Joe Lieberman and many of his supporters really, really want to try to make the blogosphere’s opposition to his continued employment as a U.S. Senator about anti-Semitism and/or anti-Israeli-ism. Today’s probably not the best day to discuss Israel dispassionately. But, Joe Lieberman is high on crack if he thinks we dislike him because he is Jewish or because he is supportive of Israel. The very most I will say is that some people think his concern for Israel may be clouding his judgment about Iraq. But let’s be clear: It doesn’t matter why his judgment on Iraq sucks, it only matters that it sucks. And Iraq is only one piece of the puzzle. Personally, Joe lost me when he told rape victims to go for joyrides in their cars looking for hospitals that would be willing to tolerate their desire to make sure they didn’t become mothers to their rapist’s child. I want all Joe’s supporters to consider that position very carefully. I have a mother, and I have several women in my life that I care about. I couldn’t look any of them in the eye and support Joe Lieberman.
Asked specifically if he felt that the wave of opposition to his candidacy had anything to do with his religion or his support for Israel, Mr. Lieberman paused, stepped toward the blue sedan that would speed him to a meeting outside of Hartford and said, “That’s too big a question to answer on one foot. We should come back to answer that one.”
Lieberman needs to come back to his flirtation (up to the last minute) with Social Security privatization. He needs to consider his cloture vote on Alito. He needs to revisit his smooch of George W. Bush. He ought to think about why he told me not to undermine the credibility of the President in wartime. Most of all, he needs to abjectly apologize to every citizen of these United States for suggesting that rape victims avail themselves of motor vehicles in order to attain Plan B contraception.
And there is that pesky little war. Lieberman thinks things are going just great. He’s wrong.
People need to figure out that this is not about Israel. That includes Israelis:
“I can’t tell you how many times I was asked by officials and even people walking down the street, ‘What is going to happen to Joe Lieberman?’” said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia who just returned from a research project in Israel. “They are aware about this race, and they are concerned.”
They might be concerned that they are going to be missing one of their staunchest supporters, but he is not being opposed because he supports Israel, nor because he is Jewish. I have stated many times how much I admire Russ Feingold. It’s not about Joe’s religion. It’s about his tendency to be aggressively and obnoxiously wrong on the issues.
I mentioned this before, but you opened this door to mention it here again. I can’t help wondering if the 2000 election would have had a different outcome if Gore had not chosen Lieberman as his VP mate. It was such a darn close elction, and how many potential Gore voters out there did not vote for Gore because of Lieberman being on the ticket for whatever reason. It would not have taken too many to have stayed with Gore to change the final results, and now look what has happened. I do not blame Lieberman for this, but I do blame Gore for his choice. No jewish voters, IMO, switched to Gore because of Lieberman, but there sure may have been some going the other way. It may have been the most fatal mistake made in the history of this country because of its enabling Bush win. I get nightmares thinking about this still!
Good post. I agree completely. Lieberman was elevated by Democrats to stratospheric heights–if they weren’t up against the Bush Crime Family, he’d be finishing his second term as vice president and would probably be the favorite to be president. He can’t now say that Democrats are anti-semites.
Boy was his one-foot answer weasely.
Actually, completely predictable. Of course, to be honest, you’re not really allowed to ask him if he has dual loyalties and which country he first represents: Israel or the United States. Face it: the Iraq war is a proxy war for Israel. And when Joe tells me he has loyalties beyond his party…then again I guess racism forced that african american guy to put bills into his fridge. Yeah right…
A while back, I wrote this:
(for working links go here:
http://amsam.org/2006/06/what-hesh-said-post-that-got-me-banned.html
Unnamed lady: You can disagree with the evangelicals but they’re great friends of the Jews. They believe Israel is the holy land.
Hesh: Just wait. (As seen on an episode of the Sopranos…)
What Hesh Said: I ‘m also praying to the Flying Spaghetti Monster (the one true god and you must believe this as well or I’ll have to kill you and liberate your oil or something) that Tony strangles that Christian fundamentalist with his bare hands. 6000 years. Jesus Christ.
I’m still working on a bigger Jewish conspiracy piece (short version: Jewish dems have traded the party for what they think will protect Israel: War with Iraq (and possibly other countries to be named later.) Biden (editor’s note: I made a mistake. He’s a tool of AIPAC and the credit industry but he’s not Jewish.) and Leiberman and Feinstein love the war. That’s why the filibuster hasn’t been used once, according to my crazy conspiracy theory. You can’t sustain it without Jewish senators. There are about 44 dems, one independent. There are 10 Jewish senators. You need 40 for the filibuster. Do the math. They think they have to kill to protect Israel. (I don’t entirely blame them. If you had been through a Holocaust wouldn’t you be more prone to overreact? But it does mean, unfortunately, that I can’t trust them. ). Right now, I don’t fully trust Jewish Democrats, especially the ones who are “running” our efforts to take back both the House and the Senate. If my theory is true, then Rendell and Schumer (both Jewish and I used to not care) really don’t want to unseat Rick Santorum, and if they do unseat Rick then they want a candidate who will stick out the war, and possibly favor other invasions in places like Iran and Syria. Casey sounds like their guy. They think that’s good for Israel. I don’t trust the Alan Sandals candidacy for the same reasons. I think he’s running to split the pro choice vote, or better yet, get another senate vote for Israel. That means more war. Infinitely.
I might add that when you strengthen the hand of the Christian right in this country–which you’re doing when you pay Satan’s price and roll over on court nominees and policy issues–then you’re not working for the safety and inclusion of the Jewish people, anywhere. Or as Hesh said: “Just wait.”
Update:
First, more info about our good friend Rahm, the completely impartial man behind our efforts to retake the US House. This is from Andrew Cockburn:
At a recent meeting of House Republicans, members ruminating on the disastrous state of their party reportedly murmured with gloomy jocularity about the administration of “President Hastert”. A CounterPuncher familiar with the proceedings reports “they were only half joking”.
Yet, as they contemplate political ruin in next year’s election, these Republicans can take solace in the fact that, if defeated, their replacements may not differ in any meaningful way on important issues of the day. That at least is the hope and dream of Democratic apparatchik Rahm Emmanuel and the corporate toadies he represents. Ominously, Emmanuel, a relict of the Clinton White House, heads the Democratic National Campaign Committee.
As such, he decides which candidates for the House should get money and other support from the national party. At a time when any fool can see that the public hates the war more this month than last, and will hate it even more next month and the month after that, Emmanuel is doing his best to recruit candidates, preferably rich ones, guaranteed to eschew vocal opposition to the war.
Clear evidence for this proclivity is evident in the race to succeed Henry Hyde, in Chicago’s 6th District.
Read the whole thing here. I guess if I were to point out that Rahm volunteered for the Israeli army and may have other motives in his house selections I would be called “anti-semitic”. Well fine.
From the comments:
What arguments? Your belief you can read another’s mind by knowing their religious/cultural/ethnic identity? I thought we had moved past the stage when pseudo-scientific, racist wankery like The Bell Curve had to be logically refuted, rather than simply thrown in the trash with other tabloid crap.But since you likely don’t believe what I am telling you, allow me to offer this example:”A couple black people I saw on TV think gangs are OK. That’s why I don’t really trust any black person I see.”That is not only racist, it’s also not worth legitimizing with a “debate”. It’s prejudice, draped in rationalization, masquerading as a logical argument.
First, I’m not engaging in telepathy, I’m looking at their actions in terms of who they pick to “win” house and senate seats. I’m also trying to figure out why there hasn’t been a meaningful filibuster in the US Senate. Not a one. Why doesn’t the Democratic Party act like an opposition party? By the way, it’s not just ethnicity. Perhaps they hate the policies of the Republicans but they love Israel more. They’re blood. “Never again.” (Except for that asshole Leiberman…)
But let’s try another tack. I actually think it would be interesting if African Americans had the power of Jewish Americans. Would be quite swell actually.
Of course, Jews can pass for “white” while African Americans can’t. But let’s take a look at this situation from a racial what if position.
Let’s just say for a moment that we have 10 or 11 African Americans in the US Senate. Say that we have a dozen or more African Americans in the US House, plus we run several state governments. Furthermore, African Americans run Hollywood, and have major stakes in both the Washington Post and the New York Times. I’m sure that’s a wet dream for most black people right, but wait: There’s more. Only 1 percent of our males are incarcerated, as opposed to a third being groomed for the prison industrial complex. And, just as an added wondrous touch: We have Black Pac, which terrorizes every one on the Hill who doesn’t fall in line with African American interests. Sounds cool, huh? Let’s add one more element: African Americans are tied historically and emotionally to one country: South Africa. Unfortunately, the black majority in South Africa treats the white minority quite horribly. There is a very little news about this and when someone, even on the Internets, even mentions that perhaps black legislators put the interests of Black Ruled South Africa not just above the party’s interest (most African Americans are in the Democratic Party) but above US interests as well, they’re called an anti semitic racist asshole, delinked and the discussion stops. The corporate media doesn’t even mention the issue because those Goddamned niggers control everything! (I wish.) I might note that African Americans are the big money donors of the party.
In other words, its not like they have one senator from Illinois in this alternate reality. They have real power and real influence.
Furthermore, the country has been in a very brutal war with, say, my parallel reality’s Nigeria. Its a war for oil but Nigeria also happens to be an enemy of South Africa. African Americans, stung by the loss of 20 million during the slave trade, have vowed “never again.” Its rumored that other countries are on the hit list, all of them have oil and happen to be avowed enemies of South Africa. One could make the point that there’s a deal in place in the US Congress. The African American senate delegation, particularly Obama Leiberman, clearly supports the war and are administration boosters. Obama Leiberman also leads the effort to retake the senate. Blacks are in control of retaking both the house and senate. Coincidently enough, even though the public hates the war they pick pro war, pro South African candidates. Even if control switches, the war machines rocks on. Meanwhile, nothing happens for the Sudan. Sudan even gets screwed in alternate realities.
Okay, do you see the point now?
Let’s go back to this reality now. I’ll try to summarize the question in several lines: If the Jewish American delegation in congress, combined with the Democratic Leadership Council (evil in all dimensions)likes the Republican agenda, then do they really want the Democratic Party to win? Or even be an effective opposition party?
By the way, here’s what real opposition parties do: they use the filibuster until its illegal to do so. They talk like James Galloway and not like Joe Leiberman. They pay attention to the work of Bob Fitrakis, Harvey Wasserman, Greg Pallast, Bradblog and Robert Kennedy when they say the last several national elections were probably stolen. They do this not to recount elections–although that should be on the table–but to make sure the same caging techniques aren’t used again in 2006 and 2008. (The Dem party isn’t doing this by the way…Of course, if you wanted the other side to win you would ignore this story.) They push real democrats in blue states that don’t support the war and Bush nominees. Well you can answer these questions yourself.
Okay, you’ve answered those questions in two seconds and you’re horrified. I’m not sure what the answers are. but it probably means taking closer looks at any and all third party efforts out there and recognising that we’re running out of things you can do legally or nonviolently to change the US. I mean, if the vote is rigged, and the parties are indistinguishable and in a lot of states third party efforts are impossible…you might also start learning about terms like “systems disruptions” and “open source warfare” and not just as academic exercises.
posted by Philip Shropshire at 2:00 PM Comments (16)
Clarence Thomas did it..”High Tech Lynching…” OJ did..”If the hat don’t fit you must acquit..” And Joe Liberman is doing it now “Thats to big a questions…”
But Joe you are selling out the Democratic Party. We don’t like you because you would prefer to ride an elephant instead of a Donkey. The fact that your Jewish is irrelevant, the fact that you support the Bush’s Iraq War is relevant.
the Elite. The people who deep down don’t give a shit about anyone but themselves. Their own group identety is nothing but a means to an end.
Or even just plain wrong. : )
It just occurred to me that there never seems to be anything about Israel and bombing, invading collective punishment(defined as war crime) on the front page.
Sorry to get slightly off topic. Maybe Kos do it.
You just said what I’ve been thinking all day. That is one huge story.
An excerpt of Dahr Jamail’s recent blog post:
My emphasis added.
.
Another quote from your link to interesting article on Joe Lieberman —
Certainly, some of Mr. Lieberman’s companions in the hawkish political universe see some deeper implications in his jarringly abrupt political decline.
“I’m concerned that Northeast liberals are trying to conflate the entire Iraq war with support for Israel and the failure of Middle East democratization into the same package,” said Edward Blum, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, who added that if Mr. Lieberman were not an incumbent with a national profile, his tough foreign policy would disqualify him from running in the primary. “The power of those issues to keep Democratic primary voters in line may be waning.”
Mr. Gerstein says he has detected what he calls a “growing strain of anti-Semitism on the far left,” which he believes is in part fueling the strident opposition to Mr. Lieberman.
CT-Sen: Lieberman consultant freaks out over blogger ◊ by kos
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Just what is Edward Blum, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, supposed to be saying with this statement:
“I’m concerned that Northeast liberals are trying to conflate the entire Iraq war with support for Israel and the failure of Middle East democratization into the same package…”
The neocons conflated these arguments long before northeast liberals complained that the policies weren’t working. After all, the neocons conflated these arguments as the justification for the Iraq War and their policy of benign neglect in the Israeli-Palestinian questions. The necons sold the US electorate on the policy that the Iraq War would democratize the Middle East and thereby make the region safe for another, non-Arab democracy in the region, Israel. The neocons crafted this snake oil and now they’re trying to claim somebody else is responsible. We need to give them an enema with their old statements everytime they try to spew this canard.
And how does Lieberman explain away the fact that Lamont seems to have the edge among CT Jews? Joe’s problem is that he is dumb.
I’m really sorry to have to ask this but, where is the jewish community in the face of this? Lieberman (and some of his supporters I suppose) are blatantly using “the anti-semitism card” to demonize voters that wont vote for him in a deemocratic election. Cavalierly throwing around charges of anti-semitism devalues not only Lieberman but the jewish community as a whole. Why don’t the jewish community speak up about this?
Well for one thing, “the Jewish community” is no more monolithic than any other ethnic or religious group in its politics. I don’t understand how Lieberman’s tactics devalue “the community as a whole” except to those who generalize about millions of people in that way.
Well, the jewish community in the US counts several organizations if I’m not misinformed. AIPAC, the ADL, the JDL and so on.
I find it somewhat inconsistent of people to be calling on the Muslim community to denounce whatever and then not call on the Jewish community to do likewise.
So… for consistency’s sake, do you think the Muslim community should denounce… whatever?
the charge of Anti-semitism implies a generalization in the first place, doesn’t it? The one who makes that charge in the face of a personal challenge seem to be calling out “When they’re challenging me ALL of us are challemged. Come to my rescue.”
I agree, use of the tactic does feed into unproductive generalizations.