Caroline Glick on the Obama, the Iran deal, and the Jews
…Obama’s appeasement policy toward Iran has been going on since he took office six-and-a-half years ago…
Every time Obama has sided with the mullahs against domestic opponents he has played the Jew card in one way or another. He has blown more anti-Semitic dog whistles than many in Washington even realized existed.
Now the stakes are far higher than a mere sanctions bill. Obama has gotten his deal with Iran. And he’ll be damned if he allows it to go down.
So it is open season on Israel and its supporters.
This all could have been predicted in 2008 by anyone who took a look at Obama’s history. Therefore, those who excoriate Jews for nevertheless supporting Obama in 2008 and 20012 have a point. But please remember that “the Jewish vote” contains a huge number of secular Jews who are not only not religious but whose “faith” amounts to leftism, and that the left has become strongly anti-Israel for the last forty-five or so years. Talking about “the Jewish vote” as though it had anything to do with Judaism or support of Israel is like including everyone who was born into a Christian family but left the Christian church in “the Christian vote.”
That aside, Obama is also a liar and a double-crosser, and he takes the Jews for fools and patsies and marks:
In the president’s words, opposition to his deal comes “partly from the $20 million that’s being spent lobbying against the bill,” and “partly from the same columnists and former administration officials that were responsible for getting us into the Iraq war.”
One of the ironic things about this statement is that while AIPAC studiously avoided taking a position on the Iraq war, (while both of Obama’s secretaries of state and his vice president supported it), two years ago Obama strong-armed AIPAC ”“ against the wishes of its members ”“ to lobby Congress to support his plan to bomb regime targets in Syria. He then left AIPAC high and dry, with its credibility in tatters, when he changed his mind at the last minute and did nothing…
The point is demonization…By casting aspersions on the motives and character of his opponents Obama seeks to end debate on the merits of his plan in order to force Democrats to support it.
And that, more than anything, is why it’s at least a possibility that Obama may actually be genuinely angry at Chuck Schumer’s rejection of the deal rather than just pretend-angry, even if it ends up that there aren’t enough votes in Congress to make that rejection stick. Schumer not only said no to the deal, but he composed a defense of his “no” position that makes it clear that he has good reasons for opposing it, and he is one of the most prominent Democrats in Congress.
Schumer’s position legitimizes opposition to the Iran deal by Democrats, at least in the eyes of some of the public. The rest will just dismiss him as a Jew with dual loyalty, a position that Obama has hinted at for years for American Jews who oppose his policies.
Carly, “Politicians respond to pressure.”
I hope American Jews put so much pressure on Dem Senators that they have to flip. Looks like it worked on Schumer.
“….all could have been predicted in 2008…” Amen, Neo. And was. That said, The Infantile Majesty has exceeded even my craterous level of “expectations” in that election year. To loath the Israelis significantly more than True Enemies of Modernism and Freedom leaves me gasping.
IF Chucky Schumer grows some showable cojones and pressures his caucus to stand with him against this horrific treaty, then it’s just wimpy “show” with nuthin’ of substance. I ain’t going to hold my skeptical, cranky neoconservative breath.
Correction: Should have said above: “..UNLESS Chucky Schumer grows some..”
NeoConScum:
Not so empty in personal terms, however, because it may cost Chuck his position as Reid’s heir apparent.
Funny how the Dems put party loyalty over the potential destruction of an ally and the United States. The ICBMs will be aimed at DC.
Neo: ‘Scuse my current level of Democrat cynicism, but he may be doing his deal with a wink-wink and nod to the boys & girls at 1500 and inside his caucus as in: “Let me give the appearance of Juevos, but I’ll pressure NO ONE to come with my vote against.” Now IF Little Dicky Durbin jumped in with Chuckles, I might pay some respect.
Cornhead: “Carly, “Politicians respond to pressure.””
The activist game is the only social cultural/political game there is.
Neo quoting Glick: “… “partly from the same columnists and former administration officials that were responsible for getting us into the Iraq war.””
Countering Obama’s Iran deal on the premise level always required setting the record straight in the zeitgeist on Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Good piece from a Jewish pub on insty. As always, somebody comes up with, “Yet another rube self-identifies.”
Not too difficult to figure out.
Jew opposes the lying thug in the White House?
Well then, stomp the Jew.
One would expect nothing less.
File under: Don’t you ever, ever, doubt the patriotism of this President.
“Talking about “the Jewish vote” as though it had anything to do with Judaism or support of Israel …”
neo, I disagree somewhat with what you are saying here or at least what you are implying. I agree of course with your overall point that leftist politics have greatly influenced how Jews vote – that is self-evident. However I think that in spite of this, in spite of such vocal organizations such as J Street that are less pro-Israel and in spite of the fact that younger American Jews may feel less emotional attachment to Israel than those of us who grew up during or just after the Holocaust, that American Jews are still overwhelmingly pro-Israel.
My belief is that there has simply been a huge amount of denial on the part of liberal Jews who over the years find it increasingly hard to reconcile their affinity for leftist politics with their attachment to Israel which is now so vilified on the left. Case in point – Alan Dershowitz. In any case the chickens are coming home to roost now and the contradictions are now overwhelming, exploded by the Iran deal as well as Obama’s typically ruthless, vindictive style of politics.
If only Obama had explained to Iranians that the only other option besides a deal was war, he might have gotten a much better deal.
1) I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for enough Democrats to oppose the deal. They’re as spineless as the Republicans.
2) Obama is obviously trying to change the facts on the ground to make the situation permanent, but it doesn’t matter. The ultimate check on the deal resides with Russia and China, since they are supplying the nuclear tech. Whoever succeeds Obama can reverse the deal by squeezing Russia and China.
A little CIA backing of Iranian revolutionary dissident groups might help as well.
Neo,
I note the second volume of Manchester’s The Last Lion on the desk in your blog’s masthead photo. I’ve worked my way through the first volume and am about halfway through the second, and so much seems to be parallel to our times, with the rise of Nazi Germany, but more specifically with the willful blindness of the British government to observe and identify what was coming. Have you ever written on this? I have read a fair amount of your work, but have yet to run across that. In any case, it is stunning, and more than a bit unnerving.
Neo said:
“Talking about “the Jewish vote” as though it had anything to do with Judaism or support of Israel is like including everyone who was born into a Christian family but left the Christian church in “the Christian vote.””
I’m not sure the analogy works here. The term “Jewish” refers to a member of an ethnic group as well as to an adherent of a religious faith. Christianity has nothing to do with ethnicity.
The controversy surrounding the Iran treaty [to call it by its real name], should cause significant and increasing cognitive dissonance for American Jews, not only because of the Treaty (which is as bad or worse for America as it is for Israel), but because of the recent Progressive domination of the Democratic party. Progressive anti-Semitism has been bubbling (mostly) below the surface for years. Defense of the Iran Treaty is making this cesspool visible for all to see.
The President’s ever more rabid supporters in Moveon, the NetRoots, CodePink and faculty lounges across America are making it increasingly obvious that anti-Zionism/anti-Semitism is not an accidental by-product of this fight. As they say in the tech community, for the Left, anti-Semitism is a FEATURE, not a BUG.
Why? Much of today’s Progressive ideology is grounded in ‘social justice’ themes compatible with or actually nurturing Jew hatred: third world post-colonialism (West bad, Third World good, Israel an illegitimate Western outpost), anti-capitalism (a Jewish invention), a longing for utopian political innocence (get [Jewish] money out of politics), pacifism (neocon Jewish warmongers threaten humanity whereas the “people” want world peace), Occupy (secret [Jewish] banking interests corrupt politics and control [Jewish] media discourse, oppressing the 99%), philo-Islamism (Islam is the religion of the world’s poor and idealizes true equality and peace, in contrast to Jewish tribal ‘exclusivity’ and Christianity’s 2000 year history of violence against ‘the other’), NGO-ism (romantic globalism seeks to transcend all outmoded nationalisms, particularly illegitimate Jewish national aspirations).
Given that the Democratic party has lost its Scoop Jackson/Moynihan wing and is increasingly a creature of the NetRoots and Code Pinks, anti-Semitism has become more and more obvious. Progressivism’s core anti-Semitism is becoming socially acceptable by the PC guardians of our discourse.
San Francisco Occupy’s website, for example, distributed anti-Semitic rants straight out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and labelled them as important, must-watch videos. The ANSWER coalition makes no secret of its Jew-hatred. And the President’s supporters are popularizing the dual loyalty, Jewish warmonger, Israel-firster, corrupting influence of Jewish money tropes beloved of the quite marginalized extreme Right and the now mainstream PC Left. (That the University of California needs to put policies in place to combat anti-Semitism AND finds that defining anti-Semitism is controversial tells you everything you need to know about the culture of the PC Left.)
It will be interesting to watch the American Jewish response. Conservatives in the US, Canada and the UK are the strongest and most unified voices against anti-Semitism and ant-Zionism (and have been in the US since the days of Bill Buckley who led the fight–in the late 1950’s–to make Jew hatred anathema on the mainstream Right). But this is mostly (and sadly) invisible to the US Jewish community.
Due to the (now quite irrelevant) memory 1930’s Republican anti-Semitism and the Jewish canonization of FDR, the community has voted overwhelmingly for the Democrats for the last 80 years. For an American jew, to vote Republican is almost akin to breaking a prohibition from Deuteronomy, the ultimate unclean act of political defilement, a forsaking of family and tradition. As I was told by a Jewish faculty colleague decades ago, “you’re a Jewish Republican and NOT a socialist? How can that be? You CAN’T (she screamed) be Jewish and not be on the Left.”
How American Jews handle cognitive dissonance will be interesting to watch.
How American Jews handle cognitive dissonance will be interesting to watch.
They won’t have to, it’ll be taken care of:
“Go back to the ovens, you need a big oven that’s what you need,”
They’ll act surprised ….
Eric J.:
Gov. Scott Walker summarized it well over the weekend. Speaking of President Obama and the Iran “negotiations”, Walker said: “I’d love to play cards with this guy. He folds on everything.”
Perhaps Schumer will be purged soon, have an “accident” or have charges filed against him given “evidence”. The consequences of a puppet trying to control the master, is severe.