Skip to main content

View Diary: Democrats, Republicans, and Zionist fanatics (82 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And, of course, the term "Zionist fanatic" (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MBNYC, Mannie, JNEREBEL, leftynyc, dhonig, zemblan

    is offensive, and not one that the candidate would use.  Canvassers should not be using their canvassing time to even implicitly push an agenda that is opposed by the candidate.

    •  Except that I didn't, which I think would be (4+ / 0-)

      apparent if you read the diary carefully.  They made clear to me they were voting Republican because of the Democrats' positions on Israel.  They then expressed their own fanatical opinions about Israel, opinions I believe even most pro-Israel Democrats would disagree with.

      During my conversation with them, I never once went into the particulars of my own opinions about Israel.  I did express in general terms my disagreement with their opinions, I noted the similarity between my candidate's position and theirs, and I suggested that reasonable Jews could have differing opinions on the questions they brought up.

      Their response was the man walked away and the woman gave me the cross-eyed look...

      When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

      by litho on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 10:42:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You would have served your candidate far better (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MBNYC, leftynyc, JNEREBEL, zemblan

        if you woud have simply corrected their misunderstanding of Markey's views on the subject, and left it at that.  Markey is not well served by you injecting your own personal disagreement with voters, particularly when it is based on a viewpoint that he completely disagrees with.

        And, of course, the candidate is not well served when one of his canvassers throws around the term "Zionist fanatics."

        •  You do a lot of canvassing, I suppose (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Fire bad tree pretty, poco

          These guys were fives.  Canvassing protocol holds that you should thank them for their time and move on to the next door, because you're never going to convince them to move towards your candidate.  In fact, general instructions are that for anyone worse than a three, you should simply move on.

          So, you're right, I shouldn't have stayed at their door.  I chose to stay briefly because I was nearing the end of my turf, and I knew I would ultimately hit all the doors I had been assigned.  I knew I could take a few minutes to engage in polite and respectful conversation with this couple, regardless of the deep and profound differences between us.  Given those differences were based on a serious misunderstanding of my candidate's position, I felt further justified in at least attempting to engage them, especially because the subject of the difference happens to be an issue I know a great deal about.

          The husband grew angry with me and shut down when I attempted to correct his blaming of Obama for the current size of the US federal deficit.  He refused to even listen to the argument that the economic crisis began long before Obama was elected, as that would have challenged his preconceived notion that the Democrats are responsible for the deficit.  When his wife, who had previously demonstrated the knowledge that Markey had gone to AIPAC, went on to acknowledge Republican responsibility for the fiscal crisis, I did feel -- as I laid out in the diary -- there may be the basis for a conversation.

          That is, the husband demonstrated Republican fanaticism in addition to his Zionist fanaticism. I still hoped, however, that the wife's greater openness to actual evidence -- you know, facts and stuff -- might allow for a more productive conversation.  The wife, however, demonstrated the same closed-mindedness about Israel that her husband had shown on fiscal matters.

          Remember, my comments took the form of "I see that differently" not "you're wrong, this is what really happened."  But her response to each one was to delve further into her perception of Palestinian perfidy, and to assign sole responsibility for the Mideast conflict to the Palestinian side.

          Now, I know that you and many of the other commenters in this diary agree with her on that point, but I certainly hope and believe that you do not agree with her that Democrats have sold out Israel and we should all vote Republican instead.

          The choice facing you here, really, is either to acknowledge that her fanaticism led her to a bad decision -- to reject the Democratic Party -- or to simply deny that decision was in any way related to her position on Israel.

          To take the latter option, however, would fly in the face of her own words about what she had done.  I'm sorry to have put you in such a difficult spot.

          When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

          by litho on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 12:09:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So you admit you blew it. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MBNYC, JNEREBEL, zemblan

            You knew full well that the appropriate thing to do was to simply move on, but you just couldn't help yourself. You just had to inject yourself into an issue over which your candidate's views are in total disagreement with your personal agenda. And while it would be understandable if you simply wanted to correct the facts about Markey's views, you -- by your own admission -- went beyond that and mentoned your own beliefs.

            You screwed up. But as is apparent from your tossing around the term "Zionist fanatics," you just couldn't control yourself. Well done.

            •  I didn't blow it (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Fire bad tree pretty, poco, Brecht

              I spent five minutes on a lost cause.  We didn't argue, nobody accused anybody of anything, and nobody got mad (except maybe the husband when I challenged his false accusation of the president).  At the end of the civil exchange of profoundly different opinions, I left.  I didn't change anybody's mind, but I felt it was time well spent.  After leaving, I completed my turf, knocked every door I had been assigned, and was able to plant some seeds on behalf of my candidate in a couple of threes I met a few blocks over.  It was a successful afternoon canvassing.

              Three days later, still disturbed by the blatant fanaticism I had observed, I decided to write it up for dailykos, a website I am supremely confident neither of these people read.

              You think I told the woman I thought she was a fanatic?  Don't know where you got that idea...

              When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

              by litho on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 04:02:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You indeed did blow it (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL

                You were there on behalf of Markey, and your exchange of "profoundly different opinions" included an attempt to push your own perspective, one that stems from an agenda that is profoundly in conflict with the views of the candidate. This was neither the time nor the place for you to take even baby steps to push that personal agenda.

                You would do well to recognize that you did not serve the campaign well in this regard, and you should try to demonstrate more self-control in the future.

                •  Thanks for the advice. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Fire bad tree pretty, poco, Brecht

                  I fairly represented my candidate.  I did not commit suicide, and I did not deny who I am, but at the same time I made clear to the homeowners they had more in common with the candidate than they believed.

                  When my candidate wins election, as I am sure he will, I intend to pressure him to open up towards a more expansive view of Israeli history, one that confers upon Israel's aggressive actions towards the Palestinians their proper role in understanding both the origins and reproduction of the ongoing conflict.

                  That is, as a campaign volunteer I am working hard to get him elected, and to establish a foundation to enlighten him once he gets into office.

                  I know you want to blame the Palestinians for everything and the Israelis for nothing, and I know you are profoundly disappointed that an American Jew would even think of criticizing Israel on fundamental matters.  But you don't own me.  And you certainly don't control my thoughts nor my actions.

                  Thanks for the advice.  Markey will win.

                  When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

                  by litho on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 05:05:13 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I too hope and believe Markey will win (0+ / 0-)

                    And when that happens, you will have every right to make known to your new Senator your views and attitudes about Israel, Zionism, Zionists, and Jewish supporters of Israel.  That is a cherished American  right.

                    And I am absolutely confident that, like your other excellent Senator, Markey will not for a second consider adopting those hideous views and attitudes as his own.

                    Oh and by the way, you and I have had enough communications over the years so that you know full well that this statement of yours is not true.

                    I know you want to blame the Palestinians for everything and the Israelis for nothing, and I know you are profoundly disappointed that an American Jew would even think of criticizing Israel on fundamental matters.  
                    So that makes you . . . a liar.

                    Here's a little advice -- lying ain't the best way to persuade anyone toward your point of view.

      •  I agree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        litho, poco

        there was no point lingering, especially if you're canvassing for a Democratic primary and they now dislike all Democrats. Unlikely to pull a ballot on Tuesday.

        But last year I got into it with someone who kept insisting Liz Warren sold out the asbestos workers. Wouldn't even look at the letter I had from the asbestos workers' law firm, saying she'd come in on the side they supported. Normally I don't waste my time while canvassing but sometimes, if they're just factually wrong, you can't help yourself.

        Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

        by fenway49 on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 01:17:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah. (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      livosh1, leftynyc, JNEREBEL, zemblan, Red Sox

      Last I checked, that was the point of the exercise: to positively engage people. There is even some data to support the assumption that people can read what you think of them even if you don't communicate it verbally.

      Meh.

      Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

      by MBNYC on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 11:43:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And you, of course, are an authority on this: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        litho

        "How to positively engage people."

        An authority well-demonstrated, as we all know and remember from your multiple gracious visits to Adalah diary threads (latest evidence: your sweet attempts to positively engage the diarist and myself in this thread).

        And as numerous worn-out site administrators and moderators know and remember from the various complaints, counter-complaints and suspensions you have been a major player in and/or recipient of - all the while, without contributing a single atom of positive, useful knowledge or insight about the topic of Israel-Palestine.

        I guess you can also teach us a lesson or two on self-introspection, while you're at it.

        Consider yourself disengaged now. Shabat Shalom.

        •  I am, actually. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          livosh1
          And you, of course, are an authority on this: (0+ / 0-)
          "How to positively engage people."
          Which is why I'm going to refrain from tearing you the new asshole you've earned with your fabulations and weak attempts at bullying. Try that with someone who doesn't think your petulance is at best mildly amusing. Hint: not me.

          But yes, do have a great weekend.

          Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

          by MBNYC on Thu Apr 25, 2013 at 03:30:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Your comment is unconstructive to community (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          livosh1, zemblan, MBNYC

          dialog and your attack against another member is noted with the warning to honor your pledge to disengage.

          If you ignore this warning you will be reported.

        •  Do not ad-hom MBNYC. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MBNYC, JNEREBEL

          This is your first and only warning. Because it sounds real ba-a-a-adass to say shit like that.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site