Israel’s guardian sews up the Senate


A few months back Chuck Schumer went to AIPAC and said that he had the name Schumer because Shomer means Guardian, and God had made him the guardian of Israel. He also finished, with a shout: “Ladies and gentlemen, Am Yisrael Chai. In Israel and America the Jewish nation lives now and forever.” Soon after that he said that Gaza ought to be strangled. Charm has never been his strong suit.

Well Schumer just gave two “monster checks,” worth $2 million, to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee last month, the Hill reports. Thus insuring that with Bobby Byrd dead, the Senate will vote 100-0 on pro-Israel legislation and Schumer will be the Demos as well as Israel’s top man in the Senate.

Schumer’s donations are sure to raise eyebrows because he himself is up for re-election this year, albeit against weak opposition. He is also widely expected to run for Senate Democratic leader if Reid loses his race in Nevada.

The gifts cement Schumer’s position as the Senate Democrats’ biggest financial backer, and could make a difference if he makes a bid to lead Senate Democrats in the 112th Congress. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) is seen as the other favorite to succeed Reid.


27 Responses

  1. Chaos4700
    October 21, 2010, 9:08 am

    Incidentally? I give up. At least for now. The moderation around here is absurd and I’m sick and tired of getting punched in the gut and then having anything I try to do to reply deflected before it hits the screen.

    I really can’t deal with the stress of watching Palestinian commentators here being abused by certain exceptions to the rules and not being able to respond. This place is basically in the same death spiral when it comes to open discussion that I’ve seen pretty much everywhere else in the US blogoshpere.

    I’m going to go hang out on Palestinian-oriented blogs for a while. At least there me and the Zionists are on even footing. I’ll come back later. Assuming there’s something to come back to. And assuming you guys even realize that because THIS post might not even make it through moderation.

    • maximalistNarrative
      October 21, 2010, 9:11 am

      Am Yisrael Chai, what a beautiful statement by Schumer

      • Citizen
        October 21, 2010, 10:58 am

        Where do you live?

      • Chu
        October 21, 2010, 11:23 am

        yeah, what a sweet guy. He should buddy up with Senator Orrin Hatch and perform another Hanukkah diddy around the holidays to reinforce our Judeo/Christian values.

    • Antidote
      October 21, 2010, 11:22 am

      chaos – several of my posts disappeared yesterday, too, and it seemed completely arbitrary – no plausible connection to their content. I figured it was a busy day at MW, and that I probably posted too much/frequently. So, stay.

    • Sumud
      October 21, 2010, 11:54 am

      Chaos ~ hmm, this is tricky, but I want to talk w/ you about this.

      I know since comments went to moderation you’ve said a sizable portion of your comments have been rejected by the moderators. A few of my comments are rejected here and there, but not so many. It sounds like you’re having a different experience to me, even perhaps to the point of being and/or feeling victimised. It’s impossible for me to seriously comment on this without being able to view the comments that are being rejected. A few things come to mind:

      1. You’ve said a few times that extremist zionists get a free hand here with the moderators. Since you’re not a mod you can’t know which of their comments have been rejected, so you can’t really know whether they get a free hand. Better to not lose sleep over it then. MaxN complains endlessly about the mods for example, so not all his comments are passed.
      2. It’s tedious, but you should consider posting a copy of all your comments on a posterous blog or something like that – with tags saying either “rejected” or “approved”, with a link to the comments you’re replying to. That way other regulars here can at least comment on whether they think the mods are being fair to you. As is, we can’t.

      On moderation: in looking back at the archives now and then, I’m sometimes shocked by the profanity – even in one instance, something I had said. I think it’s good that this has changed. You will know that I hold the strong opinion lack of profanity makes not for civilised discussion. There are trolls here advocating the most vile things, but using polite language. I think it’s a big mistake to not recognise this and boot them. So I’m also not satisfied with this aspect of moderation, but I won’t leave over it. It’d be a shame to see you depart permanently

    • Psychopathic god
      October 21, 2010, 10:01 pm

      what is desperately needed is an equivalent to Mondoweiss but by non-Jews.

      Americans should be — MUST be freed up and empowered and must take to themselves the media presence to say, Obama’s responsibility is to represent the United States, not Israel. Americans must take the power and right they have to express their resentment for demanding from AMERICAN representatives, allegiance to Israel.

      You find that “anti-Israel” or even “anti-semitic?” Who cares? Why should American taxpayers care? This is the United States of America, it is not Israel.

      • Sumud
        October 22, 2010, 3:19 am

        PG ~ Well what’s stopping you! You say Americans must be freed up, but there’s nothing to stop you or anyone else from starting a new blog…

        The trick to gathering a readership would be in finding the right way to pitch it. For a single issue blog, this would be critical. Frankly if your mission is to have a place where you want to express resentment it doesn’t sound like a very appealing read. I don’t think other sites (and I understand these aren’t blogs, but work with me on this) with a negative mandate like CAMERA, UN Watch, Pal Watch have a sustained readership. If that’s how you pitch it you’ll end up being followed by angry Americans of the sort attracted to the Tea Part(ies). Come from a positive andserious angle (American Independence?), with a minimum of flag-waving patriotism and you might get somewhere…

  2. potsherd
    October 21, 2010, 9:16 am

    It’s not like Durbin, Mr PEP, would be any better on the issue. He’s been beholden to the Lobby since the beginning.

    • Kathleen
      October 21, 2010, 10:43 am

      He did not vote for the Iraq war, for the justice blocker Micheal Muskasey and he has gone up against the banking industry fat cats in a big way
      link to

      Not the case for Schumer

      • potsherd
        October 21, 2010, 3:39 pm

        Trust me on this Kathleen. Durbin will not raise a finger against Israel. Don’t place any hope in this guy.

  3. pabelmont
    October 21, 2010, 9:37 am

    Well, if Schumer’s running, I’ll vote Prohibition Party or Anti-Abortion Party or something. (We need a “declines to vote” column in NYS.)

  4. Kathleen
    October 21, 2010, 9:59 am

    Israel firster Schumer does not stand a chance against Durbin. Remember Schumer voted for the Iraq war, Durbin did not. Schumer voted for Mukasey Durbin did not. Schumer supports what ever crimes Israel commits

    Schumer’s vote for the justice blocking Micheal Muskasey. (Feinstein voted for Mukasey also)
    link to

    Vote no on the Iraq war resolution
    link to

    Senators voting “no”

    * Bingaman (D-NM)
    * Boxer (D-CA)
    * Byrd (D-WV)
    * Chafee (R-RI)
    * Conrad (D-ND)
    * Corzine (D-NJ)
    * Dayton (D-MN)
    * Durbin (D-IL)
    * Feingold (D-WI)
    * Graham (D-FL)
    * Inouye (D-HI)
    * Jeffords (I-VT)
    * Kennedy (D-MA)
    * Leahy (D-VT)
    * Levin (D-MI)
    * Mikulski (D-MD)
    * Murray (D-WA)
    * Reed (D-RI)


    • Chu
      October 21, 2010, 11:31 am

      Buying your seat into office only lasts for so long. People realize you’re corrupt or worse, they fail to see and society erodes into a dystopian nightmare.

    • Jeffrey Blankfort
      October 21, 2010, 8:39 pm

      Votes against the war don’t, unfortunately, carry over into voting against Israel. Only the late Sen. Byrd of this group or the entire Senate did that. As for Durbin, it is a matter of record as noted by JJ Goldberg in “Jewish Power,” (1994), that he was handpicked by AIPAC to replace another Lobby lapdog, Paul Simon, upon his retirement. Simon, of course, had been recruited by AIPAC to run against Charles Percy in 1984 Percy was persuaded by Pres. Reagan to vote in favor of selling the AWACs early warning aircraft to the Saudis which AIPAC strongly opposed. The choice for the Senators was portrayed as Begin vs. Reagan and the popular president barely won but he had to expend a great deal of his personal capital to do so. That was considered a triumph for AIPAC.

  5. Kathleen
    October 21, 2010, 10:08 am

    Vote on Goldstone Report in the house. Was there a Senate Bill that was the equivalent to this can not find it
    BILL TITLE: Calling on the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the “Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict
    link to
    And then this
    Published on Tuesday, October 12, 2010 by
    “Why Is the U.S. Government Deaf to What Has Been Done to My Son?” Asks Father of an American Murdered on the Gaza Flotilla

    by Ann Wright

    Through his lawyers in Turkey, Ahmet Dogan, the father of Furkan Dogan, the 19 year old American citizen who was executed by Israeli commandos has challenged the U.S. government its lack concern about the death of his son.

    Dogan was killed by commandos who shot him twice in the head and three times in other parts of his body on May 31, 2010 on the Mavi Marmara in the Gaza flotilla.

    “Up to this moment, I still do not understand why the United States government is deaf to what has been done to my son, an American citizen. I urge the U.S. government to act to defend the rights of my son. I also would like to know why the U.S. voted against the Gaza Flotilla Report of the UN Fact Finding Mission at the Human Rights Council last week, as that report included information about the execution of my son, ” said Dogan. (link to

    U.S. votes against the U.N. Human Rights Council Fact Finding Mission report

    The only country to vote against acceptance of the U.N Human Rights Council fact finding report (link to ) on the Gaza flotilla, was the United States.

    link to

  6. David Green
    October 21, 2010, 1:15 pm

    There really is a “Long War” going on, from Somalia and Yemen to Palestine and Pakistan. It’s about American control of resources in the region. No senator opposes that on principle or in fact. Supporting Israel goes with the territory, so to speak. This obsession with the Lobby really does the Palestinians no good whatsoever. It does provide plenty of fodder to those who think that anti-Israel means anti-Semite. I know there’s no point in my saying this, and of course I will arouse plenty of predictabel invective from JB. Still, there are a few sensible people listening, and this misplaced hysteria is appalling. It will make NO difference who leads the Democrats.

    • Avi
      October 21, 2010, 3:16 pm

      So what you’re saying is that the Moon is made of cheese.

      • David Green
        October 21, 2010, 4:49 pm

        No, what I’m saying is that senators use the cover of support for Israel and pressure by the Lobby to support what the government and ruling classes have been supporting since 1967–support for Israel as a way of asserting U.S. (elite) “interests” in the region. But of course, that’s too serious a point for you to respectfully consider.

      • Avi
        October 22, 2010, 7:59 pm

        David Green October 21, 2010 at 4:49 pm

        No, what I’m saying is that senators use the cover of support for Israel and pressure by the Lobby to support what the government and ruling classes have been supporting since 1967–support for Israel as a way of asserting U.S. (elite) “interests” in the region. But of course, that’s too serious a point for you to respectfully consider.

        You want to be taken seriously and treated with respect, but time and again you offer the same claim that the interests of the United States and Israel are aligned, as though Israel is the victim in this entire affair.

        But, such claims have been disproved by every former CIA officer — I know of at least 5 who’ve written on the subject — and put together, their service with the CIA spans decades.

        Furthermore, FBI representatives appearing in front of a Congressional committee that was investigating the events surrounding 9/11 have clearly stated that America’s support of Israel was the number one motivation for the 9/11 attacks.

        Then there is the Palestinian doctor from Amman, who in response to Israel’s massacre in Gaza went and blew himself up at a CIA compound in Afghanistan, killing in the process 7 officers in December 2009.

        And finally, there’s Gen. Petraeus’ report on the difficulty he faces daily in making progress in Afghanistan due to Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians.

        Put together, all this information shows that the national interests of the United States are not aligned with the national interests of Israel. Instead, this evidence clearly illustrates that U.S. Congress members are influenced by forces that do not have this country’s interests at heart, but instead have Israel’s interests at heart.

        Hopefully, you’ll show this website and its readers more respect next time you decide to post that boilerplate statement about The Lobby.

    • Chu
      October 21, 2010, 4:33 pm

      the democrats are the fuzzy head of the 2-headed beast.
      (Republicans are portrayed as lizard-like.)
      Schumer is a nightmare for this nation, especially
      with his openly Israel-first rhetoric.
      It’s appalling… and he is the Senate Democrats largest
      financial backer.

    • Antidote
      October 21, 2010, 8:44 pm

      I appreciate your point about the Lobby. I can’t shed the suspicion that they are being played as useful idiots and blame deflectors. Arabs are no paupers either. And the “Long War” is no doubt about control of resources in the region, and, one might add, export markets and the death industry/MIC. Good luck with untying that knot.

    • Jeffrey Blankfort
      October 21, 2010, 8:57 pm

      No invective necessary, David. You are just projecting what you have said about me which was rejected from several websites for that reason, , namelyyour inability to keep a civil tongue in your head when someone accurately places blame on the Zionist Lobby. In this instance, your words speak for themselves as does the reality of the situation which just happens to dispute them.

      • Keith
        October 21, 2010, 11:18 pm

        JEFFERY- While the power of the Zionist lobby is indeed impressive, let us not think that its power is exclusively directed toward Israel’s benefit. The lobby also functions as a lobby for the American Empire, and, in fact, is consonant with US geo-strategic objectives. The control of the Middle East energy resources has been central to US geo-strategy since long before AIPAC became a factor. Gregory Harms in his book, “Straight Power Concepts in the Middle East,” reaffirms what Chomsky has maintained all along, and what common sense tells us about Americas 750 plus military bases worldwide. It is one thing to highlight the power of “the lobby,” it is quite another to deny the reality of Empire. As for an “inability to keep a civil tongue in your head,” I think that your incessant smears against Noam Chomsky surely qualify. In response to a recent unrelated question in the New Statesman blog, you went way off topic to assert that “Chomsky is a polemicist not an historian and an intellectual midget….” It takes more than a little arrogance on your part to make such a claim, in view of Chomsky’s stature compared to yours. You would do well to keep a civil tongue in your mouth even as you deal with your dysfunctional animus towards Chomsky.

      • Jeffrey Blankfort
        October 23, 2010, 8:14 pm

        Placing blame for the war on Iraq on Israel’s agents/support network in the US is not letting the US empire or imperialism off the hook. There is no question but that Israel’s US agents are also powerful and important advocates for the US arms industry and for the extension of US military power in regions outside of the Middle East. The war on Iraq, however, which Israel’s agents inside and outside of government relentlessly pushed, as they did the first Gulf War in 1991, was not necessary to maintain US hegemony or access to the region’s oil reserves and represented a sharp break with past US policy in the ME which was to overthrow progressive governments, i.e., Iran and Iraq, and collaborate with the reactrionary dictatorial regimes as it had done with Saddam up until 1991. Given the need to sell Iraq’s oil through the major global oil companies, there was no need to take out his regime. In fact, Bush Sr., James Baker, and Brent Scowcroft, all of whom has closer ties to the oil industry than anyone in Dubya’s cabinent including Cheney, opposed the war, something you will never hear Chomsky mention, nor does he talk or write about senior Bush’s refusal to give Israel $10 billion in loan guarantees in 1991 and how he made a special broadcast to the American people on 9/12/91 to criticize the Israel lobby and “its 1000 lobbyists” visiting Capitol Hill that day, nor does he ever mention that Bush Sr., when Veep, had wanted to sanction Israel after it bombed the Iraq reactor and after it invaded Lebanon in 1982, but was outvoted by Reagan and Haig. Chomsky also doesn’t mention that JFK supported Res. 194, the Palestinian right of return, he adamantly opposed, both publicly and privately, Israel obtaining nuclear weapons, and that his Justice Dept. under brother RFK was actively trying to get the American Zionist Council, which morphed into AIPAC, to register as a foreign agent after Sen. Fulbright held hearings in 1963 which revealed that tax exempt money being donated to Israel was being funneled back to the US to pay for pro-Israel PR. Chomsky, the polemicist mentions none of this in book he has written about the Israel-Palestine conflict which is why I classify him as a polemicist and not an historian. I could give you other examples of his failure as an historian just by going through what he presents as footnoted sources for his misguided opinions.

        I do admit to having referred to him as an intellectual midget compared to Arandati Roy and it is an opinion for which I have no reason to apologize. Chomsky has said and said repeatedly that anyone who supports boycotting, divesting and sanctioning Israel directly, and not just what it does in the West Bank, is harming the Palestinian cause, as as such, he is not deserving of any apology. It takes quite a bit of arrogance for an American Jew to tell the Palestinian civil society which has called for BDS against Israel that what they are doing is wrong.

  7. mig
    October 21, 2010, 1:48 pm

    “U.S. votes against the U.N. Human Rights Council Fact Finding Mission report”

    ++++ Well that has never happened before, and now it happened again.

    link to

Leave a Reply