Dean, meeting with Jewish leaders, promises strong backing for Israel

[Feanorcurufinwe]

Before his first major meeting with American Jewish communal leaders, presidential hopeful Howard Dean ducked into a Manhattan sukkah to shake hands with local children and admire the homemade rings of construction paper they had draped across the outdoor hut.
Later Friday afternoon, however, at a meeting at the Lincoln Square Synagogue, it took more than a photo-op and some handshaking to placate 26 representatives of Jewish groups.

A former Vermont governor, Dean had vexed many members of the Jewish community last month when he recommended that the United States take a more “evenhanded” approach to brokering Israeli-Palestinian peace — a phrase generally taken to mean that the United States should not take Israel’s side.

Dean backers say the comment was distorted by his opponents.

Asked about his remarks during the closed-door meeting, Dean “covered his face with his two hands and shook his face as if to say ‘Oy, what a mistake that was,’ ” said David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee.
http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=13346&intcategoryid=3

[killbotfactory]

1. Jimmy Carter said Dean was right

But what's Jimmy Carter ever done worth mentioning?

[Meshuga]

4. Yes

Jimmy Carter is a great man and he has done more good as an ex-president than any of the men who took over after him combined!

[blm]

6. Too bad Dean didn't mean what Carter thought he said.

Dean backed down from his "evenhanded" comment.

Basically, Dean didn't know exactly what to say and said what popped into his head that he thought would get him out of taking an actual stand that might annoy supporters.

[killbotfactory]

8. No, he did.

Carter realized that he meant we can't be biased towards either side of we are going to be acting as an honest broker. I'm sorry some democrats exploited and misconstrued those common sense comments for cheap political points, but it's not Dean's fault.

[blm]

10. Puhleeze! heheheheh....

you can't be serious and expect us to believe he knows what he's sayoing and means what he says.

Howard "Gary, what do I do?" Dean?

I'm quite certain that Carter doesn't want to increase the military aid to Israel by billions more than Bush like Dean does, and I'm quite certain he wouldn't agree with Dean that while increasing that military aid to Israel you tell Palestinians they can only have a DEMILITARIZED state.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

13. Are you going to believe blm or Carter?

Dean "backed down" from his comment because of all the idiots who thought saying "even-handed" meant that he wanted to nuke Israel, instead of recognizing that he meant that all parties should be considered equal.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

14. Who'd o' thunk it?

"Dean "backed down" from his comment because of all the idiots who thought saying "even-handed" meant that he wanted to nuke Israel, instead of recognizing that he meant that all parties should be considered equal."

A former Vermont governor, Dean had vexed many members of the Jewish community last month when he recommended that the United States take a more “evenhanded” approach to brokering Israeli-Palestinian peace — a phrase generally taken to mean that the United States should not take Israel’s side. http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=13346&intcategoryid=3

Actually it sounds like to the writer of the article at least, 'even-handed' actually meant 'even-handed'.

Who'd o' thunk it?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

17. Bzzt. Wrong again.

Even-handed means even-handed, not "that the United States should not take Israel’s side."


Check the writing in this article for "buzz" words:

"ducked"
"vexed"
‘Oy, what a mistake that was,’
"The group’s ambivalence is due, to some extent, to Dean’s departure from the Bush administration’s foreign policy."

[Feanorcurufinwe]

20. fun with font tags

not

[blm]

18. HAHAHA...great explanation...no hyperbole there....

no sirreee.....

Can you cite where someone interpreted Dean's remark to mean that he wanted to nuke Israel, thereby forcing Dean to retract?

Take your time.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. From the article:

a phrase generally taken to mean that the United States should not take Israel’s side.

The "nuke" part was my words. The sentiment is the same, however.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

21. No the sentiment is not the same.

Being even-handed WOULD mean to not take Israel's side.
It also would mean not to take the Palestinian's side.

Dean is just displaying his lack of diplomatic tact in being unable to negotiate these admittedly treacherous waters without sticking his foot in his mouth. He's managed to make both sides think he's biased against them and has gained no one's trust.

[rman]

2. oh sure it's much better not to be evenhanded

i suppose Dean didn't meet with any anti-zionist orthodox jews?

[madrchsod]

3. well let me

off dean`s bandwagon..yes what a mistake it was ,i thought maybe someone would have the balls to stand up to the government of israel but i guess not.oh,well same as it ever was,same as it ever was....

[KaraokeKarlton]

7. Dean will be fair about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict

In fact, you'll be seeing him push for a Palestinian State, the clearing out of many settlements and a more balanced approach to that whole mess. There are NO second class citizens with Dean, no matter where they come from. At the same time, he has to be supportive of Israel. It IS possible to be supportive of Israel while still holding the Israeli government accountable. Dean is no pushover. He is NOT going to give Sharon a free pass to do whatever he wants to do. Likewise, Dean won't pat Arafat on the head when he behaves in a way inconsistent with peace. Dean will be equally demanding to BOTH sides. He won't abandon Israel, but neither will he coddle Israel. Dean is a person who is fully capable of finding a fair balance on things. He also won't put up with a bunch of nonsense. The man also has the ability to explain things to people in a way that just makes sense. He is brilliant at framing and selling his ideas. That's what is really needed in dealing with both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian mess. Both sides are wrong in the things they do. Sure, one is more powerful than the other, but might or lack thereof doesn't make anyone's choices the right ones. That issue is much more complicated than it looks.

[DuctapeFatwa]

5. He's met with liberals, but feels $ to Israel should have no conditions

"...the former Vermont governor declared that, while the United States should become more engaged, he did not have any fundamental objections with President George W. Bush’s policies...

When asked by the Jewish newspaper Forward late last year as to whether he supported APN’s perspective, Governor Dean replied "No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view."..

He also rejects calls by APN and other liberal Zionist groups that Israel’s requested $12 billion loan guarantee be linked to an Israeli freeze on constructing additional illegal settlements on confiscated Palestinian land, arguing that such aid should instead be unconditional...

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0226-04.htm

[DrFunkenstein]

9. Dean Actually Says His Policies Are Same As Bush's

"When they have bothered to state them, the Administration's guiding principles in the Middle East are the right ones. Terrorism against Israel must end. A two-state solution is the only path to eventual peace, but Palestinian territory cannot have the capability of being used as a platform for attacking Israel. Some degree of separation between Israelis and Palestinians is probably necessary in light of the horrible bloodshed of the past two years. To be viable, the Palestinian Authority must become democratic and purged of corruption." - Dean, at his Drake foreign policy speech.

Not to mention "Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state."

<>

[ex_jew]

11. But still we know he won't invade ME countries just because

Sharon wants him to. For that much at least I am grateful.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

12. How do we know that?

[ex_jew]

15. Based on his opposition to war against a country that was not a

threat to the US, I have trouble imagining him using the same ruse (assuming we haven't invaded every country in the ME before he takes office). This may be wishful thinking...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. *

*