by Matt Stoller, Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 01:21:11 PM EDT
I just got a flyer from the Republican Jewish Coalition slandering Lamont on Israel.
Oh yeah, don't worry, Lieberman will caucus with the Democrats.
Tags: Connecticut, CT-Sen, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)
That picture of Weinstein, look at it closely. That's not an American flag his standing before.
Picture says a lot.
I for one am offended Hubert Humphrey's image is used in this way. Perphaps someone can get Skip or Buck to sue.
Cindy Sheehan speaks for the Democratic Party! Classic.
I really think right-wing activists overestimate the effect that tawdry appeals like this will have on rank-and-file Jews. You can't abandon the concept of social justice, and expect Jews to vote for you just because you get all hawkish when it comes to Israel.
Jewish PAC that gets out the fliers first and is able to compete against these kinds of the-sky-is-falling Israel advocacy groups--this stuff will happen.
I did a quick search for Jeff Weinstein and it took me to a NORPAC page full of pictures from past events. Single politician events included: George Allen, Lieberman, HRC, Menendez, Stabenow, Pelosi, etc. etc. Republicans and Democrats. So they get to everybody and everybody gets to them.
The Jeff Weinstein's of America need to be displaced by other Jewish groups.
I seriously believe we should consider forming a Jewish Progressive Pac with the sole purpose of creating photo ops for Progressive candidates who want to reach out to the "Jewish vote." That way when these "Dean hates Israel" and "Jimmy Carter hates Israel" (!) crap floats to the surface--we are already out in front of it with pictures and press releases, etc.
(Anybody know any wealthy American Jews who want to pony up $250K for a new Jewish PAC so we can have some luncheons?)
...as a political football.
Israel has its Right of Return policy. If anyone feels more allegiance to Israel than he does to the United States, well, I recommend he check out that policy.
It's a win-win for both countries. America gets rid of people of dubious loyalty, and Israel gets new, enthusiastic residents who want to be there.
But the Israel issue has hijacked our foreign policy long enough.
You're forgetting - this cheerleading for the likudnik version of Israel by hawkish folks of all stripes in America was the blueprint for chickenhawkishness viz. Irak.
Here's how they work:
"Support for Israel on the US taxpayer's dime? Yes! Undermine US interests in the middle east by pushing the diplomatic balance in the region off kilter? Yes! Fund the emprisonment of Palestinians in the occupied territories? That too!
But expect me to go over there once the impact of my prior advocacy starts sinking in? Hell no...it's too dangerous!"
And watch the steady trickle of educated Israelis out of Israel, mostly to the US. It's in full swing, and something of a cause for concern among many Israelis. Security, while not the primary concern for many emigrants, is becoming an increasing factor.
I saw the bottom one as a full page ad in my mom's copy of New Jersey Jewish News, or some such newspaper. Frankly, when rightwingers pander to Jews by being hawkish on Israel, as if we should ignore the fact that they disagree with most of the Jews I know on just about everything else -- NY Jews are generally quite liberal -- it turns my stomach.
I'll gladly get on board with a progressive Jewish PAC, damn do we need one. I just need a few, um, hundreds of thousands of dollars.
This is what the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) does; see, e.g., http://njdc.org/njdcspeaks/detail.php?id =519 and http://njdc.org/issues/detail.php?id=599
We also have a bunch of other ads -- re NJ Senate here ( http://njdc.org/takeaction/detail.php?id =591&sub=4 ) and re Ohio Senate (primarily) at http://njdc.org/takeaction/detail.php?id =509&sub=4
It strikes me as a little imprudent of them to have a picture of Joe in a carbon copy of the clench that led The Kiss. It just may tick off a few --
JOE LIEBERMAN WAS A VOICE OF SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL
America and Israel are worse off for it.
It seems like a 50-50 guess on whether or not Lieberman would caucus with Dems. It would be pretty hard to buck the tide if Dems had just been swept into office with gains all over the country. Think about this scenario, however:
Lieberman announces he will vote for Reid, Bush decides to offer him Rumsfelds job. Bush gets a trifecta. He seems somehow bipartisan for selecting an ostensible Dem for his cabinet, he manages to change the subject for a while on the Iraq disaster and gets at least a Friedman or two in leeway from the press to see how Lieberman does, and he gets a Republican Senate when Rell appoints Lieberman's successor. Lieberman, for his part, is perfectly positioned to join the ticket with McCain in 08.
All around a nightmare scenario that I think makes it a roughly 3 in 4 chance that Lieberman's win turns into a Republican Senate. At the very least, while Lamont is trying to get a promise from Lieberman on caucusing with the Dems he should also demand a promise he won't leave to serve in the Bush White House.
People have accused me of being "anti-Israel" or even, get this, "antisemitic" because of my loathing for Lieberman. No shit.
But, I guess it seems, THEY (meaning the Lieberman camp) are the ones that are making up this shit and smearing their opponents with it.
Perhaps if Joe IS re-elected, instead of CFL, he can switch to Likud. Sen. Joe Lieberman (L-CT). And, the Lieberman supporters would say that just me saying this makes me what the above charges were. They are truly delusional people.
That whole ad campaign was woeful. They should be ashamed. I examined it here: http://tinyurl.com/sql6v
-----------
myDD - skin
-----------
18 Comments