Neoconservatives have Obama for dinner

by on January 15, 2009 16

The AP reports that Obama ate dinner Tuesday night, and surely nodded his head alot, at George Will's house. Who was there? David Brooks, William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer. Two fullblown neocons, one merely neoconnish, all tragically wrong on Iraq, all Jewish with no problem with the Israeli Occupation. The question arises, for those who were not invited to dinner: Why, when the Gaza slaughter is happening, is Obama meeting with these men? OK, Will and Brooks are serious and important writers. But Kristol and Krauthammer are feverish ideologues who deserve to be ignored. Why do they have power? Why is Obama's progressive base in purdah? Why did McCain run with a frankly-neoconservative program and Obama ran against it without the temerity to finger it openly? Why does Dennis Ross have power? What are the springs of this influence? I say that it is the Jewish presence in the media/financial/political Establishment and the pervasive infection of Jewish life with Zionist ideology. The Jews who chained themselves at the Israeli consulate in LA are our ray of hope, and they are not at dinner.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Gaza, Iraq, Neocons, US Politics

{ 16 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. samuelburke says:
    January 15, 2009 at 10:54 am

    but dont worry phil, obama is for change…..change you can believe in…not.

  2. Me says:
    January 15, 2009 at 10:56 am

    Beautifully put, Phil, that last sentence especially.

    I shall call you "Philip the Wise" from now on.

  3. Anonymous says:
    January 15, 2009 at 11:19 am

    "neocon blankley wants to bring back the draft".

    "Blankley is saying that the problem with US foreign policy is that Americans don’t support it. They must be forced into supporting it, via slavery and coercive taxation."

  4. John Lewis-Dickerson says:
    January 15, 2009 at 11:35 am

    ********************************************
    FROM ABOVE: "Neoconservatives have Obama for dinner"

    ME: Neoconservatives "serve" Obama

    **********
    From Wikipedia:

    To Serve Man (The Twilight Zone)

    “To Serve Man” is an episode of the television series The Twilight Zone.

    The story is based on a short story To Serve Man written by Damon Knight. The title is a play on the word serve having the dual meanings "assist" and "provide as a meal". The episode is one of the few instances in the series wherein the actor breaks the fourth wall and addresses the viewing audience at the episode's end….

    ….A race of aliens known as the Kanamits lands on Earth and promise to be nothing but helpful to the cause of humanity. Initially wary of the intentions of such a highly advanced race, even the most skeptical humans are convinced when their code-breakers begin to translate one of the Kanamit's books, with the seemingly innocuous title, "To Serve Man."

    Sharing their advanced technology, the aliens quickly solve all of Earth's greatest woes, eradicating hunger, disease, and the need for warfare. Soon, humans are volunteering for trips to the Kanamits' home planet, which is supposedly a paradise.

    All is not well, however, when a code-breaker discovers the Kanamits’ true intentions: Their book, "To Serve Man", is a cookbook, and all their gifts were simply to make humanity complacent, much like fattening pigs or cows before they are slaughtered….

    SOURCE –

  5. American says:
    January 15, 2009 at 11:36 am

    First…

    BRAVO,BRAVO..for the LA anti zionist Jews!

    As for Obama….almost everyone in the US wants the neo's excuted ..so Obama has dinner with them and in doing so elevates their importance and egos.

    If you thought Georgie was bad wait till you get a load of the Three Faces of Eve multiple personality government of Obama.

    Meanwhile I see Sen.Schumer making a speech at a pro Israel rally and calling all of us anti semites for objecting to Israel's carnage in Gaza.

    One of these day boys, one of these days..

  6. Craig says:
    January 15, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    So, are you getting disillusioned with Obama yet? I think you should be. The really funny part is that he hasn't even been inaugurated yet and the honeymoon is already over (at least, it should be).

  7. Ed says:
    January 15, 2009 at 12:15 pm

    The two-party-regime is getting increasing sloppy when it comes to concealing its duopoly. We all know Washington is now Zionist-bought territory, but meeting with four “conservatives” who are held up as the “opposition” in the false dichotomy maintained by mainstream media (three of them notorious, arch-Jewish Zionists) a few days before the inauguration? This is getting ridiculous!

  8. Doppler says:
    January 15, 2009 at 12:35 pm

    Give Obama a break. When running for editor-in-chief of the HLR, he won by listening to the conservatives, winning them over, because he heard them, not because he agreed with them, and, in so doing, honored them. I for one welcome the era where honoring people is again coin of the realm, instead of insulting and demonizing them, a tactic which we should remind ourselves is the traditional last resort of the rhetorician who has nothing of substance to argue. So long as Obama doesn't recite AIPAC talking points, again, as he did last summer, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, because I believe his public silence is having a gestating effect on the collective thought process, which is surely being transformed.

    Incidentally, if the ability to listen to and hear competing values, thereby honoring them, as prelude to policy decisions that move the collective forward, returns to value, Obama's got all the money. Neocons, not so much.

  9. Julian says:
    January 15, 2009 at 12:40 pm

    "The Jews who chained themselves at the Israeli consulate in LA are our ray of hope, and they are not at dinner."

    If this is what you believe, why aren't you involved with these groups, out there on the front lines, taking action?
    It would certainly make your blog a lot more interesting.

  10. Ed says:
    January 15, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    @ Doppler: "I believe his public silence is having a gestating effect on the collective thought process"

    Oh, I get it. By remaining silent on the Gaza slaughter, Obama is actually doing the Palestinians a favor. And no doubt, by remaining silent on all of the corrupt Wall Street banksters who donated money to his campaign, he is going to restore integrity to the markets through metaphysics as well.

    Sorry, Peter Sellers already did the movie about the noble idiot who's silence was a mark of his "genius."
    —
    I guess there truly is a sucker born every minute.

  11. Tom White says:
    January 15, 2009 at 2:09 pm

    Well, Phil is overdue in getting O in true sight. I predict this administration is going to go from disaster to disaster and end in dreadful mush. But we are condemned (or is it chosen?) to live it day by day, so let's get going on that. Obama is essentially an unknown at the moment. As of 1/20/09 we begin to get to know him. What will it be? Not long to wait. Tom W.

  12. Rowan Berkeley says:
    January 15, 2009 at 3:43 pm

    Will and Brooks are serious and important writers

    Nonsense: they are just parroting puppet underlings of the gangster playboy scum on top, to borrow Francis E Dec's colorful terms.

  13. 5 dancing shlomos says:
    January 15, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    will important? he is a constipated wannabe intellectual. not one original idea not a creative brain cell. sort of an above average dullard. but he is nutandyahoo's personal crotch sniffer.

    brooks? take away his being a jew for israel and always lying, he (and deathhead kristol) is serving kosher pickles at mort's.

  14. Jery Haber says:
    January 15, 2009 at 5:22 pm

    A week after I said Kurtzer was in, I am not so sure. If he is out, then it is curtains for this administration's Middle East policy (it may be curtains if he is in).

    I said I would be disappointed with Obama, but so quickly?

    Remember what happened to another Barak — he was elected with 90% + of the Arab vote in 1996, and then he proceeded to ignore, and even to insult, his electoral base. He wanted to be the prime minister of "kuulllamm" (everybody), and he ended up being the prime minister of nobody. And the Arabs didn't turn up to vote, especially after October 2000.

    First rule of politics — don't be a slave to your base.

    Second rule of politics — don't neglect your base.

  15. Ed says:
    January 15, 2009 at 6:19 pm

    Apparently Barak didn't really want to be the president of everyone, he just said he did to get elected. He really only wanted to serve the interests of the Jews.

    Can the same be said of Barack Obama? Sure, and Bush too, But for each, just add in the Neocons, Neolibs, and their various partners in cynical State exploitation.

    Everyone else, those who aren’t mobbed-up and don’t want to be, can go to hell.

  16. samuel burke says:
    January 15, 2009 at 6:30 pm

    Ron Paul….

    i didnt vote for the elitist first colored president of the united states……i was ready to vote for him only if mccaineoconut had any chance of winning

    but obama is an elitist chump who is ready to play ball just to be able to wear the shirt of his home team at harvard elitist academy….

    america needs change…
    real change not the chump chage these gatekeepers think they gave us.

    we want the constitution of this great nation…we want what the forefather handed down to us.

Leave a Reply