Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School says in a piece in the NYT pointing out that Elena Kagan will make it three Jews on the Supreme Court, and no Protestants. It's easy for him to say, he's a winner. Also, Feldman served in the Coalition Provisional Authority in the Iraq war and occupation. Was Zionism, which has a religious component, a factor in support for the Iraq war among Jews manning the establishment?
By the way, Feldman doesn't credit E. Digby Baltzell with helping to open the blueblood doors in the '60s. His book the Protestant Establishment was very important, though; it said that a caste of WASPs was keeping out the talented, including many Jews. The honest question that Feldman won't go near here is whether the networks that I was part of at Harvard in the 70s, the rising Jewish establishment that lifted him too, didn't have a castelike quality. Certainly we looked out for one another. Is it mere coincidence that Lawrence Summers, a Jew, taps Elena Kagan to be dean of the Law School? What is our Jewish obligation, as winners, to hire diversely? (And yes, I include myself).
P.S. Here is Adam Garfinkle, also of the Iraq war braintrust, writing in Jewcentricity about religion and the neocons, and showing that religion matters very much indeed:
Neoconservatives are the purest expression of two phenomena simultaneously. First, they are an American Jewish example of the broad modern tendency for religious energies to attach themselves to politics, and second, they are an expression of stereoscopic chosenness, having filtered out the realism-inducing study of Jewish history and replaced it with the heroic narratives of American and modern Zionist histories…
Neoconservatives tend to unite aroudd the conviction that small, beleaguered groups of chosen believers can prevail over all odds if they stick to their beliefs… If this sounds like the sort of reaction one would have expected from Jews in centuries past who were assailed in their ghettoes and small villages by masses of threatening ignoramuses around them, that’s no coincidents. There really is such a thing as the moral chauvinism of the downtrodden…
{ 106 comments }
Phil, I can’t understand why you blame Judaism for every one of your personal ethical failings? It’s really not fair, you know?
Look, if I don’t blame Judaism for my looks, you don’t have to blame it for your failings.
On the other hand, there’s no reason why American Jews shouldn’t emulate their neighbors, and the non-Jews set a high mark when it comes to chauvanism. Or did you think they sit around thinking about Thoreau all day?
At any rate, please don’t blame the Jews. The only thing I blame them for is my circumcision, and I think my Mom would have done that just for fun.
I would actually feel bad for Phil except that his self hatred is really funny.
Mooser – If you cannot see in everyday life that Jewish is the new WASP, in fact even worse with shameless incidents of collective stonewalling and exclusion against all others in the last 10 years, either you lead an exceptionally isolated life or you are blind. If you insist, try to explain away the rapidly growing gap between relative proportions and representation.
Also, it has zilch to do with racism. This is one of the essential instruments of the Zionist mafia that now totally dominates national life. And yes, they are moronic enough to do it in plain daylight.
“If you cannot see in everyday life that Jewish is the new WASP, in fact even worse with shameless incidents of collective stonewalling and exclusion against all others in the last 10 years”
Again, Phil, this is what your posts lead to: crazy, antisemitic statements like this that sound like they were written by Klan members. Would you deny that this is something David Duke would be likely to say?
“If you insist, try to explain away the rapidly growing gap between relative proportions and representation”
There’s no reason to explain it away. Jews are on average highly educated and successful. That there are a disproportionate amount of Jews amongst our federal representatives is something to be proud of, and Jews are envied for it. And of course, as all of you know, there are a disproportionate number of Jews in the left-wing activist community for much the same reason. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that many are jealous. It also shouldn’t surprise anyone that the next generation of successful ethnic communities, such as the South Korean community and particularly the Indian community, look to the Jewish community as a model of how to organize and become successful.
Yeah, those Indians. The ones who are disproportionately represented in the spelling bee every year, because, naturally, they are practicing nepotism, right?
Jealously leads to hatred like that of Azythos. But there’s no reason for us to apologize for the accomplishments of our community, Phil, and no reason to allow comments like those of Azythos to pass without rejoinder from you on your blog. You should stop allowing your criticism of Israel to morph into this apologetic nonsense that neither accurate nor especially original.
In fact, the relatively recent move from usual tribal network to total dominance by the Zionist lobby also involved some other significant changes: the promoted are no more necessarily Ashkenazi but they sure are committed Zionists -no matter their ethnic or religious belonging.
Also, all this is an impression as long as we don’t do some statistics to follow the evolution during these last 15-20 years. In fact, I am sure someone must have had the courage to do it.
And of course there is none of the usual tribal “community” here. That was all before 1960or so. Now all there is is a regimented collective of people manipulated by a war machine.
“That there are a disproportionate amount of Jews amongst our federal representatives is something to be proud of, and Jews are envied for it”
Ah, hopmi, good for you! You admit that Jews are responsible for the Wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, and the economic meltdown. Thank you for also admitting that Jews act in concert to screw others.
I can just hear Hophmi in a few years: “Jews? All we do is pray! And eat! We had nothing to do with the disasterous US government! You aren’t poor because of us! Your children aren’t dead because of us! We’re a religion, that’s all! We never do politics, not as Jews!
Gosh, aren’t Hophmi’s views of the Jews in America very much like that of Jews in post WW1 Germany?
It would be interesting to know how much of a role ethnic solidarity played in Elena Kagan’s woeful affirmative action record: only one non-white appointed to a tenure or tenure-track position at Harvard Law School during her deanship (and that an Asian woman who happened to be married to another member of the Harvard faculty).
Knock yourself out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/politics/14diversity.html
There’s no evidence that it played any role at all, and since she became Solicitor General, a third of her hires have been ethnic minorities.
“And yes, they are moronic enough to do it in plain daylight.”
Be grateful for their boundless arrogance, both in Israel and here, it will likely be their undoing. Notice how they are increasingly being forced out into the open?
Speaking of gratitude, as a refugee from NPR et al. I can’t tell you how happy I am to have discovered this website in the last few weeks. Finally a few honest souls with the guts to speak the truth on the subject at hand. Best of all, it seems to be a happy mix of Jews and non-Jews, with nary a Neo-Nazi crackpot in sight. I’m even grateful for the Maximalist, for reminding me of why I fled from the mainstream media in the first place.
bookwoman, welcome!
Me too – welcome!
Bookwoman – “Be grateful for their boundless arrogance, both in Israel and here, it will likely be their undoing. Notice how they are increasingly being forced out into the open?”
I’d say there isn’t much to be grateful for. The Zionists more than deserve it, but they have mainly been successful in making a majority of the people believe their claim that they have something to do with, more, that that they represent “the Jews”. Now, that’s perhaps because a large majority of the people have average intelligence by definition, and/or because most are religious and tribal and easily manipulated (even in civilized Europe). As a result, a good number of people who reject Zionism (and even those who, like myself, have no connection whatever except biological and linguistic) could end up being tarred with the same brush as the Zionists. Most unfortunate, easily predictable and predicted.
This is of course a self-fulfilling prophecy of the Zionists, who do everything to stoke racism against “Jews”, whatever the definition of the term, in order to exist. The more you look at Zionism, the more its parallels with Nazism are in your face.
You make a valid point, azythos. “Anti-Semitism” has too long routinely been used by the Zionists as a club with which to attack anyone even mildly critical of Israel. I speak from experience. By doing so they have devalued the word to the point where, to be honest, just hearing it makes me see red. It’s easy to forget that in a larger context it does describe an objective reality which lies just beneath the surface and which, given the right conditions, might indeed manifest itself as you describe.
Yes, the larger part of the population is ill-informed and gullible. I understand your concern. Is that a reason not to speak up, though? I’m not asking rhetorically; I would like to know what you think.
Bookwoman – “reason not to speak up”? On the contrary, in my personal opinion it’s an added reason for working to destroy not only Zionism but also tribalism. And religion, when we get to that.
Civilized people don’t have tribal or racial loyalties. If of a conservative bent they’ll be loyal to the money of their country’s ruling class; if not, to humanity as a whole.
Very many people that Zionists classify as “Jewish” (i.e. biologically, sometimes linguistically) are in fact already just like that, with no “Jewish” ties at all.
Mostly in Europe, though, as the US is handicapped by the fact of being the Western country least influenced by the American Revolution. So the problem will be felt chiefly in the US because of our level of tribal loyalties and a religious mania which statistically puts us on a par with Saudi Arabia.
“either you lead an exceptionally isolated life or you are blind.”
Got me on both, and you can’t know how grateful I am for it. And I plan to get about as isolated as I can for the rest of my years.
Or, I never imagined things could get worse than what I saw as a young person. Maybe they have.
Oh well, if things get bad I’ll just get baptised. They tell me it’s now worse than a dip in the pool, and a hell of a lot better than the price of admission to Judaism. It didn’t cost me”an arm and a leg” to get in, but sometimes I wish it had, or at least I wish the mohel hadn’t had so much to drink. Oh well.
He has served as senior constitutional adviser to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq and advised members of the Iraqi Governing Council on drafting the interim constitution.
circa 4/03, right after the invasion. they were always on board w/dividing the secular iraq by sec and handing it over to the shia..the elliot abrams model for peace thru civil war.
bbc
everything about this article pisses me off. federalism for the kurds and bla bla bla. bearing point wrote that interm constitution, presumably noah just greased the wheels. sorry for the divert.
nyt finali : The spread of Ivy League style is therefore not a frivolous matter. Today the wearing of the tweed is not anachronism or assimilation, but a mark of respect for the distinctive ethnic group that opened its doors to all — an accomplishment that must be remembered, acknowledged and emulated.
oh my.
someone should update wiki’s page on tweed lest we forget who to pay homage to when we wear it.
“lest we forget who to pay homage to “
And I thought “Harris” was just a guy who had some connections in dry goods. and shortened his name.
mooser, your link isn’t working..
“mooser, your link isn’t working..”
I know, and I can’t imagine why, except that they never do. I’m always the weakest link.
Have you ever seen him speak? He’s has all the waspy affectations down to a tee.
Religion Doesn’t Matter Any More? Yeah, tell it to Gilad Atzmon!
Tell it to yourself, mooser.
I am reporting again this reference to “Judas Brigade” for American Jews which recalls ancient Christian stereotypes that Jews (in this case American Jews) are the same as the “Collective Judas” responsible for killing Jesus.
This is anti-semitic as it presents Jews that support Israel as traitors and opens Jews up worldwide to bodily harm.
“I am reporting again”
What do you care, nancy? You’re not Jewish.
:D
Thanks for removing the comment. I really only report comments that are overly offensive and I am not using the abuse button as a tool.
If we can have a discourse that focuses on the issues it’s best because then more things can get hashed out without resorting to personal attacks or hurtful statements.
Re the ‘Judas Brigade’ you write -” This is anti-semitic as it presents Jews that support Israel as traitors and opens Jews up worldwide to bodily harm.”
I can live without the specific phrase, but you have blundered into something accurate. something that the anti-Zionist Jews warned about for decades.
Do you see, or perhaps you don’t see, that this is the flip side of Bibi’s demand [as well as that of a lot of other Zionist politicos as well] that Israel be recognized as a “Jewish State”?
If Israel is the state of the Jews/for the Jews, then Jews everywhere are somehow going to implicated in all the various words and deeds, rightly or wrongly, for good and for ill, of the so-called “Jewish State.” There will be a lot of places where the worst elements in society and polity are going to be thrilled to ask “Are you Jewish or are you ____?”
“Recognition Plus” – wake up buddy, it’s a disaster in the making. You are empowering every anti-Semite in the world, but you’re too blinded by ethnic and religious chauvanism and fear to understand that.
You need heroes other than self-destructive martyrs like Sampson and the Masada death cultists. Follow their lead, and you paintyourself into a corner from which it will not be easy to exit.
“If Israel is the state of the Jews/for the Jews, then Jews everywhere are somehow going to implicated in all the various words and deeds, rightly or wrongly, for good and for ill, of the so-called “Jewish State.”
That is the Zionist’s fondest wish! And such a deal for them! They never had to ask the rest of the Jews if they wanted Israel, or approved of the methods. But we can all share in the blame! Which might leave us dependent on the Zionists. Such a deal.
The word “Judas” as been synonymous for betrayer for about 2000 years having nothing to do with people of any particular religion though used most of all by Christians characterizing other Christians. Imagine such polite speech that you could not call Benedict Arnold a Judas if he had been Jewish.
I agree with Les. I have never heard of the word Judas used as anything other than as the word traitor. Never. It also implies a traitor who did the deed as a member of the inner circle. And it is a decidedly Christian term, which you have hijacked for your own usage.
You’re seeing anti-semites under every rock, and you’re just plain wrong.
Maybe you would like the words Glenn Greenwald uses to slam Jeffrey Goldberg, which delineates a more detailed definition of what was meant when referring to those Israel-Firsters here who would betray the US for Israel.
[As I wrote in the comments there, "In other words, he's an Israeli." My Israeli buddies here excepted.]
I agree I’ve only ever heard the term ‘Judas’ as reference to a traitor, and a Christian traitor not Jewish ; not letting the fact that everybody’s actually Jewish in the Bible stories get in the way.
I have noticed, with regard to the topic, how power seems to move sideways before resentfully spreading downwards from elites. Despots get replaced by new Despots. e.g. the Magna Carta , a document originally indended to shift power from the King to the Robber Barons, and only recently living up to the freedom for the masses hype.
Report away, moronic buffoon and shameless, self-confessed slanderer (All 5 accusations objectively provable)
As for “the ‘Collective Judas’ responsible for killing Jesus” either you indicate another source for the existing legend (there isn’t any), or you have to accept it: the only existing legend says in so many words that the Jewish collective killed Jesus, one of them.
I’m confused about your writing on this, why this is at all important.
If Jews are to average at equality, and the firs 150 years of Jewish experience in the US was of light (not always) persecution, and now there are a couple more Jews in some public positions than proportional, how is that of any merit at all?
The 2003 war is passed. At most the Jewish elite support for it was potentially a straw that added the final tip, but the weight of the reasoning for the war was through a combination of many other influences.
There is no Jewish cabal on this. Its getting a little wierd.
a couple more Jews in some public positions than proportional, how is that of any merit at all?
excuse me? a couple more? is that what you tell david brooks when he blathers all over the nyt about jewish ’success’. this 3% of the population is accounting for way more representation in most of the influential professions in this country. don’t pander this off to ‘a couple more jews’ in ’some public positions’, not when we’re talking the supreme court or the white house for that matter. i think after enduring the repercussions of cheney and his cabinet and legal advisors you should either address phil’s points honestly or not bother opening your mouth.
Don’t allow yourself to get racist, Annie.
There are more Jewish journalists in the country if you look at urban areas only. Similarly in law, in banking, in accounting, in governance, really any profession.
What persecution have the Jews experienced in the US, Witty?
Slavery? The Jewish Excluision act? Please detail or substantiate that Jews have suffered anything beyond the normal exigencies of democracy here.
“I’m confused about your writing on this, why this is at all important.”
Says the guy who, in any other post, would be yelling about the Jews being “a people” or “a nation”. Now, all of a sudden, complete alienation has set in!
G-d, Phil.
Do you have any evidence AT ALL for anything that you say? Could it be that Kagan got picked because she was qualified?
Do you have ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL that Jews have operated in a caste-like way in the legal community? Have you done comparison studies determining percentage of minority hiring by firms run by Jews and firms run by WASPs? Have you any proof that any difference in hiring rates is due to ethnocentrism?
It’s the same with the neocons, your obsession and the obsession of many others. Because a few Jewish intellectuals are involved in a movement, it is thus a “Jewish movement.” There’s no evidence that non-Jews were restricted from this movement, no evidence that it was ever exclusively Jewish, no evidence that its ideas are based in Judaism and no evidence that its intellects ever argued that its ideas were based in Judaism. Characterizing it as such is a the most transparent and base form of antisemitism, whether you understand it that way or not.
dont be naive hophmi. i worked in a profession for 30 years. i know on waht basis people are hired. when i suggest that jewish kinship networks play a role– not determinative,but a role– im not wasting anyoen’s time. you are being thick for the purposes of ethnic defensiveness
Yeah, Phil. I’m a professional too. I work in Manhattan with a lot of Manhattan Assistant District Attorneys. Robert Morgenthau is one of the most prominent Jews in America. The Manhattan DA’s office is a extraordinarily diverse.
The reason there are a disproportionate number of Jews in prominent positions in this country is simple. We are part of a culture that places a huge emphasis on education. It is the same with the Asians, who are disproportionately represented on college campuses and in the next generation will be overrepresented in positions of power.
Are you going to tell us that the reason there are 15 Jewish Senators and 31 Jewish House members is because of Jewish nepotism too?
it’s an element.
rather than being defensive, you ougth to open up to readers of this list the ways you notice who’s jewish and who isn’t. jews were raised doing this, i was. and starting in college i worked for publications that discriminated for jews, because jews were doing the hiring and felt more comfortable with other jews.
ive never slighted our cultural advantage, emphasis on educcation. it’s huge. but other people are also smart
Courageous stance, phil. I can tell you I was a once pushed out of the legal Dept of a huge investment advisory firm in chicago b/c the general counsel and the top five lawyers at the firm were all Jewish and I wasn’t. They replaced me with a Jewish lawyer.
Which may be illustrative of your position, or maybe Julian will just tell me that my Ivy league law school credentials were insufficient. That said, my wife is Jewish, and I’m just reporting the facts. If I were black or Hispanic, maybe I would’ve been more put out, but I was a white Anglo-saxon male. So it goes.
Also, Kagan is NOT qualified. She’s never been a judge, and she’s worse than Harriet Miers as a candidate. Though you may think George W. Bush was a destructive buffoon that is the high water mark of the decline of america as a superpower (and I certainly do), after Miers he nominated SC justices of sparkling intellectual firepower to the Court and they couldn’t be attacked.
Obama should do the same, instead of selecting an AIPAC-Foxman-Dersh-ZOA vetted automaton.
Phil.
I am not being defensive. I genuinely think you are wrong and that your position is unsupported. I have seen pieces on Jewish nepotism, usually in Commentary magazine. Meir Soloveitchik, who is perhaps the Jewish intellectual most associated with promoting an unapologetic Jewish supremacy, wrote an article on Jewish nepotism not too long ago and argued that it was a good thing in the sense that we had to look out for one another back then.
I agree that Jews have practiced nepotism like other ethnicities do. But you are taking this argument much, much too far in asserting, without any proof, that Elena Kagan was hired because of her ethnicity, and in your larger obsession with connecting the positions of Jews in America’s foreign policy establishment with their religion, which I find reflects, if nothing else, a very old-fashioned, outmoded paranoia about our position in this country. It is almost like you are living in the World War II era, and you are afraid to speak out about the Holocaust (or Israel, for that matter) because your position may be attributed to your religion rather than to your logic and ethics.
One of the great ironies about the anti-Zionist movement is that despite criticizing Israel for purporting to act on behalf of Jews, you do not hesitate to argue that you are acting in the name of Jewish values, which, in your world, always bear more than a passing resemblence to Marxist philosophy and more often than not, are uttered by people who are completely secular. You can say what you want, but it seems disingenuous to me to criticize the Israelis on those grounds and then do exactly the same thing yourselves when many of the Jews in your movement not only would not be caught dead in a synagogue, but in many cases, openly bash the religion. I can remember Lenni Brenner speaking at an anti-Zionist event in New York City hosted by Alexander Cockburn and others (it was the book launch for “The Politics of Anti-Semitism”, and yes, I was there), saying to a room full of hundreds of people how great it was that there were less and less Jews in America due to assimilation. There was loud applause.
The history of Jews in America is much more characterized by universalist politics than it is by ethnocentric politics. The majority of Jews in this country, including Kagan and Summers, are secular, non-observant people who are fully assimilated.
I’m not sure why you feel you must say “others are smart.” That’s certainly true, a good number of them taught by Jewish schoolteachers in New York and elsewhere, by the way. I don’t see what it has to do with your argument. Ethnicities that emphasize education go far in this society and are disproportionately represented at our country’s best schools. If Asians are not yet overrepresented in the corridors of power, that is simply because many more of them are first-generation, and they simply haven’t gotten to that point yet.
I agree largely with Hophni, that you are making more of this than is real, or important, or helpful.
Again, the presence of Jews in professions in New York is not particularly disproportionate to the population of New York.
And, if based largely on merit, combined with ability to actually work with others, that seems more than legitimate to me.
Outside of New York, there are other nationalities very highly represented in publishing, media, professions. You are outside of New York now. Who owns your local paper, who edits, who writes?
In my town, there are a couple Jewish reporters and columnists, but most are not.
For a very long time in my life, I also judged whether I was welcome or not by presence of “longhairs” in the community.
Remember?
Hophmi,
You can’t be serious to assert that ethnic/religious/whatevah kinship does not play a role in the appointment of Serious People to Serious Roles. I have never not seen this amongst any community — Scots, Greeks, Latins, etc. It is ubiquitous and natural to feel more comfortable with “your own” and hire/act accordingly.
Clip from one half of a conversation with old ex-girlfriend, who happened to be jewish, talking to Dad, a doctor, who was in the middle of tussle with the medical association:
- “And then what?”
- …
- “So he voted ‘no’?
- ….
- “But he was Jewish, yes?”
- …
- “And he still voted against you?”
- …
- “Did you say that to him? ”
- …
- “And he didn’t care?”
- …
———————-
As a young interloper, I remember clearly feeling nakedly awkward overhearing the conversation. It was like walking in on your parents having sex. You knew it happened, but you felt dirty seeing it happen in plain sight.
And you deny all this?
Going off the Jew-this/that theme, Kevin McDonald (resist the urge to cry antisemitism, hophmi) makes the argument that immigration policies pushed by Jewish politicians were intended to ’shield’ Jews from ‘visibility’ by the ‘White’ majority.
He says Jews (conflation I know) feel safer in multicultural societies.
I don’t know how to deal w/ your generalization though.
What examples are there of Jewish politicians looking out for the tribe? What examples are there of Jewish politicians being universal?
“And you deny all this?”
No, I don’t deny all this. I said above that there are plenty of instances of nepotism across all ethnicities. But that’s not what Phil’s post was about, and that’s not what we’re talking about here.
Phil suggested that Elena Kagan’s hiring as dean of Harvard had something to do with nepotism, with no proof, and then that her Supreme Court nomination by a black Christian President did, with no proof, and then, when asked to explain what the election of Jewish politicians from places with relatively few Jews had to do with nepotism, asserted that it played a role. These were ELECTIONS, not hirings or appointments. These are conspiracy theories here, not arguments, and they bear more than a passing resemblence to classic antisemitics tropes about how the Jews have too much power.
Phil has a habit of distorting what he writes about. Feldman’s whole article is about how Protestantism’s triumph is the entrance of minorities into the corridors of societies. So from that, he says Feldman points out that there are three Jews and no Protestants on the Court.
Personally, I’m tiring of hearing this shit about the Protestants, who really don’t seem to care much, outside of the far-right. Every President of this country save Kennedy has been a Protestant. Protestants are doing just fine. It’s the bean counters in the media who made this non-issue an issue.
You know, gosh almighty, sorry to ask, but do you see the Catholics doing this to themselves? They’re overrepresented on the Court too. Is that because of Catholic nepotism? Do you see them self-flagellating like this? What does Phil think about the six Catholics on the Court?
HOPHMI- “It’s the same with the neocons, your obsession and the obsession of many others. Because a few Jewish intellectuals are involved in a movement, it is thus a ‘Jewish movement.’”
I think it is quite relevant that the overwhelming majority of neocons are Jewish Zionists.
“Could it be that Kagan got picked because she was qualified?”
Qualified for what? Above a certain level, almost all hiring and firing is politically motivated. Phil is calling attention to what seems to be an obvious pattern to those who care to look. As for this “black Christian President,” he seems to function like a Sabbath Goy. This administration is at least as Israel centric and Jewish centric as the Clinton administration, which is saying a lot.
hophmi June 28, 2010 at 1:20 pm
“Yeah, Phil. I’m a professional too.”
Doubtful, your sayanim/hasbarat activity so far has been equivalent to that of an average teenager. You might be paid to do these disgusting advertisements, but you are hardly a professional.
That is funny, Hophmi is definitely the most well-spoken of the Zionist crowd on here. His domination of the comments section is remarkable.
Hayate, do you have anything more than attacks against people? Have contributed anything since your ‘resurrection’ who were u previous to this? Chaos4700?
That’s a fair, sincere answer. That said…:
If I may, we do tend to care about any perversion of “our” foriegn policy, at least to the extent that it reflects poorly on us. Remember, the WASP’s highest calling is to not make anyone feel uncomfortable. Certainly, nothing too craven.
But since “you guys” have taken over, it’s been a goddamn sh-t show. You have no tact at all. At least, when we were in charge, we’d have the decency to take over, and have our way with, countries when no one was looking. Your lot is far to brazen and tactless for the polite company we are used to.
To be frank, it’s pretty bloody embarassing what you’ve gone and done.
And soon enough, we’ll have the nuts to say: “We want our country back.”
A “professional” is proud of his name, his qualifications, and his associations. Hophmi is not.
So we are supposed to accept his word that he’s a “professional” without even a name to Google? Yeah, sure.
“For a very long time in my life, I also judged whether I was welcome or not by presence of “longhairs” in the community.”
Good Lord, Richard, don’t you think we know by now exactly how stupid and shallow you are? But thanks for admitting it again.
I’m sure you took as much time with your son as you do plumbing the depth of people’s character, based on hair length.
This really is something: Hey, Richard and Hophmi (“the professional”) what happened to the Jewish “peoplehood”? Where is our self self-determination?
So us Jews are people enough to reclaim our homeland through martial victories, but not united enough to give each other jobs?
We are willing to die for Israel, but unable to keep our sons and daughters from marrying Gentiles?
Ah, the ineffable fungibility, the infinite morphability of Judaism, which of course, is perfectly interchangable with “Jewishness”.
Judaism, the religion, and Jewishness, the identity, a pair equal to any challenge! There’s only one thing to do:
Brush up your Yiddish!
Start speaking it now.
Let ‘em know you’re Jewish,
And the machers will kow-tow!
A professional is also someone who show discretion. Give it up, Mooser. You’re not going to be able to bait me.
RICHARD WITTY- “…the presence of Jews in professions in New York is not particularly disproportionate to the population of New York.”
While the presence of Jews in professions in New York is not wildly disproportionate, the New York demographics themselves are of interest. I am not sure what percent of New York is Jewish (15%? 20%?), however, I am under the impression that New York has the largest Jewish population of any city in the world. In short, in New York the Jews are a power to be reckoned with under multiple criteria, easily the most powerful ethnic group.
This is significant. New York is the financial and media capital of the American Empire, as well as the launching pad for the emerging transnational corporate/financial empire. Political power aligns with economic power. Whoever controls Rome rules the empire. In other words, the concentration of Jews in New York has greatly facilitated the power seeking ambitions of the Jewish elite, who now comprise a significant component of the capitalist nobility. Lord Blankfein, et al.
Hillary RC marries her daughter into the tribe within the fortnight.
Yes, “the Tribe.” This is Norton Mezvinsky’s nephew, as I’m sure you know.
“You ougth to open up to readers of this list the ways you notice who’s jewish and who isn’t.”
I’m not sure what you mean. When I note the number of Jews in Congress, I’m going by their stated religion. I’m not “noticing” anything. It’s not that dissimilar from the feeling I might have about Ike Davis, the first baseman for the Mets. Religious and ethnic minorities usually take pride in those in their community who accomplish something. Indians take pride in Bobby Jindal and Japanese in Gary Locke, and South Koreans take pride in Harold Koh (someone I’d love to see nominated to the Supreme Court), and African-Americans certainly take pride in Barack Obama. And in 1960, Catholics certainly took pride in Kennedy and doubtless take pride in the fact that 2/3 of the Supreme Court is Catholic.
If you mean some sort of cultural stereotyping, like pointing out who’s a Jew when I walk down the street based on how they look or act, I don’t do that.
yonira June 29, 2010 at 12:32 am
“That is funny, Hophmi is definitely the most well-spoken of the Zionist crowd on here.”
When “the best” you lot have impresses others as teenager dribble, what does that tell you?
:D
“When “the best” you lot have impresses others as teenager dribble, what does that tell you?”
It tells me that the the opinions of the “others” you speak of, who deal in ad hominem attacks rather than facts and arguments, are not worth a pitcher of warm piss.
lol, give me a break yonira (ZakariaKujuta@BG?) – but you were always quick to suck up to whatever new Zionist showed up here. Whether it was 3e, BSD, etc. etc.
Why is there no unease that Israel openly recruits Americans for its IDF? What would be the response if Turkey, Jordan, Syria, or Egypt did that?
I lived in Israel for 10 years. After that and till now, I have lived in the USA. In 12th grade I got a letter from only one foreign army – the French Army!!!! I have never seen anyone object to the French recruiting here in America.
Why would the Légion Étrangère want to recruit you? As far as I know, the L.É only recruits in times of impendent crisis/war and when the flow of recruits had dried up. I doubt France is on the verge of an imminent war noadays.
If you are a citizen of France, it is not an attempt to recruit foreigners.
the French have an army? who knew?
I would add, Phil, that posters like Oscar make clear how most people take your position. He calls you courageous, followed by a statement that he’s disgruntled because he got turned down for a position that a Jewish person got, followed up with the ridiculous statement that a person who is Solicitor General and was Dean of Harvard Law School is less qualified than Harriet Miers, a person who most people agree simply was not much a legal mind and had not even kept her bar admission up to date, ending with the blatantly antisemitic statement that Kagan is “an AIPAC-Foxman-Dersh-ZOA vetted automaton” for no other reason than the fact that she is Jewish.
Don’t you see a problem with this picture?
That’s BS.
And the ethno-religious variable matters you phony. Of course there is tribal nepotism.
But yea, antisemitism, hitler, nazis, pogroms, etc. etc.
Go on.
What’s BS, Cliff? Do you have an actual counterargument? If you agree that Elena Kagan is less qualified than Harriet Miers, please, please defend that position.
If you believe that Kagan is “an AIPAC-Foxman-Dersh-ZOA vetted automaton”, please substantiate that position.
Please tell us how a Supreme Court nominee picked by a black Christian President with a resume a mile long including stints as the Government’s top appellate lawyer, dean of Harvard Law School, deputy domestic policy advisor under Clinton, law professor at U of Chicago, straight A’s, summa cum laude – please, Cliff, explain to us how her selection is an example of “tribal nepotism.”
Then you can explain to us how, when faced with this evidence, you look and all you see is “Jew”, you are not a Jew-hater.
Or crawl back into your hole and stop wasting everybody’s time with your ridiculous nonsense.
“Do you have an actual counterargument? “
You tell ‘em, Hophmi! What possible argument can withstand the crushing moral force of Zionist egalitarianism?
I guess the answer is no. And we are talking about Jewish influence in America, not Zionism. But I thank you again for being honest about the fact that what is driving your so called anti-Zionism is really antisemitism.
Chuck Schumer = Black? Christian? hell, go for the hat trick: Chuck Schumer = American?
Larry Summers got Kagan her gig at Harvard.
Schumer told Obama who Obama wanted to appoint.
I never said I believed in your straw man, you putz.
Do you really think everyone is a Jew-hater? Do you think calling anti-Zionists, Jew-haters, actually injures them in some way?
You’re degraded that charge. I mean, being called a Jew-hater by a Zionist tool is a badge of honor.
You can tell a lot about a person by their enemies.
An ‘antisemite’ is now someone who fanatic Zionist Jews hate. Not someone who hates Jews.
I think I’ve met 1 Jew my entire life. Get over yourself you freak.
And your source for this is? The chairman of the Judiciary Committee is Pat Leahy. Last I checked, he’s not Jewish.
“Do you really think everyone is a Jew-hater? Do you think calling anti-Zionists, Jew-haters, actually injures them in some way?”
No, just people like those here. If being called a Jew-hater doesn’t injure you, it’s simply because it’s the truth.
“I think I’ve met 1 Jew my entire life. Get over yourself you freak.”
Oh, OK. That explains your ignorance. Ignorance of the other usually breeds bigotry.
Hophmi > Re Cliff post: Many of my friends are Jews and it doesn’t explain my ignorance on the matter. Does that clear it up for you?
What’s puzzling to me is that you are young, likely an American citizen first, well educated, but do not see many of the inherent problems that that state of Israel imposes on the US state (perhaps you do, but your not willing to discuss them).
Is political ambition a factor in your defense of Israel, as you clearly want people to know who you are and what arguments you are making. Are family ties in Israel a main factor and/or is it Jewish kinship? I wish I could better understand why you can’t agree that there are real problems in the special relationship. You’re relatively young and not a hardened old git, like Rich Witty.
You’re a narcissistic windbag. Completely deluded. Being called a Jew-hater by the likes of you is a badge of honor. If Schumel or Danaa or Avi genuinely thought I was antisemitic, then I’d contemplate the nature of my political alignment – the why/when/etc.
But when a dishonest and hysterical Zionist, like you, flings that accusation around – I could care less.
At one point, you said people were just jealous of Jewish lawyers. I think you directed that accusation at Danaa actually.
You reply to every single commentator here as if you know them well.
That’s why your denunciations are meaningless and trite.
Antisemitism is a framework of thinking. It is not a fact. A fact is not antisemitic.
You have to conflate the action of an individual w/ his or her’s ‘identity’. I have never done that.
All I said was that the ethno-religious variable matters – and it does.
Being the total coward that you are – it’s understandable that you’d be so quick to call people bigots and antisemitic. You’re like our very own Dershowitz.
Many of your best friends . . .
I don’t agree with you, Chu. I don’t speak based on political ambition or family ties; I have no family in Israel. I don’t believe Israel poses any real problem for the United States or anyone else. And I never said that the relationship between the US and Israel is without problem.
My religion matters only insofar as I have an interest in the travails of my co-religionists. And even then, my arguments should be evaluated on the merits, not based on my religion.
I believe that support of Israel is in the US interest, and that working to resolve Israel’s conflict with the Arab world is in the US interest. I don’t believe it is greatly in the US interest to mollify the Arab world by abandoning Israel. Israel has long been used as a wedge by Arab leaders to deflect criticism from their own societies.
In the international context, I simply do not see Israel as a major issue for other countries to worry about. This is small-scale conflict, with relatively few casualties. Western interest in the issue is media-driven and history-driven. It is not logic-driven. If casualties were the issue, people would focus on Congo. If human rights were the issue, people would focus on Darfur, Burma, or China.
The obsession people display here is out of all proportion to the conflict itself. That much is clear to me.
and I also forgot my best friend is black…
I think that Israel is a issue that is not clearly addressed in this country by media outlets. Many people you speak with are clueless that their is an occupation taking place for 40 years. Israel could be the leader and take leadership in building separate states or 1 state. But they are focused on taking East Jerusalem. I believe the growing borders is the big problem if they want peace. You may say they are boxed in and the Arabs don’t want to negotiate, but if Israel is to exist they need to form some alliance with it’s neighboring states. Imagine the US had Mexico and Canada as hostile enemies. It may be time to try and come to terms with one enemy. I think you can see my point and the Palestinians are willing to negotiate terms. It may happen soon, it may happen never, but the fortress mentality of Israel in a foreign land has got to change for their behalf.
Israel had an alliance with Turkey, until it recently chose to bust it up.
hophmi, your reply regarding oscar – and earlier – Phil – are almost as disgraceful as the fact that this empty, triumphalist article by Feldman even saw the light of day in NYTs. The article gave me the creeps – especially the way it presumes “protestants’ are just fine – no matter what or who kicks them in the rear (as in – don’t let the door slam on your way out).
Even worse, you are disingenuous about the Kagan appointment – this has to be one of the most mediocre appointments to the SCOTUS we have seen – every bit the equal of Miers – and in some ways worse. Kagan’s credentials are thin as a razor’s edge, her 4(!) legal papers – the grand total oevre of her life – are OK, but nothing that another few 1000 graduates of law schools could not – and did not produce in a flash. Don’t even have to be “elite” east coast schools.
Why was Kagan appointed? that’s obvious – she is the status quo personified – her most cited quality being loyalty to the rich and well to do and well annointed – politically speaking. She became dean of harvard after having been rejected by the Texas University of Austin, which found her credentials somewhat lacking in scholarship and chose another. But then UTA does not have the same allegiances one would expect from an elite east coast institute – why, their law school faculty is actually quite mixed, with no one group being in a majority. Summers selected her because he knew he could trust her to do his bidding. And she did well – by Summers and the powers he represents. Not so well by democracy – as her track record of appointments proves.
Now, one could say this was a master stroke by Obama – choosing a very jewish-named, very well connected, very loyal lackey for the appointment guaranteed muted republican opposition (after all, they suspect she’s a closet ally – when it comes to corporatism), and no more than a murmur of discontent from the already busily disgruntled left – which has more to be disgruntled about than they can handle. That’s the beauty of the pick-a-kagan maneuver. criticize her and you get accused of anti-semitism. So all are cowed into silence except for a few brave souls like Greenwald, Turley etc.
Interestingly though, the NYT and WaPo did their best to shill for her – with one or more articles DAILY! – all favorable – for the past 10 days, yet the quiet on the left and/or legal blogosphere is deafening. What can one say? that it’s a thoroughly political appointment by a president who wanted to minimize contention? that she is a mediocre appointee and at best, a good legal hack? that she may not do too much damage in the civil rights area?
Write me down as one who totally agrees with Phil except I cringe with disgust at this Feldman article far more than he does. One day, when the chickens come home to roost (and they will – mark my words), remember this article and the condescention towards all things not jewish elite it embodies. Just that. Another water shed to mark.
I’ll write you down as someone who similarly presents no facts to back up your argument.
You write that the Kagan appointment is as mediocre as the Miers appointment based on the fact that her record of legal scholarship is limited and that she was rejected by U of T at Austin because of it. Again, you ignore totally the fact that she was dean of Harvard, Solicitor General, a professor at U of Chicago, and so on.
Then you say “That’s the beauty of the pick-a-kagan maneuver. criticize her and you get accused of anti-semitism.”
Perhaps you can cite a list of which Republicans have been accused of antisemitism for their criticism of her. Please list all of the accusation of antisemitism thrown at, well, let’s start with Jeff Sessions, just to pull one critic’s name out of the air.
Now, if you say that the reason Kagan was picked was because she’s Jewish, and then extend that by belittling her record and stating, with no offer of any proof, that her pick was based on Jewish nepotism, then you are going to get accused of antisemitism, and rightfully so, because that’s what antisemitism is.
I mean, when you say things like this: “remember this article and the condescention towards all things not jewish elite it embodies”, why bother denying your obvious bigotry, unless, of course, you simply don’t understand what bigotry is.
hophmi, what I am saying is that looking at her record with its sparse scholarship, it stands out that she did receive a professor appointment at harvard, shortly after her stint at U of chicago ended and Univ of austin declined to appoint her dean. The interesting part, the one that should raise eye brows, is that within less than a year of being at harvard, seemingly out of the blue, she gets picked as dean by Summers, whom she apparently knew well. Even at the time, there were quite a few questions raised about her sudden rise out of nowhere.
Yes, hophomi, I AM sayijng that she became a dean BECAUSE she was jewish and had the right connections and Summers felt he could count on her. Harvard law school is, to the best of my knowledge, over 1/3 jewish. harvard undergraduate class is 35% jewish. Harvard faculty? 40% with heaviest concentration in the humanities and economics. So, you can keep telling me it’s merit, and i’ll show you 10 professors of law that are eminently more qualified than Kagan to have been a dean. And I’ll show you thousands of similarly meritorious students from all over the country with records just as impressive as those who did get in. It’s not that the students and faculty at harvard and yale are undeserving. It’s that out of a large pool of similarly well deserving candidates, the majority who get in happen to share one element in their background.
As for republicans not being accused of anti-semitism…see – that’s where the dynamic gets interesting. Republicans and conservatives can criticize kagan all they want because the reasons they cite are accepted as off-the-wall, so whatever accusations they come up with is chucked to BRD (Bad Republican DNA). They are effectively dismissed as palinesque, with some jewish neocons humoring them, but always with barely veiled contempt – as in “poor dears – not so smart, but hey, we could use some foot soldiers”. Which is similar to the dismissive attitude of the zionist pro-settlers towards the christian zionists.
Alas, the anti-semitism weapon is reserved for the more capable, better argued critics from the left. that’s what I meant by the “genius” of foisting this mediocrity on us: the republicans can be readily dismissed with a sneer, whereas the democrats can be scared into silence with name calling – just as you are trying to do. Not so effectively, I dare say.
As for your request for citations – let me turn it around. Can you bring a single piece of evidence for Kagan’s scholarship, judicial rulings, cogent argumentation or any other matter of record to support her merit? don’t hide behind appointments as those are the very ones that are suspect for being earned through judicious networking (which is one thing she does, by all accounts, quite well). feel free to compare with Sotomayor, ginzburg, kennedy, breyer, renquist or even our nemesis scalia, roberts etc. Now, justice Thomas – there’s a good comparison for you – I might agree that bears comparison as being on the same level (ouch!).
Lastly, calling things for what they are is not bigotry – it is forthrightness. I suggest you don’t like the truth because you do feel the faint breeze of danger that comes with too much power amassed too quickly and without regard to consequences. it’s the gradient, BTW, that’s the problem, not the rise, and not the networking. Too steep. And way too noticeable for being so steep.
“she gets picked as dean by Summers, whom she apparently knew well”
Well, yes. Both served under Clinton. But that suggests nothing other than the personal nepotism that is common among people in politics.
Yes, I would not be surprised if Harvard is 1/3 Jewish. That’s not nepotism. That’s called merit. Trust me, no one is getting into Harvard because they’re Jewish. In fact, if I had to bet on it, I’d say at this point it’s the other way around.
“So, you can keep telling me it’s merit, and i’ll show you 10 professors of law that are eminently more qualified than Kagan to have been a dean.”
And I’ll show you ten deans who were not the most qualified for their positions either. This is tiresome. Do you really think that jobs like this always go to the most qualified people? None of this remotely proves that her appointment has anything to do with her religion.
“It’s that out of a large pool of similarly well deserving candidates, the majority who get in happen to share one element in their background.”
Now it’s the majority? Do you have ANY DATA AT ALL to back up these assertions? This is a data charge your making. I assume you have figures showing the number of Jews who applied to Harvard and number admitted, and the numbers for similar ethnicities, along with their college GPAs and their LSAT scores. Law school admissions are for the most part pretty simple. They are almost completely pegged to LSAT scores, with the quality of the undergraduate institution playing a supporting role.
I doubt you can prove a damn thing, other than that you’re jealous there are so many Jewish lawyers in the Ivy League schools.
“Republicans and conservatives can criticize kagan all they want because the reasons they cite are accepted as off-the-wall, so whatever accusations they come up with is chucked to BRD (Bad Republican DNA).”
I’m just curious. Do you write this shit yourself, or does someone write it for you? This is straight out of the school of “I’ve been proved wrong, so let me pull shit out of my ass.”
“As for your request for citations – let me turn it around. Can you bring a single piece of evidence for Kagan’s scholarship, judicial rulings, cogent argumentation or any other matter of record to support her merit?”
I asked you first, and frankly, your arguments are more controversial than mine. But let’s start with the fact that she was both a Circuit Court clerk and a Supreme Court clerk, which alone places her in the ultra-elite of lawyers. As a clerk, she had to draft a myriad of memoranda on cutting edge legal topics.
During law school, she was the supervisory editor of the Harvard Law Review, a position requiring the reading and editing of legal manuscripts.
Yes, she has not published much, though she has written law review articles on the First Amendment, and she was good enough at U of Chicago to get tenure.
She was associate White House counsel under Clinton and wrote a memo in favor of partial birth abortion.
And in 2001 she wrote an article on administrative and regulatory that was honored as the year’s top scholarly article by the American Bar Association’s Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice.
I mean, I could go on, but you too can read wikipedia. I’ve provided you much more than the single piece of evidence you asked for.
All along the way, virtually everybody who has met her has remarked on her find legal mind. I don’t recall anyone describing Harriet Miers that way.
You don’t know squat about Thomas either. Thomas was a federal judge, was head of the EEOC for years, and was an assistant attorney general for years before that. And he comes from by far the humblest circumstances of anyone on the Court. And though he’s very conservative, he has the strongest First Amendment record on the Court. I don’t agree with Thomas’s politics. And he does not always help his own case. But he’s no dummy, and the ignorant shit some of my liberal friends say about him makes me mad.
Was he the best qualified candidate when he got nominated? Certainly not, at least if you value experience as a judge. But he was certainly qualified.
Why don’t you read his opinions, since you’re such an expert? They are the work of an intelligent man.
“Lastly, calling things for what they are is not bigotry – it is forthrightness. I suggest you don’t like the truth because you do feel the faint breeze of danger that comes with too much power amassed too quickly and without regard to consequences.”
You’re not calling things what they are, and you’re not speaking the truth. You’re making bald assertions based on no facts that derive from bigoted views. The truth can be subjective; facts are not. They are not on your side, and your complete failure to grasp any of them shows.
Yes, because this is what people do w/ their lives. They sit around and get jealous of Jewish lawyers in the Ivy League.
GET OVER YOURSELF
No one here thinks in this framework.
You – of all people – throwing these accusations around means nothing.
I believe you also said Israel intended no violence on the MM because they could have simply blown it up.
You’re so dishonest and shameless.
Another wise post from you, Danaa.
Thank, MRW. Doing what little I can – not a often as I should…
Hophmi, you certainly haven’t made your case that Kagan is nothing more than a politically-connected lightweight, and there would be perhaps 1,000 better choices. You have to give credit to the conservatives. When Bush invoked some good ol’ Texas style nepotism and nominated Miers, leading voices in conservative circles shouted her nomination down, and she “declined” to move forward. Bush nominated John Roberts and Sam Alito, whose intellectual firepower and deep judicial experience were beyond question.
Like Miers, Kagan has never been on the bench. Sorry, Hophmi, but that to me is the litmus test for qualification to be nominated for the Supreme Court. A judge is small claims court has more judicial experience than Kagan, and unlike a cushy diplomat gig in a European country, the SC is not a mere prize for the well-connected and politically acceptable.
It’s always refreshing to listen to reason over alarmist tones of this guy, Hophmi.
There are other interpretations of Judas/Jesus:
The Romans were the masters,
When Jesus walked the land,
in judea and in Galilee,
they ruled with an iron hand,
and the poor were sick with hunger,
and the rich were clothed in splendor,
and the rebels whipped and crucified hung rotting as a warning.
and Jesus knew the answer,
said give to Caesar what is Caesar’s,
said love your enemies,
but Judas was a zealot,
and he wanted to be free,
resist he said the romans tyranny.
so stand up,
stand up for Judas,
and the cause that Judas served,
it was Jesus who betrayed the poor with his words.
Jesus was a conjurer,
miracles were his game,
and he fed the hungry thousands,
and they glorified his name,
he cured the lame and the lepers,
he calmed the wind and the weather,
and the wretched flocked to touch him so their troubles would be taken.
and Jesus knew the answer,
all you who labour,
all you who suffer,
only believe in me,
but Judas saw a world where none starved or begged for bread,
the poor are always with us Jesus said.
so stand up,
stand up for Judas,
and the cause that Judas served,
it was Jesus who betrayed the poor with his words.
now Jesus brought division,
where none had been before,
not the slaves against their masters,
but the poor against the poor,
sent son to rise up against father,
and brother to fight against brother,
for he that is not with me is against me was his teaching.
said Jesus I am the answer,
you unbelievers shall burn forever,
shall die in your sins.
not sheep and goats said Judas,
but together we may dare,
shake off the chains of misery we share.
so stand up,
stand up for Judas,
and the cause that Judas served,
it was Jesus who betrayed the poor with his words.
Jesus stood upon the mountain,
with a distance in his eyes,
I am the way of the light he cried,
the light that never dies,
so renounce all earthly treasures,
and pay to your heavenly father,
and he pacified the hopeless with the hope of life eternal.
said Jesus I am the answer,
and you who hunger,
only remember,
your reward’s in heaven.
though Jesus preached the other world,
but Judas wanted this,
and he betrayed his master with a kiss.
so stand up,
stand up for Judas,
and the cause that Judas served,
it was Jesus who betrayed the poor with his words.
by sword and gun and crucifix,
Christ’s gospel has been spread,
and two thousand cruel years,
have shown the way that Jesus lead,
the heretics burned and tortured,
and the butchering bloody crusaders,
the bombs and rockets sanctified,
that rained down death from heaven.
they followed Jesus,
they knew the answer,
all nonbelievers,
must be believers,
or else be broken.
so put no trust in saviours Judas said,
for everyone must be to his or her own self a sun.
stand up for Judas
leon rosselson
I used to hear this song on the radio back in the 80’s…skerry times then, eh. ;D
“Yeah, Phil. I’m a professional too. I work in Manhattan with a lot of Manhattan Assistant District Attorneys. Robert Morgenthau is one of the most prominent Jews in America. The Manhattan DA’s office is a extraordinarily diverse.”
But you won’t tell us your name so we can Google and check the veracity of your statements? You are full of shit, hophmi. You can’t tell us what a professional you are but hide behind a pseudonym!
I know, I know, it’s so the Nazis don’t come get you. Or is it because you are ashamed to write these things under your own name? That, at least, would be somewhat creditable. In a ethically perverted way, of course.
Unless, of course, you know so many DAs because you are a professional criminal, besides being a Zionist-shill, I mean.
And who are you, Mooser?
For obvious reasons, I’m not going to reveal my entire identity here (and I know no one who has). There are a lot of dangerous people here who give me no reason to trust them. I’ve given out plenty of details in discussion. It’s simply not prudent for anyone to reveal those kinds of details on the internet. I do have a public life outside of the internet, and I don’t keep my views a secret. Why would I need to? They’re mainstream views in this country. It’s the rest of you who are on the margins. I’ve stated my views in public radical left fora. How many Zionist meetings have you attended?
I’ve also published about three dozen letters to the editor over the last few years, so again, there’s no secrets for me. But the fact that you would ask me to reveal who I am alone makes me question your motives. Be a man and address my arguments on the merits, instead of being an asshole and asking me personal questions.
He’s Michael Brenner, a graduate of Vassar. Not much of a Jewish sounding name. That sounds Irish. He may want to change it to Jerkowitz.
http://mlbrenner.blogspot.com/2004/12/brenner-and-cole-discussion.html
Thank you, Chu. So now, Mooser, you have what you want. And who are you, Chu?
Chu, of course, talks of reason and then suggests I change my name to “Jerkowitz.” Brennan is Irish. Brenner is a somewhat common Jewish name and for some reason, a somewhat common name in Mexico.
What a motley crew of antisemites you people are.
You shouldn’t do that–if someone wants to be anonymous then let him be anonymous. Most of us are doing that. I don’t have much respect for most of his posts, but there’s a basic blog etiquette principle here and I think your outing should be deleted.
Ok fair enough Don. It not like he’s Valerie Plame.
If he wants to challenge Juan Cole to a debate and post it on line along with his other blogs, what’s the problem?
Try it yourself. Type in the name and see what you get.
He’s no secret and I didn’t search hard at all.
Outing! Good one B!
As I said, I haven’t really tried to keep who I am a secret, though it seems only fair for those who question my anonimity to reveal their own identities.
I do believe it is against basic blog etiquette (and basic common courtesy) to do what Chu did, but no one here is big on etiquette. Chu is the one I think who first made reference to where I went to school. So I’ll wait for Chu to be a man and reveal his identity, since he revealed mine. Who is Chu?
Here is hophmi’s twitter account:
http://twitter.com/hophmi
Damn, what a stalker. Check out the first and only tweet:
Everyone’s antisemitic!
Run for the hills!
You’re calling ME a stalker?
Comments on this entry are closed.