Joe (left), me (middle, holding sleepy girl), in happier days
The overwhelming majority of my fellow Jewish Americans are Americans first, and Jews second. But not all. And apparently not Sen. Joe Lieberman.
For at the heart of Sen. Lieberman’s split with the Democratic Party, and his embrace of Sen. John McCain last night at the Republican convention, there is a single issue: the war in Iraq. And regardless of what he may tell others (or even himself), Sen. Lieberman’s passion for maintaining a US military presence in Iraq, and indeed expanding it throughout the Middle East, is predicated on one and only one goal: assuring the survival of Israel.
It is a goal that I share with Sen. Lieberman, as do a majority of our fellow Americans, Jewish or not, but it is a goal that cannot and should not comprise the centerpiece of US foreign policy, and that can never be achieved through the brutal application of American military force. Every Arab killed by an American or Israeli soldier—every house destroyed, every life left in tatters—makes it that much harder for Israel to achieve a permanent peace with her Arab neighbors, and makes the world that much more dangerous for Jews everywhere. Every threat the US makes against the sovereignty of an Islamic nation is understood on the Islamic streets as a threat made on behalf of “the Jewish state”… and in the case of Sen. Lieberman I’m afraid, that impression would be largely correct.
I’ve only had the opportunity to meet Sen. Lieberman briefly, and while I cannot say that I know him well, he seemed immediately familiar. He and I come from the same East Coast Jewish milieu, where he could have been the father of a childhood friend, or a distant uncle on the Connecticut side of my extended family. No, I cannot say that I know Joe Lieberman personally, but I’ve known many Joe Liebermans throughout my life, in Philadelphia and New York, on the beaches of the Jersey Shore, at the Florida retirement community where I visit my mother every February… even here in Seattle, where the familiar Ashkenazi Jew is almost as hard to come by as a good bagel.
These are my people, and I know what makes them tick. We are the post-Holocaust generation, a generation in which survivors guilt and the very real experience of genocidal anti-semitism drives even the most secular amongst us to recognize the absolute necessity of a Jewish homeland. It is this intimate knowledge of both ancient and modern history that drives even the most liberal, Jewish American bleeding hearts to sustain unwavering support for the state of Israel, even when we find ourselves genuinely outraged and disgusted by the policies of the Israeli government itself.
Likewise, Sen. Lieberman’s unwavering support for Israel, as misguided as his policies might be, is entirely understandable to a fellow Jew like me. But as a fellow American I find it an entirely inappropriate platform on which to prioritize the agenda of a US Senator.
Yes, Sen. Lieberman has betrayed the Democratic Party (for whatever that’s worth), but I believe that in embracing Sen. McCain and his belligerent hundred years war—in standing on the floor of the Republican convention and endorsing the pro-war Republican ticket for president—Sen. Lieberman has also betrayed the American people and his solemn oath to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic … without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion…” I believe that Sen. Lieberman’s Israel-first AIPAC agenda has clouded his judgment (as it has that of many other old, Jewish men), driving him into the arms of a Republican party with which he is at odds on almost every other substantive policy issue.
And I believe that it is time for other American Jews to stand up and acknowledge Sen. Lieberman for what he is.
Goldy
Quite a post.
I think there are good reasons to consider ANY American who would support McC at this time as lacking patriotism. The nomination of Palin is beyond the Pale!
I am, however, uneasy about the assertion that Israel is the only reason Lieberman has joined the dark side. This sort of equation is too often used against Jews … even before the establishement of Israel, Brits, Germans, French, etc have questioned our loyalties.
My own guess is that Lieberman is simply not very bright, more than a bit of sycophant, feels (rightly) estranged by the Dems, and is simply a close friend of McC. Rather than accuse Lieberman of divided loyalites, as a Jewish American I would accuse people like Joe, Medved, Lapin, etc of being the Jewish equivalent of Uncle Tom, all to willing to shine the Massuh’s (Christian fundy) boots in return for the privilge of not being a field slave. I see a lot of similarity between Joe and Moses Hemmings, Jefferson’s chef.
On the bigger question of divided loyalties, why even raise it? Is there any substantial evidence of a threat to the Union of a Jewish fifth column??? I really do not think so, do you?
Like you I feel that the US has to walk a difficult path between Israel, US idealism, and real politics. The question of whether the US may need to give up on Israel in order to survive is not an unreasonable one as is the even clear issue of whether Israel will ever be viable. OTOH, questions like this are no more “special” than similar questions about Taiwan, Cuba, Perto Rico, or .. now .. Georgia, Ukraine, Latvia, etc. And yes, all of these have their equivalents of AIPAC.
Where we do disagree is on Iran. I will NOT pretend to know the answer, but I think there is ample reason without even focusing on Israel, to worry about these guys. Orthodox Islam .. Wahabe or Khomeini Shia, does see itself as world political movement. There is no more reason to be comfortable about these extremism(and therefore about either Iran or Saudi Arabia) then there was to be comfortable about the crusaders, the Stalinist USSR, or the Nazis. Moreover, unlike any of these, orthodox Islam can claimn to have once been the predominant world power and now to have God;s gift of oil.
ctd …
Jew @1,
The fact is, I’ve had these conversations with guys like Joe dozens of times, and I’m sure, so have you, and in the end, it all comes down to Israel. I understand why this drives the Jewish vote, and it is defensible. But it needs to be talked about.
Obama will still get the majority of the Jewish vote, but he wont get as large a majority as he should, because too many Jews simply don’t trust him on Israel. Joe is one of them.
Iran and the Quran
Are you familiar with the story of Yathrib and Medina in the Quran?
After the Quereshi threw Mohamed out of Mecca for undermining their religious trade, he fled to and was accepted by the people of an oasis called Yathrib. Not only was he allowed to join the community, large parts of which were Jewish .. possibly the majority, he was invited to take the status of judge between the tribes because M. already had a reputation for wisdom. He governed the oasis, now called Medina, under what is said to have been a very equitable rule. The basis for that rule is sometimes called the “Constitution of Medina: and is the prototypic idea of how a Muslim rule can be applied to any country.
Not only the Khomeini crowd but most of religously radical crowd in Islam, inclding the Muslim Bortherhood that has been such a source of trouble across North Africa, subscribe to this Constitution as a model for how they want all countries and certainly Muslim countries governed. That message is often combined with concepts of socialism and wealth redistribution you and I would recognize as being of the left including universal health care, education, etc.
The analogy to the promises made in the name of Marx is obvious.
ctd.
Thanks for saying the truth from a liberal Jewish perspective!
You may get hammered, but you got it right.
(I’ll send some money.)
Finally, Medina (for Jews) failed because we refused to join with M., when the Quereshi came from Mecca. The Quesreshi lost, we lost too and as a result M. declared Arabia Judenrein.
That story and the prophet’s resolution is a central story in the Quran and is taught to all muslim students, including an inherited claim that Jews are perfidious. The analogy to the New Testament treatment of the Pharisees is clear.
I tell this story not as an indictment of Islam but to point out that in some ways Islam is more a political, albeit theopolitical, ideology, than a religion. There is every reason to worry, though not panic, at the global intent of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Taliban, the Wahabes, and .. yes Iran.
ctd.
So, back to the neocons, Lieberman et al.
Like you I do not see these folks as motivated by American patriotism or by some concept of the good of the world.
Like you, I think they have been willing to fuck the entire US because of their commitment to Israel.
To that extent we agree.
What I do not agree with is that there stand is in anyway less patriotic than your or mine.
I also disgaree on the issue of Iran. Should the US bomb Iran? Should Israel do it? I honestly do not know.
However, before that I like the ideas Obama has put forward … ideas that are reminiscent of Bismarck and Kissinger.
Here is what I believe BHO will do:
1. He believes in talk-talk first but talk backed up with weapons and goodies. Based on the Berlin speech I believe that Obam will try to rebuild the alliance destroyed byu the Cowboys and extend them. We need to get Europe involved and China. Both should do this because it is in their interests.
2. The idea of a statelet along the rim of the Jordan creek and in Gaza is nuts. Before a state can be built we should be work with Abdullah. Europe, China and SA to build a vibrant economy in Jordan and Lebanon so
free” Palestinians do not starve.
BTW, for better or worse, this dream never seems to be shared by the neocons .. that is why I despise them for siding with GWB, It is a dream put forward by Bill Clinton, Obama, and Jimmy.
Dr Prof SeattleJew: R U saying Jewish people can’t view the world differently from you and when they do the woodshed is calling?
“And I believe that it is time for other American Jews to stand up and acknowledge Sen. Lieberman for what he is.”
If “American Jews” all think like you they are piss-poor Americans.
I think the DNC will and should poor a BOATLOAD of money into Joe’s race next time and they should make sure they have a very electable candidate. The best way to deal with traitors is to get rid of em. He needs to leave the Senate and we need to see that he does….no matter where we live.
Thank you, Goldy, for pointing out that most Jews are liberals and are not like Lieberman, Wolfowitz, Perle and the others. Contrary to popular belief, Lieberman and his ilk are not at all popular with Jewish voters. Most of us believe in equality, freedom of speech and peace.
http://www.homesteadbook.com/blog
@10 David
While not a Lieberman supporter ever (I find him not very bright), on most issues other than the war he is a VERY doctrinaire Dem.
Support for McCain Palin is, however, imho unpatriotic. Even his friendship with McCain, can not justify the possibility that one night, say t 3AM. the phone rings and our 74 yo President is too somnolent to awake. The caller is redirected to #2 and Sarah answers, fresh of finishing her evening AK47 practice session.
7 To the contrary, Puddy, it would appear that Stephen is saying that the neocons are exploiting American Jews’ concern for Israel to further their own objectives.
#7 Puddy
Where in what I wrote do you see that?
OTOH, just as (I assume) you get POd by step’n fetchits like Thomas, I feel the same way toward Jews who choose the Dobsons as their allies.
Did you know that one sect of Judaism, the Karaites, managed to have Hitler declare them not Jewish in WWII?
BTW .. please call me voice. I have a proposition that I think might interest you.
@12 ArtFart
Actually no. I respect many of the neocons and think there were good reasons from a Jewish and an American perspective for invading Iraq.
What I do not respect is:
1. Their incompetence. Invading Iraq while breaking up decades old aliiances was idiotic.
2. Their willingness to suck up to the worst of Christianity. Emanuel Ringelbaum, commander of the rebels who fought the Nazis to the death in Warsaw, said that Jews should never again be willingly sent to camps. The allies of the neocons, at least many of them, are radical religious repricans who see us only as the fodder for their own triumph. Joining wiht such people is to dishonor those who died in Warsaw!
3. EVERY PASSOVER we read in the Haggadah that the slavery in Egypt was not our ancestors but our own slavery as is the slavery of all people anywhere. Loyalty ot Israel is great, I have that. But the Neocons are willing to put that loyalty above the rights of other humans and that is wrong!
Most Palestinians, and quite a few Jews for that matter, pretty much agree that the Israeli government’s present “apartheid” policy is not sustainable and fuels the fires of animosity (I should probably use a stronger term) among its Arab neighbors and provides propaganda fodder for Muslim radicals. The American right has helped perpetuate this because they know keeping the conflict going serves their interests. It’s good for business, and it makes sure there will be enough radical whack jobs making trouble to justify the “war on terror”. This in turn provides justification for exercise of wartime powers by the executive branch, and provides a convenient diversion from the fact that the fabric of American society is coming apart at the seams.
While I firmly support Israel’s right to survive, I’m not convinced that Israel’s policies are wise. Israel will not have peace while they continue to occupy Palestinian territory, treat Palestinians as conquered subjects, and deprive Palestinians of the means to build an economy to support themselves. When you push someone’s back to the wall, they have no choice but to fight. There will be no lasting peace in the Middle East until the Palestinian people are allowed to function as an autonomous society. For their part, the Palestinians can’t expect to be left alone or given autonomy until they stop attacking Israelis. Awfully hard to tell who’s the chicken and who’s the egg in this situation. My take is there’s no good guys on either side. That doesn’t give me much optimism for the future. And in this scenario, it’s foolish to handcuff our policies and fortunes to Israel’s.
As another Northeastern Jew transplanted into the bagel-deficient, pastrami-challenged Northwest, I concur with your characterization of Lieberman. He is indeed “one of us”, because (too) many of us do perceive America through the prism of an idealized Israel.
For most of those alte kockers (in outlook, if not necessarily in age), that’s a harmless obsession. But Lieberman is in a position of power — chair of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, member of Armed Services, Environment and Public Works, and Small Business, and chief sycophant for a possible POTUS. In that position, such a fixation is beyond dangerous. Lieberman is really just a few steps short of being a foreign agent.
I mentioned an “idealized” Israel. The Israel of Joe’s youth, of my youth, was a far more admirable place than today’s. That it was led in those days by the Labour Party of Ben Gurion, Meir, Peres, Rabin, Eban, et al. was no accident. That today’s neocon and often-embarrassing Israel has been dominated by the likes of Begin, Sharon, Netanyahu, Sharansky, et al. is also no accident.
Joe Lieberman appears not to understand that Bebe Netanyahu isn’t the latest incarnation of David Ben Gurion, that Likud isn’t Mapai or Labour, that this Israel isn’t the one we were (over)sold in Hebrew School.
Palin the Vindictive Prick
The most disturbing thing about Sarah Palin is that she’s a vicious thug who personally retaliates against people for having honest differences of opinion with her. And she’s eagerly willing to use the authority of a public office to settle political or private scores.
Nowhere was this more evident than in her attempt, as mayor of Wasilli, to fire the town librarian for opposing Palin’s efforts to censor books in the public library.
But it also appears in a most disturbing fashion in her use of the governor’s office to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from his state job.
This is abuse of power in its rawest and most dangerous form. These are the actions of a dangerous bully who views politics as warfare and sees political opponents as enemies of the state to be crushed by extralegal means.
Two generations ago, the world paid a high price — 50 million human lives — to remove a group of such people from power.
It’s much cheaper not to give them power in the first place.
I wonder how many “anti-Zionist” types there are among Sarah Palin’s friends in the Alaskan Independence Party. There must be someone in that organization who has been quoted as blaming “the Jews” for everything.
17 “Joe Lieberman appears not to understand that Bebe Netanyahu isn’t the latest incarnation of David Ben Gurion, that Likud isn’t Mapai or Labour, that this Israel isn’t the one we were (over)sold in Hebrew School.”
Not to mention that that schmuck Nasser has been dead for decades. Isreal remains in a state of peril, but not exactly the same kind as it faced in 1967.
19 Richard, lately the Darbyite faction of the “Christian” right has pretty thoroughly adopted the concept of the Israelis serving as some sort of proxy warriers in the battle with “Gog” leading up to the End Times. Hal Linsey has blathered in recent years about how it would be in line with Biblical prophecy for Israel to gain control of “all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates” prior to Christ’s return to welcome his Chosen Few to Paradise (with or without those 37 virgins) and administer a righteous ass-whippin’ to the heathen.
Most of you know my name. This post is important so I put it out there where everyone can see it.
To me it is at odds with what being a Jew is, what being a Jew means for a Jew to be anything but a Democrat. Our people know first hand, as a group, what it means to be truly put upon, to be judged for what you were born and not who you are. Blacks, Indians, Muslims and many others who are “different” can easily relate to this plight.
In the political climate of this world there is no way that the United States would allow the security of Israel to be compromised. Israel has the finest intelligence in the world. I know first hand that we have benefited from this intelligence.
Senator Lieberman is, as Goldy described, like many old Jewish men who’s biggest fear is that the Israelis will be driven into the sea if we are not “RIGHT THERE” 24/7 to protect them.
What the good senator should know, better than the rest of us, is that times have changed. The Israelis have the ability to protect themselves for the 18 hours it would take our troops (Rangers are capable of being on the ground, fighting anywhere in the world in 18 hours or less) to get there from a dead stop, if our assistance is needed.
The truth is Lieberman is acting from a deep fear which was placed there by his parents. I don’t fault him for that, I fault him for lying and miss characterizing both McCain and Obama to forward his agenda.
His goal is admirable, his method is shameful.
his goal is to be on the board of blackwater
Dr Professor Steve:
The way you wrote your disagreeing argument against Lieberman.
I will try and call you tomorrow if I am not too busy.
Puddy
@15 ArtFrat
As a fan of Jimmy Carter I agree in part with you, but I also think you WAY underestimate the extent of the problem on the Palestinian side. No matter what tack Israel takes, short of exodus, the prospects for peace remain poor,
Tr these for size:
1. As proposed by Clinton to Arafat, the rump of a state would not have been viable. A non viable West Bank and Gaza, with greater access to weapons and people would be a disaster for Israel.
2. If, as you suggest, Israel is not viable, then one would hope Europe would step in provide an alternative .. perhaps a good part of Saxony.
3. The term apartheid is loaded. There is really no similarity in the histories leading to the current situations in SA and Israel.
@In SA, the Bantu and Zulu invaded AFTER the white man.
@The Afrikaners hogged all the good resources of SA, Israel basiually does not have any.
@At least officially, the intent of the apartheis movement was to create different states for different ethnic groups. That is (on paper) really no different than the proposal rejected by Hamas of two states.
Steve @ 5
I tell this story not as an indictment of Islam but to point out that in some ways Islam is more a political, albeit theopolitical, ideology, than a religion.
At the risk of opening a can of worms, allow me to point out that there is no small amount of parochialism in both that statement and in the historical account that you gave leading up to it. Not that I’m faulting you for it, but your understanding of that history is as colored by a broad Jewish ethos as a Muslim’s understanding of that same history is colored by Arab ethos. Each point of view has it’s own basis in a self-identification as some form of “chosen” people.
I point this out, because a failure to identify even small amounts of parochialism can lead us to misidentify the basic problem in Islam today, and, by extension, fail to recognize how that same basic problem manifests itself in other world views.
The governmental model established at Yathrib is not inherently oppressive of Jews or Christians. Indeed, a fair assessment of history shows that Islamic societies were far more tolerant of divergent views and believes than were any other contemporary civilizations, and there is no a-priori basis to believe that modern liberal (in the classic sense of the word, not the American political sense of the word) concepts cannot be incorporated into that model.
No, the basic problem with Islam isn’t the governmental model. Rather, the basic problem in Islam is fanaticism–an attitude that grows out of a very basic assumption that one possesses a unique grasp of, or avenue to, the Truth(TM).
In light of this, we can recast both Joe Lieberman’s actions and the actions of the neocons in the same light: they are as fanatical as are the Islamists they’re fighting, and there really can be only one outcome when fanatics do battle with other fanatics: chaos.
The question that’s left for the reader is, is McCain also animated by a similar form of fanaticism?
25 I think you and I may be in “violent agreement” here. I certainly don’t intend to underestimate the degree of animosity on either of the several sides in all this, nor the ability of any of those several factions to make a great deal of mischief. It’s taken over half a century to create this mess, and undoing it will be neither quick nor easy, but one way or another it will indeed be undone. Whether the result will be some kind of equitable peace in the region or some hideous sort of mutual genocide remains to be seen.
One thing that seems pretty clear is that right now they’re galloping full speed in the wrong direction.
The state of Israel probably doesn’t have the resources to support its people without a steady infusion of supplies and money from elsewhere. The “Palestinian territory” as it’s presently constituted can in no way function as a viable nation, and the Israelis clearly intend to keep it that way. It’s doubtful that Lebanon can in any reasonable way support its population either. So, ironically enough, in material terms they’re all fighting to the death over a few crumbs.
@26 Don Jo
May I recommend a great primer of the Quran ..No god but God by Reza Aslan?
He reviews the constitution of Medina very well and discusses its role in later history. His ideas about the west’s inability to understand the concept of Islamic democracy are very important.
As to my bias, that may be but what I wrote is pretty much the straight facts as agreed to by Muslim ans non Muslim scholars. There are disputes .. viz. about whether M.. had a right to expect support from the Jewish tribes, was he betrayed by them, etc. BUT, based on this a pattern was set that still operates and makes Arabia .. the home for Jews as long as it has been for Arabs, Judenrein. This is ethnic cleansing by word of God!
Where you and i really differ is on Islamo-fascism, not Islamo-fanatacism. I prefer the former term, despite the illogic of calling an islamic theocracy “fascist,” because Islamo-fanatacism is intended to create a sungle system of government, where only Muslims can rule, regulated, as it were, by Islamic Law.
There is nothing new in this. The single most expansive conquest of all time was that led by Umar as he led a tiny group of Arabs on a conquest that extended from Gibralter to Northern India and eventually all the way to the Phillipines. Lapu Lapu, the chief who killed Magellan was a Muslim!
Islamic conquest, however, was rarely, excpet to some extent under the Turks, united by the kind of central imperial court as ruled Rome, the Aztecs, or China. Rather it was a spread of Islamic Law itself, with the subjugation of all non Muslims. This IS the world the Islamo fascists or Islamo fanatics want restored, it IS the Islamic golden age and it IS the major issue in Israel where Hamas has said that Jews are welcome to live in a single state governed by Islamic law.
As for the various condominiums of Jews and Muslims, that has been an ip and down story. Andalus, Baghdad, Alexandria, and Jerusalem were at various times very good places for Jews to live .. as long as you understand and they did understand their status as dhimmi .. with no rights to serve in government, build new synagogues, intermarry (except by conversion) etc. True compared to such hell holes as Paris, post 1493 Iberia, and York, this was pretty good but it is also true that Jews in Rome and Venice had rather similar rights and these persisted over many years. Things were pretty good or even grate in Holland for the last 400 or so years.
OTOH, in both Muslim and Christian countries we never had full rights (until we came to Holland) and pogroms occured not only in Europe but in Andalus under the Muslims and .. esp. under the Turks where the entire myth that we eat blood started.
@18 Roger ..
great comment. There are no “nice” people with her kind of beliefs. Whatever I once believed, MCCain has joined a very bad club of America hating radicals.
And that, Goldy, rather than Lieberman’s support ofr the neocons or even Bebi Netanyahoo, is why I am ashamed of Medved, Lieberman, and the rest of their capo community.
@22 Grossman
Great and insightful post.
I would go you one further. The Medveds and Liebermans endanger BOTH Israel and American Jewery.
Israel needs long term survival and as Rabin taught, that can never by won by any military means. Israel’s military must be a means … somehow .. to foster peace. When these mumserem of Jews promote anti-arab feelings or the ethnic cleansing of Israel, they destroy the very reason the Zionists created Israel.
American Jewish children need to grow up thinking more like African American children .. more about their pride in who the Jews are then merely in ancient stories or current military events in Israel. How many Jews can name the Mississippi threw or explain what they did. Every year we win a amazing portion of all Nobels in Science, Peace, and Literature. Yet, how many kids here can name a Jewish author or scientist?
One of my good friends, Judah Folkman, because very famous to the point where there was an expose of his origins from a rabbinic family! As if it is somehow demeaning that a modern scientific scholar should be descended from a scholar of the Torah!
How many Jews, in their pride over the existance of Israel, know that as a proportion nof our size as a people, we gave more Jewish lives to die as soldiers in the war against the Nazis than any other ethnic group!
By endorsing McCain/Palin, Lieberman has dishonored a great American Jewish tradition. I do not think that Gompers, Alinsky or the Mississipi three will ever forgive him.
@27 ArtFart
Israel actually is economically quite viable except for it unbelievable defense budget. In fact, part of the stupidity of the whole thing is that Israel would like to and could serve as the nidus for a wonderful renaissance of its neighbors … if they were willing to accept us as their kin.
As for Palestine, I know you are quite wrong. There have been and even now are numerous efforts by Zionists to help build a Palestinian economy. When Sharon built the wall he discussed this, pointing out that the sad trade off was to deprive Palestinians of the economic opportunity Israel offered to them. He believed that such a dose of economic reality might bring the terrorist factions into disfavor. Sadly he was wrong, all the wall does is cut down the number of suicide bombers. Is there any alternative?
I think there is. Lets say the community of Palestinians and Jordanian/Palestinians numbers 6 millions. Then suppose that the powers thaat be committed money to subsidize that economy. How much would it cost to create peace? 10 billions? 60 billions. Given our history in Iraq that is chicken feed. Shit it wold be a worthwhile INVESTMENT for Europe, China, and the US even if all it did was to eliminate one excuse for more war war in the Indian Oceean.
Goldy’s sad. Lieberman came to his senses, and looking at that pic– Goldy longs for his hair (and youth) back. A tiny lil tear….
@32 Since your head is still intact you likely haven’t heard that Palin’s been outed as a lesbian. Oh, wait, no. It’s only reported that she had an affair.
You lose. A tiny lil tear…
@33 Palin is no Lesbian!
That is a terrible comment to make about this woman, after she made all those babies the old fashioned way?
Tsk tsk .. I am shocked (:)>
@34 “Tsk tsk ..”
I’ll really do promise that I’ll get around to feeling a measure of shame tomorrow. Meanwhile, tonight is must see TV! Even as she’s accepting the nomination they’ll be backstage, planning her exit from the race. They’ll find a better candidate, sure, but the damage is done.
Actually, since we are wallowing in bad taste, I have heard she plans to do a strip not so tease tonite and reveal that she is ….. an ……,
elephants are not the only mammal with anterior facing long, prehensile organs.
Other examples include ….
The men in black are having discussion about whetehr they or the moral squad should be ion hand for this evening’s event!
@36 Hmm, I knew something was wrong with her when I first set eyes on her. Something not quite natural, something not quite right at all.
Eric Alterman posts an interesting piece on Lieberman’s speech:
In my Nation post last week, “How to Cover the GOP,” I wondered if the media would obsess over every disagreement or sign of disunity in St. Paul, as they so enthusiastically did in Denver. (Jamison Foser notes a nice moment in his column where Jeffrey Toobin and Carl Bernstein explode on CNN’s Soledad O’Brien in Denver after she asked about the millionth variation of the Great Clinton Question: “Do you think it matters at all — anyone can jump in on this — that President Clinton will not stay for Barack Obama’s speech on Thursday?”)
Anyway, it’s obvious the media are suddenly tired of ferreting out intra-party insults and squabbling. The huge Ron Paul counter-convention, and McCain’s subsequent effort to keep Paul off the convention floor, just haven’t done it. So may I suggest another possibility?
Last night, Joe Lieberman gave a speech in support of John McCain. Lieberman was the Republican nominee’s choice for vice president as recently as 10 days ago, has been one of McCain’s most visible supporters on the campaign trail, bashed Obama during his speech, and is beloved by the national-security wing of the Republican party. But in his speech, Lieberman said this:
If John McCain was just another go-along partisan politician, he never would have taken on corrupt Republican lobbyists, or big corporations that were cheating the American people, or powerful colleagues in Congress who were wasting taxpayer money.
But he did!
If John McCain was just another go-along partisan politician, he never would have led the fight to fix our broken immigration system or to do something about global warming.
But he did!
Um, reading between the lines, didn’t Lieberman address the Republican convention — shortly after the sitting Republican president — and call the Republican Party a bunch of corrupt, cheating, tax-wasting do-nothings? That seems awful juicy to me. Reporters should ask other Republicans if they agree with Lieberman, and if not, if they still want him by McCain’s side this fall. They should also ask Lieberman to expand those critiques, and why, if he believes them, he is still supporting the Republican presidential ticket in November. (Also, by “taken on,” he means what exactly?)
@ 28
May I recommend a great primer of the Quran ..No god but God by Reza Aslan?
Thanks. I’ll keep an eye out for it.
As to my bias, that may be but what I wrote is pretty much the straight facts as agreed to by Muslim ans non Muslim scholars.
I’m not questioning your facts, but your characterization of them (“ethnic cleansing by word of God”) is certainly colored by your history. How is Yathrib any different from the way non-Hebrews were treated by the Israelites at, say, Moab?
Where you and i really differ is on Islamo-fascism, not Islamo-fanatacism.
I recall talking about fanaticism without the “Islamo-” prefix. Is there something about Islamic fanaticism that makes it distinctly different from any other form of fanaticism?
I prefer the former term, despite the illogic of calling an islamic theocracy “fascist,” because Islamo-fanatacism is intended to create a sungle system of government, where only Muslims can rule, regulated, as it were, by Islamic Law.
I appreciate that you recognize the illogic of using the term “fascist” in this context, but do you fail to see how your usage of the term and your justification of it makes my point for me?
Could an Arab Muslim ever actually ascend to a position of authority in present-day Israel?
@19. Richard Pope
Sure, there are certainly plenty of anti-Zionists in various Palin associated groups but they pale in comparison to the vile anti-semitic congregation that Obama attended for 20 years.
If you mean the stories in YOUR bible (the Jewish revelations end with the penetateuch) we know they are myths and, even then there was never a law sayng non Jews could not live in Judea or Israel.
As to my use of the word ethnic cleansing, what other term is there? M. expelled all Jews from Arabia.
Quite the contrary. There needs to be a term to describe the political and religious commitment of Wahabes, Muslim brotherhood, Irani Shia, hezbolah, Hamas, Nigerian Hausa, European fundamentalist muslims, Wahabes, and the Taliban to their shared concept of muslim rule.
Of course not all Saudis put on suicide vests or even contribute to ben Laden, but the movement is world wide and as intirinsic to Islam as Shabat is to Jewish law. If you read Aslan you may understand this better. He discusses the issue fomr the POV of the harm this doctrine does to efforts within Muslim states to foster western demoocracy.
What would be extreme would be if I were to paint all Muslims wiht one brush. That is wrong, bit all of Islam does have this problem to solve much as, on a less intense scale, the various segments of Christianity need to deal with the claim of the Bishop of Rome to have primary authority.
One place you might web surf to see this from a Muslim perspective is the press of India. India is the first non muslim country to be home to a large muslim population. There are efforts in india to adapt and modernize Islam to a multicultural society. I have also read of some effort in Australia. Sadly, Europe does not seem to foster this sort of thing.
Yes on two levels. First there are Muslims all the way up to cabinet rank, second the only element of Israeli law that does exclude Muslims is the requirement for universal military service .. an obviously difficult issue.
This does not say that Israel is perfect. Thsre are major issues with Muslim/arab rights ot buy property form the Jewish Afgency, memebrship o Histadrut (the very powerful union) was at one time restrcted, etc.
In comparison no Jew may hold office in Iran or Pakistan, with the exception od set aside seats in the parliament of Iran. Jews are not allowed to head their own schools in Iran. Things in secular Syria are bad too. Then there is Arabia .. we are not allowed to live there .. punkt.
I honestly think my stand is equal handed. Like Jimmy Carter I feel the terrible pain caused by the wall. I’m also very proud of my own Andalusian history and consider Halevy., a great rabbi of that era, on of my teachers.
That said, what is gained by ignoring the problems with Islam?
Thank God there is one Jew in American who hits the nail on the head.
Good for you, Goldy!
Preach it, brotha
“25. seattlejew spews:
@The Afrikaners hogged all the good resources of SA, Israel basiually does not have any.
@At least officially, the intent of the apartheis movement was to create different states for different ethnic groups. That is (on paper) really no different than the proposal rejected by Hamas of two states.”
Israel has been trying to ‘hog’ the water resources of that area for a while now.
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansu.....23020.html
Not sure what your last point is. Creating a Jewish state and constantly expanding its size via the ‘settler’ movement, demolishing Palestinian homes and olive groves, is exactly like the creation of separate and unequal bantustans that SA used to do.
Finally the notion of an all Israeli controlled Jerusalem seems to be a giant thorn in the side of any sort of peace process.
Steve @ 42
If you mean the stories in YOUR bible
First of all, you know that I’m not a Christian. Capitalizing “YOUR” in this context personalizes this discussion in a way that’s both false and unnecessary.
Secondly, I was referring specifically to events that occurred before the conquest of Canaan recounted in Joshua. Do you subscribe to the post-hoc myths that erase any notion of war and fighting between the Israelites and other groups? Do you deny that the Israelites had very different attitudes towards various descendants of Abraham than they had towards other peoples?
Thirdly, the very foundation of Jewish identity is the notion of having a unique covenant with God.
even then there was never a law sayng non Jews could not live in Judea or Israel
Neither is there a Quranic law against Jews living in Saudi Arabia. There’s a dictator’s edict, but there are a number of Islamic scholars who claim that such laws go against the Quran.
There needs to be a term to describe the political and religious commitment of Wahabes, Muslim brotherhood, Irani Shia, hezbolah, Hamas, Nigerian Hausa, European fundamentalist muslims, Wahabes, and the Taliban to their shared concept of muslim rule.
Why? If you focus that much attention and energy on the symptoms, don’t you run the danger of failing to recognize the cause?
First there are Muslims all the way up to cabinet rank, second the only element of Israeli law that does exclude Muslims is the requirement for universal military service .. an obviously difficult issue.
There is a Muslim in the Israeli cabinet. For more than a year, he had no portfolio whatsoever. Last March, he was given the portfolio of “culture and sport” where his “authority” largely consists of making pronouncements on whether or not Israeli athletes should observe various moments of silence.
Take a walk through Haifa’s Wadi Nisnas, and then tell me that Arabs aren’t second-class citizens-in Haifa where the relationship between Arabs and Jews has always been, and remains, more congenial than any where else in Israel. That disparity has little to do with whether or not Arabs are allowed to serve in the military.
I honestly think my stand is equal handed.
I’m sure you do. On the other hand, there really is very little chance that it could possibly be even-handed. It’s simply too colored by who you are, your history and your ethos. This is the sociological version of Schroedinger’s cat.
Goldy–
Wow, you have lost a lot of hair since then.
Blogging==Hair Loss.
Perhaps you ought to start a Bosley Franchise.
45. Don Joe spews:
Sorry, hoiw was I to know that?
But, the case remains. The Christian/European defnition of the Bibole and the Jewish defnition are utterly different.
You may have me here. what event do yo mean?? But beyonds that, you are still talking about something mythical and even then with none of the properties of ethnic cleansing and permanent condemnation of another people.
I think you are really taking a Christan view. Even for Orthodoc Jews, these stories are interpreted as long ago history and not as evidence for some law the Deity wants.
I am not a follower of the 613 Jewish laws, Hallakah, but those laws have no equivalent for the concepts in Sharia, Islamic Law for things like exterminating an enemy, dhimmihood, and rule of Jews over others.
Yes and that covenant is interpreted totally dfferently in Judaism than in Christianity. Chrsitinaity see it as part of their idea of being selected for rewards, for special privilege or salvation. Judaism describes the covenant as an obligation. The teaching is that a good non Jew, following only the 7 laws for non Jews (a version of the ten commandments) MUST be more holy than any Jew since the burden of 613 mitzvot is so high.
The “dictator” you refer to was M. and the first three caliphs. The laws are in Sharia. If you want t trade cites show me yours and I will show you mine.
Why? Because the problme is wrious and wide spread. Islamo-fascism is a threat not only to Jews and the West, it is a threat in China, Russia, India, Indonesia, Egypt, etc. Have you read about the probemes in Nigeria?
Again, read Aslan. I thinkl you will like him. He says that Islam is in trouble because of the confluence of islamic fundametalism and the socio-economics of a post colonial society. I agree and would point out that very similar issues gave rise to the Nazis and Stalin.
I do not disagree. I was simply responding to YOUR question. There are also Muslim officials at lower levels who do have more authority. Moreovfer, I cited a number of very real, specific issues facing Muslims … Histadrut, the National Fund, the role of military service in getting civilian jobs,etc.
I do think that is a balanced view. FWIW I have
“Taken a walk through Haifa’s Wadi Nisnas,” and visited with Palestinian friends both within Israel and on shared ground in Jerusalem. Like most liberal jews, and the great majority of all Jews, know all to well that “Arabs are(-) second-class citizens-in Haifa.” It sia real problme and many of us want to solve it, even under the horrid circumstances in place now. As onbe example you might look at Gan Havivah.
Sorry, but you are dead wrong. Military service is amjor crioterion for employment in Israel and the old boy effect of having served in elite groups is well known. A son of a friend f mine fought hard to get admitted to the Golani Brigade, partly fporm patriotism but also for the jobs it leads to later.
You must understand Schoedinger better than I do. Obviously ALL of us reason within an envelop defined by or experiences. I think that is a huge part of the existentialist debates of the 20th century.
BUT, I do work very hard to have an open mind. I aslo read very widely.
I think this vein is getting shallow. If you want to continue, I can create a thread over at SJ.
@44 kirk
There is no doubt that the water is an issue .. though you might be aware that ultimately the water is controlled by Syria.
As I said, although I know the intent is quite different, the effects of the wall are very much like those of Apartheid. One huge difference is that there is no equivalent of Jordan in SA.
In some ways we are making the same point. As it is comprised today, even with no territorial changes, the bits of land proposed as Palestine are nt viable unless Palestine is told to a larger viable economy.
As for Jerusalem, the great bulk of jews .. far more than a majority, have already agreed t some form of condominium. The issues are tw: 1.Hamas wants sole control. 2. Even now Jews are not allowed to visit our holy places. 3. The EAST side was Jewish before 48, that is now trhe “Arab” side. This creates a problem because the suburbs are largely Jewish too. Few Jews see this as an insoluble part of the problem.
Steve @ 47
First, yes, this discussion is getting a bit shallow, so I’ll simply clarify a few points and leave it at that.
Sorry, hoiw was I to know that?
Because I’ve pointed that I am not Christian to you in other discussions we’ve had here.
You may have me here. what event do yo mean?? But beyonds that, you are still talking about something mythical and even then with none of the properties of ethnic cleansing and permanent condemnation of another people.
I was specifically referring to the passage through various cities and territories at the end of the Exodus narrative, though the point I’m making doesn’t rely on historical details. Rather, the point has to do with the attitude expressed in that narrative with respect to a given tribe’s relationship with Abraham. It was permissible to wage war against some tribes, and not against others. The entire narrative strikes me as having a number of parallels to the story of Yathrib.
Yes and that covenant is interpreted totally dfferently in Judaism than in Christianity.
True, but the different interpretations of that covenant aren’t germane to the point I’m making. What is germane is the extent to which that covenant leads to an attitude of uniqueness. The Abrahamic covenant does play a central role in Jewish identity, does it not?
The “dictator” you refer to was M. and the first three caliphs. The laws are in Sharia. If you want t trade cites show me yours and I will show you mine.
You may have to show me your references, because my understanding of the Constitution of Medina is that the behavior of certain tribes (the Banu Nadir in particular) would result in the expulsion of those tribes and annulment of the provisions of the Constitution with respect to that tribe. This did not extend to all Jews merely by virtue of their being Jews. That’s why I thought “ethnic cleansing” was a bit strong of a phrase for what happened at Yathrib.
Because the problme is wrious and wide spread. Islamo-fascism is a threat not only to Jews and the West, it is a threat in China, Russia, India, Indonesia, Egypt, etc. Have you read about the probemes in Nigeria?
I’m not sure that answers the question. The breadth of the threat, the variety of people threatened, doesn’t change the fundamental causes of the threat. Address the fanaticism, and the threat dissolves. Talking about Islamo-fascism, while it might raise alarms, obscures the fanaticism that lies at the core of the problem.
If fascism is the flame, then fanaticism is the oxygen that fuels it. No matter how wide-spread the flame, you can’t put it out merely by noting the spread of the conflagration.
You must understand Schoedinger better than I do.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. I just think there’s a measurement problem any time one of us attempts to assess the balance of our own views.
About the most civilized discussion I have seen on a contentious issue in a blog. Congratulations or thank you.
I think where we differ is that I see Islamo-fascism as a political rather than a religious movement. Khomeini did not succeed in his revolution because the Iranian people were thirsting for more chador and less rock. He succeeded because he offered them a political alternative, indeed a divine political alternative, to the Shah’s dictatorship and the implicit national disgrace of being seen as America’s toadies.
I also think you issue here maybe with the conflation opf two terms that have different connotations. Fascism has a very negative connotation. While not all fascist states were racist and classist, the term has come to be equated with those states that were .. Germany and the USSR. Islam, on the other hand, has a religious and historical connotation that, other than European bigotry, really ought not to have any negative connotation.
Is that your issue?
But what happens when fascism arises under the banner ofv something else that is powerful?
That said, and whatever one calls it, there is very wide spread fascist movement built on the concept of divine authority. If you think that is NOT dangeorus, consider what the US would be like if the Sarah Palin’s of this world came to power .. combining the divine authority of Dobson with the powers of the Presidency? Even a 30% support for such a government would be scary (about what Hitker started with).
What would you call that? Christo-supremacy? I suggest the most apt term would be Christo-fascism … aka Franko-ism.
***********************************
In my opinion, the best way to deal with this is by replacing the current half with with a very bright and balanced man (Obama). I then hope, he will use his chair to defuse the racial and bigoted aspect of this while committing the US to a world wide movement of support for an alternative that respects Islam while denying fascism.
What might such a movement be called:
Islamo-democracy?
Think about that term esp in relationship to the various Christian parties of Europe. Think of a movement that incorporates the liberal Muslims of India, Australia, and Indonesia!
For outsiders to lead such an effort is not easy. There is, however, a startling precedent. Sun Yat Sen was an agent of Americans promoting the then view of democracy for China. He is revered today. There are other examples, some of what might have been … at one time I believe we could have “turned” Allende, Castro, and Ho-Chi-Minh to OUR side if we had not been such idiots about conflating American capitalism with democracy.
Imagine how different the world might be today if Truman had supported Ho Chi MInh’s effort to overthrow France, we had backed Allende and Castro, etc.?
BTW, the offer to continue at SJ was menat out of a guess that there may be a lot more to discuss but .. that most of that does not belong here.
On one specific topic, I am very aware that some modern scholars claim that M. did not condemn all Jews and that all Muslims accept the Quranic view that M. was betrayed. That si why I presented the Yathrib story as what we know rather than the story many scholars belive which is muchg more judgmental. For example, it is believed that M killed or enslaved the entire tribes.