boeing, Colt, and Raytheon of that largesse while simultaneously showing that the Republican Party has as much antagonism and hostility towards Israel as the Democrats have.
But if this is what Mr. Paul wants then he should go for it, Israel will still turn to American arms manufacturers for their goods, but there will just be fewer and cheaper purchases. I doubt that the American workers at these companies will object to the job losses either.
Go for it Ron!

Posted by: Beniyyar | January 28, 2011 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Foreign aid may leave a slight stench in the air but the only real things to analyze are the costs/benefits. Do we get bang for our buck. Sometimes we do; sometimes it is hard to see. With Israel, I don't think there is any doubt. We get big bang for our buck. With the Arab autocracies in the Middle East and the African kleptocracies it is harder to tell. In any event, as regards Israel specifically, I am all for military aid; other types, I am not in favor of. Israel is a rich country and shouldn't have its hand out for anything but military assistance.

Of course, Jennifer, your post will stir the hornet's nest. The Jew haters despise aid to Israel whether or not it benefits us. They will be gathering no doubt for a full frontal assault in a few posts.

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Condemned by the Israeli apologists you mean? Rand Paul for president!

Posted by: wpost16 | January 28, 2011 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Hmmmm, it seems very naive to expect to have your cake and eat it too all the way.

- you want democracy everywhere, but only if it results in the elections of "our people", never Hamas or Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood

-you want to drastically cut the budget, but only as it effects Democratic initiatives.

- you want to embrace the Tea Party, but only if they attack Democratic ideas, not if they have a few of their own.

Got it!

Posted by: johnmarshall5446 | January 28, 2011 10:53 AM | Report abuse

NeoCons,beware of what you wish for,Ayn Rand Paul & Ron Paul are the Tea party.
Their bill to audit the Fed has been introduced in house/senate,any comment on that,but here's a question.
Where in the Constitution does it authorize a privately owned central Bank to manage the monetary policy of the US Government?

Posted by: rcaruth | January 28, 2011 10:53 AM | Report abuse

"Doesn't Rand Paul doesn't realize that most of the American money sent to Israel is actually spent in the United States on American made arms, planes, tanks, and ammunition......."

The old "the more of their money Americans give to Israel the richer Americans become" argument.

Is there no limit to the self-delushions of Israel's apologists or their contempt for our people?"

Posted by: Lazarus40 | January 28, 2011 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Wow, another reason to like Rand Paul. Why do we support Israel (and Egypt, Jordan, etc. for matter) again? This isn't 1948. They aren't a poor, enfeebled country. They are big boys who can take care of themselves. Why is this type of welfare any more preferable to the domestic kind?

I'm not anti-Israel in the least. I have loads of respect for the country -- I just think that time has long since passed for them to get off the US gravy train.

Posted by: grabowcp | January 28, 2011 11:47 AM | Report abuse

This Rubin lady is a straight out Israel hack. She makes no pretense of hiding it either. The Wa Po has been a neo con paper for years so no surprise.

Cut off aid to Israel now. I wish them well but I am just tired of paying them.

Posted by: wj03412000 | January 28, 2011 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Would some Israeli aid supporter please explain why it is in America's interest to give money to Israel? Serious replies only, please -- circular economic nonsense like Beniyyar put forth is embarrassing to read.

Posted by: Inagua1 | January 28, 2011 1:01 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe that I missed it when you raised concerns about Rand Paul, Jennifer. Then I would have known not to support this evil being who would dare cut welfare to Israel. I think you should take on the name "Cassandra."

Posted by: Sullly | January 28, 2011 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Well the author and her many Israel-Firsters in the media must have mighty tight sphincters today realizing that the situation on two sides of Israel clearly reads the end of that Apartheid state, born by the invention of modern terrorism (if "god gave that land" to you why did you have to blow up innocent British citizens?).

I have little truck with Ron Paul (less with Glen Beck) but he is right here. Israel has been, not only a drain to our economy since 1948, but with the assistance of traitors in the media (who were strange bedfellows to oil craving BushCo, grandson of a Nazi banker, in lying us into 9/11Less Iraq, Israel's then concern du jour) we've suffered the loss of lives and alienated a billion arabs. Israel hasn't even pretended to attempt to get along with its neighbors (an arrogance we wonder if genetic noodgery) or shown an inch of kindness for those displaced by its adherence to Bronze Age beliefs.

Isolationism? Hell Yes!

Posted by: mot2win | January 28, 2011 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Does Israel give us bang for our buck?

Absolutely.

It is called 9/11.

Posted by: Garak | January 28, 2011 2:03 PM | Report abuse

If it comes down to rescuing Social Security for the citizens of this nation, ALL foreign aid needs to scrutinized. $3,000,000,000 here, 3 billion there, it all adds up to big bucks. How can sending that much money abroad be justified when it is needed to rebuild and sustain this great nation?

Posted by: shangps | January 28, 2011 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul for president in 2012. He is both smart and courageous. America can't give away money that she doesn't have.

Posted by: ratbui | January 28, 2011 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul for president in 2012. He is both smart and courageous. America can't give away money that she doesn't have.

Posted by: ratbui | January 28, 2011 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Garak:

You believe that Israel was the reason for the 9/11 attacks despite the fact OBL made no mention of it in his declaration of war against us that preceded the attacks? Only an ignoramus would choose to disbelieve facts on the ground. But if the shoe fits....

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Isolationism? Let's engage with all the world -- let's just not buy are way into trouble by borrowing money to give to oppressive foreign governments. Rand Paul avoids making any distinctions and supports cutting foreign aid across the board. The world and the United States would be better off for it.

Israel is a prosperous and powerful country. It is more than capable of taking care of itself. Moreover, we are giving Israel the wrong incentives. What incentives does Israel have to make peace with its neighbors?

Posted by: chucka1 | January 28, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

The only way for the US to get Israel to make peace with the Palestinians is to threaten to cut aid to Israel. The Palestinians have nothing, and that's why terrorists can so easily recruit them. A terrorist organization with a truck full of food and medicine is a king/savior on the West Bank. If there's ever to be any progress in Middle East peace, it is in convincing the Israelis that they have much, much, much more to lose.

My concern is that the US (behind the scenes) has no interest in creating peace in Israel. Otherwise why would they always side with the Israelis, vetoing UN resolutions to sanction Israel for, say continuing settlement building. The US condemns new Israeli settlement building in the West Bank, but does nothing to stop them. And let us not pretend that annual military and economic aid to Israel isn't sufficient leverage to force Israel to the bargaining table. Of course, it is.

Posted by: paul6554 | January 28, 2011 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I suppose now that it becomes obvious Israel is doomed all its many moles in our media and society will rush to it in support. Doubtless the many zionists who've grown fat in America, the hassidics who ripped off employees (in Iowa and Washington etc.) the overpaid talking heads cosy on their fireproof perches, will all rush to its defense? No?

Posted by: mot2win | January 28, 2011 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Paul finally got something right. Include Egypt in the equation also. I see all the Post's Israel apologists are up-in-arms, as well as the kowtowing Congress. Ally my tail. All they do is thumb their noses at us with one hand, then take our money with the other. Israel doesn't want peace, and we fund them to ghettoize the Palestinians.

Posted by: jckdoors | January 28, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

That was an uncalled for cheap shot that Jennifer took at J Street ("J Street's position is a bit confusing, however. J Street wants to give Israel money but condemn the Jewish state in the U.N.? Can't quite fathom that one.").

J Street's position is that it strongly supports Israel, but opposes many current Israeli policies that, in their view, threaten the possibilities for peace and security for Israel.

There is no contradiction between supporting Israel and condemning Israel's illegal settlements and treatment of the occupied territories. In fact, it is a position that reflects the sentiments of a very large portion of the American Jewish community.

Those sentiments have been frozen out by many of the establishment organizations (AIPAC for example) that blindly defend every action of the Israeli government, including those that go against Jewish values, international law, Israeli interests, and chances for a peaceful stable Middle East.

Posted by: terje1 | January 28, 2011 3:07 PM | Report abuse

mot2win:

I shouldn't engage with the likes of you, but the temptation is too much: Your anti-Semitic slip is showing.

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Interesting! Now we know why Ron Paul named him "Rand". It's code for "Adolph".

This newly elected nimr0d is really not smart enough to stop talking. I wonder is his father proud of him?

TGIF

Posted by: free-donny | January 28, 2011 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, but it makes no sense to borrow from China to give to Egypt and Israel. Time to kick both countries off the Uncle Sam gravy train.
We limit lifetime welfare benefits, yet have paid out billions every year for 30 years to the 2 MIddle East welfare queens.

***J Street thunders! "All the money we Jews give to US politicians! We demand they toe the line and send the billions to Our Special Friend! Ummmmm, well-heeled Jews...why not just send your money to Israel instead of the politicians and cut 5 billion off the China IOUs the country owes to keep Israel and Egypt getting extra dough?? You got the money, send it to Israel...not that they are exactly hurting for it.***

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | January 28, 2011 3:38 PM | Report abuse

What's the problem Rubin?

You didn't have a problem with Paul Rand running around talking about cutting off the funding for America's Domestic Entitlements and programs, such as SS, Medicare, Education, et al for her own citizens.

And now all of a sudden, you have a problem with Rand Paul wanting to cut off "Foreign" Aid to Israel, so that she can get her own house in order.

Isn't it just like somebody like you, living here in the U.S., pushing American taxpayer dollars towards their Ultra Zionist agenda over in Israel, as opposed to helping the American people keep their own tax dollars in their own country for her own citizens.

You know what Rubin, you sound just like a female version of Krauthammer trying to use America and her citizen's tax dollars to push your own agenda even when millions of American citizens themselves are suffering socially, economically, and politically, based on the tripe you just wrote.

I don't agree anymore with Rand Paul's way of thinking any more than you do, but how dare you try to put Israel's supposdely needs over the needs of American's and especially when it comes to our tax dollars.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | January 28, 2011 3:42 PM | Report abuse

I'm no fan of the Pauls but its possible to discuss our policy on Israel without being an anti-Semite, right?

Posted by: DatMel | January 28, 2011 3:47 PM | Report abuse

I'm no fan of the Pauls but its possible to discuss our policy on Israel without being an anti-Semite, right?

Posted by: DatMel | January 28, 2011 3:47 PM

Yes, it is. Support Israel in the discussion and you're fine. Criticize in any way and you're an antisemite. Hope that helps.

Posted by: paperwc | January 28, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

paperwc says: "Support Israel in the discussion and you're fine. Criticize in any way and you're an antisemite. Hope that helps."


Nice strawman argument. Critique Israeli policy all you want. Critique American suport for Israel all you want. Neither criticism is necessarily anti-Semitic and very few would say otherwise. But use words like "traitor" or "mole" or some of the characterizatons I see slung around here for supporters of Israel and you reveal a mind poisoned by anti-Semitism. That's not too hard to understand, is it?

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Paul is correct in his position and explanation.
How and why should the US send billions overseas and then turn around and withdraw, reduce and/or eliminate medical support for its own citizens ?
Maybe we ought to ask Israeli doctors and medical personnel to come over here and DONATE some of their time and professional services to offset the reductions in government assistance to Americans while we continue to send money , arms and military to the middle east .

Posted by: wek41 | January 28, 2011 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Way to go Rand Paul! I'm tired of passing out money to other countries while our own citizens go hungry and lose their homes. Cut off ALL foreign aid and that includes Israel. Israel is't special they are always just first in line with their greedy hand out for our money.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | January 28, 2011 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul is right. This must stop.

Posted by: keb777 | January 28, 2011 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Wow...it took 2 seconds of Googling to disprove Jennifer Rubin's entire thesis: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-support-for-israel-is-decreasing-new-poll-shows-1.308855

What's more -- it came from the SAME SOURCE she used to slam Rand Paul.

This is embarrassingly poor journalism. If you'd like to defend yourself of provide a rebuttal, I'm all ears. pinpointpc ([at]) gmail.com

tl;dr -- Jennifer Rubin failed her 4th grade research project and got a job at WaPo.

Posted by: libertyftw | January 28, 2011 7:17 PM | Report abuse

As a Dem I actually agree with this nut. Nobody here can give a clear reason as to why we must never waiver in our support to Israel. The only people we should never waiver in our support to is Americans.

Posted by: doesntmatter | January 28, 2011 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, brilliant logic from someone who has the foresight of an amoeba! Sure, cut off all support of a country in the Middle East that has the only true support of America. Hey, all you antisemitic morons, if you cut off aid to Israel, as Egypt is literally going up in flames and an anti-American opposition party is trying to gain power and then screws up the price of oil, consequences that will drive this economy right into a three piece thick cinder block wall, who ya goin' call next to aid in Middle Eastern calamity? Ghostbusters? What, to revive the corpses of pending dead Americans as terrorism runs rampant? Screw your allies. Only the campaign slogan of a political action party that should have a sign of a graduate cap with a red circle and a line through it as their party slogan!!!

Alternatives of support? Saudia Arabia, who per the leaks of WikiLeaks has been advocating for the destruction of IRAN of late, Not ISRAEL? Or perhaps Syria, who is the latest puppet of Iran? Oh, yeah, let's get Iraq to step in and save the day for us after we spent what, 7 years destroying their country from within after the failed pretenses to invade them in the first place?

You people who attack Israel at the drop of a piece of toilet paper are beyond pathetic, you are disgusting and lack any concept of insight and judgment, much less any common sense what are the consequences at hand in Middle East conflicts at this time.

And, another dump by the Tea Party in their failed quest to promote alleged real and responsible representatives in place of the alleged failed status quo in DC prior to the last election. This dumb butt budget submission by a Tea Pary hack has confirmed for me as a moderate independent voter that ANY TEA PARTY CANDIDATE hereon is not only NOT going to ever get my vote, but I have to ponder campaigning for any Tea Pary candidate's challenger to at least try to save America from the absolute poor judgment of a political imperative that wants to return America to the thinking of the 50's.

That is the 1550's!!!

Posted by: Joelhassfam4 | January 28, 2011 7:56 PM | Report abuse

"Sure, cut off all support of a country in the Middle East that has the only true support of America."

Give me a break, we get nothing from Israel, however, our blind unquestioning support of that country makes us a target of Islamic militants. The earlier poster who claimed bin Laden never mentioned US aid to Israel is mistaken, it was one of the three reasons he cited to justify 9/11.

"Screw your allies"

An alliance presumes mutual benefits, as I mentioned, we get nothing from our alliance with Israel. Its all a one way street.

"Alternatives of support?"

How about none. Why not just sit out Middle East conflicts, plenty of other nations do and, not surprisingly, they aren't targeted by Islamic militants.

"...let's get Iraq to step in and save the day for us after we spent what, 7 years destroying their country from within after the failed pretenses to invade them in the first place?"

Yes, and that invasion was partially justified by Saddam Hussein's hostility to our "ally" Israel. You are making the case for cutting off aid.

I don't have anything against Israel but its not a US state and our blind unquestioning loyalty to that country has far more costs and benefits. Enough is enough. I'm no fan of the tea party but I'll

HURRRRRRRRAY FOR RAND PAUL!!!!!

Posted by: RealChoices | January 28, 2011 8:21 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that Israel and other foreign aid recipients should bear a pro-rata share of the needed cuts to bring the American budget in balance with our revenues.

Israel is a worthy cause, but should not be entitled to better treatment than the American people themselves.

So if we need say, a 15% reduction in federal spending, we should cut aid by a similar percentage.

Posted by: Mannie_Davis | January 28, 2011 8:23 PM | Report abuse

"mot2win:

I shouldn't engage with the likes of you, but the temptation is too much: Your anti-Semitic slip is showing.

Posted by: gord2"

Well clown you don't engage me because you are incapable. And by the way, a semite is actually an arab...look it up...likely makes you an anti-semite. Oh, excuse me...was that engaging me?

Posted by: mot2win | January 28, 2011 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Isolationism? How about common sense.

I'm so glad there is a Rand Paul in the Senate to counter the pro-Israel lobby that has infiltrated both parties.

America's relationship to Israel is like China's relationship to North Korea. The larger country gets nothing in return except headaches.

I am a former Bush Republican who now sees the dear price we have paid to be Israel's protector. I'm not an anti-Semite or Pro-Palestinian. In fact I don't care one bit about the Palestinians. It's their issue, let them figure it out. No more dead Americans because of Israel!

Go Rand Paul!

Posted by: louisp3 | January 28, 2011 8:37 PM | Report abuse

American's hatred blinds them to the fact that they elected .. racist neonazi Republican impersonating political officials into power. The blatant hatred of President Obama is now the countries downfall because now we are stuck with 2 years of racist policies. In the end after medicare, education, defense and every other public benefit have been cut you will be wishing you let Obama do what he needed to do. Support your President and stop supporting neonazi politicians parading as Republicans.
"If it looks like a racist talks like a racist smells of racist then.. Its a racist"
I guess America is the country of we do not like Jews, Blacks, The Poor and The Mexicans.. Lol!

Posted by: KBrustmeyer2003 | January 28, 2011 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Beniyyar | January 28, 2011 9:43 AM

"Doesn't Rand Paul doesn't realize that most of the American money sent to Israel is actually spent in the United States on American made arms, planes, tanks, and ammunition."

Sure he does, but it is still government spending, which the GOP are claiming to be trying to cut.

Of course, Jennifer would have us believe this is a fringe issue, when it's anything but neo.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 28, 2011 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 2:24 PM

"You believe that Israel was the reason for the 9/11 attacks despite the fact OBL made no mention of it in his declaration of war against us that preceded the attacks?"

Obviously you haven't read Bin Laden's 1996 fatwa against the US.

But you do have a point - only an ignoramus would choose to disbelieve facts on the ground - and you just proved it.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 28, 2011 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 10:18 AM


"We get big bang for our buck"

In which case, you should have no problem providing examples.

BTW Having Americans killed on their behalf doesn't count.

"In any event, as regards Israel specifically, I am all for military aid; other types, I am not in favor of. "

Wow, what a surprise ! It's not like Israel is spitting in our face over settlements or threatening to attack Iran (in spite if admitting Iran has no nuclear weapons program) if we don't.

"Israel is a rich country and shouldn't have its hand out for anything but military assistance."

I see. So because Israel is a rich country, we should be giving it aid. Yeah, makes a lot of sense.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 28, 2011 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 10:18 AM


"We get big bang for our buck"

In which case, you should have no problem providing examples.

BTW Having Americans killed on their behalf doesn't count.

"In any event, as regards Israel specifically, I am all for military aid; other types, I am not in favor of. "

Wow, what a surprise ! It's not like Israel is spitting in our face over settlements or threatening to attack Iran (in spite if admitting Iran has no nuclear weapons program) if we don't.

"Israel is a rich country and shouldn't have its hand out for anything but military assistance."

I see. So because Israel is a rich country, we should be giving it aid. Yeah, makes a lot of sense.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 28, 2011 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: gord2 | January 28, 2011 10:18 AM


"We get big bang for our buck"

In which case, you should have no problem providing examples.

BTW Having Americans killed on their behalf doesn't count.

"In any event, as regards Israel specifically, I am all for military aid; other types, I am not in favor of. "

Wow, what a surprise ! It's not like Israel is spitting in our face over settlements or threatening to attack Iran (in spite if admitting Iran has no nuclear weapons program) if we don't.

"Israel is a rich country and shouldn't have its hand out for anything but military assistance."

I see. So because Israel is a rich country, we should be giving it aid. Yeah, makes a lot of sense.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 28, 2011 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Let's see, Limbaugh insults Asian-Americans; Paul goes after the Jews; the Republicans hate Hispanics and Blacks. Is this a political party or a suicide pact?

Posted by: jibe | January 28, 2011 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul for President!!! I'm Black and would vote for him 10000%. I hope he doesn't cave on this point.

Posted by: cleancut77 | January 28, 2011 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Paul is outside the mainstream of elected leaders and the American public. Both are overwhelmingly supportive of the aid we supply to our democratic ally and understand that the U.S. cannot withdraw from the region.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hey I have nothing against Israel. If the Jews want to setup shop in a bad neighborhood not my problem. I have a problem with Israel using our money, technology, and in some case men and women to make them secure.

Besides if we go broke and China comes to the fore you think they will give a damn either way about Israel?

Posted by: cleancut77 | January 28, 2011 10:44 PM | Report abuse

This Rubin lady is a straight out Israel hack. She makes no pretense of hiding it either. The Wa Po has been a neo con paper for years so no surprise.

Cut off aid to Israel now. I wish them well but I am just tired of paying them.

Posted by: wj03412000
++++++++++++++++++++++++

Come on now you can't possibly think someone with the surname "Rubin" could be anything but in the tank for Israel.

Posted by: cleancut77 | January 28, 2011 10:49 PM | Report abuse

We've come a long way from the USS Liberty incident, where President Johnson himself and John McCain's father went out of their way to cover up Israel's deliberate killing of 38 US sailors and the destruction of the Liberty. A long way from when the Israel Lobby could end the careers of distinguished US Senators J William Fulbright and Charles Percy, for seeking to get AIPAC registered as an agent for a foreign power, which it absolutely is. A long way from when AIPAC and the rest of the gang could get rid of Cynthia McKinney and Earl Hilliard for pointing out the brutality of the Israelis to the Palestinians, on our dime! The Israel Firsters should thank Sen Rand Paul for not pointing out that Israel is not an ally of the US at all and unworthy of our friendship much less our money. Let us hope these pseudoAmerican Israel Firsters really make an issue about this! And find out how much support they really have in this parasitized country, aside from their bought and intimidated pols, and nutcase christian zionists, and their media moles and propagandists, this Jennifer Rubin case in point. Bring it on! You're on your way out, Israel will dissolve within ten years,
and let's hope they don't use the Samson Option on all the rest of us on their way down. They're just as much a bloody ally as Mubarak's Egypt is. And propagandists such as Jennifer Rubin need to acknowlege who they really owe allegiance to. Remember the dancing Israelis of 9-1-1!

Posted by: ronin1776 | January 28, 2011 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Joelhassfam4 | January 28, 2011 7:56 PM

"Hey, all you antisemitic morons, if you cut off aid to Israel, as Egypt is literally going up in flames and an anti-American opposition party is trying to gain power and then screws up the price of oil, consequences that will drive this economy right into a three piece thick cinder block wall, who ya goin' call next to aid in Middle Eastern calamity?"

So accordinf to Joelhassfam, giving moiney to Isrle keeps the price of oil down.

Let's test that shall we?

When Bush (the most pro Israeli president ever) came to office, the price of oi was $20 a barrel. By the time he left office is was $100 a barrel.

Yeah, some great insight and judgment there pal.

That looks like a fail to me.

"Alternatives of support?"

How about no support, which is Cantgor's policy anyway?

"Oh, yeah, let's get Iraq to step in and save the day for us after we spent what, 7 years destroying their country from within after the failed pretenses to invade them in the first place?"

Umm, while you're perfectly right, you might want to consider that Rubin and co were also accusing critics the FUBAR in Iraq...wait for it....isolationists.

Here's some advice Joelhassfam4. When you set a rhetorial trap, the trick is not to be the first to step in it.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 29, 2011 12:27 AM | Report abuse

So here's Jennifer Rubin logic for you.

A high speed rail, where the money is given to US companies and US citizens to build stuff that will:

a) remain in the US
b) benefit US citizens for many years to come
c) benefit infrastructure
d) reduce our dependency on foreign oil

is a boondogle.

But spending money to build weapons that:


a) will not remain in the US
b) are fo no benefit US citizens
c) do not benefit our security
d) does not reduce our dependency on foreign oil

is a sound investment.

GO IT!

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 29, 2011 12:30 AM | Report abuse

"Paul is outside the mainstream of elected leaders and the American public"

Let's remind Jennifer of this statement the next time she lauds the Tea Party as a mainstream movement.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 29, 2011 1:33 AM | Report abuse

Interestingly, from the report at Haaretz, the comments are overwhelmingly in favor of Rand Paul's poisiton.

It turns out that Jennifer, the Israeli lobby (that includes J Street) and the paid psychophants in Washington are out of touch with the public. Of the 48 comments, only one disagrees with Paul.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-democrats-and-pro-israel-lobbies-slam-republican-senator-s-call-to-halt-israel-aid-1.339662?localLinksEnabled=false

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 29, 2011 5:51 AM | Report abuse

Why should I allow the jews to spend MY money?
With the money the jews in the US send to their brethren is enough.

Posted by: analyst72 | January 29, 2011 9:12 AM | Report abuse

shingo wrote;

"A high speed rail, where the money is given to US companies and US citizens to build stuff that will:

a) remain in the US
b) benefit US citizens for many years to come
c) benefit infrastructure
d) reduce our dependency on foreign oil"

Almost none of what you wrote is true.

First of all the trains themselves won't be made here. Also it won't benefit any infrastructure but the tiny, tiny number of people who will use it. Freight and highspeed rail do not use the same tracks, otherwise they could just use the existing rail infrastructure and not need to build a new one.

Lastly, an incredibly few number of people on a nationwide basis will ever use this type rail, so any effect on oil will be simply non-existent. However there is no projection of profitability for any of the planned railines, because passenger rail is never profitable in this country (see Amtrak), so the government will continue to subsidize these lines year after year, just like Amtrak.

You really need to research this because you clearly don't know anything about the subject of high-speed rail.

Posted by: johnmarshall5446 | January 29, 2011 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Another little tip. Maybe the Jewish groups on the right should explain to the Jewish groups on the left what they have done. Another reason why today the average American doesn't have much loyalty towards Israel. It's when I watch progressive Jewish groups help to subvert our immigration laws. They should expect payback and it's coming. Let's do the same thing in Israel. I would encourage my government to push Israel to open those Israeli borders wide and learn to live with your Arab neighbors side by side. Or maybe the Arabs can just overrun Israel by sheer numbers. No concern at all about any violence or the destruction to Israel's economy which is the same disdain they now show the border states. You really shouldn't expect average Americans to continue to support Israel. We lose all interest in partnering, protecting, or financially supporting Israel. You reap what you sow.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | January 29, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

No, Shingo1, my point is that the U.S. is so protective of its oil interests that it needs any and all allies to assist them, and not that this position is good, but, it is the reality it is and, oh yeah, more and more Islamic/arabic populations are being indoctrinated to hate us to a point of flying planes into buildings killing thousands of people at a time! So, dump your one ally in the region to try to neutralize this hate, and then how do you manage the area to your benefit? Oh yeah, again, just invade and bomb them into submission. There is a great Public Relations ploy!!!

Let's face it, while some commenters are just generalizing we need to reel in spending, some are using it as a ploy to spew their antisemetic rants. And, if you really think the Tea Party is looking out for Americans' interests, aligning with antisemetic rantings of supporters really will draw in independent voters' supports.

NOT!!!!!!

Posted by: Joelhassfam4 | January 29, 2011 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Rand is ABSOLOUTLY RIGHT ! WHY should we borrow against our childrens future to send aid (military or otherwise) to ANY foreign country (Israel INCLUDED) when we are drownding in DEBT ???? Our politicians are GIVING AWAY MONEY we don't have, and have to borrow, from RED CHINA ??? How can ANY sane person argue with what Rand Paul is proposing ??? Just what exactly do we 'get' from our alliance with Israel anyway ??? I don't see any 'benefit' whatsoever. It does however seem to make us a target for every fanatic in the arab world however.

Posted by: killerm1 | January 29, 2011 11:55 AM | Report abuse

"Maybe the Jewish groups on the right"

What Jewish groups on the right? Jews vote for the Democrats in even higher percentages than blacks do, from mid 80's to mid 90's, depending on the election. That is what makes the Obama left's hatred for Israel so amusing-after decades of supporting the Democratic Party, the pro-Israel Jewish majority is now getting kicked in the teeth.

Posted by: Azarkhan | January 29, 2011 12:01 PM | Report abuse

"No, Shingo1, my point is that the U.S. is so protective of its oil interests that it needs any and all allies to assist them"

Wrong. The US only imports 12% of it's oil from the ME, so it's only interests are to control who does and does not get the oil. No matter who's in power in the ME, they still need to continue selling it.

"oh yeah, more and more Islamic/arabic populations are being indoctrinated to hate us to a point of flying planes into buildings killing thousands of people at a time!"

You have it backwards. They don't just hate us out of boredom, they hare us  because of our policies, 2 of which are support for tyrants like Mubarak and one sided support got Israel

"dump your one ally in the region to try to neutralize this hate"

Israel is one of the main reasons for unrest. It's ability to neutralize it us about as effective as using gasoline to put out a fire.

The fact is that neocons like Jennifer ate only too happy to slash spending when it comes to America, but insists on throwing money at a state that insists on pursuing policies that Ova declared are a threat to US national security.

There was nothing anti semitic about what Rand Paul's comments. He wants to but ALL spending, ALL aid - not just Israel. You're just so obsessed with Israel that all you hear is one thing.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 29, 2011 12:13 PM | Report abuse

It is easy, but not accurate to label Rand Paul as isolationist. It is better to describe him as anti-handout and against the uncontrolled growth and power of the state.

The current revolt in Egypt doesn't do much bolster any argument that borrowing money to give oppressive foreign governments billions of dollars over many decades is a worthwhile investment.

Israel is a friend and is democratic. It is also prosperous and militarily powerful. It can take take of its own security without our billions in aid. Moreover, when year-after-year we shovel billions of dollars of military aid to Israel we remove any incentive for the Israelis to make peace with their neighbors or to resolve issues with the Palestinians.

Let's get back to basics -- "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none." Of course, those radical words are those of Thomas Jefferson.

Posted by: chucka1 | January 29, 2011 2:21 PM | Report abuse

@Gord2: Never said that. Maybe I meant that our blind subservience to Israel and its routine raping of the Palestinians may have possibly caused some to view us with less than the utmost love and affection.

As for Osama bin Forgotten, let me quote from his "Letter to America" from 2002, in which he explained why he attacked us on 9/11:

"(Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you?

"As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:

"(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.

"a) You attacked us in Palestine:

"(i) Palestine, which has sunk under military occupation for more than 80 years. The British handed over Palestine, with your help and your support, to the Jews, who have occupied it for more than 50 years; years overflowing with oppression, tyranny, crimes, killing, expulsion, destruction and devastation. The creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel. The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its*price, and pay for it heavily.

"(ii) It brings us both laughter and tears to see that you have not yet tired of repeating your fabricated lies that the Jews have a historical right to Palestine, as it was promised to them in the Torah. Anyone who disputes with them on this alleged fact is accused of anti-semitism. This is one of the most fallacious, widely-circulated fabrications in history. The people of Palestine are pure Arabs and original Semites. It is the Muslims who are the inheritors of Moses (peace be upon him) and the inheritors of the real Torah that has not been changed. Muslims believe in all of the Prophets, including Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all. If the followers of Moses have been promised a right to Palestine in the Torah, then the Muslims are the most worthy nation of this."

Now, if this isn't sufficient for you, here's an excerpt from his 1996 fatwa against the US:

"It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq. The horrifying pictures of the massacre of Qana, in Lebanon are still fresh in our memory."

Who's the ignoramus here?

Posted by: Garak | January 29, 2011 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Nicely done Garak,

The one thing I would add us that the 1996 Fatwa was inspired by the Qana massacre (by Israel), that same year.

Posted by: Shingo1 | January 29, 2011 4:00 PM | Report abuse

shingo wrote:

"The US only imports 12% of it's oil from the ME, so it's only interests are to control who does and does not get the oil."

Actually it's up to about 17-18% now, because of increased output from Iraq, but not the dominant area in any case.

Posted by: johnmarshall5446 | January 29, 2011 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Wolf Blitzer of CNN asked a Dilemma question for political reasons. How dumb can we get not to recognize what is being asked. Why did he not ask are you going to start taxing TAX EXCLUSION INCOME ? No, because he is a recipient. It looks like Jennifer is doing the same thing. The question should be WHY ?

Posted by: buckaroo5 | January 29, 2011 8:10 PM | Report abuse

Joelhassfam4: Yeah, brilliant logic from someone who has the foresight of an amoeba! Sure, cut off all support of a country in the Middle East that has the only true support of America. Hey, all you antisemitic morons, if you cut off aid to Israel, as Egypt is literally going up in flames and an anti-American opposition party is trying to gain power and then screws up the price of oil, consequences that will drive this economy right into a three piece thick cinder block wall, who ya goin' call next to aid in Middle Eastern calamity? Ghostbusters? What, to revive the corpses of pending dead Americans as terrorism runs rampant? Screw your allies. Only the campaign slogan of a political action party that should have a sign of a graduate cap with a red circle and a line through it as their party slogan!!!

Alternatives of support? Saudia Arabia, who per the leaks of WikiLeaks has been advocating for the destruction of IRAN of late, Not ISRAEL? Or perhaps Syria, who is the latest puppet of Iran? Oh, yeah, let's get Iraq to step in and save the day for us after we spent what, 7 years destroying their country from within after the failed pretenses to invade them in the first place?

You people who attack Israel at the drop of a piece of toilet paper are beyond pathetic, you are disgusting and lack any concept of insight and judgment, much less any common sense what are the consequences at hand in Middle East conflicts at this time.

And, another dump by the Tea Party in their failed quest to promote alleged real and responsible representatives in place of the alleged failed status quo in DC prior to the last election. This dumb butt budget submission by a Tea Pary hack has confirmed for me as a moderate independent voter that ANY TEA PARTY CANDIDATE hereon is not only NOT going to ever get my vote, but I have to ponder campaigning for any Tea Pary candidate's challenger to at least try to save America from the absolute poor judgment of a political imperative that wants to return America to the thinking of the 50's.

That is the 1550's!!!
========================================
And where did you go to improve your knowledge base ? Kerfuffle University ?

Posted by: buckaroo5 | January 29, 2011 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul has given notice that the Zionists' puppetry is no longer effective. They are so used to manipulating people (like the fundamentalist Christians) they are trying to undermine the fact of hundreds of thousands of ordinary men and women who are putting their lives on the line to revolt against Zionist arranged oppression. The Zionists are so used to manipulation they do believe in what is so obviously a spontaneous revolt against their economic oppression imposed by their puppet tyrants.

Zionist thugs you are put on notice that your day of reckoning is at hand and all those US furnished weapons will not be enough to maintain your predatory regime.

Posted by: ToddPollard | January 29, 2011 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul has given notice that the Zionists' puppetry is no longer effective. They are so used to manipulating people (like the fundamentalist Christians) they are trying to undermine the fact of hundreds of thousands of ordinary men and women who are putting their lives on the line to revolt against Zionist arranged oppression. The Zionists are so used to manipulation they do believe in what is so obviously a spontaneous revolt against their economic oppression imposed by their puppet tyrants.

Zionist thugs you are put on notice that your day of reckoning is at hand and all those US furnished weapons will not be enough to maintain your predatory regime.

Posted by: ToddPollard | January 29, 2011 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul has given notice that the Zionists' puppetry is no longer effective. They are so used to manipulating people (like the fundamentalist Christians) they are trying to undermine the fact of hundreds of thousands of ordinary men and women who are putting their lives on the line to revolt against Zionist arranged oppression. The Zionists are so used to manipulation they do believe in what is so obviously a spontaneous revolt against their economic oppression imposed by their puppet tyrants.

Zionist thugs you are put on notice that your day of reckoning is at hand and all those US furnished weapons will not be enough to maintain your predatory regime.

Posted by: ToddPollard | January 29, 2011 10:21 PM | Report abuse

What conerns me is that I actually agree with Sen Ding-a-Ling on this issue. Acdtually, I would include a stoppage for very country in that part of the world. We are broke!

Posted by: BBear1 | January 29, 2011 11:25 PM | Report abuse

OK, let's cut off aid to all our alleged allies, take on an isolationaist stance, which I will freely admit to some degree we need to consider but not as a blanket policy with all outside contacts, and focus on internal needs for what, the next 4-8 years?

Then what in that time period, former allies are left out to dry and be mercilessly attacked by other "interests" who have no real interests in other cultures or societies, but like the Borg of Star Trek, are just moving across the lands to assimilate and crush any alternate and viable alternatives of political and/or social structures that challenge the domination attitude of the oppressor regimes fostering assimilation? That is how I interpret the extremist element of Islam/Muslim culture, and note I am not damning the religion or culture as a whole, just their fringe/extremist movement typified by al Queda and Hamas and other "join us or die" factions in the Middle East (which I would hyphenate as M.E., not ME which is Maine).

This quick fix mentality offered by certain political structures and extremists here in the U.S., as evident by supporters at this thread, is so void of foresight and judgment, it makes moderates like me more frightened of what strolls around this country right now than what is outside in the M.E. and Russia. Russia, yeah, there is another concern brewing in National Policy concerns in the near future. Hey, remember their airport was bombed this week. Oh, didn't happen in the US so who cares, right Shingo and Buckaroo!?

By the way, thank you for correcting my misspelling of antisemitic, and don't know of Kerfuffle U., but based on the rebuttals, doubt some even made it to your nearest CC's, those being Communicateless Colleges.

Maybe Rand Paul is not being antisemitic in his interests in cutting spending, but he is not showing leadership skills in taking a chain saw to prune the tree that needs to grow in the front yard.

If Paul wants to cut foriegn aid, he better be ready to alienate some people who will not take his calls later!

Posted by: Joelhassfam4 | January 30, 2011 9:54 AM | Report abuse

"J Street wants to give Israel money but condemn the Jewish state in the U.N.? Can't quite fathom that one.)"

I don't find them particularly confusing. They don't want to harm Israel with the UN condemnation, they want to scold her for letting them down. They want to make her stronger but guiding her away from the overly punitive policies she visits non-Jewish Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. But wishing to guide her away from what they see as grave injustice is not at all the same as wishing to harm her.

Posted by: LEMON4 | January 30, 2011 12:21 PM | Report abuse

"Doesn't Rand Paul doesn't realize that most of the American money sent to Israel is actually spent in the United States on American made arms, planes, tanks, and ammunition. Perhaps not, but this sort of populism seems to be the stock in trade of certain politicians. Of course Rand Paul can deprive Boeing, Colt, and Raytheon of that largesse while simultaneously showing that the Republican Party has as much antagonism and hostility towards Israel as the Democrats have.
But if this is what Mr. Paul wants then he should go for it, Israel will still turn to American arms manufacturers for their goods, but there will just be fewer and cheaper purchases. I doubt that the American workers at these companies will object to the job losses either.
Go for it Ron! Beniyyar "
So... we should continue to make sure that armed conflict remains armed because the US needs the jobs? This must be a special kind of insanity. Surely the US still has the ability to innovate and the wealth to retool so that we can give alternate employment to workers who are no longer needed for military related industry. Isn't it really quite immoral to say, in essence, we must have war or the immenient danger of war somewhere in the world so that we at home continue to enjoy our prosperity? And then we wonder why we are loosing the trust, respect and friendship of the rest of the world.

Posted by: LEMON4 | January 30, 2011 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Shouldn't Rand Paul be exerting more energy pushing Libertarian policies like decriminalizing pot?

Posted by: angie12106 | January 30, 2011 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company