I'm pretty sure he shares all of your views on Israel/Gaza and none of mine.

Neo-Cons favor any and all war on Muslims and Arabs. They are thugs. This does not mean this specific conflict

Your reflexive desire to smear a position because it's embraced by chickenhawks for the wrong reasons is illogical in the extreme.

If O'Reilly thinks 2+2=4 because the Sun God "Ra" commands it, that doesn't make 2+2=4 untrue.

He also sees anti-semitism under every rock -- just like you:

O'Reilly uses and abuses anti-Semitism like he uses any other position. When it suits him, he uses it. His "War on Christmas" is the most overtly bigoted anti-Semitic rant on national TV today.

I don't see anti-Semitism "under every rock." I just acknowledge it as a motivating factor. If I'm joined by nuts by Bill O'Reilly on my side, you have a long, inglorious line of Jew hatred on yours:

http://www.nsm88.org/index2.html

A relatively tiny country of just 6 million people has colonized the United States. For example, representatives of Big Oil and other industries often opposed the Iraq invasion; yet the U.S. went forward with the invasion anyways, goaded on by neoconservative “Israel firsters,” thus eliminating a “threat” to Israeli security at the expense of American lives, taxpayers and industry. The same process is now underway with respect to Iran.

Check the link Glenn. Scroll down to the part about Rahm Emmanuel's secret power to work for Israel under Obama.

If my position can't be accepted because a fool like O'Reilly supports it, take a look at who's standing behind you with global Jewish financing conspiracy theories.

In fact, all of Fox News --- from Sean Hannity on down -- sounds just like you on this topic.

Because they're reflexively pro-war in all cases. They also sound like much of Daily Kos, much of Huffington Post, and all the democratic members of Congress.

So there's two possibilities here. One, a grand conspirachy theory that is silencing dissent. And two, you're way out in a self-deluding fringe in which you've white-washed all anti-Israel rage on your side while amplifying the pro-war nuts on the other side.

We can argue all day about who is Bill O'Reilly, but those are just facts

The facts are that a broken clock is right twice a day. The fact the wingnuts, who support any act of violence towards Muslims, happen to support an action of Israeli defense from Hamas terrorists, doesn't disprove anything any more than your fan on this issue, David Duke, disproves you.

David Duke supporting your position. Duke, like you Glenn, is simply a "patriotic American":

Duke: Well, as a patriotic American - and I come here not as a Syrian partisan, but as an American patriot - it's more shocking for me than it should be for you, because our sons and daughters are being killed in Iraq, are being wounded, innocent Iraqis have died, America is being hurt, and yet we have this policy which is only for Israel. This war is completely about Israel, and I would like to suggest to people in the Middle East... Sometimes I believe that the Zionists run a mystification on us. I find, with some of the leftists around the world who say this is a war for oil or this is an American imperialist war - No, this is a case of the Zionists using America to fight their war with our blood and our money.

http://www.zionism-israel.com/news/duke_anti_zionism.htm

Boy Glenn, that David Duke sure makes a lot of sense! Who knew?

Occam's Razor simply suggests that Congress may be voicing support for Israel because they support Israel's actions.

That's it.

I'm not claiming they're smart, or stupid, or well informed, or not well informed.

I'm stating that Glenn's posts, filled as they are with what people in Congress will "dare" to do, or their "ability" to speak out, or how they're "fearful" not to say X or Y, suggests agenda and conspiracy, and out come the AIPAC conspiracy theorists in the threads.

Far more obvious an explanation is that they simply see the right for an ally to respond to years of mortar shells from a terrorist group in power on its border.

That was my entire point.

I'm showing the obvious logical fallacy that Glenn constantly tries to use to smear a point of view he doesn't like by citing who "else" supports it.

Obviously Glenn is not David Duke. But by Glenn's very logic, I should now dismiss him for sharing David Duke's 20 year campaign against "Israeli influence" in Washington.

If you'd take a breath, you'd see the point was simply how ridiculous smear-by-association is. The point wasn't to seriously argue you think like David Duke. The point was if I were to go out and find white supremacists who reach the same conclusions as you do, that that would somehow invalidate you.

However, here's an article on David Duke's website you might enjoy:

http://www.davidduke.com/general/robert-fisk-why-do-they-hate-the-west-so-much-we-will-ask_6935.html

If you agree with this, and David Duke agrees with this, presto, you're a Klan Member. It's inane logic, and beneath Glenn.