General Category > Ask JTF
Ask JTF For February 10 Broadcast
Ari:
Hello Dear Chaim,
Hope all is well. This week I would like to ask you about The Holoucast. In addition to the obviously evil Nazi pieces of garbage (Yimach Schman Vesrichan), who do you hold most accountable for the travesty which resulted in the death of 6 million Jews. Was it Governments such as those of the United States and Britain who could have done much more before it was too late? Also how accountable do you hold American and International Jewry for not doing more to save their fellow Jews. What could they have done? I remember seeing a program about Jewish History on PBS a while back where they said that during World War 2 there were discussions among Jewish leaders of putting together an International Army of Jewish soldiers to take on the Nazis. Was this ever a feasible option? If G-d forbid there ever was another attempt to annihilate the Jewish people, would our fellow Jews be more prepared this time around? Thanks for all your great efforts and taking the time to answer our questions. Until next week, all the best.
Ari O0
RationalThought110:
Shalom Chaim,
No need for you to read this aloud on your broadcast.
The following is just something for you to think about:
When Spitzer wanted to give driver's licenses to illegals, most people (I think close to 80%) opposed it--with that high of a percentage, it means that many liberals were also opposed. And Spitzer's approval rating went down.
At around the same time, Hillary was taking multiple positions on the issue within a few days and the media criticized her a little.
But the media protected Obama. Like Bill Richardson (who is no longer a candidate), the governor of NM who signed a bill into law a while ago to give driver's licenses to illegals (and is proud of it), Obama supports giving driver's licenses to illegals.
Yet, there's been no backlash against Obama the way there was against Spitzer.
The idea was so unpopular nation-wide that I think some other states (NM is an exception that I mention below) that previously had laws to give licenses to illegals, revoked that law in their state.
Liberals who rejected Spitzer's proposal probably support Obama.
So among people who support Obama, it seems like there's not much that could be said in terms of policy, to convince them to no longer support him.
About a month ago, I posted a thread on the front page of the forum about how Obama's campaign is like a cult.
His supporters are hypnotized by him. All he has to do is say the words "change" or "hope" and they support him.
All presidential campaigns offer some type of "change" in their platform. Yet, Obama thinks he owns the term "change" and that everyone who wants some type of "change" wants the same type as him, which is clearly false. For example, many people want the borders secured and doing something to stop illegal aliens. That's not the type of change that Obama would offer.
Maybe Ron Paul's supporters could somehow get into a fight with Obama's supporters, with the resulting effect being that some people might get turned off from Obama. After all, Paul's supporters have a slogan "Ron Paul Revolution" and Revolution is definitely "change."
I'm not sure what would be the most effective methods in decreasing support for Obama.
Maybe some of the independent voters who have been considering Obama could be swayed by substance.
kahaneloyalist:
Dear Chaim, if the government falls, and you are not yet in Israel who should we support politically?
Daniel:
I personally think you gave up on Huckabee too soon and that you were too focused on defeating the candidate you didn't want instead of focusing on supporting the candidate that you did want. I think that when setting out to achieve and objective whether it be playing a game or running a political campaign, the way one needs to go about it is to focus on winning instead of trying not to lose. When trying not to lose overshadows the desire and objective in winning, then most often that team or that individual ends up losing. As it turned out in this case, Huckabee ended up outperforming Romney. So I think that Huckabee would have been and still is the stronger candidate to support in defeating McCain. But aside from that, we should support Huckabee anyway, because he's the best candidate, not just because we're trying to defeat McCain. I hope in future campaigns you would take on more of an attitude of supporting the best candidate instead of adopting a mindset of trying to defeat the worst candidate. That's just my opinion anyway.
Daniel
Zvulun Ben Moshe:
Shalom Chaim,
Have you tried using speech recognition devices?
Thank you.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version