I'm just a dumb goy, but last time I read Genesis, it kind of indicated that nobody gets God's blessing just because of who their ancestors were. Having the right foremothers can help, but in the end if you want that baruch, you gotta rassle Him for it.

And to stray on topic, McCain doesn't swallow that "gotta support Israel to bring on the end times" crap. He's a lapsed Episcopalian. (At least he had the self-preservation instincts to link up with a church whose founding principle was putting a divine stamp of approval on nasty divorces.) Dubya's evangelicalism is an ill-digested lump of half-heard scriptures and shibboleths that will never make the journey from his paunch to awaken his bowels to compassion, but at least it's been internalized. Any religiosity Saint McCain displays is for the rubes. Like the wayward wind of fond C&W memory, he was just born to pander, born to Rove.

Good rasslin' to you, Derbig. Not too hard around here to tell the heavyweights from the bantams.

"What exactly is the point of feeding Israel billions of dollars every year in military aid..."

All you gotta do is read the Haaretz.com link in your article, where it says the following: "...the agreement permits Israel to convert into shekels 26.3 percent of the aid money, thereby enabling it to procure defense equipment from Israeli companies. The rest of the aid must be used to purchase equipment from American military industries."

"Commando Hillary" Clinton and Mad Bomber McCain are both owned by the Israel Lobby. They won't make a move regarding "American policy" in the Middle East without clearing it with the boys back in Tel Aviv. Both of 'em subordinate America's interests to Israel.

Clinton said that she'd nuke Iran if it attacks Israel. Say what? An attack on Israel is--well, an attack on Israel. No American interests involved. (Not that Iran would attack Israel anyway--it doesn't have nukes, unlike Israel.) Then again, there is reason to believe that Israel is the "51st state". . . .

Mad Bomber McCain is an amoral looney tune. Among his rabid neocon supporters is "Zionist Joe" LIEberman, Senator from Israel--er, Connecticut.

He can imagine that American democracy is threatened by a Falwell, but not that our strong world position, on which American democracy depends, can be threatened by a resurgent Islam,... -- RobbySh

So that is what our "democracy" depends on is it? Our strong world position? Or did you mean to say: "on which American imperialism and empire depend"? There are plenty of strong republics out there that don't depend on a "strong world position."

You are just an imperialist warmonger who couldn't care less about "democracy." Your rhetoric and the wet spot between your legs give you away.

I'm starting to hear this a lot. It's important to note that Hillary did not say she'd nuke Iran if they attacked Israel. She said she'd nuke Iran if they attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.

I share your concern that she is too enthralled by IAPAC. But in this particular sound byte, she was soothing the Israel lobby without really giving them so much as the time of day. In point of fact, Iran would never attack Israel even if it got nukes, which Hillary knows as well as you and I. It was like promising every American a personal 20,000 dollar check the very instant that the Moon is destroyed by a giant asteroid: a feel-good statement (for a certain low IQ constituency) with no practical consequences whatsoever.

-...I said I'd "rather" Obama win...-

And I know what you 'said', I simply consider it bullshit.

McCain is merely adding more fuel to the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Unless the USA can undo centuries of mideast warfare and hatred we can only mess things up.

Our track record in Vietnam, South America, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan doesn't help us much either.

Electing another puffed-up GOP sabre-rattler is not a good idea.

@ quickstragegy

system, outside of these numbers, which went to the contractor), and there's the issue of asset specificity ... you don't have an option of buying F-16s from an Israeli source, unlike the case with economic assistance where there's some elasticity.

Actually the Israeli's manufactur their own electronics for the F-16.

They purchase the airframe as a shell. The division of Elbit Systems that manufactures the avionics is EFW.

http://www.efw.com/f16.htm

Thus, Elbit has been able to bring all of the eastern block airforces up to NATO standards. The Israeli's can make an F-16 out of a MIG if they so choose. There is plenty of "elasticity".

Thanks for that very interesting link ... good info.

I assume you would agree, though, that even if this invalidates my example (I'm not sure it does ... adding updated avionics to a 'shell' ... engines? other components ... gives the Israeli def industry a heft and buyers some flexibility, but they still can't source anywhere else for F-16s), that the point about asset specificity still applies to any number of other items in the defense 'basket'?

To the Senate, that is.

I'm increasingly with Digby that the Republicans won't win much of anything in November (not that keeping them out won't take a fair bit of work in the meanwhile).

I am however wondering how much longer before a challenge can be brought against this geriatric nutcase. Anyone know?

At one point long long ago, the Israelis were developing their own airframes, called the Lavi. It now seems that China has much of that technology.

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=204211

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/aircraft/lavi/Lavi.html

It looks like an F-16 but it was developed in Isreal with American financial assistance. Obviously, American contractors would not want to compete with an F-16 look alike made by the F-16 avionics maker. We backed out.

Isreal is much bigger now than they were 20 years a go, and their industries are more sophisticated. They are basically low cost source for U.S. components.

The point is F-16 airframes are a gift to the manufacturer, Israel has always wanted to manufacture and deploy the Lavi.