Talk:Kadima

Factual Errors?

I've done some cleanup on the information mass-posted by User:IZAK, which certainly helped flesh out the article, though it may have granted Sharon a bit too much applause for an encyclopaedic article. Anyhow, my concern now is that the actual facts seem contradictory, at one point we seem to claim that Sharon pushed for the March 2006 elections, in another we say that his opponents did it. Can somebody more knowledgable about Israeli politics try to decipher this for us? Sherurcij 06:16, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sherurcij: I strongly object to your statement/s here. Have you not heard of "writing" and "editing" Wikipedia articles? Otherwise it's just a useless stub. It is not a question of "applause" for anyone, it is only a question of facts, and description and explanation that are accurate. Originally, it was well-known that Sharon wanted to complete his term in office until Novemebr 2006. Once the political landscape changed and Labor left his unity government Sharon haggled over when in March elections should be held, because they must be held 90 days after the dissolution of his government from about now. What Sharon has been pushing for now is to get the elections held in late March, unlike Labor who are pushing for early March, or the Likud which wants elections held as late as possible. If all this is too confusing for you...then I would apply the adage: "If you can't take the heat, then get out of the kitchen". IZAK 07:56, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You strongly object to my pointing out contradictory statements and asking if somebody can explain who called the election in the article? My comment wasn't for it to be clear on the talk page, but in the article :P Sherurcij 14:54, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Party's name

The apparent name seems to have swung back to National Responsibility (Hebrew: אחריות לאומית, Aharāyūt Le'ūmīt) Eranb 07:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking story on 23/11/2005

Yea, see the Haaretz of Last update - 06:57 23/11/2005 [1] :

Sharon's new party likely to keep `National Responsibility' as name By Mazal Mualem, Haaretz Correspondent:

The temporary name of Ariel Sharon's new party - National Responsibility -will probably become permanent. The name was proposed by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and got the nod from advertising executive Reuven Adler. Now it awaits Sharon's approval.

The temporary name was used because time was short and Sharon's team knew they couldn't launch a nameless party. "Kadima" (forward) and "The Israeli Party" were also considered, but were rejected after they were tested on focus groups. Yesterday, the moniker "National Responsibility," which began to take off in the media, seemed to Sharon's people the most suitable, despite being cumbersome.

One contributing factor in the decision to focus on the temporary name may have been the well-publicized altercation in the Knesset on Monday between the chair of the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, Michael Eitan (Likud), and chair of the House Committee, Roni Bar-On (from Sharon's faction). During the dispute, the name "Kadima" was bandied about. In the heat of the argument, during the plenum debate over going to early elections, Eitan called out to Bar-On: "Kadima to the Ranch," taunting him to go "forward" to Sharon's Sycamore Ranch.

So much for following a "breaking story"... IZAK 07:46, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's officially Kadima now: "Sharon party officially launched -- Prime minister's new party registered Thursday morning; faction members scheduled to convene in Tel Aviv at 12:00, where strategic advisors expected to present party's new name – Kadima." YNETnews.com [2]

Well, changed back to Kadima: [3], and registered under that name. Eranb 09:28, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear phrasing?

This fragment appears in the "Political Objectives" section in the context of Shinui:

[Shinui] seeks to promote a secular civil agenda as opposed to the strong influence of Israel's Orthodox and Haredi parties (the latter) who joined Sharon's last coalition...

What does "the latter" mean here? Is it that the Haredi parties joined the coalition, but the Orthodox parties didn't? If so, might this be better?

...seeks to promote a secular civil agenda as opposed to the strong influence of Israel's Orthodox parties, and the Haredi parties which joined Sharon's last coalition...

My knowledge of Israeli politics is very limited and I am puzzled. Molinari 18:59, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Molinari: Indeed, the nationalist Religious Zionist Orthodox parties were at first part of Sharon's original government and sat together with the fervently secular Shinui party in the government, but the Haredi parties were not in that coalition. Sharon subsequently dumped his first nationalist Orthodox partners, and then later Shinui left the government and was replaced by Labour. It was then that the Haredi parties joined Sharon's government as well. Your suggestion is sound. IZAK 06:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article about Sharon?

Since I'm probably not going to edit this article as I know little about the party (haven't followed the news that much lately), I thought I'd still mention that it reads as an article about Ariel Sharon's 2005 career, and not a political party. Today everyone's calls it 'Sharon's party' and consider him its indivisible leader, but this may change later, regardless of whether the party becomes big or slips into obscurity. Can someone make it more similar to an article about a political party, and not one politician? Thanks. By the way, I realize I wrote it in a sort of accusative tone, I didn't mean it, so apologies. -- Ynhockey 14:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ynhockey: While what you say may sound nice, it makes little sense, because, as of this writing, the new party is only a few days old and is nothing more than an extension of Sharon: his plans and his objectives. It revolves 100% around him, and that's the way he wants it for now, otherwise why would he have left the Likud? The new party has been founded to accomplish Sharon's goals. Maybe in six months or a year from now, when the party will develop more independence from Sharon it will be possible to write about it the way you would like. For now, the Kadima party is a new-born political "infant" attached to (and minutely nurtured by) its "Mama" (and "Papa" -- rolled into one): Sharon. To cut him out of the picture at this stage would in fact be a misrepresentation of what's happening with it. IZAK 06:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sharon's history

This article should mention that Sharon helped found Likud then left to form his own party after he called for negoiations with the PLO and the creation of a Palestinian state in Jordan. I'm talking about in the '70s by the way.

By the way, who are you and why did you not sign your comments with the four "tildes" ~~~~ ? As for your question, could you please provide some source for it? Thanks. IZAK 06:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- Sorry, I actually didn't know how to do that, thanks. My source is the Knesset website: http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections01/eindex.html I always either see it mentioned that Sharon helped found Likud or that he founded his own party and tried to align it with Labor but I hardly even see both of those facts mentioned at the same time. That link explains how both are true. Pimpalicious 21:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]