« My Son, Hot 97 DJ, Peter Rosenberg, Interviews Dave Matthews About Obama | Home | Friday Poll in Israel shows Majority/Solid Support for Settlement Evacuation »
The Ground Shifts: Olbermann Goes After Lobby, High Fives J Street, And Discusses The Shift Among Jews
The tremors started before Obama but then he was sworn in and from, day one, showed it was a new day.
Today the Walt-Mearsheimer book is the story of what was, not what is.
And the polls from Israel today show that a strong majority wants Bibi to yield to the President on settlements.
It's happening. Once again, America shows that we remain dynamic and revolutionary. But, again, none of this could have happened without Barack Obama.
Advertisement
Yeah, team!
June 5, 2009 9:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Today the Walt-Mearsheimer book is the story of what was, not what is."
Only an MJ Rosenberg would make a comment like this, presumably with a straight face, a comment which is res ipsa loquitor on the nonsense that Walt and Mearsheimer wrote. Presto, all that "scholarly research" is meaningless because we have a new president. Laugh out friggin' loud; guess the Lobby wasn't in control after all.
Actually, and there is absolutely no need for you to respond, the positive changes in American policy that appear to be going on right now in the Middle East--thanks to President Obama and his diverse and competent team of advisers--puts a penetrating dagger through the center of the heart of the inherently hateful and historically repetitive message, cloaked in the veneer of scholarly finesse, that was propagated by the likes of Walt and Mearsheimer. The Jew Lobby (and you can call it what you wish but where I come from we call spades spades) never controlled American foreign policy, never caused us to send American boys and girls to die in the deserts of Iraq, and never prevented an American president and Congress from pursuing a rational foreign policy in the Middle East. It's just that the detractors from the status quo either had no balls, or were comfortable throwing darts at people and groups instead of pursuing rational political strategy--because it suited their own personal agendas and in some cases pocket books.
Maybe now people on what I like to call the parlour pink chair left can start being a little more sensitive to utilizing age-old scripts and sterotypes against the Jewish People, or a portion thereof. Of course, my take, certain folks will always find folks to hate, particularly folks who like to prop themselves up by making other folks look bad. I know the game--honest people know the game. It's as plain as day. Too bad they can't take a lead from a politician who is acting like a real man right now, and that is our president, Barack Hussein Obama.
June 5, 2009 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ooops forgot:
Bruce S. Levine
New York, New York
June 5, 2009 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rough days, Bruce. This is exactly why you opposed Obama in the primaries.
And, poor Brad, just waiting for those anti-Obama talking points to come in.
Great days for my side of the argument. We worked so hard to elect a President who would be pro-peace and we got one who goes beyond our wildest dreams.
It is hard to contain my joy.
But I feel your pain, boys. I'm compassionate and I believe in handshakes with the losing players. That's you.
June 5, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are so full of it MJ. I am a union lawyer and I supported Hillary Clinton because that was consistent with my what I do in life and where I thought she would take the labor movement. I have devoted my adult life to. You, like a garden variety bigot, presume that because I'm Jewish I didn't support Obama because of Israel. Nonsense. When Obama was elected, I contributed to his campaign, I worked for his election, and I know the people he has hired in top labor positions personally and I am elated.
And just what is my side of the argument? That I think W&M are full of shit? On Israel-Palestine, tell me how my position is any different than yours? Are you honestly so stupid, so pig-headed, that you cannot understand that someone who supports Obama's approach to the Middle East peace process can still think that W&M are full of baloney. I don't think so. I just think you like to talk trash.
You're a phoney MJ, and you've been called on it time and again by people on here, and not just by people who think like me. One of the most delicious things I ever read on here was when Dan K, respected by all, dressed you down like you were nothing more than a showroom dummy, or a plucked Christmas goose. It was fabulous and you earned it.
And the sad thing is, Mr. Bunzl and Josh Smilowitz and the other folks at IPF wanted my help and I tried to help them. But I would be a fool to offer my services to your organization at this point. And that is unfortunate, because some of the folks over there really are committed to doing more than insulting people on the internet, and at least they thought I could have been an asset. Sometimes, pride takes over and it does so here.
You know, I kind of feel sorry for you, even now, because you are so exposed as nothing more than an entertainer. . .and at other people's expense.
Bruce S. Levine
New York, New York
June 5, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should be, when Obama was nominated. . ..
June 5, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
:-)
June 5, 2009 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stay classy, emjay.
June 7, 2009 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bye, Bruce.
June 5, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, emjay. You know that bumper sticker on your kid's car that you like so much, the one that reads "Mean People Suck"? That means you, dude.
June 7, 2009 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly right.
In addition, it's obviously too much of a mental burden for poor MJ to understand that one can be in alignment with the general goals of a two-state solution and ending occupation and still be skeptical that these are sufficient to achieve peace.
June 5, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
So true Brad. And I admire your willingness to state your case, even though you and I don't always agree on things, with dignity and grace, and despite some simply awful things that are written in reply to some of what you have written. Keep it up buddy.
June 5, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
And that is unfortunate, because some of the folks over there really are committed to doing more than insulting people on the internet
You mean like caring more about what happens in Israel/Palestine than getting back at a Washington lobbying organization that you once worked for and that dissed you and friends?
Was just piping up so you know that there are some out there like me, who have recognized the beltway parlor game in most of these posts, and who also feel it is more than a distraction from the actual issues that matter (unless you think Beltway employment status is the most important thing in the world, that is) but a real pity in that it actually stokes tensions that need to be tamped down if any real progress is to be made in the real world problem over there. I do find it very sad that more who say they are supporters of Obama can't operate more like Obama, but feel the need to get back at something someone did in DC to them or their friends. Need I remind of this point: who is the current Secretary of State? :-)
June 5, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. You should know, Bruce, that the only reason I have respect for IPF is because of what I have read by you about them on these forums. If I did not have your input, I would consider them someone working to cause more stress in the I/P situation through agitprop, simply because of their employment of M.J. Rosenberg and what I have seen him write on this site over the years. I wouldn't give them a second glance if you hadn't said you support their work.
June 5, 2009 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you AA. The IPF is staffed by a fine bunch of committed people. I have been privileged to meet with them, to have been invited to hear speakers up close and personal, and to see a progressive Jewish community do more than taunt the so-called status quo. My rejection of MJ as a serious person, and my inability to personally work for his organization as a result of that rejection, should in no way dissuade anyone else from supporting the Israel Policy Forum. I have nothing but respect and admiration for the organization, and I wish it continued success.
And, now, I've said enough. Ciao AA.
Bruce.
June 5, 2009 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is there a point to your ad-hominem laced tirade, Mr. Levine? It seems to me you have actually had a few in past posts. Hard to detect here, though.
June 6, 2009 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Always remember that in Washington, where one stands (on an issue) depends on where one sits. And MJ sits is a place that defines itself as opposed to AIPAC and the rest of the pro-Israel establishment (and never mind if the cartoon version of AIPAC described by MJ bears only a passing resemblance to reality). Thus anything that even hints at a diminishment of the power of that establishment gets magnified into some earth-shaking development that is going to set things in a fundamentally new direction.
We'll see.
I expect that like many administrations before them, the Obama Administration will make a great public show of trying to do something different about the Israeli-Palestinian problem. I think he and others are sincere in their attitudes towards trying to freeze settlements and will continue to put pressure on Israel in this area. But sooner or later they will confront the same reality that has always existed: Israelis will not confront the fanatic settlers and force them to withdraw unless they see the possibility of peace. Palestinians will not be able to convincingly demonstrate that the pain of withdrawal will lead to real peace. And thus we will be back to where we started. No initiative in the works now would lead me to think any other outcome is likely - or even possible.
June 5, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Israelis will not confront the fanatic settlers and force them to withdraw unless they see the possibility of peace."
A nice AIPAC BS line (except for the truth they would always deny, about settlers being fanatic). As if the world can only beg the Israeli government to act civilized while latter thumbs its nose in return, and the settlers whistle to their U.S. dupes and tools to flood the US Congress with hypocritical crap.
SHARON DID "confront the fanatic settlers and force them to withdraw".
Not, of course, because there was either any particularly improved "possibility of peace" then nor because Sharon ever gave a tinker's dam about peace to begin with, but because it was in HIS interest, and the interest of his closest supporters (e.g. to play divide and conquer between the West Bank and Gaza, and clear the latter for the IDF slaughter-machine without the inconvenience of Israeli residents getting caught in the line of fire, and to show some initiative while the Labor Party and the Palestinians were in a funk and while W Bush was lying down to be his eternal doormat.)
As soon as America demands it or else, rather than requesting it as Obama has done so far, it will swiftly be very clearly in the interests of the Israelis to agree (as it already long has been, but much less clearly so obviously). And it will matter not a wit what they think about peace, or what AIPAC's tricksters claim about it.
June 6, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it's really changing as you say, that's just amazing, and *Happy Day!*
But if so, how come Krauthammer is still spewing his poison invective ("No 'natural growth' means strangling to death the thriving towns) yaddah yaddah) in Today's W. Post? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/04/AR2009060403811.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
*Plus,* care to day why his scowling pic so markedly resembles the puss on a Marine Iguana, MJ?
Hmmmnnnnnn?
June 5, 2009 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
But Overreach, that's precisely the point. Sure, Krauthammer et al can say all kinds of things, and by the way, even MJ's IPF does not expect Israel to permanently cease all construction in all settlements forever--that's a prudent and bold posture for President Obama to have taken at this point because man does it shake things up and get the ball rolling. But Krauthammer et al don't control American foreign policy, and my point is they never did.
June 5, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
I find it a little disturbing nonetheless that you did not find it in you to try to account for his puzzling resemblance to the celebrated maritime reptile!
*Anyone* can tackle the *easy* questions, Mr. L! ;)
I was telling my truelove I guess why the bombastic curmudgeon is with the Post is to grant them deniability: if they are accused as not tough enough on the Arab good-for-nothings, then they may comfortably retort, "Who, us?! Surely you jest!! Why, we have this misanthropic throwback on our staff (who resembles a submarine lizard) and he foments hate, stalemate, and never-ending war that you so delight in, and every few days at that!" JMHO.
June 5, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've been very pessimistic about the ability to ever change direction in the West Bank, and I'm glad to be proven wrong.
I'd just like to point out that we went from hang-wringing that Netanyahu would be too tough for Obama to handle to wondering if his administration will last in about three weeks.
I have to learn not to underestimate Obama.
Bslev, I get your point. But why, in the last decades, have other presidentis not this uncompromising stance that Obama is taking? What happened with Bush Sr. tried? Surely that was a demonstration of the power of the Israel Lobby?
June 5, 2009 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correction: But why, in the last decades, have other presidents not taken this uncompromising stance that Obama is taking?
June 5, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
What was that saying: "a lobby is like a night flower. It thrives in the dark and dies in the sun."
You see the difference is we're watching now... we weren't before... me thinks massive damage control is going on at the moment.
June 5, 2009 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
RE: "Olbermann Goes After Lobby, High Fives J Street, And Discusses The Shift Among Jews"
BUT ALSO SEE - "Max Blumenthal: Feeling the Hate In Jerusalem on Eve of Obama's Cairo Address"
(EXCERPT) Max Blumenthal writes: On the eve of President Barack Obama’s address to the Muslim world from Cairo, Egypt, I stepped out onto the streets of Jerusalem with my friend Joseph Dana to interview young Israelis and American Jews about their reaction to the speech. We encountered rowdy groups of beer sodden twenty-somethings, many from the United States, and all eager to vent their visceral, even violent hatred of Barack Obama and his policies towards Israel. Usually I offer a brief commentary on my video reports, but this one requires no comment at all. Quite simply, it contains some of the most shocking footage I have ever filmed. Watch it and see if you agree. (Warning: this video contains profanity and material offensive to just about anyone.)
VIDEO - http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/06/max-blumenthal-feeling-the-hate-in-jerusalem-on-eve-of-obamas-cairo-address.html
June 5, 2009 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink