(Image: pluralistnation.com)
This is hard to believe. MSNBC's coverage of New Hampshire began tonight with a five or six minute conversation about Sheldon Adelson's "dark money," as Rachel Maddow put it-- the $5 million injection to Gingrich's super PAC that has revived the former speaker's presidential race-- without the word Israel crossing anyone's lips.
Chris Matthews
Maddow called on investigative reporter Michael Isikoff to explain the money, and yet again Isikoff pulled the wool over his viewers' eyes about Sheldon Adelson's ends. Isikoff described Adelson as "a billionaire with his own economic interests-- a casino empire." He went on to speak of Adelson's passion against unions.
Maddow kept up the blackjack talk. She said that Adelson's "history, past interests" will become a defining factor in this campaign-- and that's casinos.
The conversation flowed into a righteous attack on "vulture capitalism" and billionaires.
Not till Chris Matthews came on a few minutes later did we get any inkling of Adelson's real interest. Thank god for Matthews, he got at the real motive behind this gift: foreign policy. Gingrich has "fluffed up Sheldon Adelson with a lot of fear talk about Ron Paul" and Paul's "isolationism," Matthews said. So Adelson will continue to cough the money up.
This has "nothing to do with theories of capitalism," Matthews said. Adelson is "afraid of the Middle East situation," and he's going to keep spending money.
As I say, you did not hear the word Israel in any of these immaculate perceptions. But good for Matthews for saying something about the emperor's lack of clothes.
For her part, Maddow has turned Adelson into a conventional liberal exhibit about campaign finance: the "quirks" of "truly motivated" billionaires are going to drive our political process, Adelson could decide to spend 100s of millions to defy the public will.
As I keep shouting, Adelson's main interest--Israel holding Jerusalem and the occupied territories--was an element of the 2000 presidential race, when he gave unregulated amounts to Republican committees, and Bush's foreign policy reflected Adelson's neoconservatism. It would be nice if the media would give Americans the chance to think about this.
Update:
Matthews’s analysis is the best answer to a reader’s questions: On what basis can anyone say that Adelson's game here is Israel when he might as well give his money to Mitt Romney? It would have the same effect. What's he gain by throwing $5 million away at Gingrich, which can only damage Romney?
The answer in a word is leverage on Romney. The Republican process is now a war over Romney’s policy positions; and the neoconservative fear is that he will be tugged left by Ron Paul's movement inside the party. So Adelson is applying a counter-weight by giving money to someone who is to Romney's right on Israel questions. Anything that brings down Ron Paul’s vote will advance neocon policymaking inside the Republican party.
Notice that Paul is working that leverage. He made nice to Romney lately, defending him yesterday on the Bain Capital criticism, and pretty much promising not to run as a third party candidate. Last night Al Sharpton expressed fear that Ron Paul would get to determine a President Romney Supreme Court pick.
In other words, the game now is how much influence Ron Paul will have.
A second aspect of the leverage game is Adelson being coy with his millions. Romney wants those millions for his campaign against Obama. But by giving a smallish-for-Adelson contribution to Gingrich (he had promised $20 million back in December, Politico tells us), Adelson is holding out. He knows that he who holds out longest has the most leverage. He may play this game with Romney for a while….
Thanks Phil, and right on. Indeed “It would be nice if the media would give Americans the chance to think about this.” God forbid, what if the price the Romney Team has to pay in order to get Gingrich to go away is to appease Adelson and adopt his “dark” agenda? Then if Romney beats Obama the unreconstructed neocons will just flood back into the new administration. My poor country!
“the Middle East situation”… How pathetic is Matthews.
I’ve heard the question asked in ‘liberal’ circles so many times…Why do the Republicans love Israel so much? The Republicans have gone so overboard in professing love for Israel that they can’t help but noticing it now.
The stock answer seems to be something about Christian Zionists wanting the Jesus to come back..or because Jewish voters vote in blocs…’FL is important!’ saying they do it for money from people like Adelson is still taboo. Until they read it in their papers or someone like Maddow says they don’t seem capable of making that connection themselves. It is very strange.
I don’t remember if I read it here or saw it on Television myself, but once she was on Letterman and said she was reading comic books while recovering from being sick. Said one of the comics was Palestine by Joe Sacco. So she isn’t as dumb in re I/P as she pretends to be. She knows the score.
My understanding is that Matthews supports Israel’s policies. There is a link either money or personal that influences his coverage of the IP issue which is favorable to Israel
“He went on to speak of Adelson’s passion against unions.”
Most Israeli Jewish workers are union members.
“Adelson is “afraid of the Middle East situation,” and he’s going to keep spending money.”
If Israel had been run on Jewish values instead of money and hatred it might have been sustainable.
Looking at that Iranian scientist assassination it is very hard to see the Zionist project ending peacefully.
They focused on the contradiction between Adelson who does not support unions and Romney who does not support unions. Now vulture capitalist Adelson/Gingrich allegedly attacking Romney on vulture capitalism
Adelson knows Newt has zero chance of winning, just like he knows Paul has no chance – he is practicing a form of censorship, introducing the antithesis to Paul, hoping it ends up a zero sum game. He can’t censor Paul outright, so he uses the old megaphone technique, and turns up the volume on his speech.
This is what modern american censorship looks like. If you can’t block speech, you drown it out.
And, I would also say, his gift is not only to censor Paul, its a shot across the bow of anyone looking to report the truth about cats like Adelson. If he’s willing to give 5 million to newt fckin gingrich, what isn’t he willing to do? Whatever else is true about the clowns on TV, they are all highly paid corporate employees – who rely on advertising dollars, they aren’t going to go out too far on any limbs – ol’ shelly is just making sure they stay in line
Paul got 22% in New Hampshire. He’s like a right wing version of Occupy. People know the system is broken.
The message is being heard and the ziobots don’t like it.
Zionism needs darkness and secrecy.
Add Huntsman’s vote, and that’s 40% of the electorate in the NH Republican primary who want immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan.
New Hampshire is a different animal though, from the rest of the republican electorate – and everyone can vote in NH, it’s not just republicans voting in the primaries…..
yeah. here’s the exit polling:link to elections.nytimes.com
32% of independents went with Paul and 24% of democrats as well.
Republicans stuck with Romney.
Tom Ferguson (from Umass Boston) had a NH poll that said 45% of the electorate defined themselves as “moderate” or “liberal” — New Hampshire also has some of the lowest church attendance in the country, it just ain’t that “conservative” in relation to the rest of the republican electorate
When I lived in the Boston area, we sure considered New Hampshire — the home of the Sununus, William Loeb, Styles Bridges, Gordon Humphrey, Norris Cotton, Sherman Adams, and Judd Gregg — conservative.
sure, but compared to the south? Boston is pretty conservative itself, and so is the Rte 93 corridor both north and south of the city – the new hampshire conservative were just smarter than everyone else, they hopped across the border, evaded all kind of taxes and higher home prices, while still getting their Boston salary…. (OT I know)
I have family in NH but they’re not noted for conservatism. Just to annoy Dan I’ll mention a trio of points picked up from Brit commentary on the Republican process – that only Romney and Paul have a genuine nationwide network, built up in previous campaigns; Romney seems to be spending a massive fortune for less response than you might expect; still, if Romney gets South Carolina in the bag he will more or less have the nomination in the bag as well.
hahaha!! I love the Brits!!
there are only two things I hate in this world, people who are intolerant of other peoples cultures, and the dutch! :)
link to youtube.com
And five million is chump change for this Dorchester oligarch.
That’s 1/4,300 of his total net worth. I think I that is a small price
to elevate the rhetoric for the Israel project. And this is just
one of the many Zionist guardians within our country. They are
the gatekeepers of political office for the US political office.
But, Gingrich’s problem (and most of Congress) is that he behaves
as a henchman, who serves the interests of a questionable ally by
way of the new-blue blooded oligarch, who makes it clear that
Israel is the ultimate priority.
Anybody have a link to a video clip of what Phil is talking about? I’d like to watch.
I did google a bit, and found an article by Isikoff on the MSNBC website which does make the connection between Adelson, Israel, Newt Gingrich , and the Palestinians. It would be interesting to see if anyone says this on the air.
link
i couldnt find it. but it was at the top of the hour last night, 7 pm MSNBC
Went looking could not find either. But sure as hell heard it. The clip at Hardball “What’s next for Ron Paul” is worthwhile (heard this guy last night” but listened again.
Don Wead (senior Rep Paul rep) “Ron Paul not going to send them to war to make some contractors rich” Oh yeah
So, I wonder how Adelson feels when the Gingrich-associated SuperPAC he funds used his money to attack Romney.
Thank you for continuing to “shout” Phil. Noticed that Chris Matthews touched on the real reasons for the $$$$. Gingrich took a beating on MSNBC last night.
If Rachel or the rest (Chris Matthews on it) start dipping their toes like Matthews we may see movement and focus on what Adelson is about
Because of the Comcast- NBC relationship, do not expect the supposedly “progressive” MSNBC hosts to make any mention of I/P matters in the future.
link to mondoweiss.net
As a matter of interest, I wonder if the diktat to avoid I/P had anything to do with Olberman’s departure.
We know the Adelson/Gingrich team can hurt Romney in South Carolina and especially in Florida. What could Adelson be fearing in Romney’s foreign policy stances? That he would be more moderate and fact based on Iran than the I lobby and Israel demand?
I think what makes this election interesting is the fact that $20m mightn’t buy anything. The sands are shifting and dictates don’t work like they used to. Paul’s anti war rhetoric is getting lots of airtime and cheers at the debates and that has to be a worry for the Ziobots since at the end of the day they are just a couple of million of a minority who need the full support of the Great Satan to keep Israel going. I always think they are like any powerful court faction who rely on a disunited majority to impose their will. Any Shia tribe ruling over a Sunni majority knows the score. You have to pray the infidels never wake up. And never ever bring the discussion out into the open.
Rep Paul is truly the counter balance to Israel and the Israeli lobbies push to go to war with Iran
Adelson looks the same as the Dersh. Old.
He won’t be around in 2022. Neither will the Dersh.
Jonathan Alter (msnbc dailybeast @jonathanalter):
“Isikoff just made good point: Casino union buster Adelson putting $5m into ad featuring union guys bashing Mitt. He’s suddenly powerbroker.”
“Isikoff described Adelson as “a billionaire with his own economic interests– a casino empire.” He went on to speak of Adelson’s passion against unions.”
Wrong. Nevada is a right-to-work state. That’s not going to change. Unions are not an issue.
Here’s the definition of what that means for you non-USers, courtesy of wikipedia:
“”Right-to-work” laws are statutes enforced in twenty-two U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the federal Taft–Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between labor unions and employers that make membership, payment of union dues, or fees a condition of employment, either before or after hiring, which would require the workplace to be a closed shop.”
My question is does Isikoff know that he’s lying when he talks about Adelson’s anti-union motivations. Does he go back to his pro-Likud friends and say “Do you think I succeeded in throwing them off the scent, there?” (or something no doubt pithier). Or has he deceived himself too?
“Maddow kept up the blackjack talk. She said that Adelson’s “history, past interests” will become a defining factor in this campaign– and that’s casinos.”
Maddow is not trained as a journalist; doesn’t do the work. Casinos are not Adelson’s worry: what’s to worry about them?
Ron Paul is the fear and anyone who spends any amount of time in the small bars and casinos off the Strip would know this. Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Washington (outlying), Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico (parts of), Texas, and Imperial Valley (CA), just to name a few, are Ron Paul country.
The problem for people out to diss the RP crowd in these areas is that they’ve been through this movie before and they have internet access.
Phil,
Just wanted to say thanks for reporting on this. Wealthy people have far too much say in our political system, and I think this is a great example of that.
Again, a big thanks!
RE: “…Adelson could decide to spend 100s of billions to defy the
public will.” ~ Weiss
MY COMMENT: 100s of billions? I assume you meant to type 100s of millions. Adelson is very wealthy, but even he doesn’t have 100s of billions. More like 20 billion or so.
sorry, thanks. will fix!
OT, looks like Rep. Donna Edwards is not going to face a primary challenge. MD-04: Donna Edwards wins primary without a single shot fired.
Potential challenger Glenn Ivey mustn’t have gotten the AIPAC money he needed to make the run. I wonder what happened there.
Philip: “you did not hear the word Israel in any of these immaculate perceptions.”
What a brilliant line.
Paul doesn’t have to win the nomination to get the US to stop bankrolling Israel’s apartheid system. As long as he stays in the fight through the summer it will be enough time for his meme that the US ought stop sending billions to Israel to take hold. If he pounds this drum loudly enough, he may get ordinary people who have never given Israel a thought to wake up, look around at the financial mess in the US, and ask themselves “WTF is going on? Why is my tax money going there and not to my own child’s education?”
As Churchill said: Americans eventually make the right decision. It’s just that they have to try all of the other options first.
Paul’s worry is not Adelson’s money going to Gringrich. Paul’s worry is pillion passengers carrying magnetic bombs. A US that no longer supports Israel is 100x more frightening to Israel than a nuclear Iran. Paul could easily be seen as an “existential threat” to Israel. And we all know what that means . . .