dagblog - Comments for "Schumer Backs Hagel-- Conspiracy Mongers Livid"

I like it Erica!

Bruce Levine — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 23:01:34 +0000

In reply to Hmm...does this mean that

I like it Erica!

Hmm...does this mean that

erica20 — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:48:08 +0000

In reply to PP, Step back. I'm having

Hmm...does this mean that your own "Hebes for Hegel" t-shirt is in the mail? :^D

(Sorry bslev, somebody had to use that joke since you left it lying around in your opening line.)

I don't buy all the hype

artappraiser — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:05:25 +0000

In reply to PP, Step back. I'm having

I don't buy all the hype about him, just as I didn't buy the hype about the man who will actually make the decisions and the man to whom Hagel will report and defer--the president

Eerie; I feel exactly the same way. I suspect it will take only a month or two for him into the position when the left on Israel will switch from thinking of him as a savior and start calling him another evil neo-con traitor.. When he will have just been being his moderate Republican self the whole time.

And just like with Obama, it won't be because there isn't a record of him being supportive of Israel or centrist on nearly everything else. And just like with Obama, the crazy fixation on "the Israel question" (with a soupcon of "the drone question") will make them ignore all of his other statements. It's like ultimate cognitive dissonance, cognitive dissonance over cognitive dissonance or something.....we are in Waiting for Godot territory again...

But I myself am actually quite looking forward to John Kerry at State! Yes, an elder male elite rich white guy with nothing to lose except his reputation and no ideological pet projects, already been through several wringers--quite refreshing actually, something different!

Ok, should have taken a more

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:39:25 +0000

In reply to PP, Step back. I'm having

Ok, should have taken a more playful tone. Don't know if there's a shift in US Jewish sentiment following the Bibi-Romney-Sheldon Adelson overreach, which looked a bit too much like a cynical political sausage factory (substitute veal processing factory if need be)

Re: Hagel, Obama has made a few supposedly good picks that then disappeared and seemed to accomplish nothing, and with Hagel, I agree, I don't know if his hype lives up to action. Mostly kabuki, I figure.

Re: enabler for hate, there have been a lot of those on multiple sides. Wonder if anyone's advertising for a peace facilitator these days.... Probably as lonely as a Maytag repairman.

Re: "senator from Israel", do you deny that there's been a lot of pressure on politicians to be seen as firmly behind Israel, not necessarily just from the ~~Jewish~~ Israeli lobby? I mean, look at past resolutions here (& here), here, here, here, here, here, ... Has the US even passed a resolution for any other country than Israel in a dozen years, much less passed it with from 88-100 Senate votes for? (88 being the one Hagel voted against). Several Gaza & Lebanon flareups, Turkish flotilla, unilateral attack on Iran... Always avowing & supporting. Pretty demanding friendship.

And while "Jewish lobby" as synonym for "Israeli lobby" is obviously wrong in terms of equating all Jews with Israel and inferring 100% agreement, do you see this as being truly vicious and not just more of a common-use substitution? (Think Rahm Emanuel always carefully says "Israeli lobby" rather than "Jewish lobby", and carefully separates "Jewish" from "Israeli" each and every time he discusses Israeli policy & events? will the average Hebe in the Street be so careful?)

PP, Step back. I'm having

Bruce Levine — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:38:04 +0000

In reply to Are you saying there was no

PP,

Step back. I'm having fun. First, I never said there weren't Hebes out for Hagel's scalp, but I bet there are more Hebes out for the scalps of Hagel's detractors by a long shot. That's just a non-story, of course, and as it should be.

And hey, if you want to respect MJ Rosenberg for anything he writes, there is nothing in my column that suggests you shouldn't. It's your nickel. I never said that guy wasn't smart and that he doesn't have good points. I spent years trying to get him to use his pedestal to promote peace. Ask AA. But I find him to be dishonest and a shit-stirrer and an enabler for hate. Other than that he's OK in my book, but I'm allowed to have fun with the guy. And if you don't think he's disappointed that there is no full-court press by the LOBBY against Hagel, then you I don't think you understand MJ's shtick very well at all.

But let's call a spade a spade here. I mean if the powerful Jew Lobby can't even derail this nomination, then it really ain't so tough. Wait, let's go further PP. Hagel has been nominated to serve as Secretary of Defense. That ain't beanbag on matters military and foreign. He's used the J word inappropriately, and I'll let folks like Nick Kristoff and maybe you tell me what this Hebe should and should not be offended by. Frankly, I'm more offended by his comments to one group that he is not the Senator from Israel, suggesting that supporters of Israel might want him to be just that. That, of course, as you've heard from me ad nauseum, plays right into an age-old and really ugly and heinous stereotype about Jews and dual loyalty--and Hagel should be ashamed of himself for saying it IMO.

And yet, he's going to breeze through (as far as the Jooz are concerned anyway).

All of that said, my principal point was and remains simply that the Jews are not stopping this nomination. And if they ain't stopping this one, what gives? I mean this is the Secretary of Defense. So the stereotype is bullshit, and I want to smear that point around a bit. Shit, I want to roll around and take a bath in that point until my skin is like one big prune.

As to Hagel, no problems here. He's OK by me, I guess. I don't buy all the hype about him, just as I didn't buy the hype about the man who will actually make the decisions and the man to whom Hagel will report and defer--the president. But if the pres wants him then that's OK by me indeed.

Are you saying there was no

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:27:15 +0000

In reply to Schumer Backs Hagel-- Conspiracy Mongers Livid

Are you saying there was no Jewish criticism of Hagel? Least by the ADL? (and the non-Jewish Susan Collins)

Or that "teh Jews" proved they don't walk in lockstep on Israel? (which they did from day 1, with J Street's head noting the absurdity of how Hagel was abeing attacked)

Or that after apologizing for his "Jewish lobby" comment (when it should be "pro-Israel lobby"?), Hagel is now kosher?

Did we come to a conclusion on whether AIPAC intimidates lawmakers?

I think the real loser in this is Foxman, for calling Carter borderline anti-Semitic.

The winners might be Israel & Palestine, if Hagel can actually influence policy.

Having the knee jerk government reaction be pro-Israel, anti-Palestine, anti-Iran, with little nuance (pro-Egypt when they support us, anti-Egypt when they express any reservation) has led to stasis on any progressive solution to Mideast problems. Either we're bystanders as Arabs demand freedom, or we're providing weapons & air cover for overthrow and saber rattling against Iran. Being Bibi's poodle hasn't helped US interests or image or lessened our military presence.

There's absolutely no chance of us abandoning Israel, which wouldn't be a good thing anyway, but perhaps we'll get to see the 5 or more sides to the story as policy evolves.

Regarding MJ Rosenberg, I think it's best just to read what he's written on recent Israeli activity and judge whether it makes sense or not. Clever as the pejorative was about his crying over the ADL statement, I don't think it quite does justice to Rosenberg's opinion on Israeli matters and the Israel-Palestine conflict. (I've argued with Rosenberg quite a bit in the past, and it seemed he had a period where he threw out a lot of flippant, unthought out grist and then disappeared them, but from latest material, it seems well-formed even if you disagree)

In fact, Rosenberg just wrote a column about how both candidates insulted American Jews by assuming all even care that much about Netanyahu, much less define their lives around Israeli matters (it came in #5 among concerns, and of course there are disagreements on what to do about it)

And Rosenberg was incisive in noting a key moment in the debates when the idea of a military attack on Iran was shut down by both candidates. Contrast this with 4 years ago when military confrontation with Iran was a litmus test of virility, and 10 years ago when neocon expansion was predicated on talking tough about responding to the "Axis of Evil". Times have changed. That doesn't mean we've gone peacenik - we'll stay involved in military intrigues around the region and our proxy drone wars, MJ doesn't think we'll change our support for everything-Israel that much, but some jingoist actions are no longer in our playbook.

Stephen Walt and MJ Rosenberg

artappraiser — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:35:04 +0000

In reply to Schumer Backs Hagel-- Conspiracy Mongers Livid

Stephen Walt and MJ Rosenberg were seen weeping outside of the ADL offices in Washington after learning that that zionist entity just wanted to be left alone and would have nothing further to say about the president's nomination.

Good one!

I ran across an essay by MJ the other day somewhere, like a week ago, and was shocked to see he was back waxing poetic man-love for Barack Obama, as if the whole fury of the scorned thing between them had never happened.