He doesn't actually seem to have one when pitted against John McCain. Rather, Jewish Americans like Clinton best, Obama second-best, and McCain least. Keep this in mind next time you read an argument that seems to assume that white working class Clinton supporters would prefer McCain to Obama -- it's perfectly possible for Obama to be someone's second-choice, just as Clinton is the second choice of millions of Obama voters.
« Less Talk, More Investment | Main | Stuck in the Middle With Mac »
Obama's Jewish Problem
13 May 2008 02:43 pm
Comments (38)
In the following link, Douglas Feith joins Lawrence Wilkerson in denying that Israel pushed for the Iraq war. Mr. Don Williams can cite Bibi all he wants but we now have two former Bush administration officials who agree that the US went into Iraq against the advice of the Israeli officials that Feith and Wilkerson talked to.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3542925,00.html
"Addressing claims that Israel pushed the US Administration into the war, Feith said "I never saw that."
"What you heard from Israeli officials in private discussions was that they were not really focused on Iraq," Feith said. "They were much more focused on Iran."
When asked why Israel did not publically object to military action in Iraq, he said this was a result of the strong relationship between Israeli officials and the Bush Administration.
"The relationship between Bush and Israel was so strong and so friendly that the Israeli government was not going to join Germany and French in opposing the US," Feith said, and added that "what you heard from the Israelis was not any kind of advocacy of war with Iraq." "
Er, 76% Kerry, 21% Bush.
Damn lies.
Er, 76% Kerry, 24% Bush.
Damn lies.
I live in the second largest Hasidic neighborhood outside of Israel. Lots of Jews. I simply don't hear any mistrust (among the local lefties) in re Obama. This whole meme seems manufactured to me. Purely anecdotal, but still.
"The N.Y. money men" of both parties (thank you, Wes Clark), the VIP ziocons fear and loathe Obama. Reverend Wright, Bill Ayres, Susan Power, Robert O'Malley, "He's for Hamas", "He's a sap for Ahmadinijead, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah" "Neville Chamberlin", "The jew-hating Trinity church", ad nauseum - these are just Round #1 smears designed to put the "filthy, shvatz goyim" down. Average, everyday, sensible, intelligent, hard-working Jews do not count - they have zero influence. In the big scheme of things- you - Matthew, Phillip Weiss, Tony Judt, Michael Neumann, Larry David, (Obama supporters all)et. al. have negligible influence. Obama's Biggest Enemy is the Ziocons. The "left-wing" manned by Dennis Ross. The "center" by Joe Lieberman. The right by Morton Klein.
No, no, no, don't you understand that the only reason anyone voted for Clinton it that they hated Obama? I mean, the idea of people voting for Clinton because they liked her (or Bill) is just absurd.
Wait, John McCain is losing 2 to 1 with Jewish voters? What does that say about McCain that he can't get Jewish votes? Is it his stance on Isreal? His past associations? What is wrong with him?
How come if Obama is (fake)weak with Jewish voters, its a big problem, but if McCain is (really) weak, nobody cares?
Later in the article SLC links to, Doug Feith dismissed claims that the Bush Administration had its mind set on war in Iraq even before the September 11 attacks.
"A lot of the decisions came after September 11th," he told Ynet. "I think one of the things the book explains is that Iraq was a major issue before September 11th - it was a major issue since 1990 for the US, and there was a debate within the US government on what to do about Iraq."
he's really bending reality here. it's true that no decisions were made before 9/11, but there was no debate about"what to do about Iraq" Bush wanted to invade iraq and there was no dissent within bush's inner circle.
Paul O'Neill described President Bush's very first National Security Council meeting, “From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go,” says O’Neill, who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.
“From the very first instance, it was about Iraq. It was about what we can do to change this regime,” says Suskind. “Day one, these things were laid and sealed.”
As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council. He says in the book he was surprised at the meeting that questions such as "Why Saddam?" and "Why now?" were never asked.
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this,’" says O’Neill.
And that came up at this first meeting, says O’Neill, who adds that the discussion of Iraq continued at the next National Security Council meeting two days later.
He got briefing materials under this cover sheet. “There are memos. One of them marked, secret, says, ‘Plan for post-Saddam Iraq,’" adds Suskind, who says that they discussed an occupation of Iraq in January and February of 2001.
i have no reason to disbelieve Lawrence Wilkerson,
but Feith tells so many lies in his book and on the book tour, i can't take anything he says seriously.
SLC,
Your childlike faith in the intelligence and integrity of former Bush administration officials is deeply moving. Now please leave your bank account information and I will send you a bag of magic beans.
The Republican leadership doesn't give a rat's ass who Jewish Americans support -- there's only 6 million or so and most of them don't donate squat to campaign.
What the Republicans care about is who will certain BILLIONAIRE Patrons of the Israel Lobby support?
Will Haim Saban be willing to give McCain free airtime on the Spanish language Univision now that Hillary's toast?
Will Mort Zuckerman use his NY Daily News and US News and World Report to campaign for McCain against Obama?
Will S Daniel Abraham throw $2 Million into the RNC coffers instead of into the DNC (actually, DSCC now that they put that awful Howard Dean in as Chairman of DNC.)?
Will Bronfmann throw more money into FDD so Clifford May can continually attack Obama?
You guys never heard of Pareto, did you?
Re Trevor
Apparently, Mr. Trevor is unaware that Dennis Ross is an Obama adviser.
Apparently, in pro-forma fashion - the Obama campaign HAS reached out to him. But, Dennis is playing coy, listening to his inner ziocon to be reassured that Susan Power, Robert Malley and Zbig will all play second fiddle to the great Middle East negotiator himself.
Re: Dennis Ross and the presidential campaign
Date: March 4, 2008
On Saturday, March 1, a news story in the New York Times identified Ambassador Dennis Ross, counselor at The Washington Institute and Ziegler distinguished fellow, as an "adviser" to Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama. The implication of the article was that Ambassador Ross has endorsed Senator Obama or otherwise supports his campaign in an exclusive capacity.
In accordance with longstanding policy at The Washington Institute, Ambassador Ross -- like other senior fellows of the Institute -- has been encouraged to serve as a resource for presidential candidates and their campaigns. We believe this service contributes to ensuring the highest quality debate over foreign policy in our nation's presidential election campaign. It complements the important work of the Institute's Presidential Study Group initiative, which brings together foreign policy practitioners and advisors from various campaigns to discuss critical issues on the Middle East policy agenda.
In recent months, a number of candidates and their campaigns have sought Ambassador Ross's advice, including the Obama, Clinton, and Romney campaigns. The Obama campaign has turned to him most frequently and with some degree of regularity on Middle Eastern issues, and he has responded with his consistently insightful analysis and useful policy recommendations. He will continue to offer advice on the substantive issues of our foreign and national security policy to the Obama campaign -- and any other presidential campaign that requests it -- on a nonexclusive basis. In accordance with our organization's policy on nonpartisanship, Ambassador Ross has not endorsed any presidential candidate.
Re SLC's quote of Douglas Feith:
""The relationship between Bush and Israel was so strong and so friendly that the Israeli government was not going to join Germany and French in opposing the US," Feith said, and added that "what you heard from the Israelis was not any kind of advocacy of war with Iraq."
-----------------
If anyone had any doubt that Douglas Feith is a lying shithead, they should look at the newspaper reports from 2002.
Which show Ariel Sharon's CHIEF REPRESENTATIVES repeatedly ADVOCATING a USA attack on Iraq.
See the links I REPEATEDLY gave to SLC in earlier posts on this subject:
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/10/aipac_and_iraq.php#comment-654345
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/10/aipac_and_iraq.php#comment-654354
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/10/aipac_and_iraq.php#comment-654366
I think it's important to understand that all groups except whites are homogeneous in their thinking.
Yo Trev,
It's Samantha Power. And I, for one, enjoyed your Irishization of Mr. Malley.
Now back to your regularly scheduled spew-fest.
Clinton advantage among blue collar whites is decidedly modest:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenumbers/2008/05/obama-and-worki.html
1) SLC continues to argue that the Sharon government did not advocate a US attack on Iraq in 2002 -- in spite of me showing him --on about SIX different occasions -- news reports proving the contrary.
2) SLC's ..er..persistance did help me solve a historical puzzle. I've always wondered what sent Adolf Hitler around the bend -- what drove him insane.
I've now realized that Adolf must have tried arguing politics with SLC's grandfather -- and the experience just drove Adolf apeshit.
3) Adolf described the experience in Mein Kampf -- you can still hear him sputtering with rage and pulling his moustache at the experience:
From http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch02.html
--------
"The great masses could be saved, if only with the gravest sacrifice in time and patience.
But a Jew could never be parted from his opinions.
At that time I was still childish enough to try to make the madness of their doctrine clear to them; in my little circle I talked my tongue sore and my throat hoarse, thinking I would inevitably succeed in convincing them how ruinous their Marxist madness was; but what I accomplished was often the opposite.
It seemed as though their increased understanding of the destructive effects of Social Democratic theories and their results only reinforced their determination.
The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid.
If all this didn't help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again.
But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn't help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day.
The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn't remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.
Sometimes I stood there thunderstruck.
I didn't know what to be more amazed at: the agility of their tongues or their virtuosity at lying.
Gradually I began to hate them."
----------------
ha ha ha
It was extremely unfair of Adolf to generalize from his experience with a member of the SLC clan to Jews as a people.
I'm skeptical of political correctness, but I would have to agree that a claim that Jewish Americans are like SLC would be an anti-Semitic slur.
""The N.Y. money men" of both parties (thank you, Wes Clark), the VIP ziocons fear and loathe Obama."
The "Chicago money men" (e.g., the Pritzkers) certainly don't, and neither do the "California money men".
"What does that say about McCain that he can't get Jewish votes?"
It says he's a Republican. "Jews earn like Episcopalians but vote like Puerto Ricans." -- Milton Himmelfarb
Mr. Williams,
Please do not make jokes about Hitler and the Holocaust. It's very possible that SLC actually has a grandfather or other family member that was murdered by the Nazis, as do many American Jews. Thank you.
In the following link, Douglas Feith joins Lawrence Wilkerson in denying that Israel pushed for the Iraq war. - SLC
Israel may not have pushed for the Iraq war. And it was pretty obvious that the Iraq war would be bad for Israel (*). But that didn't stop every single junior AIPAC member wanna-be from trying to tell me that, as a Jew, I "should support the Iraq war because, even if fighting Iraq was not the USA's top priority, Israel needs Saddam Hussein removed from power, and isn't it so wonderful that the we Jews have a bunch of goyim in the US to fight our battles for us?".
There was definitely a coordinated campaign to make people think Israel wanted the Iraq war -- not only to try and get Jews (some of us, alas not me, do have money, influence, etc) on board, but also to ensure that criticism of the war would be perceived as moonbat anti-Zionism and that war critics could be dismissed as anti-Semites.
Of course, Israel didn't push for this war. But when so-called pro-Israel people associated with the so-called Israel lobby (which really isn't Israel's friend in this country) complain about "why do people think the Iraq war is a Zionist plot?" they should reflect on the role of self-proclaimed Zionists in pushing for the war as something good for Israel.
If only the so-called Israel lobby and the neo-conservatives would stop granting anti-Semites the victory of having Jews that live up to anti-Semitic stereotypes ...
(*if only because of Saddam Hussein's track record of attacking Israel when the USA attacked him -- if he did have WMDs, he would have lobbed them at Israel as soon as we invaded and he knew it was toast for him ... why not go out with a bang, so to speak? I always wondered how one could both believe Iraq had WMDs AND thought the war would be good for Israel ...)
VIP ziocons fear and loathe Obama
Trev,
Even in your world, how is Marty Peretz somehow not a "VIP ziocon"?
The "Chicago money men" (e.g., the Pritzkers) certainly don't, and neither do the "California money men". - Fred
Fred's right. It's a regional thing with us Jews. It's a bit of a stereotype, I know, but attitudes amongst Jews in the NYC area seem to be very different than in the rest of the country. I could go into detail about why this is and how this difference hurts an African-American who doesn't tow the AIPAC line 100%, but then I'd just end up rambling ...
Re Don Williams
White trash Williams can quote Bibi until the cows come home. The fact is that the six different occasions he cites were all about the speech by Bibi to the Congress. This occurred after the decision had been made to invade Iraq and the Sharon government went along like the good little puppets they were, not wanting to irritate their masters in Washington. The fact is that Feith and Wilkerson, who, unlike white trash Williams were present at meetings and actually conferred with their counterparts in Israel, say differently.
As for white trash Williams invoking Hitler, thats about what we have come to expect from white trash like him.
The likely Dennis Ross ziocon-lite quid pro quo offer to the Obama campaign:
1. For our ("left wing" quadrant of The Israel Lobby) lukewarm support - an Obama Administration
A. Will NOT pressure Israel on West Bank settlement expansion.
B. Will NOT negotiate with Hamas OR a Fatah-Hamas Unity Government.
C. WILL Nuke Iran if they so much as hiss at Israel.
D. Will NOT protest if and when Israel decides to re-occupy Gaza.
E. WILL enthusiastically support an Israeli re-invasion of Lebanon and an accelerated bombing campaign against Syria.
F. WILL purge an Obama Administration of Palestinian sympathizers (Power, Malley, Zbig).
G. WILL endeavour to make Iraq the Israeli rump State the Bush Administration had as its #1A to do goal.
H. WILL designate Dennis Ross its chief Middle East Peace Negotiater.
Such a deal.
SLC: ""What you heard from Israeli officials in private discussions was that they were not really focused on Iraq," Feith said. "They were much more focused on Iran."
This is, of course, precisely what I, Don Williams, and especially those in the know such as Flynt Leverett were saying - that Israel originally wanted the US to attack Iran in early 2002, and only shifted over to agreeing on attacking Iraq when the neocons - such as Feith - assured them that Iran would be next after Iraq.
SLC ignores all the evidence from Leverett because it doesn't fit his propaganda. Among other things, it appears the neocons actually believed - or at least tried to make it appear that they believed - that Iran's government would actually be overthrown by Iranian opposition parties once Iraq had been conquered and the Iraqis were throwing flowers at US troops. It took them until 2005 to realize this wasn't going to be happening.
Nitwit SLC decides to try to push this "Israel didn't support attacking Iraq" crap once again. Since he cites the man who has been called "the dumbest fucking guy", this is no surprise, since SLC has to be the SECOND dumbest fucking guy.
BTW, Don, that quote from Hitler is brilliant - he was absolutely correct about the intellectual dishonesty you get from a Zionist. SLC and the rest of the Zionist freaks demonstrate this daily.
Re SLC's comment "White trash Williams can quote Bibi until the cows come home."
------------
But I didn't just quote Bibi Nathahyahu's speech to the US Congress, SLC. I also cited several statements made to the American people by Ariel Sharon's spokesman and by Shimon Peres. Look at the links again.
I don't think we should hold that against the people of Israel. But I do think Likud has pretty clearly shown that it --and its supporters here in the USA -- are no friends of America. And we -- and our government -- should treat Likud as such.
DAS,
The simplest explanation for New York Jews' general preference for Hillary is that Hillary is their Senator.
Uh, OK, I'm as radical as the next man, and more than most. But quoting Hitler is just fucking creepy. Can we please stop?
It took about a month to slog thru it, but amen to that Hitler v.s. the Zionist quote. You can spray these gnats with *Off, try the kinder & gentler non-toxic approach, let 'em fly off into their hot and sticky SRO lives, and as soon as you think they're gone - here comes the faint, metallic buzz, and the unclean smell of bilious pus.
Re Hector's comment "But quoting Hitler is just fucking creepy. Can we please stop?"
--------
1) Sorry, Hector. But having discussed this with SLC six times -- and seeing him behave in what I consider a dishonest fashion -- I thought he could use a cold bucket of ice water.
2) To remind him that --given that we have 4000 American dead -- we should discuss this situation in an honest fashion as fellow Americans.
That SLC should -- as DAS says -- "stop granting anti-Semites the victory of having Jews that live up to anti-Semitic stereotypes ". This is in the interest of the Jewish American community as well as in the interest of the rest of us.
3) When Ariel Sharon's representatives --His spokesman Ra'anan Gissin, Bibi Nathanyahu, and Shimon Peres -- urged us to take out Hussein before he used WMDs, they were giving the American people the assurance that they were speaking based on Mossad intelligence. Mossad intelligence which seems to have gone missing.
One can argue that they were only helping our own President lie to us. In that case, they can go visit ex-President Bush in Crawford Texas when they next need help.
4) Because if Israel elects a Likud government, I see no reason why she can expect our further support. The Obama Administration should make it clear to the People of Israel that the Likud -- and its leaders -- are anathema to America.
5) It is fair to point out -- as I have done -- that Sharon only did what Tony Blair did. Support our President. The difference is that we do not have a powerful domestic faction arguing that we should sacrifice the national interest for the sake of Britain. We don't have British billionaires dumping $Millions into US elections.
(We certainly had that problem during WWI and WWII --but not now.)
Re Don Williams
Mr. Williams now admits that the Sharon Government went along with the Bush administration, just like the British government did. And for the same reasons. Both were doing it to curry favor with the Bush administration. The fact is, which Mr. Williams refuses to admit, that the Sharon spokesmen who he quotes made the case after, repeat after, the Israeli Government was informed that their advice was not going to be followed. Until that time, as both Wilkerson and Feith have stated, the Israeli Government advised against the Iraq adventure, stating quite accurately that Iran was the real threat. If the Iraq adventure went awry, the US would not be in a position to challenge the Iranian threat. And was we are finding out in Lebanon and the Gaza strip, the Israeli cautions were 100% on the mark.
Wow, this thread turned weird and creepy fast.
Anybody remember that episode of Will & Grace when the two of them were arguing over to support the gay guy or the Jewish woman in a local election and decided not to vote after it turned out both of them were insane and then both ran out to vote when they found out a black guy was running? The two most Democratic and anti-war demographics in America are African-Americans and American Jews. If Jews never voted for black people, Rangel would have been out of a job a long time ago.
I also thought Kerry got like 82% of the Jewish vote (after all, wasn't he like the nearest we've ever had to a Jewish candidate?), but I could be wrong.
help me with the time frame here:
the voice of america reported on 16 August 2002 that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon sent a message to Washington this past week, telling the Bush Administration that any delay in dealing with Saddam Hussein will only give him more time to develop weapons of mass destruction.
In an interview with the American cable television network, CNN, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres had much the same message. Mr. Peres said a military operation against Saddam Hussein will be dangerous, but he said it would be more dangerous to postpone such action.
is the argument that bush had decided by august 16th that the iraq attack was already set and that sharon and peres were only saying this stuff to make nice with w?
I have no reason to disbelieve Lawrence Wilkerson,
but Feith tells so many lies in his book and on the book tour, i can't take anything he says seriously.
PS.... slc makes it sound like tony blair was also initially opposed to invading Iraq and that he later changed his opinion just to curry favor with bush. i can't find any proof on that assertion. thoughts?
Re SLC's comment "Mr. Williams now admits that the Sharon Government went along with the Bush administration, "
-------------------
1) Sharon didn't just "go along with the Bush Administration", SLC. He had his representatives lie to the American people -- indicating INDEPENDENTLY of Bush that the Israeli government thought Saddam had WMDs. I don't understand why you --an American citizen -- are comfortable with that.
2) In the interest of fair play, I pointed out an extenuating excuse for Israel -- i.e., that Tony Blair had done the same. An excuse that you had not seen because you apparently were too lost in your brown cloud of bullshit to see clearly. And you immediately twisted my fairness into "Mr Williams now admits..."
I admit nothing. Except that you are a putz and an embarrassment to Jewish Americans.
Re dj spellchecka's question "slc makes it sound like tony blair was also initially opposed to invading Iraq and that he later changed his opinion just to curry favor with bush. i can't find any proof on that assertion. thoughts? "
-------------
1) I think Richard Clark , in his book , indicated that Bush and the Neocons were actively looking for an excuse to attack Hussein early in the Bush Administration --maybe before Sept 11 , certainly after.
2) There was a classified British memo leaked about a year ago -- which recounted the visit of a British Intelligence official to Washington circa mid -2002. Memo reported to Blair that Bush had already decided on war with Iraq --decision was made -- and that US intelligence was being rigged to SUPPORT that decision , not to influence it.
Re Don Williams
White trash Williams has to believe that both Lawrence Wilkerson and Douglas Feith are liars for stating unequivocally that the Government of Israel had a negative view relative to the Iraq adventure. Sharon and company went along with the Bush administration against their better judgment, if those two gentlemen are to be believed. If Mr. Williams thinks they are lying about it, what is their motive? Mr. Feith may be a scumbag but I fail to see what his motive is for lying about Israeli reluctance. In fact, it would appear that he would have a stronger motive to claim that Sharon and company were active cheerleaders for the Iraq adventure, especially since Sharon himself is in no position to dispute him, thus shifting some of the blame for that fiasco elsewhere.
thanks don. upthread i offer proof, quoting paul o'neill, that bush had decided at the very first meeting of the security that he wanted saddam gone and there was no disent. feith is obviously lying when he says no decisions were made and there was discussions of the pros and cons.
on your second paragraph, i'm thinking your're referring to the downing street memo that reported that the bush administration was being intelligence to fit the policy rather than vice versa.
good as i goes, but i still can't find any proof that tony blair was against the war before he was for it.
i really think slc's assertion about blair is wrong.
slc: "Mr. Feith may be a scumbag but I fail to see what his motive is for lying about Israeli reluctance."
perhaps, just this once he's thinking of israel rather than himself. doesn't want them to look too culpable. maybe he's just lying to lie.
he does that quite often.
Comments closed May 27, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
The better comparison is how 2004 broke down with Jewish voters for Kerry vs. Bush. This source says it was 74% Kerry, 21% Bush. So comparing these two sources, Obama is underperforming by about 10% among the Red Sea Pedestrian crowd. Probably not a big deal in any event.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/jewvote.html
Posted by Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics | May 13, 2008 3:19 PM