Shahid�s Strawman No. 3

Sunday's Projo ran a detailed, 10-point essay accusing "the right wing" (abbreviated in the article as RW) of hypocrisy. My initial impression is that not a single one of the ten points has any serious merit to it.
The Senescent Man has some thoughts on point #2.
RightRI takes on point #7.
Here are my thoughts on point #8.

And here's what I think of one of the ugliest points, point #3...

For decades, one rock in the RW shoe has been its opponents' name calling; racist, bigot and homophobe are crutches that liberals use to dismiss RW arguments as emotion-based. This drives the RW people nuts, because they think themselves the logical, sensible end of the spectrum. Yet they themselves keep the charge of anti-Semitism as the first arrow in their quiver against any opposition to Israeli policy. Other opponents are simply Bush haters or America haters.

In mid-2002, after Afghanistan but before Iraq, the RW was unhappy that Colin Powell was willing to meet with Yassir Arafat before Arafat had committed to move against terrorism. To the best of my knowledge, this policy difference did not lead anyone to call Colin Powell an anti-semite. Howard Dean created a minor furor during the 2004 Presidential campaign when he said that it was not America's place to take sides in the Israel-Palestine conflict. No one in the RW accused Dean of equivocating because of anti-semitism. Certain Congresspeople, like Cynthia McKinney or Jim Moran have been accused of anti-semitism, because of specific things they or their supporters said. But other Congresspeople who have similar voting records to Mckinney and Moran according to the U.S Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, like Nick Rahall, John Dingell, Jim McDermott, or Barbara Lee, have not been accused of anti-semitism because of positions they take.

The idea that anti-Semitism "is the first arrow in their quiver against any opposition to Israeli policy" shows either blatant ignorance or callous disregard for the truth.