It’s always worth mentioning — and bears repeating — that The Nation magazine’s chief national security reporter, Robert Dreyfuss, was the former Middle East Editor of Executive Intelligence Review, the newspaper of fringe-movement leader and convicted tax felon Lyndon LaRouche. Now, youthful political dalliances should not prevent one from being taken seriously in the court of public opinion. But what makes Dreyfuss’s history relevant is that his contemporary writings are indistinguishable from the sort of bile you’d find in a LaRouchite tract.
Anyway, Dreyfuss sinks to a new low in the current issue of The Nation. There’s nothing wrong with using the phrase “Israel Lobby” to describe the constellation of organizations (all supported by American citizens, something that can’t be said of the Lobby whose pecuniary courtesies got Chas Freeman into so much trouble) committed to supporting strong U.S.-Israel ties. But use of “Zionist Lobby” is the sort of terminology that one finds only in the precincts of the isolationist Right, the Arab press and, apparently, within the pages of The Nation magazine. “The Zionist lobby roared–and President Obama blinked,” Dreyfuss writes. In certain circles — the ones Dreyfuss travels in — “Zionist” is a slur, an insult, not a term of pride. Stripped of its ulterior meanings, “Zionist Lobby” is such an imprecise term that it naturally includes the sorts of peacenik groups that The Nation loves (hey, even J Street claims to be Zionist).
Are we to believe that these groups are implicated in Dreyfuss’s attack? Dreyfuss is dog-whistling to his conspiratorial followers who believe Zionism itself to be a crime, and to Jews on the soft-left who are willing to believe that what he really means by “Zionist Lobby” is the collective influence of right-wing Jewish organizations or AIPAC. But given Dreyfuss’s history in the LaRouche movement there’s little question about what he’s doing. He’s consciously using the phrase as a slur.
The Nation wasn’t always this way. For more on the magazine’s history in regard to Zionism, be sure to read Ron and Allis Radosh’s excellent piece from last summer’s World Affairs Journal.
Jennifer, thanks for providing us with the Silver quote about Larry Kudlow. It’s great. When I read about Kudlow being a candidate, oddly enough, I think of Jack Kemp who, on the national level, was an atrocious candidate. Kemp would talk excitedly and non stop about supply-side features, throwing in the names of obscure economists, political scientists, philosophers and theologians as he went along. To be sure, his football background gave him a much different feel than Kudlow’s establishment type persona and professional career do, but both are such true believers and deliverers of their intellectual positions that ideas, not personalities, paranoia, and class warfare, are their motivations.
It’s one thing to spout the Arab line when you’re doing it for the money, because you’re a prostitute. At least prostitution has a certain cachet about it.
But from Freeman’s errant Parthian shot, it looks like Freeman is REALLY disappointed he didn’t get the opportunity to put the screws to the Jews. It’s difficult not to think he was so weak in character and intellect that he actually INTERNALIZED the Arab line. A prostitute hawks herself, but usually still retains some sense of self, some notion of boundry. Freeman completely lost any notion of proper boundary, of perspective, and instead, Stockholm syndrome like, truly espoused himself to the Arab line.
Amazing.
And just as amazing, we get his son ranting about his old man. The father’s words both indict and convict. Full context doesn’t exonerate, only further damns.
Larry Kudlow might well be the best dressed man on TV. He is at least among them.
The One has been universally praised for his style and while in this case the hype has not exceeded the reality to the same extent as that showered on the “effectivness” of his transition or the plausibility of his economic theories, it has been quite absurd. All the magazine covers and praise even from conservative who eviscerate him on policy grounds and or what? The same reasonably well fitting but by no means notably, much less distinguised suit, and 2 or 3 pretty nice but unexceptional ties. The same boring white shirt, no trace of intersting shirt/suit/tie color combinations and no cuff links.
To be fair, he himself has downplayed the stylishness of his wardrobe and in this respect has shown a soundness of judgement quite entirele absent from virtuall all of his policies and many personal selections.
This feels like a slight turning point to me. Obama and Rahm E. love a crisis. It provides the perfect cover to mainstream their fringe associates. However, they miscalculated the loyalty of writers such a Marty Peretz. If it was up to the NY Times to bring transparency to politics, well, Freeman would have cruised in.
I hope this story is covered properly now in the MSM. It seems they never learned from the John Edwards story. For 6 weeks in to his administration Obama has certainly created a notable list
1. attack Rush Limbaugh
2. mainstream Freeman
3. 25 DVDs to Brown
4. socialism stimulus
5. nation of cowards
6. Geithner’s tax and staff probs
Buyer’s remorse is around the corner. I really can’t celebrate that. I voted for McCain, but at least I thought Obama may govern from the center and his advisers would provide competent work. But, using every crisis to advance a radical left agenda from Day 1? I thought he would wait 8 months for that.
There was never good reason to think Obama would govern from the center. His ideology was clearly of the readical left and would simply not allow for that. There was some reason to hope, especially in light of some of his appointments, that his pragamatic interest in a stronger economy and re-election might restrain his ideological predelictions. Obviously and yes, from Day 1, this has not been the case. This is not to say he won’t get a second term. There are far too many built in advantages and the likelyhood of an effective Republican candidate is boviously small. Still, his policies will ensure a very sluggish economy and the opportunity to defeat him will be there.
It should be said that on foreign affairs he has been only slightly worse that might have been hoped. This, however, can be accounted for by his lack of complete lack of interest in the subjects and desire to stay out of trouble in this area so as to more effectively focus on his radical domestic agenda.
Cavalier, I agree. The initial appointments surprised me, and I thought I might have judged Obama too soon. Perhaps he tailored himself to the far left to win the primaries, and would now tailor himself to centrist America to win our love.
However, it became very clear that he truly thinks he is the Messiah, extending his Messianic reach through the American federal government. Every extension of the One will bring joy and equality. Every program will “heal” something. Every friend of America will be downgraded to just any other country and “fairness” will spread through the world and country.
I would be so happy if Obama would change direction now. I hope.
Leave it to an American President and Congress to have a crisis and go off on a preemptive unilateral course of action …
@5 I disagree. Obama was easily construed as a narcissistic cipher who went along to get along in furtherance of his own ego. He really didn’t let the mask slip very often, Joe the Plumber being the prime example. His adeptness at throwing longtime associates under the bus actually gave hope that he might jettison his ideological baggage in hope of being a successful two term president. It is disingenuous given the above to argue that there was never good reason.
As to the Republicans, where was Barack Obama on the presidential radar three years ago? A lot can happen in a short period of time. Right now it looks bleak but that is in part because Obama is still fooling most of the people. His agenda certainly isn’t going to help the economy so who knows what is going to happen when it doesn’t get better. Likewise, he has managed to miss a slam dunk or two in several foreign policy areas already. He hasn’t had the chance to screw up a crisis yet. The media will necessarily need to stop being his marketing arm after that stops selling papers. And there is nothing more vicious then the media backlash against a “celebrity” who falls from grace — or at least so we can hope.
you missed this Politico story, on how you can’t take anything Peter Wehner writes at face value, because he always has an agenda: to rehabilitate George W Bush. Good luck with that.
“The Bush defense forces include Fleischer; former press secretary Dana Perino; Bush political czar Karl Rove, who has contracts with Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and Newsweek; economics guru Tony Fratto; the prolific Peter Wehner, former director of the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives; and the graceful speechwriter Michael Gerson, who writes an opinion column for The Washington Post.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19861.html
You also missed this, from Rasmussen:
“Democrats have managed to move slightly further ahead this week in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.
“The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 42% of voters said they would vote for their district’s Democratic candidate while 38% said they would choose the Republican”
I seem to recall you made a big deal of this poll when Republicans closed the gap to 1. Wonder why you couldn’t seal the deal?
And look at this from Gallup: Approval of Congress is at a four-year high and climbing! I guess America loves Nancy Pelosi (and Harry Reid).
“Approval of Congress Hits Four-Year High, Fueled by Dems
by Jeffrey M. Jones
“PRINCETON, NJ — Americans’ job approval rating of Congress is up an additional 8 points this month, after a 12-point increase last month, and now stands at 39% — the most positive assessment of Congress since February 2005.”
When I think about the card check non-sense and Hoffa’s “what’s so democratic about the secret ballot?” screed, my mind flashes back to when Saddam took over in Iraq. As seen in the video recordings, Saddam chaired a very public large meeting of the (then) government officials. If they disagreed with him, they were escorted out of the meeting and shot.
Here’s another story Contentions missed: Sarah Palin is stinking up Alaska. Her two biggest priorities for the state are DOA, largely because of her own sloth. Talk about incompetent leadership. Maybe if she weren’t so busy with her SarahPAC? Anchorage Daily News:
“JUNEAU — Gov. Sarah Palin’s biggest initiatives for this legislative session appear dead on arrival, at least for this year.
“Top lawmakers said Tuesday they aren’t likely to pass the governor’s bills dealing with an in-state natural gas pipeline and consolidating the six Railbelt utilities to pursue mega-projects like the Susitna River dam.
“They are very big issues. I personally do not believe we will complete those before the end of the session,” said Senate President Gary Stevens, a Republican from Kodiak.
“Lawmakers from both parties say Palin introduced the bills too late — about halfway through the 90-day session of the Legislature.”
@8
Barry’s associations (“community organizing”, Wright, Ayers, Khalidi, etc) offered overwhelming evidence of what he WANTED to do. Some say that he needed to take that path to rise in Chicago politics but I don’t buy. As the first African-American President of the Harvard Law Review he was guaranteed a big political future if he wanted one and much more leaway to select a place on the ideological spectrum than almost anyone elese and he knew it. No, he chose to associate with those people. His language and manner certainly belied t but there was much better reason to take the evidence of his actions over his words.
The fact that he so willingly jettisoned some of those associations and the appointment of people like Summers and Roemer led one to allow for the possibility that he was sufficiently pragmatic to consider economic reality, his own electoral interests and perhaps actually take account of the thinking of such advisors. Guess not.
To be sure his current popularity won’t last but the media has too much invested in him ideologically and when there is a real Republican opponent there’s not much doubt whose side they’ll be on. You are correct that we don’t know who will emerge but its worth noting that even Reagan got only 50% of the vote, was aided by Anderson and even then needed a great debate performance to pull away. The money must still be on Obama in 2012 but his policies will certainly create an opportunity for one who is capable of taking it.
#9
—————-
you missed this Politico story, on how you can’t take anything Peter Wehner writes at face value, because he always has an agenda: to rehabilitate George W Bush
—————-
Gee, anybody that doesn’t keep up the utopian Bush obsession has no credibility?
#13
—————-
Sarah Palin is stinking up Alaska. Her two biggest priorities for the state are DOA, largely because of her own sloth. Talk about incompetent leadership.
—————-
A state senator doesn’t think it will get done this session, because, unlike the U.S. Congress, the Alaskans want to consider and deliberate before enaction. This is “stinking up Alaska”? It’s pretty obvious that reading comprehension isn’t one of your strong points. Maybe you should stick to playing with Legos and let the adults talk politics.
Wow, David’s morning email blast from Axelrot was full of goodies, wasn’t it? David, after you finish your homework, do share more nuggets from the Dep’t of Agitprop.
Someone should tell Ruth Marcus that the problem is not that Obama is governing as a Leftie, the problem is that he’s governing as a moron.
The red, white and blue cheerleader outfit with the big “O” on the front is cute as the dickens but Ruth Marcus just doesn’t have the legs for that short skirt anymore.
A Harvard MBA wonders about the Harvard MBA:
“Given the present chaos, should-n’t we be asking if business education is not just a waste of time, but actually damaging to our economic health?
If doctors or lawyers wreaked such havoc in their own professions, we would certainly reconsider what is being taught at medical and law schools”
The whole article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5821706.ece