Tonight on Hardball, Chris Matthews lamented Obama's passivity and, speaking of his foreign policy, said that his speech on Iraq the other night was the speech of a neoconservative, not a "dove." Over the course of the hour, the hobbyhorsical host several times slammed the Republican Party as a party of "neocons" that will give us "war on demand," which started a war against a country that hadn't attacked us, which wants to attack Iran now.
The problem with these partisan rants is that Matthews knows just what MJ Rosenberg and Sheera Frenkel report in the posts below this one: that the Israel lobby reigns in the Congress, terrifies the Democratic candidates, and forbids us to talk to Hamas even though we talked to parties of violent resistance in Iraq and Northern Ireland. As for Obama's neoconservativism, anti-Vietnam-war Democrats like Schumer, Berman, and Lieberman voted for the Iraq war, surely in part because of Israel's security. Just as many Democrats are now pushing for an attack on Iran. The Iran saber-rattling is not a partisan issue; both parties are corrupted (as both existing parties were by the slave power); and the cause of the rot is the Israel lobby. Until the media start talking about it, politicians can't run against it, and voters won't be able to vote against it.
Matthews has been rather feckless of late regarding the israeli lobby so I found it refreshing tonight, his comments on the subject – and agree that Obama seems neocon-lite these days … Matthews is equal parts journalist/advocate/blowhard, so I wasn’t bothered by any of what he said
And worse. There are numerous groups in Iraq, (i.e. armed militia) who are on the US payroll and have been paid to put down their arms. After the so-called surge, when the US sent more troops into Iraq, the only way to keep the violence down was to buy it, and the US did.
Jeremy Scahill has written extensively about this, but the source where he published that escapes me at the moment.
Which is tragic because now it’s lose-lose for Obama. We stopped paying those militias a while ago — Obama’s first opinion of the surge was correct, but like any red-blooded and utterly spineless Democrat, he backtracked.
Now violence will climb at a soaring rate in tandem with the pulling of American troops out — which has as much to do with the conclusion to the secret of the surge’s so-called success as it does with us actually drawing down our numbers. Obama’s total ineptitude with dealing with neoconservative propaganda and dirty tricks have consigned him to a single term presidency.
RE: “…the only way to keep the violence down was to buy it, and the US did…Jeremy Scahill has written extensively about this…” – Avi
ONE SUCH INSTANCE: While Obama Escalates War in Afghanistan, Iraq Could Blow Up in His Face, Jeremy Scahil, HuffPo, 03/31/09
SOURCE – link to huffingtonpost.com
and forbids us to talk to Hamas even though we talked to parties of violent resistance in Iraq and Northern Ireland.
It must be noted that even Bush considered talks with Taliban and its supporters, to the point that Pakistan offered brokering such an initiative.
Yet, Hamas remains an entity only to be spoken of to be denounced, villified and used as the justification for Israel’s atrocities against Gaza. Otherwise, the US must remain tightlipped, as on other Israeli policies deemed absolutely taboo.
RE: “anti-Vietnam-war Democrats like Schumer, Berman, and Lieberman voted for the Iraq war, surely in part because of Israel’s security” – Weiss
MY COMMENT – And in part because they support Israeli expansionism and the occupation.
According to some Jewish American pundits, Catholic school boy Matthews is a rapid anti-semite of the first order who is the historical equal of those who pushed The Protocols in old Russia:
link to americanthinker.com
The Jews are our misfortune, right Phil? Do you understand why people have a problem with you when you start claiming that, in a country where there are a million special interests, it is the “Israel lobby” that is rotting Congress?
You are correct that there are a million lobby groups that are rotting Congress. If this blog was concentrated on, say, revision of the tax code, regulation of the telecom industry, or concerns on social security, you would be correct that blaming AIPAC for those matters would be a “problem” as you put it.
However, since Phil’s blog is focused specifically on I-P affairs, and the dominant lobby in Congress on those matters is indeed the Israeli Lobby, blaming the influence of that lobby on US Israeli policy goes without saying.
From the voice of right-wing Israeli defense, you sure sound like a whiner. Waa, the jews, waa… ; (
If you see everything here as a threat to your interests and Judaism in general, you should probably not read this blog. Some things are beyond your control, like say, world opinion of settlements, so you may want to go back to things that make you feel safe inside, like reading Tablet.
‘Until the media start talking about it, politicians can’t run against it, and voters won’t be able to vote against it.’
Not only will the Revolution not be televised, it won’t be reported in the troglodytic Mainstream Media either — until it’s already over.
Bloggers are the locomotive of social change; the MSM are bound and gagged in the caboose, while Abe Foxman and the Council of Presidents guard them with shotguns.
‘Hobbyhorsical’ — LOL!
“Because of Israel’s security???”
Come on, Phil. Because of Jewish campaign contributions.
potsherd, yes, the money is undoubtedly a factor. At the same time, the pols in Congress are subject to the same media blasts as every other American–that Israel is a victim, that Israel is always on the verge of another Holocaust, etc., etc., and I think that many in Congress believe it. The money’s just gravy.
Yes, greed plays a role, but so does stupidity. And it bears keeping in mind that Congress is not composed of thoughtful, critical-thinkers anymore so than are their constituents.
Obama has rolled over. Kissing the I lobbies and Israel’s collective big powerful ass. Could not believe he bashes the senseless killing of Israeli settlers while not mentioning the senseless killings of thousands of Palestinians over the years. With Bibi standing right over his shoulder nodding his manipulative head.
Obama basically endorsed the massacre on the Mavi Marmara and gave the kiss of death to the Goldstone Report.
What hypocrisy…what a crime
Have watched Hardball for years, missed last night. Matthews pisses me off sometimes (as he should) but in regard to the invasion of Iraq he was on it more than any other talking head before the invasion. He would have Kristol, Frum, Gaffney, (Cheney would never come on) and would rip them up with a few tough questions. Although he would not go far enough before the invasion and have Scott Ritter, El Baradei, Ray McGovern on. Those who were questioning the validity of the pre war intelligence in late 2002 early 2003.
Bibi
“Netanyahu: Especially today, with America. I know what America is. America is something that can easily be moved. Moved to the right direction.
Child: They say they’re for us, but, it’s like…
Netanyahu: They won’t get in our way. They won’t get in our way.”
link to sabbah.biz
re; Obama rolling over to israeli lobby
everybody relax
it is an election year and everyone who comes here knows about the power of jewish/zionist money in the American political process
every person has an animal analog and Obama’s is, in my estimation, a praying mantis … he slowly, carefully positions himself and allows his objectives to move into the target zone before he strikes … he’ll wait and wait and wait … until he is ready
yes, the zionists have vastly disproportionate power and the US has totally been compromised by them, but Obama sees himself as an historical figure and he intends to alter the balance in the I/P situation …
be patient
Pundits seems to throw around “neocon” and “liberal” but I’ve yet to hear Matthews or any other bingo caller mention “neoliberals”. It’s as apt a label for Obama as it was for Clinton…Chicago School, anyone? Maybe because the Great God Capital and its only Earthly son Market Christ count the owners of MSNBC as but a few of their devout followers. It never even occurs to the Beltway or Wall Street mentalities that importing “markets” is as moronic as importing “democracy”.
One example is Obama hoping the Iraqis will soon have a “thriving economy”…maybe when they have running water, electricity and less than a million horrific birth defects from our weapons they’ll be as gung-ho as he is about shaking the Invisible Hand.
>> One example is Obama hoping the Iraqis will soon have a “thriving economy”…maybe when they have running water, electricity and less than a million horrific birth defects from our weapons they’ll be as gung-ho as he is about shaking the Invisible Hand.
Obama is a “warrior”, always thinking, planning, strategizing, keeping his emotions and tongue in check. The disaster in Iraq is in the past, so there’s no point fixing it because that won’t resolve anything. So it’s onward and upward to new narratives and “better wheels”! See how exciting that is?!
The humanists on this site will appreciate his determination.