Israel Election- Azazel participates in democracy, turns into a political prositute

[Az]

which part can you agree with? nevermind, it doesn't look good for you anyway.

[Eli]

12PM, must sleep. Ignore the grammar errors.

As I said, you need to define "Jewish state" first. I'm not talking about Halacha law, but some focus on Jewish laws, even less than today, but most importantly a state that doesnt consider itself as only a state for it's citizens, but for all the world Jewry. That if hypothetically tommorow the Argentianian crisis becomes even worse and the situation is on the verge of hunger, the country should use all resources available to help those 200,000 Jews there, just like it would've done if they were citizens.
That if tommorow some crazy nazi Ahmed takes control of some country and starts killing all Jews, Israel should do anything in it's power to stop him, and not ignore it like often happens to African massacres and genocides.
That if there is a terrorist attack in planning against a Jewish target in some country and that country doesnt do enough or doesnt act swiftly enough, Israel should be the one who prevents the terract.
If Jews are discriminated somewhere, attacked somewhere, threatened somewhere, Israel should treat the situation like it's our own citizens who are in danger.

That's my definition of a Jewish state. And IMO this is more important than selecting between the bad choice and the even worst choice every 4(1.5) years. Not that I oppose Democracy, but if my definition of Jewish State is used then Liberman's statement is something I can agree with.

[Az]

I don't think that first should be above the second. This are to equal importance to me.

[Sirotnikov]

I'm already voting for shinui.

1 Shinui Click for more information
2 Likud Click for more information
3 Avoda - Labor Click for more information
4 Mafdal Click for more information
5 Yisrael Ba Aliya Click for more information
6 Herut - Freedom Click for more information
7 National Union Click for more information
8 Am Ehad Click for more information
9 Meretz Click for more information
10 Ale Yarok Click for more information
11 Judaism of the Torah. Click for more information
12 Shas Click for more information
13 Hadash Click for more information
14 Ra'am Click for more information
15 Balad Click for more information


Btw, Dal, I might be doing the same thing you are, only for Likkud

From watching a film by Haim Yavin, covering the '92 elections, I realised that we've only gone downhill from there.

Oslo and the PLO should have been annihilated.
Israeli arabs should have been made equal citizens proper and enjoy compensations
Territories should have been democratized and self-governed.
Religious and Civil institutions should have been unlinked.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Azazel

Shinui have nothing against religion. they're against many religious laws that plague this country. btw Ned, do you really believe in creation and that kids should study it at school?

Azazel, You obviously are laboring under Democrat propaganda about the Republican Party. Of course, there are religious fanatics that want to impose religion on the Party and on the US. However, the Party never has adopted their platform, and rightly so. If it did adopt religious fanaticism as a platform, the Party would loose many relatively educated people.

As to creation vs. evolution: of course, I believe in evolution. IIRC from my Catholic grade school and high school days, the Church does not teach that evolution is incompatible with creation. What it teaches is the Bible is not always literally true; that the story of creation is an allegory and that it is compatible with evolution. The Church really learned a lesson from its conflict with Copernicus and Galileo. To the extent that science conflicts with the Bible, the Bible must be reinterpreted.

The problem you find is with fundamentalist Protestant religions that treat the Bible as speaking the unalloyed truth. Here you will find those who deny any science that conflicts with their own private interpretation of the Bible. I have had some interesting and frustrating conversations with these folks. But, just let me say, they do not represent the Republican Party.

[Ned]

Oh, btw, someone said earlier that Sharon was a socialist. Is this true? I thought that the Likud was a free enterprise party.

[Edan]

Originally posted by Ned


Hah! I don't believe that for a minute. Think about it. There are very few rich. The working class is highly Democrat. So are the minorities. And yet, Republicans are half the country. The middle class in the US is Republican.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/epolls/US/P000.html

From 30k-75k, it averages out to about 49.5 for Bush, 47.5 for Gore. Take in to account that, IIRC, 80% of Nader voters would have voted for Gore as their second choice, with another 20% for Bush and you have about a 1% or less difference.

Look at those claiming to be middle class and it's even closer. (48-49-2)

[Panag]

Originally posted by Eli


I'm sorry, but it's a fact. 40-50% of the Arabs are below voting age.

hi ,

dont forget the refugees who have no right to vote , including many illegal's and people on different kinds of visa

have a nice day

[Panag]

hi ,

some elections news ;

Ha'aretz - http://www.haaretzdaily.com
Ma'ariv - http://www.maariv.co.il
Yediot Aharonot - http://www.ynet.co.il
Globes - http://www.globes.co.il
Jerusalem Post - http://www.jpost.com

Hatzofeh comments that three terror attacks took place in the 24 hours after Yasser Arafat called for a ceasefire until after the elections. The editors praise the security sources for their efficiency and rapid mobilization against these attacks and believe that this undoubtedly prevented many more deaths. The paper believes that "As long as Arafat is in charge the terror activities will not cease, even if he continues to make his declarations, day and night" and calls on the government to get off the fence and take action against him.

Yediot Aharonot, in its second editorial, argues that whether or not the Israeli public wakes up to a new or old regime on January 29th, "One fact will be clear to them: This political system has spent itself." The editors argue that the two large parties have nothing to offer and call for a committee of experts, "not necessarily politicians, to consider what should be done to save democracy, mainly from itself. If a sensible and correct solution is not found, it will not be worthwhile for the parties to mothball their election campaigns, because next year... we will have to return to the ballot box."

The Jerusalem Post writes: "Much of the public, judging from the polls, is ready to believe that Sharon is no different from any other politician, all of whom are corrupt. Public opinion may be turning around, thanks to Central Elections Committee chairman Mishael Cheshin's heavy hand on the broadcast switch. But even so, fairness would seem to dictate that some attention be paid to Sharon's defense, rather than simply assuming his guilt. Sharon took a loan that appears to be entirely legal and transparent in order to voluntarily repay questionable campaign donations. The implication that the loan was some kind of bribe does not seem to make sense. If anything, the questions that arise from this episode concern the roles of the media and the Attorney-General's Office, from which a document requesting information from the South African authorities leaked."

Yediot Aharonot declares: "You do not need to be a music graduate to notice the new sounds emanating from afar. The voices of war in the Washington philharmonic orchestra are wavering and fading, weakening and becoming more distant." The editors comment that President Bush has lost the momentum for war and suggest that support for war is waning, "and therefore he will postpone the date of going out to fight again and again and again - until war breaks out."

Ha'aretz writes: "Prime Minister Ariel Sharon recently decided that agricultural lands should be rezoned to enable the city of Lod to expand so as to rescue the city from its economic distress, and he ordered government representatives in the state's planning institutions to support this decision. This order is a continuation of the Sharon government's ongoing efforts to deprive the planning institutions of any measure of professional independence and turn them instead into a disciplined tool for the implementation of government policy. The problem with this plan is that it does not actually strengthen the city; instead, it creates a neighborhood of single-family homes for the well-off that is essentially disconnected from the rest of the city. These homes will deprive the city of open spaces that were supposed to be landscaped gardens - but they will earn a lot of money for a few real-estate developers."


have a nice election day

[Ned]

Originally posted by Edan

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/epolls/US/P000.html

From 30k-75k, it averages out to about 49.5 for Bush, 47.5 for Gore. Take in to account that, IIRC, 80% of Nader voters would have voted for Gore as their second choice, with another 20% for Bush and you have about a 1% or less difference.

Look at those claiming to be middle class and it's even closer. (48-49-2)

Edan, $30k per year is barely above the poverty line. I believe US per capita income is around $30k per year. For a family of 4, that is $120k per year. I would suggest, therefore, that middle class incomes for married people range from $80k at the low end to $500k at the high end. People who make more than $500k per year move into the lower upper income "rich" folks bracket.

Incomes between $30 and $75 are not middle class incomes except for young single people, and even there I would suggest the person should be making 50k+ to qualify as middle income.

What you are describing are working class incomes. I am not surprised they split 50-50.

[Edan]

Originally posted by Ned


Edan, $30k per year is barely above the poverty line.

That probably depends very much on where you live.

I believe US per capita income is around $30k per year. For a family of 4, that is $120k per year. I would suggest, therefore, that middle class incomes for married people range from $80k at the low end to $500k at the high end. People who make more than $500k per year move into the lower upper income "rich" folks bracket.

80k-500k is middle class? No wonder you think that the Repubicans are the party of the middle class...

[CyberGnu]

Thanks, all. I might have missed the answer, did anyone say what the total voter turnout usually is in Israel?

[CyberGnu]

Ned, from http://cber.cba.ua.edu/rbriefs/middle2.html

When asking Americans how they would describe their families' wealth and social status, most will answer with the non-descriptive label of "middle class." But what exactly does this mean? While there is no clear definition of who belongs in this group, there are a few guidelines for a rough sketch of an American middle class household.

First, on the basis of annual household after-tax income, most studies agree that the "middle class" is grouped around the national average, in the range of $21,300 to $63,300 (in 1996 dollars). The lower and upper ends of this range represent the 20th and 90th percentile of the population, accounting for 70 percent of U.S. households. This definition includes all sources of income, from wages to Social Security to food stamps.

Some authors propose that 75 percent and 125 percent of the national median should be used as the extremes. In 1994, the median income in the United States was $32,264, therefore the "middle class" range would be from $24,198 to $40,330. Using the 75/125 method means almost 25 percent of the U.S. population is middle class.

Other methods for categorizing the middle class include social criteria (based on factors such as educational level and occupation) and certain income indices. One of these indices rates households on an income-to-needs basis, where a score of one signifies household income that borders on the poverty level. Using this ratio, middle class can be defined as scores ranging from 2 to 5, which was approximately 50 percent of American households in 1989.

Of course, everything is relative. I made about $20k in Indiana, and had a pretty decent living standard. $30k in LA gave me almost the same lifestyle... And I was in no way impoverished. Since last month I also got a raise, and with my current salary of $40k I feel quite well off.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Edan
80k-500k is middle class? No wonder you think that the Repubicans are the party of the middle class...

Edan, even $500k per year is not much in places like New York or San Franciso. Taxes are very high and so is the cost of living.

Yes, when I say "middle class" I do not mean the working class. I mean the middle class.

[Edan]

Quick search of news sites:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/01/13/MN172875.DTL

"Average voter turnout here is typically among the world's highest, around 80 percent. "