“Anti-Semitism has become almost wholly the province of the Left today”

Answer to what? Jim’s scary imaginary “left-muslim alliance”? His assertion that the “vast majority” these crimes are perpetrated “by Muslims” even though the statistics cited show nothing of the sort?

 Jim’s been spouting outlandish nonsense on Wizbang for years. It’s my habit, and my prerogative, to point it out when I notice it, and feel like it.

On the other hand, Cap’n, YOUR habit of standing on the shoulders of better commenters, flinging what you imagine to be clever insults, is tiresome and childish. What are you, 12 years old?

Stepehen, or what ever your name is this week, just cram it.  You’ve poisoned the well here so thoroughly there’s no chance of you redeeming yourself.  Now give yourself a nice little pat on the back for at least spelling the cuss words right.

Well, ya totally got me there. Since Hitler was a nonsmoking vegetarian, he must have been a commie.

 Forget I said anything.

Hitler was also a Christian and had been an army corporal ….
Hitler and his Mussolini-modeled modified Marxist-Leninist gangsters were Christian-hating death-worshiping satanist/pagans. 

But he did make Corporal on his own merits and could hang paper which clearly demonstrates his having been way better prepared for the job of chief executive than is America’s similarly hard Leftard charismatic (it is said)  pathological narciSSist! 

Hitler was a Mussolini-modeled modified Marxist in every way — and then some — and in fact killed many socialists and communists on his way to power and in power ….

You mean as did Stalin and Lenin and Che and Castro and Mao and Pol Pot and Ho Chi Mihn and as do Hu and Putin and Mugabe and the bank-robbing, drug and gun-running gutlessly anonymously woman, child and baby murdering Marxist gangster bastards that so grandiosely self style themselves the “ira?”

Murdering other Marxists more likely defines Marxists than excludes them!

Always identified with the right by whom?

(A) The left

(B)  The left

(C) The left

(D) All the above

It’s an attempt – a successful attempt, I should say – by the left at guilt by association.  How a party that called itself “socialist worker’s party” came to be associated with the right escapes me, unless it was simply that the reds, associated with the left, needed to try to differentiate themselves for propaganda reasons.  “We’re the left; ergo, they must be the right.”

For instance, here’s Shirer in “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” describing Hitler:

“…His originality lay in his being the only politician of the Right to apply them {certain ideas and techniques} to the German scene after the First World War. It was then that the Nazi movement, alone among the nationalist and conservative parties, gained a mass following…”

Shirer’s work has long been considered THE definitive history of Nazi Germany, and represents the consensus view of the Nazi movement until, ummm…recently…

Not much, but I tire of the new Wizbang shibboleth that the Nazis were “of the left.” It’s patent nonsense, and adopted by rubes like Jim M (I don’t believe YOU, herddog, sincerely swallow such hoo-ha) as a feeble ‘gotcha.” Goldberg, I repeat, is an idiot as a historian, but a pretty good book-seller.

LOL the “you should go to a Nazi meeting” thingie was meant to be humorous. I wouldn’t know how to find one, much less attend one.

…. Commies and nazis are nothing but criminal gangs ….

And are as totalitarian (left-wing) as and are in the final analysis almost indistinguishable from the mafia and the yakuza et al.

“Almost” so, because the mafia and the yakuza et al have moral codes and lack uniformed branches, fiat “courts” and prisons. 

They are voting for your GOP candidates at the Federal level, you total poopyhead. This is because they are part of your conservative coalition.

So, once again – if you don’t like them, stop associating with them and make clear that their racist views are utterly unwelcome in any effort to elect any GOP candidate.

Otherwise, just accept the fact that they make convenient bedfellows for conservatives and the GOP at the Federal election level.

“You still revere Robert Byrd…”

You mean, the Senator who fully repudiated his past and then proved his words with deeds for voting for the Civil Rights bill?

And your mentioning of Fred Phelps proves my point exactly. Fred Phelps is a *Southern conservative* who NEVER votes for Democrats at the Federal level.

Absolutely, people are free to vote how they will. But where did I say otherwise?

My point is, don’t try to pretend that the Southern racists who vote Democratically at the local level, aren’t voting in droves for the GOP candidates at the Federal level. If the GOP really didn’t want them, they’d repudiate them and tell them to take their votes elsewhere.

No, not necessarily. Describing West Bank policy as “apartheid” and certain people as “Israel-firsters,” while somewhat provocative and arguably over-the-top, can no more be classified as “anti-semitic” than certain commenters here, (including, if I’m not mistaken, YOU) who describe President Obama as an “America-hater” and who claim he wants to “destroy America” can be classified as “anti-black.”

And haha lol the CAP bloggers are not “posit[ing] that wanting to destroy Israel is not anti-Semitic.” Opposing Likud policy in favor of something more, ummm, reasonable is not anti-Semitism, and not even anti-Israeli. It’s just anti-Likud. There are many many Jews and many many Israelis who oppose Likud’s platform. Are they all anti-Semites?

Don’t be such a drama queen.

Lol haha I wasn’t aware that Hamas had expressed an opinion on this “controversy.”

See, don’t you get it? Every time someone disagrees with Netanyahu, they’re an “anti-Semite” who is “taking Hamas’ side.”

But let someone suggest that criticism of Obama has a racial component, and Bah! That’s preposterous! It’s simply valid criticism of his “anti-American” policies! What racism?

Try to have just a little consistency, Walter.

It seems, Walter, that despite being an excellent speller, you have trouble with definitions — of, say, “relevance,” or maybe “strawmen.”

What I’m pointing out is that just because these noted Jewish groups SAY certain comments are anti-Semitic doesn’t make it so, any more than Morgan Freeman saying the Tea Party is racist makes that so. Or, for that matter, Wizbang commenters claiming Obama is “anti-American” makes that so.

What brings Netanyahu and Likud into it is that it’s THEIR policies, as opposed to other Israeli parties’ policies, that are being described as “apartheid,” and THEIR apologists, as opposed to certain other talking heads, that are being described as “Israel-firsters.”

 Get it now?

It’s not that difficult an analogy, Walt. Jesus.

Now, if you want to continue claiming that the CAP bloggers are anti-Semites, knock yourself out. Just be aware that there are reasonable people who differ.