AIPAC and AJC Take Note: Ohio’s Jewish Community Goes Dem

-

This chart in the Columbus Dispatch on a breakdown of the governor’s race is really interesting and confirms something I have heard gossiped about here and there.
The White House has been courting hard American Jewish voters and attempting to tether them to the Republican fundraising and voting machines by prodding them with high-fear political drama surrounding Israel.
This tactic was crudely clear when Bush and Cheney shoved the John Bolton confirmation process forward again in the middle of Israel’s messy counter-attack against Hezbollah forces in Lebanon. Shortly after Bolton’s nomination was dusted off, U.S. Senators began getting phone calls arguing that “a vote against Bolton was a vote against Israel.”
AIPAC’s and the American Jewish Committee’s strident foreign policy positions that have mostly hugged the Bush-Cheney gang while sneering at both moderate Republicans and Democrats (other than Joe Lieberman, Schumer and Ben Nelson) seem out of sync with Jewish voters.
While Jewish voting participation in the country is a rather small percentage of total voting, political giving by the American Jewish community is extremely consequential.
But what is heartening to see is that of the 27 registered self-identified Jewish voters in this poll (out of 1,541 total voters), all 27 of them, 100%, favor Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ted Strickland over Republican J. Kenneth Blackwell.
Overall, Strickland leads Blackwell 67% to 31%. Remarkable on a lot of fronts.
Let’s see what those voting machines say this time around.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

43 comments on “AIPAC and AJC Take Note: Ohio’s Jewish Community Goes Dem

  1. winnipeger says:

    DonS:
    Obviously you don’t get it. I’ll ask this one more time:
    How is AIPAC qualitatively different from any other lobbying organization???
    Nobody here has highlighted a SINGLE difference other than AIPAC’s success.
    I won’t hold my breath
    and btw, “Structural”/schmucksheral”?!?! spoken like a true scholar.

    Reply

  2. Steve Weinberg says:

    I did not know that General Tommy Franks was Jewish…
    http://judicial-inc.biz/USS_Cole_prelude_Iran.htm

    Reply

  3. DonS says:

    “Structural”/schmucksheral one might say. Connection between the lobby and Israeli government may take the eye of a good auditor to detect and explain.
    That aside, I would argue that quantity, say of amount of foreign aid alone, implies difference. That might satisfy noone here, and may only be the result of applying common sense.
    What is this fixation on “structural” anyway. A red herring? I’m sorry, but that’s not the issue.
    http://www.ameu.org/uploads/vol30_issue4_1997.pdf

    Reply

  4. David I Lieberman says:

    POAnonymouse writes:
    “I love it when these blathering asses get on here and defend AIPAC by saying ‘its just another lobby’. It just underscores the fact that these people will say anything to defend Israel’s constant bribery of our public officials, even if what they are saying is ridiculous to the extreme.”
    Actually, I’m pretty certain you can’t point to a single instance in which I have defended AIPAC’s policies or agenda. I merely point out to you and to DonS that to claim that AIPAC is somehow qualitatively different from any other successful lobbying organization (see, e.g., AARP) without actually showing what that difference consists of by making real comparisons with real lobbying organizations is intellectually suspect. At best.
    David I Lieberman

    Reply

  5. winnipeger says:

    hey pissed off asshole:
    so tell us, vern. how is AIPAC different? How are they structurally different from other lobbies?
    you’re a friggin’ joke. did you know that? 🙂

    Reply

  6. Pissed Off American says:

    I love it when these blathering asses get on here and defend AIPAC by saying “its just another lobby”. It just underscores the fact that these people will say anything to defend Israel’s constant bribery of our public officials, even if what they are saying is ridiculous to the extreme.
    Only an idiot, someone completely out of touch with reality, would make the statement with any conviction that AIPAC is like any other lobby. Anyone else that makes that statement is simply a liar, seeking to advance an argument they KNOW to be false.

    Reply

  7. pauline says:

    Werner wrote:
    “What precisely makes AIPAC so ‘effectiv’?”
    Duh, do you think money that is used to influence Congress would have anything to do with it?
    When more of Congress shows up for an AIPAC annual meeting more so than ANY OTHER EVENT besides a joint House and Senate gathering like a “State of the Union” address, what else besides money would get Congress to show up in such big numbers?!?
    Duh, would big money going into untold numbers of campaigns “make AIPAC so ‘effectiv'”?!

    Reply

  8. Werner says:

    What precisely makes AIPAC so ‘effectiv’?

    Reply

  9. pauline says:

    Back in April, 2006, hey, who could forget this from that great The Washington Note’s blog?! 🙂
    Many apologists here will not even like the title! “Stephen Walt Responds:NOT Fired”
    http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001323.php

    Reply

  10. DonS says:

    David L, you are absolutely right, and a good reaon why I usually avoid these discussions. As someone who has been watching the effects of the IL on American politics for at least 35 years, its more than obvious that trying to “prove” something to one side or the other is a thankless task, even with mountains of “evidence” (that I have neither the time nor inclination to muster). But can I see the disproportionate effect, or shall we say symbiosis, with American politicans over that time?
    Anyway, thanks for reminding me that I really don’t enjoy beating my head against the wall.

    Reply

  11. pauline says:

    My understanding is that AIPAC is the second largest lobby in DC, only behind AARP. This Wash Post article from May, 2005, says a lot about it’s influence.
    “AIPAC’s Big, Bigger, Biggest Moment”
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301565.html

    Reply

  12. David I Lieberman says:

    dschumacher: “The very success of AIPAC, if it is similar to all others, validates the question of “what’s differnt”? The debate associated with the link is fuirther instructive.”
    Um, no. The only comparison with other lobbies that Mearsheimer and Walt provide in this discussion is with the pro-Arab lobby, which they describe as “much weaker.” This is actually quite unsurprising, insofar as the Arab-American community is so much younger and has had less time to establish and cultivate effective organizations. They say nothin about other lobbies in this or other arenas that may well be equally or more effective than the “Isreal Lobby.” If you want to make the case that the IL fundamentally, qualitatively differs from other lobbies, you’ll have to provide more meaningful evidence than this.
    David I. Lieberman

    Reply

  13. dschumacher says:

    The very success of AIPAC, if it is similar to all others, validates the question of “what’s differnt”? The debate associated with the link is fuirther instructive.

    Reply

  14. winnipeger says:

    the article above only suggest that AIPAC is a very effective lobby, not that it is fundamentally different from any other. this is an important distinction.

    Reply

  15. DonS says:

    For starters, this article is an introduction
    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

    Reply

  16. MP says:

    “Before it becomes a commonplace here that AIPAC is a lobby like any other…”
    In what ways is it different?

    Reply

  17. DonS says:

    Before it becomes a commonplace here that AIPAC is a lobby like any other, or that the issue of dual loyalty is dead (thoughts from upthread), its not. Not being anti-semitic, not self-hating, just recognizing the elephant in the room. Denying that just enables the phenomenon to continue to corrupt politcal debate and action.
    As far as American-Irish support for the IRA also being a case of dual loyalty, it certainly was. Even my Irish Catholic in-laws knew that. (and believe me, they’re not self-haters!)

    Reply

  18. winnipeger says:

    in fact, based on how you treat others, i will hereby refer to you as “Pissed Off Asshole.”

    Reply

  19. winnipeger says:

    CORRECTION:
    74% of jewish americans voted for KERRY
    but… your still an a-hole 🙂

    Reply

  20. winnipeger says:

    and just in case you don’t want to look for yourself. i’ll reiterate:
    according to the pew research center,
    79% of jewish americans voted for gore in ’00
    74% of jewish americans voted for bush in ’04
    asshole.

    Reply

  21. winnipeger says:

    Posted by winnipeger”
    I asked you for a source for your voter statistics. You ignored it. You weren’t lying to us again, were you?
    Posted by Pissed Off American at November 6, 2006 08:50 AM
    i missed this one. thanks for posting, MP.
    c’mon, poa! for a guy who spends as much time as you on the internet, i’m surprised that you couldn’t find this most basic info. it’s everywhere. SHEESH!
    here’s another link:
    http://tinyurl.com/ecthf

    Reply

  22. MP says:

    To POA’s request for sources for voter statistics, this was written by Ruy Teixeira in Donkey Rising on April 17, 2005. It is a comment on a study of Jewish voting patterns in general and in 2004.
    Just a small passage, but there is much more for anyone interested:
    “When viewing only the two major parties, the two-party American Jewish vote was Kerry 78%, Bush 22%. Between 1996 and 2004, the Democratic two-party Jewish vote as compared to the national vote has been remarkably stable – 28% more Democratic than the national average in 1996, 30% more Democratic in 2000, and 29% more Democratic in 2004.
    The report cites a host of other data reinforcing the conclusion that Bush’s and the GOP’s progress among Jewish voters has, by and large, been negligible. I recommend it to all those interested in separating fact from fiction about the contemporary Jewish vote in American politics.”

    Reply

  23. MP says:

    Here is an excerpt from the remarks spoken by Daniel Grossman, one of Israel’s leading novelists, at the 11th commemoration of Yitzhak Rabin’s death in Tel Aviv this past Saturday. About 100,000 attended. His views certainly reflect mine, but are nurtured by a much deeper understanding of the situation. I hope you will be as inspired by them as I am:
    “”Any reasonable person in Israel, and I will say in Palestine too, knows exactly the outline of a possible solution to the conflict between the two peoples. Any reasonable person here and over there knows deep in their heart the difference between dreams and the heart’s desire, between what is possible and what is not possible by the conclusion of negotiations. Anyone who does not know, who refuses to acknowledge this, is already not a partner, be he Jew or Arab, is entrapped in his hermetic fanaticism, and is therefore not a partner. Let us take a look at those who are meant to be our partners. The Palestinians have elected Hamas to lead them, Hamas who refuses to negotiate with us, refuses even to recognize us. What can be done in such a position? Keep strangling them more and more, keep mowing down hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza, most of whom are innocent civilians like us? Kill them and get killed for all eternity? Turn to the Palestinians, Mr. Olmert, address them over the heads of Hamas, appeal to their moderates, those who like you and I oppose Hamas and its ways, turn to the Palestinian people, speak to their deep grief and wounds, acknowledge their ongoing suffering. Nothing would be taken away from you or Israel’s standing in future negotiations. Our hearts will only open up to one another slightly, and this has a tremendous power, the power of a force majeur. The power of simple human compassion, particularly in this a state of deadlock and dread. Just once, look at them not through the sights of a gun, and not behind a closed roadblock. You will see there a people that is tortured no less than us. An oppressed, occupied people bereft of hope. Certainly, the Palestinians are also to blame for the impasse, certainly they played their role in the failure of the peace process. But take a look at them from a different perspective, not only at the radicals in their midst, not only at those who share interests with our own radicals. Take a look at the overwhelming majority of this miserable people, whose fate is entangled with our own, whether we like it or not. Go to the Palestinians, Mr. Olmert, do not search all the time for reasons for not to talk to them. You backed down on the unilateral convergence, and that’s a good thing, but do not leave a vacuum. It will be occupied instantly with violence, destruction. Talk to them, make them an offer their moderates can accept. They argue far more than we are shown in the media. Make them an offer so that they are forced to choose whether they accept it, or whether they prefer to remain hostage to fanatical Islam. Approach them with the bravest and most serious plan Israel can offer. With the offer than any reasonable Palestinian and Israeli knows is the boundary of their refusal and our concession. There is no time. Should you delay, in a short while we will look back with longing at the amateur Palestinian terror. We will hit our heads and yell at our failure to exercise all of our mental flexibility, all of the Israeli ingenuity to uproot our enemies from their self-entrapment. We have no choice and they have no choice. And a peace of no choice should be approached with the same determination and creativity as one approaches a war of no choice. And those who believe we do have a choice, or that time is on our side do not comprehend the deeply dangerous processes already in motion. Maybe, Mr. Prime Minister, you need to be reminded, that if an Arab leader is sending a peace signal, be it the slightest and most hesitant, you must accept it, you must test immediately its sincerity and seriousness. You do not have the moral right not to respond. You owe it to those whom you would ask to sacrifice their lives should another war break out. Therefore, if President Assad says that Syria wants peace, even if you don’t believe him, and we are all suspicious of him, you must offer to meet him that same day. Don’t wait a single day…”

    Reply

  24. Judah says:

    I’m struck – aside from the acute anti-semitism of the poster who believes Jews deserve a new Holocaust – I thought the accusation of Jewish dual-loyalty was more or less dead.
    Do many Jews feel a connection to Israel? Yes. But I went to college in Boston and I don’t remember people accusing those politicians of putting Ireland before America or of Irish-Americans having dual loyalty.
    You are free to disagree with many of Israel’s policies – as I do – but the American Jewish community is no different than other ethnic communities that relate to their ancestral homeland, except in two instances: they’ve been more effective in politics (and I don’t think this should be held against them) and anti-semites like to single Jews out for their own ends.

    Reply

  25. MP says:

    “And whatwill you say, MP, if it is irrefutably proven that such weapons were used? ”
    I will condemn it.
    You see, I also look at the big picture of the conflict.
    I don’t have to approve of all of Israel’s actions to support Israel, and I don’t.
    But of course I don’t believe that Israel’s actions amount to genocide or an attempt to wipe out all Muslims or Lebanese or all Palestinians–though there are extreme groups in Israel and in the US probably who wouldn’t mind. There are many more non-extreme groups in Israel; but as it is here, and probably everywhere, terrorist acts can sway public opinion powerfully.
    Nor do I resort to charges of anti-Semitism in these discussions, except where I see it present or lurking in the background. Why should I ignore it when and where I see it?
    Even though some on this site regularly and courageously call Israelis Naziis and the like, I don’t call them anti-Semites and wouldn’t–unless I think they are.

    Reply

  26. Pissed Off American says:

    “Posted by winnipeger”
    I asked you for a source for your voter statistics. You ignored it. You weren’t lying to us again, were you?

    Reply

  27. winnipeger says:

    “Comparing AIPAC with lobbys connected with France or Altria is like comparing President Bush to the president of our local Quarter Horse club. How do you dream this bullshit up, Alec?”
    What, vern?
    a lobby is a lobby is a lobby. they are all COMPLETELY comparable. AIPAC is just more successful and effective.
    ALTHOUGH, i am NOT sure that Altria’s success pales to AIPAC’s. Big tobacco speaks LOUDLY in washington.

    Reply

  28. winnipeger says:

    “I tell you what, Israel is just begging for another Holocaust and the world just might oblige them. And they will get the same amount of sympathy they have shown the Palestines and the rest of the world…which is none.”
    you see, Carroll, it is precisiely THIS type of shit-talk that has some people around here questioning your sanity and intelligence.
    Does it matter to you that the IDF apologized for the tragic killing of the little girl by a sniper (who, incidently, was trying to hit a militant)?
    http://tinyurl.com/ym3x7f
    Does it matter to you that the IDF is retaliating against palestinian militants in Gaza who have launched 30 qassam rockets into Israel in the last few days?
    http://tinyurl.com/yfrxqb
    Probably not. But some things never change.
    Congratulations, Carroll. Once again, you’ve interjected the worst type of hatred and bias into this blog.
    Your an idealogue, Carroll. There is no point in trying to engage someone like you in debate. It’s impossible.
    And forget about the word “bigot” and “anti-semite,” you’ve proven yourself to be a FOOL. Comparing the magnitude of the Israel/Palestinian conflict to slavery in the America?! threatening to “rip out Israeli’s intestines and shove them down their throats?” Comparing Israelis to Nazis?! And now this, wishing a holocaust on Israelis, OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER?!?!
    Shame on you. You prove that you have less compassion and humanity than your enemies.

    Reply

  29. Pissed Off American says:

    “AIPAC is a registered LOBBY. just like all of the others. hundreds. maybe thousands. all doing the same thing. trying to advance their specific interests. for instance, chile has a lobby. so do the french. so do the saudis. so does altria. so does canada, Brazil, etc. …and yes, so does Israel. nothing unusual or untoward.”
    Posted by winnipeger
    Comparing AIPAC with lobbys connected with France or Altria is like comparing President Bush to the president of our local Quarter Horse club. How do you dream this bullshit up, Alec?

    Reply

  30. Carroll says:

    Grrrrrrr….a 12 year old girl killed in air raids and another one shot in the head by the IDF, it NEVER ends. I tell you what, Israel is just begging for another Holocaust and the world just might oblige them. And they will get the same amount of sympathy they have shown the Palestines and the rest of the world…which is none. Fall into the sea now Israel, you are already dead and killing too many children in your extended death throes.
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110506C.shtml
    Israel Mounts Intense Air Strikes in Gaza
    BBC News
    Saturday 04 November 2006
    Israeli forces have killed at least seven people including a 12-year-old girl in air raids and incidents during an ongoing offensive in Gaza.
    The deaths bring the number of those killed since Wednesday to at least 42. A top Hamas militant is among the dead.
    At least 17 people were killed on Friday, including two women shot during the siege of a mosque in Beit Hanoun.
    Israel says it is targeting militants but Palestinian officials accuse Israel of a “massacre”.
    Israeli forces have made regular incursions into Gaza and the West Bank following the capture of an Israeli soldier in a cross-border raid by Palestinian militants on 25 June.
    “Death and Despair”
    The young girl was shot in the head by an Israeli sniper in Beit Hanoun, during a day of violence.
    The army said one of its soldiers had been aiming for a gunman but missed and hit the girl.
    An Israeli military spokesman said five air strikes had taken place after nightfall on Friday, targeting the towns of Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahiya, Jabaliya and Rafah.
    A number of Hamas militants were among those killed in the latest strikes, along with one civilian buried in the rubble of his home.
    One of the Hamas militants killed was senior member, Louay al-Borno, who died when an air strike set ablaze a minivan in Gaza City. Two other Hamas members were wounded in the incident.
    The Israeli army also said it had blown up three buildings near the mosque that witnessed Friday’s siege in Beit Hanoun. Israel said weapons were being stored in the buildings.
    A Palestinian Authority employee told the BBC it was the worst Israeli incursion they had ever had into the town.
    Ibrahim al-Za’anin, 55, said they had been without electricity or water since Tuesday night.
    “We no longer feel safe in our own homes,” he said.
    Israeli officials say the offensive is aimed at destroying militant infrastructure and stopping Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel.
    PA President Mahmoud Abbas called the operation a “massacre” and urged the UN Security Council to convene to discuss the issue.
    A senior UN official given Israeli permission to enter Beit Hanoun described the atmosphere as one of death, destruction and despair.
    “Militants Escaped”
    Friday’s action around the Beit Hanoun mosque followed a tense stand-off between Israeli forces and up to 15 militants who had taken refuge inside.
    Hamas radio then appealed to local women in the town to intervene.
    One of the women, Nahed Abou Harbiya, told the BBC Arabic Service the gunmen inside the mosque were given women’s clothes to help them escape.
    “All the women headed to the mosque to get the Palestinian resistance men… But the Israeli occupation forces were firing heavily at us with their machine guns and also threw stun grenades at us.”
    In addition to the two women killed, at least 10 women and a Palestinian cameraman were injured in firing.
    Hamas leader Ismail Haniya praised the women but Israel said they had served as “human shields” for the militants.
    The Israeli military says it only fired on armed Palestinians.

    Reply

  31. winnipeger says:

    Please remember that comment when next you endorse thier bribery of our public officials. You just ADMITTED that select policies in Washington are directly instituted at Israel’s behest. Unless of course you expect us to believe that Israel doles out all this money through entities such as AIPAC, yet expect no return on thier investment. I find it ironic that when some of us point out and lament that fact, we are, in return, accused of being “anti-semitic”.
    Posted by Pissed Off American at November 5, 2006 10:37 PM
    c’mon, POA. quit with the crazy talk. i swear, you LOOK for fights 🙂
    AIPAC is a registered LOBBY. just like all of the others. hundreds. maybe thousands. all doing the same thing. trying to advance their specific interests. for instance, chile has a lobby. so do the french. so do the saudis. so does altria. so does canada, Brazil, etc. …and yes, so does Israel. nothing unusual or untoward.

    Reply

  32. Pissed Off American says:

    “AIPAC represents the interests of Israel in American politics and Business.”
    Please remember that comment when next you endorse thier bribery of our public officials. You just ADMITTED that select policies in Washington are directly instituted at Israel’s behest. Unless of course you expect us to believe that Israel doles out all this money through entities such as AIPAC, yet expect no return on thier investment. I find it ironic that when some of us point out and lament that fact, we are, in return, accused of being “anti-semitic”.

    Reply

  33. Pissed Off American says:

    “approx. 76% of American Jews voted against GWB in ’04. Approx. 80% of Jews voted against him in ’00.”
    Posted by Winnipeger
    Can you provide the source for these figures, please?

    Reply

  34. Winnipeger says:

    this is news to you, Steve? why?
    approx. 76% of American Jews voted against GWB in ’04. Approx. 80% of Jews voted against him in ’00.
    American Jewry is historically a very reliable Democratic constituency. the poll you cite isn’t surprising, given the fact that today anyone with a brain knows that the republican part is broken.
    Also, keep in mind that AIPAC does not represent American Jewry. AIPAC represents the interests of Israel in American politics and Business. To the best of my knowledge they have not been endorsing Republican politicians or political interests.

    Reply

  35. Pissed Off American says:

    And whatwill you say, MP, if it is irrefutably proven that such weapons were used? Will you offer, once again, that the use of such weapons were just the unfortunate result of the “heat of battle”, as so many of you blathered in the defense of the use of cluster munitions or the destruction of Palestinian farmlands and orchards?
    Once again, you single out one small portion of a criticism of Israeli policy, hoping that the volumes of criticism offered will escape consideration. Well, some of us are looking at the big picture, MP, and when viewed in thier entirety, Israel’s actions look more and more like actions committed in pursuit of extermination of the people of Gaza and Lebanon. Until you can offer concise and rational justification for Israel’s actions, such as the prolific use of cluster munitions in the face of an imminent cease fire, your posts seem to be little more than half-hearted excuses for policies you are incapable of defending.
    And, in my post I made it clear that the use of enriched uranium weapons by Israel, at this point, is alleged. But you even endeavor to attempt to twist my post into a concrete assertion that such weapons were used. It constantly amazes me that you Israel apologists can only defend Israel’s actions through deceptive tactics of rebuttal, or the time worn accusation of anti-semitism. There is far more to my post than you addressed, as is usually the case when those such as yourself seek to defend the indefensible.
    UN vows answers on whether Israel used uranium munitions during summer war
    Samples from 2 bomb craters in south show high radioactivity
    Monday, October 30, 2006
    BEIRUT: The United Nations, which has been studying ecological damage in Lebanon caused by Israel’s summer offensive, said Saturday that it would soon be able to say whether uranium-based munitions were used, as reported by a British newspaper. The Independent newspaper said scientists studying samples of soil after Israeli bombing in Lebanon have shown high radiation levels, suggesting that uranium-based munitions were used.
    It said samples taken from two bomb craters in Khiam and Al-Tiri have been sent for further analysis to the Harwell laboratory in Oxfordshire, southern England, for mass spectrometry.
    “If there is uranium we will find it,” said Boutros Harb, director of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) for Asia and the Middle East, based in Bahrain.
    The samples thrown up by Israeli bombs showed “elevated radiation signatures,” Chris Busby, the British scientific secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, was quoted as saying.
    Britain’s Defense Ministry has confirmed the concentration of uranium isotopes in the samples, the report added.
    In his initial report, Busby said there were two possible reasons for the contamination.
    “The first is that the weapon was some novel small experimental nuclear fission device or experimental weapon based on the high temperature of a uranium oxidation flash,” it said.
    “The second is that the weapon was a bunker-busting conventional uranium penetrator weapon employing enriched uranium rather than depleted uranium,” Busby was quoted as saying.
    http://www.dailystar.com.lb
    http://tinyurl.com/ycckjg

    Reply

  36. Carroll says:

    I wasn’t going to continue this but I would like to add POA’s observation of where all this ‘special influence” is headed and why.
    The sort of thing represented by the reprehensible Steinlight below, is a prime example of how the US is being torn apart by “identity” groups interested only in their group’s power and dominance of American policy. I am opposed to illegal immigration also and don’t know what a humane solution would be for those here.
    But my opposition to the huge influx is based purely on future economic ramifications for “everyone” in this country, not because I want some sort of sole tribal political clout for myself or my “particular kind’.
    Steinlight and Ledden and Pipes who have also written about this are extremely replusive to me because they address everything as whether it is good for Jewish political power instead of good for all Americans. This has to end. And yes I know there are other influences on this by other ‘groups”..I got polled three times in the past three weeks on the immigration issue. Each poll caller gave me about 10 issues and asked which I considered most important and then asked if certain statements by a politican regarding immigration would have any effect on my vote. The last time I choose the “ethics” issue as most important to me because if the politicans had any, all the other issues would settle themselves as close to fair as possible.
    Steinlight is an example of fostering the wrong mentality among some Jewish voters who are comsumed with the Israeli interest..as I said I too am opposed to illegal immigration, but his reasons are corrupt…..our immigration policy should not be voted on or considered in the light of how it affects the Jewish lobby or Israel…it’s strictly an American issue.
    http://www.thejewishweek.com/top/editletcontent.php3?artid=5467
    American Jews and other Americans who care about the security of Israel should be among the immigration scheme’s fiercest opponents. If the bill passes, American-Jewish political influence will immediately be diminished and ultimately nullified. The foreign-born Latinos the Bush-Senate plan will bring to America on an unprecedented scale (demographers estimate 66 to 100 million in 20 years alone) have very high levels of anti-Semitism according to survey research, second only to Muslims. American-born Latinos also have high levels that remain disturbingly constant over time.
    Latinos also have no love for Israel. On Capitol Hill, Jewish and Latino lobbyists have long battled over where U.S. foreign aid should go, as well as who should get America’s precious few refugee and asylum slots. American Jews and their allies won these battles in the past. When Mexicans outnumber Jews by 50 to 1, can any politically literate person imagine the U.S. will provide Israel anywhere near current levels of support?

    Reply

  37. MP says:

    “According to a number of sources, it appears that Israel may have used enriched uranium weaponry in its aggression against the Lebanese people.”
    “A number of sources”…”appears”…”may have”…
    Do you know that this is true for a fact?
    And, again, just because you have links doesn’t mean the links convey the truth.

    Reply

  38. Pissed Off American says:

    And by the way, Birnbaum, while we are in the subject of “Israel’s security”:
    According to a number of sources, it appears that Israel may have used enriched uranium weaponry in its aggression against the Lebanese people. Perhaps you would like to explain to this forum why such weaponry has been used, if it proves to be the case. While you are at it, you might tackle the question about why Israel has an active campaign of razing Palestinian farmlands and orchards. It seems the other Israeli apologists that slither in here from time to time are unable to coherantly offer a rationale that meets any reasonably moral criteria.
    There is much dissent offered when Carroll or I opine that Israel is activelly engaged in a program of genocide. Yet when it is pointed out that Israelis are destroying the actual ability of the common Palestinan citizen to feed themselves, or ply thier livelyhoods, there seems to be no credible rationales offered for such practices in alternative to genocide.
    Considering the obvious “over-kill” involved in peppering the Lebanese countryside with hundreds of thousands of cluster bomblets when a cease fire was imminent, one can only ponder the motivation for such action. The only rational explanation that can be reached is that the general citizenry of Lebanon was in fact being targeted, and successfully so, as children are dying almost daily as a result of encountering these bomblets.
    Now we come to the alleged use of enriched uranium wraponry. For what purpose, Birnbaum, if not to erase the Lebanese people through the insidious introduction of cancer causing agents to the Lebanese environment? Weapons using enriched uranium are even more poisonous to the environment than DU weapons are, and have the potential to kill GENERATIONS of human beings. Like our use of DU weapons in Iraq, Israel’s use of both DU and enriched uranium weaponry in Lebanon all point to a strategy of targeting the entire citizenry of Lebanon, and not just a select few radicals.
    Now, Birnbaum, you can construe such comments as being “anti-american”, and I am sure some asshole will post here that my comments are “anti-semitic”, but until you and your murderous ilk can offer sane and moral rationales for the targeting of a nation’s ENTIRE citizenry through the use of ACTUAL weapons of mass destruction, than THIS American is going to protest America’s complicity in MASS MURDER on a scale that may well surpass Hitler’s abnominational crimes against the Jewish people. I refuse, as an American, to quietly sit by and abide my government’s complicity in Israel’s crimes against humanity. The Jewish people’s interests are not served by committing to the same kinds of horrific policies that Hitler engaged in, nor are American interests served by our participation in such policies. The sooner the Jewish people come to the realization that Israeli policy is being guided by dangerous Zionist fanatacism the sooner they will find peaceful and constructive ways to counter dangerous Islamic fanaticism. But I assure you, the present course that Israel is engaged in, coupled with America’s complicity, can only lead to an escalation of hatred and dying, and may well be the catylist that brings about the nuclear disaster that mankind will ride to extinction.
    I am sick and tired of my security being determined by your kind of religious hatred, and the hatred of your opponents, the radical Islamists. Your ignorance may well kill us all.

    Reply

  39. Carroll says:

    Finally I don’t think it’s an issue because the commitment of elected Democratic officials to Israel’s security isn’t in doubt. This of course is what pisses off the self-described “American” above.
    Posted by larry birnbaum at November 5, 2006 01:30 PM
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Nothing “self described” about the “American” above. A lot of us Americans are concerned over the Israeli cultism promoted by the more influencial Jewish leaders because it is bad for America and has corrupted our congress and especially our foreign policy in the ME. When we see people and politicans swearing alleigence to what is best for a “foreign” country, any foreign country, is begins to raise the hairs on the back on the neck. Wake up, this will backfire. You are fouling your own nest.
    You need to read this article, it has some good advice. If you can’t assimilate in the most open country in the world to Jews and seperate your alleigences you need to emigrate.
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060814/is_israel_good_for_the_jews
    August 5, 2006
    Is Israel Good for the Jews?
    Norman Birnbaum
    American Jewish citizens can be sure that a large number of Jewish organizations will claim to speak in our name–without being asked to do so. We can also be sure that should we dissent from the US Jewish community’s central item of faith, that Israel can do no wrong, we will be pilloried. When our gentile fellow citizens express doubt, they are accused of anti-Semitism. Those of us who are Jewish are taxed with self-hatred.
    Is it the supreme duty of American Jews to use our considerable influence to align US policy with that of Israel? There is, the Jewish organizations tell us, no conflict of loyalties and responsibilities; the two nations have common values and common ends.
    The assertion is nonsensical, but its repetition does negate one stereotype about Jews, our supposed intelligence.
    It is often accompanied by the claim that there is no Israel lobby, only ordinary US citizens spontaneously expressing opinions to their elected representatives and government….
    The vicarious bellicosity of much of American Jewry is destructive, and history will not judge kindly those who encourage it.
    The fixation of US Jewry on Israel as the center of US Jewish life was far from evident in the early decades of the Jewish state. Indeed, American Jewish leaders in those years instructed the Israelis that the United States and not Israel was the US Jewish homeland. Curiously, as the Holocaust recedes in time, its grip on the Jewish imagination in both the United States and Israel seems to grow, bringing a host of phantoms to life. The time has come for a more sober appraisal of the historical dimensions of the present.

    Reply

  40. Pissed Off American says:

    “Finally I don’t think it’s an issue because the commitment of elected Democratic officials to Israel’s security isn’t in doubt. This of course is what pisses off the self-described “American” above.”
    Posted by larry birnbaum
    “Self described”, eh? Who the fuck are YOU to decide an individual’s patriotism? Are you trying to tell me putting Israel’s interests above our own is an “American value”?
    I suggest you move to Israel if thats where your allegience lies. Perhaps your kids can get in on signing a few artillery shells before they are lobbed in on the heads of Lebanese children.
    Go screw yourself.

    Reply

  41. larry birnbaum says:

    There’s no question that Jewish voters have slowly drifted towards the Republicans over the past 20 or 30 years. But I think that’s based more on economic factors (voting with your pocketbook) than foreign policy issues. And Jews remain more Democratic than not. I don’t think its overgeneralizing from my own feelings to say that we’ve always been uncomfortable with the Republican position on civil rights issues. The agenda to assert the role of religion (and particularly evangelical Christianity) in government is a more recent development that is of great concern in the community as well.
    Finally I don’t think it’s an issue because the commitment of elected Democratic officials to Israel’s security isn’t in doubt. This of course is what pisses off the self-described “American” above.

    Reply

  42. DonS says:

    Regardlelss of what hard liners say, there is a postive humanitarian component of Jewish culture — though not pure by any means — that is a strength. That predilection has been stretched and confused by identification with Israel, the ideal and symbol of the holocaust, while being revolted by much of its behavior (historical fear); by the assimilation of Jews into American culture and migration of some to the “I’ve got mine Jack” mentality (republican credo); and by being manipulated by hard line AIPAC types seeking to brand themselves as spokespersons for Jews (shock and hubris).
    Its about time the pendulum started to swing.

    Reply

  43. Pissed Off American says:

    “AIPAC’s and the American Jewish Committee’s strident foreign policy positions that have mostly hugged the Bush-Cheney gang while sneering at both moderate Republicans and Democrats”
    Gee Steve. Once again, Reid is, (Was? To be honest, I haven’t recently checked the numbers), right up at the top of the list for dollar amounts recieved from AIPAC. You aren’t honestly implying that AIPAC dosn’t expect a return on thier money, are you??
    You know, I once supported Reid voraciously, due to that charade he pulled about Phase Two. (Until he demonstrated that it was little more than a publicity stunt) I even posted at his blog regularly. Then, when I discovered that he was on the dole to AIPAC, I posted the numbers on his blog. Guess what? It is the ONLY post I have EVER seen removed from his blog. There was the usual troll crap on his blog. There was the inevitable occassional link to porn on his blog. But what was removed??? The post that illustrated his financial obligations to AIPAC interests.
    Once again, I must point out that your seemingly selective disdain for AIPAC’s bribery of our public servants is somewhat inexplicable. You lament thier influence on some of our politicians while ignoring the influence on others.
    I don’t get it.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *