Conference taveng::bagels

If I remember correctly, two of the three 1988 presidential debates were on
Yom Tov.  Maybe we should urge Joe Lieberman to get on the bipartisan
debate committee.

    Part of the problem is that Bush refused to debate, once he agreed the
    time for the debates had to be compressed and hit Succot. The original
    schedule was a lot better in terms of the Chagim.

Perot is a transliteration of the Hebrew word for "fruit."

..and the English word "fruit" is most probably derived from the Hebrew word
for fruit -- 'perot'.  Do a vowel transformation using the Hebrew word - PRT.

How do you relate that to the obvious and rather more likely cognate in 
German, frucht?

Gav

    Gee, do you think Clinton will appoint Jimmy Carter to a special
    negotiating position on mid-East issues?  This just might make a
    difference, I hope!
    
    L
    

On the radio this morning I heard "Mike Dukakis" mentioned as a possible
person for the Clinton administration! Yuck!

Dave

    I am not so thrilled with another Democratic administration.  The
    Carter administration contained several Anti-Semitic members, and the
    next administration is also likely to.  Jimmy Carter himself was a
    decent and honorable man, but several of his administration were not. 
    I am happy however that the *religious right* will no longer have the
    presedential ear.  I believe that nothing will change as far as Jewish
    relations with the administration.
    
    Mark

re .8:

>    The Carter administration contained several Anti-Semitic members, and the
>    next administration is also likely to.

Fred Malik, the man who compiled the list of Jewish "trouble makers"
for Nixon, was a big wheel in Bush's reelection campaign.  Most
administrations have their share of anti-Semites.  I find it puzzling
that many Jews practically worship FDR, when his administration was
one of the most anti-Semitic ever.

>    I am happy however that the *religious right* will no longer have the
>    presedential ear.

I have mixed feelings about the religious right.  I'm fearful of their
agenda for the U.S., but many of them are strong supporters of Israel.

re: .8
Clinton promised something to every group with whom he spoke. He made a much
stronger play for the Jewish vote than did Mr. ("f" the Jews - they don't
vote for us anyway) Bush. I'm taking a wait and see attitude. I don't see
how Clinton can pay off on every campaign promise without bankrupting the
nation - but maybe some good will come of this one.

Dave

    I see the Clinton administration being much more favorable for the Jews
    than another Bush administration.
    
    Remember it was Bush who vetoed the Israel loan guarantees.  While
    Bush's representatives made some inroads in Mid-East negotiations, Bush
    abruptly pulled Baker out of his international role and placed him as
    campaign chief, thus derailing the Mid-East progress.  And, 
    Baker has made a number of anti-Semitic statements.  
    
    The Republican convention was hijacked by the religious right and Bush
    kowtowed to these extremists.  Whatever Bush's personal sentiments,
    another Bush administration would have opened the White House door to
    the Christian fundamentalist fringe.  While this fringe may support
    Israel, if only to guarantee their access on pilgrimages, they are no
    friends of the Jews in the U.S.  This fringe supports a shift in US
    policies that would move the US toward a theocratic state.
    
    When leftist groups had an important role in Democratic politics,
    certain anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist elements had a voice in Democratic
    politics.  These Democratic left-leanings alienated much of the
    American middle-class and led to 12 years of Republican presidents. 
    Clinton was important  in the formation of a centrist Democratic
    organization.  His renewed appeal to the middle class led to his recent
    election win.
    
    I believe that Clinton will try to do the right thing with regard to
    racism in the US, but not at the expense of the Jews.  There are left
    fringe elements, such as Farrakhan, who cast the racial issue in an
    anti-Semitic light.  I strongly hope that Clinton will resume progress
    against US racism by aligning himself with those who would advance the
    cause of blacks without fostering hatred of the Jews.
    
    L
    

re: .3 (NOTIME::SACKS) Perot is a transliteration of the Hebrew word for "fruit."
re: .4 (ITAI::LEVI) fruit comes from 'perot' in Hebrew
re: .5 (GOOEY::SCHOELLER)
 "How do you relate that to the obvious and rather more likely cognate in 
 German, frucht?"

Yes, "fruit" and "frucht" are closely related since it is acknowledged that
English has a rather large borrowing from German.  But why stop here?  For
instance, "frux" in Latin and "brugh" in Indo-European...does anybody speak
Indo-European???  

Again, why not keep going?  (This question is now posed to the many
dictionaries published today).  Genesis refers to 'pru u vru' --
"be fruitful and multiply".  The plural of 'pree' is 'perot'.

Hebrew (to me) has much more convincing roots than do Greek, Latin and the
Indo-European trunk.

Levi (who is no linguist but interested in etymology)

    re: .10
    
    Hi,
    
    You seem to attribute the infamous "F" quote to Bush, but I believe it
    was Baker who said it (though both may share the same sorry outlook -
    who knows?).
    
    re: Clinton
    
    Did he promise to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem?
    
    Steve

>    Did he promise to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem?

Is there a politician who hasn't?

    RE: .7  Hey, Dukakis is not so bad, I liked him enough to actually vote
    for him in 1988 (which is more than I can say for Clinton, or Bush or
    Perot).  But then, I have never lived in Mass...
    
    RE: .12 and others on Perot.  Add one more to your collection.  A
    transliteration of Russian 'Perot-fuit' would be frookt.
    
    Jake

    re: .14
    
    Just checking to see if he was doing his political duty and following
    suit  :-\
    
    Did he though?  And if so - will he?  What do you think?
    
    Steve

    RE: .15
    
    I've known Dukakis since he was a state Representative.  I haven't
    always agreed with him, but he has easily been the best Governor that
    Massachusetts has had in the years that I've lived in the Commonwealth
    (I've been here through seven Governors).
    
                                        Aaron

I usually agree with Aaron, but here I must disagree. Under Dukakis, state
taxes went up and up and up while services went down and down. I thought his
predecessor, King, was infinitely better.

Dave

King was and still is a solid gold jerk.  His only quality is that he has
a network of contacts.  Dukakis is at least a very competenet administrator,
all King could do right was to send out for lobster dinners...at the tax 
payers' expense.  Blaming Dukakis for the rise of state taxes is a knee-jerk 
reaction. 

I think that this subject is starting to go down an unrelated rathole.

--David