« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Obama's 'Jewish problem' is not being dependent on AIPAC
There is a lot being written about Obama's alleged 'Jewish problem'. What this seems to mean is that there is one particular group of people who have a habit of thinking that they speak for the entire community who have a particular problem with Obama.
But that problem has nothing to do with what Obama has said about Israel. Obama has a 100% rating with AIPAC and there really is nothing to distinguish Obama's policy from Clinton's.
There is no real difference on their position on the war(s) either. Both are committed to win against Al Qaeda, both are committed to withdraw from Iraq and likely to mean it, neither is going to start an unprovoked war with Iran.
Some of the difference is explained by racism, but thats not what drives the big lobbies. Their problem with Obama is that he is his own man and does not depend on them for support.
Worse, Obama has much more support and much more visioble support from under 40s in the community they purport to speak for. Obama does not need to tug his forelock to AIPAC, if he becomes President they need him more than he needs them.
That is the real reason for the racist anti-Obama email campaign that has been directed at anyone with a Jewish sounding name the past few months.
Comments (10)
Bullseye!
May 23, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a refreshing thought...a US President who is not beholden to AIPAC. Just think, the US might start crafting a middle eastern policy that is more in line with our own foreign policy interest. It also looks like Obama might break the strangle-hold of the Cuban American lobby as well.
Much of the McCain chest-thumping rhetoric about Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran must be meant to reassure AIPAC that he's their pick over Obama. Get ready for the Cuban American congressional-folk in NJ and Florida to start claiming that Chavez (thanks to the Castro brothers) supports Obama or that Obama will embolden Chavez somehow.
May 24, 2008 5:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dream on. If my friends were to label Obama unkosher becauase he advocates the kind of Israel-bashing you favor, he will lose because he will lose Florida and one of the key states of New Jersey or Pennsylvania and he can't be elected.
ATTENTION OBAMA SUPPORTERS: YOUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF HAS GIVEN YOU AN ORDER--QUIT BASHING ISRAEL AND JOIN HIM IN HIS "UNSHAKEABLE COMMITMENT" TO THE SECURITY OF THAT "STALWART ALLY" IN HIS WORDS.
May 24, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where in that post do you detect any "Israel bashing?"
May 24, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect that this is a troll. But no, bashing AIPAC is not bashing Israel. The AIPAC position is supported by at most 25% of Israelis they are frequently well to the right of Likud.
It works both ways, AIPAC want Israel to be dependent on them as well. It is a minority position but there are some Israeli politicians who argue from time to time that US foreign aid comes with too many AIPAC strings attached.
May 27, 2008 8:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
piss off
May 24, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
BTW - if wishing that the United States would craft a foreign policy in our own national interest(rather than in the interest of a foreign government) passes as "bashing" a foreign government then so be it. It is time that we, Americans, began thinking about what policies and wars will serve our own citizen's interest (both at home and abroad) rather than cow-towing to a foreign government's agenda and taking on battles that cannot be won to protect foreign governments. Israel is a nuclear power...undeclared of course...but it is a sovereign nation that can fight its own battles and must learn to get along with its own neighbors. If supporters of AIPAC, like "apacmember" want to threaten the American public by promising defeat of a US presidential candidate who refuses to do AIPAC's bidding then such Israel supporters should leave the US; their allegiance is clearly with a foreign government, not with the United States of America.
Obama has a balanced view of the US role in middle eastern affairs. As the good "American" Martha Stewart would say...that is a good thing.
May 24, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt that working for our national interests in that region will not also be beneficial for Israel. I think both can be done. I'm sure that Obama will do both. The way McCain has set this up insists that we look at this as children - as in - - oh look over there, Hamas endorses Obama! Oh look Hamas hates Israel, therefore, Obama hates Israel. Stupid. We're not stupid.
May 24, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Welp, as I was just saying in response to M.J. Rosenberg's article about Hagee, I'm Jewish, I'm pro-Israel (my kid is going to live there this fall), and I have no problem with Obama--so I hope he doesn't have a problem with me.
May 24, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
(That was a joke--Obama's "Jewish problem.")
May 24, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment