Ned, Junior, and their hate-filled endorsement's nasty sympathies and 2 Dem Senate candidates

By Mark Kilmer Posted in Comments (5) / Email this page » / Leave a comment » has endorsed Pennsylvania's Junior (Bob Casey, Jr.) and Connecticut's Ned (Lamont). William A. Levinson of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania had his letter to the Washington Times published today:

(Read More...)

Eli Pariser,'s political action executive director, has been somewhat disingenuous in disclaiming's responsibility for the anti-American and anti-Semitic slurs that have been appearing all over its Action Forum ("MoveOn and hate speech," Letters, Saturday).

First, has always had the power to moderate this forum. Objections to slurs like "Jew Lieberman" were in fact removed while the slurs themselves were allowed to stand. Only when Robert Goldberg's "Donkey See, Monkey Do" Op-Ed (Aug. 29) exposed this scandal did MoveOn try to sweep the worst of the evidence under the rug. Unfortunately for, much of it is still cached on Google and has been downloaded and posted elsewhere for all to see.

The MoveOn community shows overwhelming approval for accusations that Jews do not serve in the U.S. military, Jews are loyal to Israel instead of the United States, America is a war criminal country, and other, often worse, critcisms.

It is time for all liberals who consider themselves ladies or gentlemen to walk away from's anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism. Candidates like Ned Lamont and Bob Casey cannot control who endorses them but they can reject MoveOn's endorsement the way President Reagan rejected the Ku Klux Klan's.

At IsraPundit last week, it was suggested:

It is necessary to question the very loyalty to the United States of any candidate who accepts support from George Soros or, which Soros played a major role in founding.

There is more information and commentary in the IsraPundit post linked.

The type of hatred evinced by and by George Soros is dangerous. Ned and Junior ought to be aware of what is supporting their candidacies, and I've little doubt they are. This is a political campaign, however, and money and grassroots support, no matter how tainted, is a temptation. But if it is tainted, such as in this instance, succumbing to that temptation is a symptom of a weak moral code. We don't need two more of that type in the United States Senate.

Despite their radically different political ideologies, one can safely surmise with certainty that neither Rick Santorum nor Joe Lieberman would succumb to a similar dastardly temptation.

[hat tip, Howard Mortman.)

« When Negative Ads BackfireComments (4) | SEN-MD, SEN-WA, SEN-MI: Club For Growth EndorsementsComments (2) »
Ned, Junior, and their hate-filled endorsement 5 Comments (0 topical, 5 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

They must be embracing an "anyone but Santorum" attitude to endorse that empty suit for US Senate from PA.

Mark, don't forget that Bob Casey has set a precedent of returning "tainted" money.

He did return Dan Savage's $2,000 donation. Dan Savage is the man who coined the alternate definition to Santorum.

It only took him six weeks.

Let's give him a chance. ;)

for many of the "I'm sitting this one out to punish Santorum for not supporting Toomey" crowd to realize what their actions may engender. Not only will the "temper tantrum" crowd put an empty suit in DC, but they will also help give rise to more Kos/Moveon type of activity.

To turn a phrase they like to use: how can you meet your maker knowing that by sitting out you helped put Casey in the Senate?

Bravo, paleocons. Bravo.

i realize that righteous indignation is all the rage in politics, but this is kind of silly.

just because some nutter makes some stupid or disgusting comment on moveon's messageboard, it doesn't make it moveon's policy. and it certainly doesn't make it the official policy of a political candidate that accepts money from moveon.

democrats might as well demand that republicans give back campaign money every time someone says something nutty on freerepublic.

It's a very poor and inaccurate analogy for two reasons:

1) MoveOn has the ability to edit out comments that they don't like. The comments they leave and the comments they remove gives a clear indication of their stands on policy.

2) FreeRepublic doesn't donate money to candidates, last time I checked. MoveOn obviously does.

Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)

©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service