On New Year’s Eve, with Republicans and Democrats negotiating an eleventh-hour deal to avert the so-called fiscal cliff, President Obama did something strange. He called a press conference, styled as a campaign event, to mock and taunt the Republicans whose votes were still needed on the legislation. Conservatives weren’t happy, and noted that this behavior would not exactly encourage the GOP to vote for the bill. But liberals in the press openly sneered at this concept. Would Republicans really act against their better judgment because Obama was mean to them?
No, they would not. Yet strangely liberals in the press are now taking the other side of that argument. Joshua Hersh reports today that, in retaliation for criticizing Chuck Hagel on Israel and Iran, the new defense secretary may hold a grudge and seek revenge on Israel and those opposed to the Iranian nuclear weapons program:
Indeed, in the days following his confirmation, Hagel has to return to Capitol Hill to help hash out a deal on a budget sequester that would impose massive cuts across the board to the Pentagon. Then he will negotiate with lawmakers over a more restrained budget trim that could affect military spending and jobs in states represented by his chief opponents on the Hill.
All the while, the issues that were elevated above all others by his chief antagonists — the ones that drove the most vociferous and inventive opposition to his confirmation — will sit firmly in the forefront of his docket: the military’s relationship with Israel, and America’s belligerence toward Iran….
An alternative view is that the fight only diluted the hardline pro-Israel position on military aid and Iran by making it partisan, and that Hagel, having won, now feels empowered by the hardliners’ failure to stop him.
This, of course, turns the argument in Hagel’s favor on its head. Those backing Hagel couldn’t seriously argue that he is competent or well-versed in the facts–after all, Hagel himself admitted he wasn’t knowledgeable and pledged to try his best not to let his stunning incompetence get in the way of those actually making policy. The best they could do was argue Hagel’s views wouldn’t matter.
That, however, was nothing compared to J Street’s response, expressed by Dylan Williams to Hersh. The J Street position is that pro-Israel voices should quiet down and realize just how… uncool it is to be pro-Israel:
“Celebrating this as a wedge issue is about the worst possible outcome from the point of view of the vast majority of the pro-Israel community,” said Dylan Williams, the director of government affairs for J Street, a liberal pro-Israel group that supported Hagel’s nomination. “When you have SNL, the Daily Show, Colbert mocking the extent to which conservative members of Congress were falling over themselves to demonstrate the most hawkish positions on Israel, that’s something that the true pro-Israel community does not appreciate, and which we have every reason to believe the government of Israel itself does not appreciate.”
I’m sure Williams is right that the government of Israel doesn’t appreciate being mocked by America’s liberal popular culture. But is Jon Stewart really the best barometer on this? Here’s Stewart interviewing David Gregory in 2009, and objecting to the fact that Gregory brings no one on his show to defend Hamas:
Stewart: This always surprises me. Why can’t any American politician criticize Israel in any way for their behavior? I’m watching these shows, and there’s not one person going “Jeez, it’s kind of complex. Yeah, Hamas is a bad actor, they shouldn’t be throwing missiles, but gosh, you know, the treatment of the Palestinian people for the past 50 years, not so nice either.” (Wild applause.) It just seems like it’s a more complicated situation than is portrayed.
Gregory: Well, but it’s complicated in terms of the whole situation, remains complicated. In this particular instance, there’s very little love for Hamas–not in America, not in Arab capitals, Abu Mazen, who leads Fatah on the West Bank, has criticized Hamas. There isn’t a lot of admiration for Hamas’s tactics, or even their strategic vision.
And we can all be happy for that, I think, since Hamas’s tactics are terroristic and their strategic vision is genocide. Does Williams really think that the government of Israel watches programs like that and thinks for a second that pro-Israel Republicans are the problem? Is the lack of moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas a bad thing? Because in Jon Stewart’s opinion, it is.
What’s really going on here? It can’t really be that Williams longs for the day when Hamas gets equal American airtime. And the left can’t really believe that Hagel is a true friend of Israel but will seek to punish the Jewish state as defense secretary because he didn’t like the way Ted Cruz spoke to him one time. The more likely answer is that liberals are suddenly worried that Hagel’s critics were right all along.
"…Ashamed Jews such as Jon Stewart, or, as he was formerly known as, Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz." n nYes, Stewart goes to great lengths to hide his Jewishness.
"Yes, Stewart goes to great lengths to hide his Jewishness." n nyeah, he's very proud of being Jewish. the name change from Lieberman to Stewart should prove that. n nHillel…I've long stopped asking what is wrong with you, because you probably aren't self-aware enough to answer. but…sometimes–even just once–maybe try THINKING before you comment?
Stewart is an 0bama boot licker.
Tuchus.
I just reread Liebowitz ( Stewart) on Hamas v. Israel, above. n nUnbelievable what a schmuck he is. Is it any wonder they booed Israel at the DNC? n nJon Stewart told them, basically, that's it's OK to do so. n nHis bubbe would be so proud.
That "Jewishness" to which lumiere1 alludes is the sort that announces itself in those letters to the NYT lambasting Israel that start, "As a Jew…" Indeed so well-recognized is that formulation, it is commonly, and mockingly, shorthanded as "AAJ." n nAnd it should be "ASHamed (not "Ashamed") Jews" because that is how Howard Jacobsonso devastingly portrayed the type in his Booker Prize winning The Finkler Question. spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=7444
doc, I've often wondered about that. Finkler suggested changing Ashamed to ASHamed, and the group embraced his idea with gusto. What difference did they see between the two names? I feel like I'm missing something.
Ah, you got me there. The truth of the matter is that I started the book but gave up after 25 pages or so because it was slow going, no Portnoy's Complaint. I did skip about some, though, and do recall that there was that division among those English AAJs, people who identified as Jews for the sole purpose of excoriating Israel, over whether to march under the banner of "Ashamed Jews" or "ASHamed Jews." Whichever it was, the satiric point was clear enough, and it is unlikely that you are missing it. (Did you look at that review of the book by the estimable Edward Alexander published by Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, an estimable group?) n nI probably should return to finish the book. I'm told that the letter his wife (or ex-wife?) wrote to Finkler was a not-to-be-missed gem.
Yes, his wife's (not ex-wife's) letter was a gem. She died before the book started, and he first sees the letter some months after her death. She lambasts him but good over his attitude about Jews and Israel, and it's all the more poignant because she converted in order to marry him.
Maybe Stewart goes to great lengths to prove he is a different kind of Jew; not one of those obnoxious Zionists.
Jon Stewart and Chuck Hagel were never going to act or speak any differently no what anyone else said. So it's not relevant taking their complaints into consideration.
Obama sets all foreign and military policy. Note all the fired generals (unprecedented) in his first term. Hagel is nothing, and can not do anything with out the word from Barry.
HAGEL TURNED US ARM FORCES AGAINST REPUBLICAN CAMP WHO WANTED MCCAIN FOR PENTAGON nMY CONGRATULATIONS GOES TO ISRAEL, THEIR LOVE ONES IN DC DONUTHOLE AND WHOEVER OWES ZIONISTS BANKSTERS MONEY OR BRIBE SUSPECT. HAGEL CLOTURE PASSES 71-27; FINAL VOTE: The Senate voted to confirm former Sen. Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, replacing Leon Panetta to win a 58-41 vote Republicans Finally End Their Filibuster of Chuck Hagel. That’s makes sense now to me. Nirupama Rao hangover influenced by DC Israelifirsters who probably promised her Chamcha Husband and her entire family E-2 visas [whenever made unemployable] if she’s ever uses Indian stance to put Hagel vote to death. Hagel remarks ain’t unearthed Monday by Washington Free Beacon Israelifirsters. Hagel speech at Oklahoma's Cameron University is GoogledJunk for some time since 2011. Where’s the Indian Ambassador all these years? Nirupama Rao fast asleep for past 2 years. If Nirupama Rao took her 2 years to Google Hagel Speech – How would India sport Afghan Politics to rile Pakistan by Rao-Type at the helm in Delhi – Unless Pakistan exploiting Delhi superiority-complex to drain Indian treasury in stockpiling on arms for a war that both ain’t dare. Wow! Jonathan. I am waiting for this unforgettable moment of Truth. Chuck Hagel will be confirmed as Secretary of Defense when Senate reconvenes. Republicans abandoned delaying nomination. Stalwart friends of Israel Democrats closed ranks behind President Obama’s choice. Chuck Hagel ain’t ridiculed for his incompetent performance during confirmation hearing and troubling stands on Israel, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah will be running Pentagon. As Orwell coined contradictory beliefs of hypocrisy and neutrality Pete the doublethinker wrote earlier today, having a “dim-witted” Secretary of Defense who isn’t up to task of helping to set policy is bad for National Security. Quit babooning ‘National Security’ ain’t child-play. You and Pete knew that you ain’t winning this battle but both of you continued promising your conscious of a victories that ain’t there. Give me in the seven thousands years of Jewish history one metaphor that begins with ‘Once upon a time……and ends…..and they lived happily ever after’. I feel sorry for both of you. n
Back on your meds, please.
lolol n n
"…President Obama did something strange." n nIt's only "strange" if you persist in imagining Barack Obama doesn't know exactly what he's doing! You, Mr. Mandel, along with 99% of journalists, still believe that the president wants the economy to strengthen, that he wants compromise in the Congress, and that he hopes more Americans go back to work, etc. But the exact opposite is true. How do I know? Because the only other explanation for Obama's actions over the last four years would lead one to conclude that he's an idiot! And he is anything but an idiot. n nYes, it is "strange" that a president would do everything he can to upset and stymie the nation's political system and its economy. But "strange" how? From the perspective of history, to be sure! Obama is a president who is committed to collapsing this nation, then rebuilding it to suit his ideas of "redistribution" and "social justice." That's what Marxist politicians do. Is it bizarre to call an American president a "Marxist?" Yes. Unless he is one. n n You and others can keep denying the truth as long as you must. Only please stop doing it. You, Tobin and the other writers at Commentary for some reason cannot bring yourselves to say the unthinkable: that Barack Obama is exactly who you suspect he is, but are too cautious to state openly. But this is having a very bad effect on readers, who are asking for insights and—God forbid—clarity. Instead you folks keep circling your wagons, defending yourselves against—the truth about Barack Obama. Why don't you just blurt it out for once? Get it over with? "America, we have a serious problem on our hands. Our president is the first in our history who doesn't much like the nation and people he was elected to lead." There! Not hard, is it? So what's stopping you? n nBarack Obama will do whatever it takes to push this country over the edge, so he can remake it, transform it, re-imagine it. No more Washington, Adams, Madison, Hamilton, Franklin et al. From here on it will be a "new America," courtesy of Barack Obama and his co-conspirators on the far-Left, the bloodless, ruthless technocrats like Kathleen Sibelius and Shaun Donovan, and above all Michelle Obama and Valery Jarrett—both unabashed and highly disciplined soldiers for the president. Then there is Joe Biden, the most dangerous of all, with his seemingly jovial malaproprisms that hide a dark, take-no-prisoners temperament and intent. n nThis is not a normal administration in historical terms. It is a "strange" administration. We've never had anything like this before. Hopefully, and if we're lucky, we'll never have another one. For, of such men and women as these were all the monstrous regimes in history made. We just always assumed "it could never happen here." We were wrong. Dead wrong. n nFigure it out, Mr. Mandel. Please.
No, Americans never had anything like this before, but are too stupid and uneducated to know where this leads to. People who have imigrated from the Eastern Block, Cuba, or any other communist country, are only too familiar with it and they see the signs.
Whoa. That pretty much lays it out pretty clearly. n nNo pundit will say it, though, for the same reason they won't admit the 'palestinians' are genocidal monsters who want to dance on the graves of the ALL the Jews ALL over Israel. n nSome truths are just too toxic for pundit careers. n n
Putting aside all the rhetoric and partisan sniping, my sense is that the Hagel confirmation will convince Iran that the US will not attack their nuclear installations militarily and probably won't give Israel a green light to do so. Thus Iran will be emboldened to move ahead on their nuclear plans. n nIsrael will clearly understand this and may feel compelled to attack the Iranian nuclear facilities before their own red line is crossed.
In fact the treatment of Arabs by the Jews was very nice. See, e.g. Karsh, "What Occupation" that lists the many benefits from Jewish administration from 1967 to Oslo. These include advances in income, per capita GDP, literacy, life expectancy, increases in the number of houses with running water, electricity and natural gas, 0 colleges in the so called "occupied area" before 1967, 7 colleges after 1967, etc. Instead of a Nabka it was a mitzvah. See: "Narrative of Perpetual Palestinian Victimhood" by Shelby Steele in the Gatestone archive on the internet and google the internet for the counter narrative called "The Palestinian Narrative" by Salomon Benzimra. nSteele says that the narrative is "a 'poetic truth' that can't be dented by facts, logic or reason." n nFrom the very beginning in 1890 the Jews benefitted the Arabs by draining the swamps and ridding the land of malaria. See. George Gilder, "he Economics of Settlement, American Spectator, on the Internet.
The Neocons have been repudiated by both the Democrat and Republican parties. No one wants to fight their next war, wherever it might be. Is there a definition of ABJECT FAILURE they can't understand? How's that Arab Spring workin' out for ya? Neocons are ISRAEL'S WORST ENEMIES.
Who are the Hagel supportes who are singing a different tune? I can’t tell here.
the "true pro-Israel community" –"the most hawkish positions on Israel"? hawkish as in whats up with claiming the Jewish lobby intimidates the Hill? That doesn't even make any sense. SNL? So because the Democratic hipoisie of cable TV and a NBC late-night franchise decades past its due date mock people who stand up for Israel then the "true pro-Israel community" knows you stand up for Israel by not standing up at all? Or you only stand up if all the Republicans in the room are sitting down? This is an argument? God forbid we run into negative Tweets–then the "true pro-Israel community' would really be up a tree. And the *government of Israel*–Bibi and Lapid and Bennett-are clapping their hands to their foreheads with "Oy vey! Jon Stewart and those trenchant satirists of Saturday Night Live are making fun of our staunchest friends in Congress–we must get new friends immediately!!"? Really? Do we even need to get to the Tosafot on Jon's six degrees of separation from identification with the Jewish state to parse the latest J-Street moronocism ? n nThis is either a viciously misleading but at least compos mentis obfuscation of an as-yet hidden agenda of out and out anti-Zionist deconstruction towards a universalized (and left-wing politicized) Jewish reform or a cravenness without bounds. n nMr. Williams is certainly no Israel Firster–if you leave granny in the tender mercies of home care staff with a similar attitude towards what counts as the truest geriatric care you might well come home to a tranquilly inert paperweight. n nTypical mopery from this pro-Israel stalwart: n n"While the revolutions and protests in the Middle East have produced a new sense of optimism, the Israel-Palestine dispute remains locked in the same patterns of trouble. Dylan Williams argues that the United States takes significant blame for this, as its policy toward the conflict is not only counterproductive to a peaceful resolution, but also contrary to the dominant hopes of the American..blah blah blah"
and like HillelA. Or is it non-Jews masquerading as Jews, like HillelA? Either way, a tool is troll. n
The writer missed J Street's concern. The Secretary of Defense is responsible for running the US Armed Forces and managing American security interests globally. The critics of Hagel, by focussing on a few gotcha quotes concerning Israel, suggested that the pro-Israel community in the United States was solely interested in the nominee's mouthings of precise approved sound bites concerning Israel. That sort of orthodoxy made the Hagel's critics look frankly like idiots when in fact the underlying motivation for their criticisms was unhappiness that the President was reelected and that the Washington consensus on Iraq was that the invasion and follow up military actions were a mistake and a disservice to US security interests. After all Iran would be much more amenable to pressure if its neighbor to the west had remained n Arab sunni state, not a failing shiite managed state.
Yeah, it was all pique at St. Obama's reelection. Tthe lack of any meaningful experience running anything like the Pentagon had nothing to do with it. Neither did Hagel's being soft on dictators, his readiness to falsely accused both the US and Israel of war crimes, and his delusions about negotiating with murderous dictators who are trying to stall long enough to develop dangerous weapons. And Iran was so much more tractable when Iraq was there — after all, it's not like Iran conducted or sponsored terrorist attacks in the UK, Argentina, Lebanon, the US and who knows where else while Saddam was still in power. n nYep, it's all about Obama and it's all the fault of Bush and the neocons. nYou can go back to J Street now. n nTofuDogma is an apt name – your dogma is full of beans. n
Which is why Hagel has spent years claiming that the Shiite state to Iraq's north is an unstoppable regional hegemon that should be permitted to get nukes. n nor not.
Ich habt gehaben in pupich, as the dictator Hailstone remarked.