“It’s rare for a head of state to take time during an official U.N. visit to meet with the peace community, especially in a situation where the host government—represented by the Bush administration—is so hostile,” said Evans, co-founder of CODEPINK. “The fact that the meeting took place and was so positive is, in itself, a major step forward.”

Isn’t that special? Obama hate-America money who**s lining up with Achmedinijad vs their own country. How Obama supporters sleep at night is beyond me.

I am flattered by Dr. Chesler’s assumption that I am “an Obama operative”. I am certainly a supporter, but not an “operative”; if “operative” means someone who is formally associated with and paid by Obama’s campaign. Thank you for this thought, Dr. Chesler, as it is a stimulus for the kind of reflection and life planning that is appropriate at this time of year; with Rosh Hashana fast approaching.
(Intrestingly, as some of my views are to the left of Obama’s, it is an open question as to whether and at what level I would be considered employable by the campaign.)

I do enjoy responding to blogs of left, right, and center; as it gives me an opportunity to hone my writing skills and to learn about diverse perspectives. Thank you for this opportunity as well. I am sincerely grateful for it, and I hope that you will count this as one of the positive responses you would like to see.

“Given that he declined to attend, there was no reason to give Palin “pride of place” in attendance as it would have created an impression of partisan favoratism.”

We’re all aware this is the opinion of some, Marion. Chesler obviously disagrees with it.

“Partisanship” was not a concern when Clinton was thought to be attending, without Palin.

And I’m familiar with the synagogue you are talking about. Live close to it and I’ve been there. The rabbi’s a good person – someone I respect – but let’s not bullshit: he’s very politically outspoken, through his weblog entries and invited speakers to the temple, who recently have included anti-Zionist historian Tom Segev. He also favors dialogue with Hamas and Hezbollah, and is on J-Street’s board.

“He repeatedly welcomed alternative points of view from the audience.”

The majority of said synagogue’s congregation is to the left of the political spectrum, as well, so I doubt “alternative points of view from the audience” were a big issue.

Now, when Palin was disinvited, said rabbi touted it as a victory for J-Street. It’s right there, on his blog.

And J-Street’s statement, right on its website, claiming Paulin doesn’t align with the views of American Jews, was as political as anything else.

So, with all due respect, I don’t buy this argument about 501 status, or that J-Street welcomes all POV, etc., especially given Rosner’s recent article about their fudged “polls”, which claims that American jews favor their POV on international issues.

I think Chesler’s language is over the top. But not allowing Palin was as political as anything else, and hiding it behind other reasons seems a bit disingenuous.

This was clearly a case of the Conference of Presidents being intimidated by the strong-arm tactics and intimidation of the Democrat Party. So what was the result. We showed Ahmadinejad that the Jews can’t even get any public officials to support their flimsy protest. Shameful!!

As for Marion L. notion of organizers of the demonstration being “better prepared” – I would ask – is this the first such rally by Jews? Hardly.

Its the sway of the Liberal/Left on Jewish Organizations who should stand up for Jewish interests that is at issue!

Thank you for responding. You are entitled to your perspective on the Democratic Party but I’m still surprised that a child of survivors would use the kind of language that you initially used.

It seems to me that the sponsoring organizations for this rally needed to be better prepared in terms of what kind of rally they were sponsoring – i.e. – issue specific and communal – or partisan or both. Then the awkwardness of “disinviting” a speaker could have been avoided. And the critics may have been correct that with Palin as the only partisan nominee speaking that tax exempt status could be in jeopardy for the sponsoring groups that have
501(c)(3) status and are therefore not permitted to engage in partisan politics. (This issue came up when I was a member of the now defunct New Jewish Agenda and some members wanted to endorse political candidates. We could take positions on issues and express individual opinions about candidates but we could not formally endorse them as New Jewish Agenda had 501(c)(3) status.)

Reminiscent of Stanley Baldwin, before WWII. Even famously magnanimous Churchill could not find good words for Baldwin after the war.