Jack Ross writes, re Marty Peretz and Obama:
I think you're way off, if in fact that's your implication, that Peretz is going to be in the same camp as Jeffrey Goldberg or even Olmert. He, like many Jewish "liberals", is desperately bobbing and weaving since McCain's ship is clearly going down and want to delude themselves that they can handle Obama from the inside.
I repeat, to those who think it dubious, the very fact that Richard Holbrooke and Dennis Ross had to form that ridiculous front group indicates that they see the writing on the wall, that they are only being used by the Obama campaign to ameliorate certain constituencies the same way Brent Scowcroft and Colin Powell were used by Bush in 2000.
I'll grant that this election cycle has shown just how much Peretz has invested in his shell game of the last 40 years, and that he'll go completely mad before giving it up, in fact I suspect he's been at it so long he can't give it up if he wanted to.
A couple of issues ago he went on a rant about of all things on earth the Rosenberg case, and was revealing in his desperation in the number of times he belabored the point that the followers of My Darling Party Line were today comparable not to the Zionists but to the anti-Zionists. And his bizarre suggestions about Jackson and about math and science education in the black community are evidence of further derangement.
Let me also take this opportunity to tell you not to despair about this Jackson flap. Its yet another of those things that none but us who care about this stuff know a thing about, and don't doubt that both father and son are a major influence on Obama – the son, of course, is pretty much a shoe-in to succeed Obama in the Senate.
Unless something serious has changed, do not look for Holbrooke in an Obama administration.
Dickie the Butcher of Belgrade was not on the list of O's National Security Working Group
link to blog.washingtonpost.com
And from the rumors I've heard, he's totally on the outs with Susan Rice, Obama's Condi.
Knock on wood, but I think we dodged the Holbrooke bullet when HRC went down.
Susan Rice is the one I'm really scared of, I hope she's not national security advisor.
I hope this is right about Holbrooke. I was thinking of getting active in a campaign to prevent Obama from appointing him to any position. What about Indyk and Ross? They were Aipac moles that helped scuttle Clinton's ME ambitions, does anyone think they will be back.
Aipac has prided itself on placing its people in key jobs for both dems and repubs the last 20 years. Can Obama resist that this time?
"Can Obama resist that this time?"
We don't know. The one positive development is all the attention that's been paid to "the Jewish question" during this campaign — the AJC's internal memos, the circulated Hebrew e-mails, the endless groveling before AIPAC (for the M&W ad, for Revd. Wright, for dinner with Edward Said, for Robert Mally, etc. etc. etc.). With all the light being shone on the issue this time around, it means that if he's going to cave in, he's going to have to do it knowing that we KNOW he's doing it. It will be an interesting test of character. (Unfortunately, politicians aren't known for their depth of character.)
Who is this noxious guy Holbrooke, and why won't he go away?
Some very nasty individuals somehow manage to encrust themselves on the US foreign policy apparatus.
I'm tired of it.
it may not have to do with character. m&w had character, jimmy carter had character. what happened to them? i wish i knew how it worked exactly. breaking the back of this thing is possibly going to take a long time. and so what that " we know" now what is going on with obama and the neocons. "we" are an extremely small and pretty powerless group.
it may not have to do with character. m&w had character, jimmy carter had character. what happened to them? i wish i knew how it worked exactly. breaking the back of this thing is possibly going to take a long time. and so what that " we know" now what is going on with obama and the neocons. "we" are an extremely small and pretty powerless group.
it may not have to do with character. m&w had character, jimmy carter had character. what happened to them? i wish i knew how it worked exactly. breaking the back of this thing is possibly going to take a long time. and so what that " we know" now what is going on with obama and the neocons. "we" are an extremely small and pretty powerless group.
Who the fuck is the evidently legendary Jack Ross?
I have a dream…
that Obama has one of those day to a page diaries kept on his person at all times. Every entry til Nov 4 says 'keep ticking their boxes' but Nov 5 is chock a block full, including:
'Shed neocon-lite advisers, replace with Malley, Siegman etc; restart AIPAC spy and Israeli art student cases, and encourage Israel to admit culpability for USS Liberty; warn Israel that funding and military support ceases unless road map implemented by end 2009; make public statement about dual loyalty in US public service and media (not Israel-specific, but that's not necessary to get the point across) and also a clear statement acknowledging the Nakba and US role in suppressing justice for Palestinians, and the effect this has on how the world sees us, not just the terrorists – if the MSM reacts on cue, take them on, offering to debate any 3 the Lobby wants, on prime time…'
but these momentous changes are actually about two thirds the way down the page, forced down the pecking order by mere bagatelles like:
'Apologise to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan for what we have done to them; announce modest new foreign policy aimed at repairing relationships and fostering dialogue rather than a weaponised discourse of dominance;
Withdraw all forces from all GWOT theatres due to national economic emergency and deploy them as labor for massive infrastructure repair and new projects to retrofit communities for looming challenges like the social dislocation from sheer economic want, peak oil, climate change etc; start process of selling global military bases, proceeds to national consolidated fund for infrastructure; likewise cancel MI complex consultant boondoggle contracts and funnel those funds into 'repair and prepare'…
Make landmark speech denouncing the undemocratic, laissez-faire Greenspan years of predation and speculation which stole the assets of the middle class to feed the super-rich; appoint commission to look into the pursuit of proceeds from those who made off with millions as a reward for screwing everyone else; consider a simple wealth tax, with CIA and FBI enlisted to ensure wealth is not transferred elsewhere; introduce bill to force closure of offshore tax havens and profit laundries, with power to chase past beneficiaries; ask Bernanke and Paulson to fall on their swords and appoint Stiglitz and Krugman in their places; engineer new financial system (with input from Soros, Roubini, Kevin Phillips et al) which encourages investment in productive economic activity, with special attention to tax credits for the poor and unemployed middle class to foster domestic consumption and therefore domestic production and investment…'
In fact, Israel, the Lobby etc might have to wait til Nov7…
Glen,
You are a stinking Communist apparatchik that sold your soul to Lenin and Stalin. LOL. Don't you know that the capitalism, the more aggressive, the better, is just a way for fulfilling Gods will to reward the faithful, as per Christ's Gospel of Prosperity?
On a serious note, I have dreams like yours, with an addition that the media and telecommunication act restricts the ownership of the media so that nobody can own more than 4% of the market share, and there is a strong anti media monopoly commission that is able to enforce the sales of assets of companies that seek to dominate a market.
Somewhere over this rainbow can we add free TV stations devoted to
free air time for political candidates since legally the public owns the airwaves? And, add regular in-depth debate shows on all issues with a national impact, again, since the public owns the airwaves? That would go a ways toward politicians actually being able to afford
to act in the interests of the public as a whole. To say nothing about
actually gaining an informed citizenship.
Yes Eva, peeking at Nov 8, I find our man has the return of the Fairness Doctrine and strict cross-media controls on the agenda before breakfast, with campaign finance and electoral reform (as in publicly funded paper-trail elections) on the menu for lunch. He's hoping to have the afternoon off to clear some brush from his ranch…
"..the son, of course, is pretty much a *shoe-in* to succeed Obama in the Senate."
If the odds of winning Obama's seat are highly favorable to Jackson's son, he's a "shoo-in" for sure. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toe here.)
–
Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego
I was wondering for quite some time now, but I am not sure we are correct. Maybe the usage trumps academic nitpickers here?
There are signs that usage ultimately trump correctness here, the ultimate test for every neo-logism:
Wikipedia
The Free Dictionary
Will ultimately usage trump correct use?:
World Wide Words
[Q] … "I was wondering if you could possibly find out the origin of the term shoe in, meaning someone will win for sure.”
[A] This one is spelled wrongly so often that it’s likely it will eventually end up that way. The correct form is shoo-in, usually with a hyphen. …
shoo-in versus shoe-in
Sorry, highly iterative note. Here again the most important link:
World Wide Words