Tom DeLay is an "Isreali at heart"

From the NY Times. If you’re not registered, it’s free and painless.

How is it helpful to the peace effort for the House Majority Leader to contradict the President and declare himself “an Isreali at heart”? Is this not deliberate sabotage? With all the difficulties we have in MENA, how is it a wise thing for one of the more powerful leaders in Congress to declare himself firmly on one side in the struggle?

Link to full speech text. I found this bit more disturbing, quite frankly.


Somewhere out there in cyberspace, december is preparing a rousing defense and adulation of Mr. DeLay as we speak… :wink:

Well, as his typical ravings go, this one seems muted and reasonable.

I’m really sorry to have to say this.

Not that I really like Tom DeLay, but what did he say that was so objectionable? The PLA does need to fight against Palestinian terrorism, and the Palestinians do need to democratize.

Never thought I’d see Tom DeLay emulate Jesse Jackson; and with his own team’s man in the White House no less. WHAT is the world coming to ??? :stuck_out_tongue:

Elsewhere in cyberspace, people don’t know how to post to the right forum.

It seems to be a reversal of the idea that both sides bear some responsibility for the forward movement of the peace process. Now the onus is entirely on the Palestinians. This is the same hard-line approach which has stalled the peace process for the past couple of decades. The road map was supposed to be different. Cessation of hostilities was an important part of it, but it is too important to let a handful of radicals derail it. Now there is news of Israel actually expanding some of the settlements in Gaza Strip.

I agree, and I have always said, that the PLO/PLA should do their utmost to stop terrorists. What I disagree with is the hard-line “a single act of aggression on the part of any Palestinian derails the talks” bullshit. As we in the US are beginning to learn, cracking down on terrorists isn’t as easy as it sounds.

Personally I got really bad vibes from reading the speech. Lots of references to “God” and “The Lie”(which, IIRC is a euphamism for the devil when that kind of capitalization is used). This seems to bring religion into the issue far more boldly than I’m at all comfortable with. All this talk of being on God’s side and opposing the minions of “The Lie” sounds way too much like rhetoric from Islamic extremists when they start in with the “Jihad” angle.


While I can understand those who object to Tom DeLay characterizing himself as an Israeli (in that this may seem one-sided to some Palestinians), I don’t understand why you consider the rest of the speech to be objectionable. When he says “The Lie” he means that the PLO has been promising Palestinians a better future which it has not delivered, and that meanwhile Arafat is aiding and directing Hamas.

We have differences of opinion here. If Delay wants to highlight them, that’s his right.

This strikes me as the words of someone who’s never studied anywhere else that has successfully dealt with a terrorism problem.

The Palestinian people are up against[ol][]the terrorists[]a largely intransigent leadership[]daily inconvenience/oppression by the IDF (depending on your viewpoint), which leads to[]grass-roots support for the only people who seem to be doing anything about it, however immoral (see point 1)people who are scared of the terrorists[/ol]Sort out number 2, and you’ve still got all the other dreadful things going on. This isn’t the sort of thing where the entire (fractured) community can get together and say “yeah, dammit, let’s stop the terrorists”. It’s as simplistic as the arguments of people who blame the whole problem on the Israeli government.

I watched the speech on C-SPAN and came away with the feeling it was a very statesman-like speech.

You can’t debate the fact DeLay is a very divisive force on Capitol Hill, but unless you’re so filled with venom for the man or what the West stands for, there’s really not all that much to find fault with in what he said before the Knesset.

Similar to PM Blair’s speech to a joint session of Congress on 7/17 (that some from the anti-war movement called “bloviations”), DeLay’s sentiments expressed optimism and hope.

When all is said and done, it still think it’s better to be labeled an “Israeli at Heart” as opposed to a “Hamas Militant at Heart”

I freely admit I think DeLay is an absolute tool. I ran across the text of this speech before Homebrew mentioned anything about it though and my first, and major objection, was the shifting of the policy from a “let’s work together, as two imperfect groups of people, towards peace” to “Alright you slackers, we’ve got our shit together and we won’t deal with you until we feel you’ve got yours together too.”

My first thought was “shit, the extremists have just been handed the reigns of the peace process AGAIN”. :frowning:


Asking the Palestinians to give up terrorism is handing the reins of the peace process to extremists?

DeLay is telling the PA that they have to fulfill their half of the bargain.

The Lie is defined in the speech as follows:

No reference to the Devil.


The White House seems to not agree with DeLay.

The problem with DeLay shooting off his mouth is that it sends mixed signals and can lead to mistrust of anything any American leaders says.

And, Shodan, if you reference erasing the “imprint of the Almighty”, you are obliquely referencing Satan. In the worldview of the monotheists, it is Satan who opposes God and therefore anything that is working against him is of Satan. We’re versed enough in the mythology to recognize the meaning.

And the Lord sayeth:“Whomsoever is not with Me is against Me.”

I got two bits says that Ol’ Tom gets the Trent Treatment. Takers?

From your lips to Bush’s ears.

Sure. Easy money.

Most Americans see a difference between urging the Palestinians to give up terrorism and embrace democracy vs. praising racial segregation.

Oh come on Shodan. He likens this “Lie” to the words of the serpent. Do you think he meant a garter snake? Or was he in fact referencing the Devil.


This is lame. It tries to define the two sides as Israelis v. Hamas militants and ignores that there are actually Palestinian people. When all is said and done is it better to be labeled an Israeli at Heart or a Palestinian at Heart? Personally I think they are both BS. He’s a Republican at Heart.

Well, duh. Guess I should have made it clear that this isn’t this issue. But Marse Tom has made a pest of himself more than once, and Karl Rove, he’s got a little list, he’s got a little list.

Of people who won’t be missed, and Tom De Lay won’t be missed.