She is a VERY brave woman, who has been around California politics for years. She was in Jonestown not as a senior political aid, but as a Jr. Staffer. That’s how long she’s been around. Going to Jonestown was the kind of thing she did, not because she was ordered to do so (she wasn’t) but because she though she ought to see what was going on firsthand. The SF chronicle from that week and the picture of her coming back on the medevac plane is very instructive. You can tell just from the picture. She was badly hurt. She looked awful. Being in that kind of a line of fire changes ones life.

Jackie wasn’t “ordered” to Jonestown. Good Grief! Jackie was there because she was having an affair with her much older and married Congressman boss. Is that the bravery and character you want? This is just amibition and opportunism on her part. Lantos is well above average for a Demo rep., and has seniority and some credibility. He confronted Yahoo on China and confronted Blackwater. Even if you don’t like his pro-Israel stance, it is the right wing that is driving that bus. Knocking off Lantos won’t make any difference. Why can’t Jackie find another office to run for, or do something else for another two years when Lantos will be gone?

I am a Califorian and a long time observer of California politics. I like her, would work for her, and would give her money. She has been on the right side of the issues, smart and agressive. Go for it.

Lantos and Feinstein are Jewish. Both have been way off base with regard to the Middle East. Speier is Jewish? How does she stand on foreign policy?

I vaguely recall the Jonestown events. Isn’t it strange that Feinstein made her move after the SF shooting of Harvey Milk and now we’re talking about Speier and a shooting she was directly involved in?

I hope, if she’s elected, she will be as good on foreign policy as she has indicated (people write) she would be on domestic policy.

BTW, what kind of person carries rum with them on a flight? Does she drink all the time or was it Rep. Ryan’s rum? What’s the deal with that?

I’m Jewish like Lantos. And his story is pretty amazing…But it’s time to stop using the Holocaust as a reason to give a blank check to Israel and it’s policies.

It never really was a good enough reason. Sympathy yes, blank check no.

Our support for Israel is to protect it’s existence and freedom from outsiders. But, there have to be limits to all things.

Doing the Snoopy Dance of hopeful anticipation Jackie Speier throws her hat in the ring!

Tough, smart and clearly fearless Jackie is a firepup dream public servant with a track record guaranteed to give Rahm and his gang sleepless nights. ;~)

I’m in. It’ll be nice walking my own precinct for a change…

Although Tom Lantos has had a decent voting record over the years, his use of his present position as head of the House International Affairs Committee to foment irrational war-making against Iran poses a clear and present danger to U.S. national security and the lives of countless innocents throughout the Middle East. As a Jew with deep sympathy for Holocaust survivors like Mr. Lantos, I can understand why he feels that this policy helps both the U.S. and Israel. But I respectfully and strongly disagree. Unless he changes his position, his defeat is regrettably an urgent priority for anyone who truly understands both U.S. and Israeli national security. Jackie Speier should be implored to run and supported to the hilt by all those who care about peace, sanity and the fate of the world.

If 3/4 of Congress cowers at the prospect of getting on AIPAC’s bad side, maybe representatives would find fortitude if money was available for anyone wishing to resist AIPAC?

Paul Findley, a Republican forced out of Congress in 1983, wrote a book about that experience called, They Dare to Speak Out. From here:

Findley was, however, elected a member of the United States House Of Representatives in 1961, representing the Illinois 20th district. He held this post for twenty-two years, until 1983, when his outspoken views against the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) caused them to back an opposing candidate in the 1982 elections. His career in Congress was essentially ended by AIPAC. Findley became interested in Middle East Foreign Policy while still in Congress, where for twelve years he was a member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East.

As Paul Findley was a Congressman for over 20 years, this puts him in the unique position to criticize his target- the pro-Israel lobby, specifically AIPAC (The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee). Findley believes that many politicians have lost elections due to the influence of this group. In a responsible effort to re-assert the freedom of speech in the US, Paul Findley has written five books, the last two of which: ‘They dared to speak out’ and ‘Silent no more’ have turned into international bestsellers.

Paul Findley founded and currently holds the position of Chairman for the Council for the National Interest. He writes and lectures frequently on Middle East issues, particularly against the strong influence of AIPAC over U.S. politics.

Why re-invent the wheel, when such experience is available.

Don’t forget Pete McCloskey, a moderate Republican who dared to criticize Begin’s policies and was similarly “made an example of” by the Lobby-that-must-not-be-named.