The Times has a big pro-Obama op-ed from Haim Saban today in which Saban makes the undeniable case that Obama has been in essence a Likudnik on Israel. The piece endorses the settlements and dispenses with the mantra of “two states living side by side.” There is no talk about a Palestinian state, except to congratulate Obama for blocking the Palestinian Authority’s unilateral declaration of one.
The real estate the Times granted to Saban– funder of the Democratic Party and the Brookings Institution, and “an Israeli-American who cares deeply about the survival of Israel and the future of the Jewish people”– is a frank acknowledgment of the Israel lobby’s importance in the political process. The piece’s point of view is shockingly lobbycentric. Will folks wake up to the hold that these rightwing forces have in our politics?
The piece is called The Truth About Obama and Israel. It uses the word Palestinian once, and includes these pro-settlement statements:
When the first President Bush had disagreements with Israel over its settlement policy, he threatened to withhold loan guarantees from Israel. Mr. Obama has had his own disagreements with Mr. Netanyahu over the settlers but has never taken such a step. To the contrary, he has increased aid to Israel and given it access to the most advanced military equipment, including the latest fighter aircraft.,,
Mr. Obama has been steadfast against efforts to delegitimize Israel in international forums. He has blocked Palestinian attempts to bypass negotiations and achieve United Nations recognition as a member state, a move that would have opened the way to efforts by Israel’s foes to sanction and criminalize its policies. As a sign of its support, the Obama administration even vetoed a Security Council resolution on Israeli settlements, a resolution that mirrored the president’s position and that of every American administration since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
That was the power of the lobby right there: Obama went against US policy on settlements. I know that many idealistic Americans think that Obama will push for a two-state solution in a second term. I doubt it–he surely sees that as a wasted effort.
You wouldn’t believe what some of these “idealistic” Americans think is in store for us if Barry and the O’s get re-elected. Peace in the Middle East, withdrawal from afghanistan, big tax increases on the rich, card-check for workers, single payer health insurance – i swear i was told all of this is going to happen, this past weekend at a family BBQ. He’s just biding his time and so on. Oy, someone pass the dutchey.
Dan, I guess I was at the same BBQ – exactly four years ago today.
the so called left has been having that BBQ for fifty years
DAN CROWTHER- I, too, believe that if he wins we will see a different Obama. You think he is bad now, just wait. No more Mr. Nice Guy! I’m not joking.
Keith – Exactly. He’ll be worse! haha.
Can’t wait to see what tyrannical powers he claims in his second term, and can’t wait to see what the next nutjob does with them! I feel like the guy riding the bomb to the ground in Dr. Strangelove…….
So in essence he’s saying that no matter who’s president, the lobby has their balls in a vice.
and it didn’t even cost saban $100 million
RE: “The Times has a big pro-Obama op-ed from Haim Saban today… The piece endorses the settlements and dispenses with the mantra of ‘two states living side by side’. There is no talk about a Palestinian state, except to congratulate Obama for blocking the Palestinian Authority’s unilateral declaration of one.” ~ Weiss
MY COMMENT: Elliott Abrams convinced me several years that the two-state solution was completely dead! Saban’s op-ed just confirms this.
FROM ELLIOTT ABRAMS, The Washington (Neocon) Post, 04/08/09:
SOURCE – link to washingtonpost.com
P.S. Elliott Abrams has totally convinced me by the sheer power of his “logic” (and his excellent math skills)!
Ergo, the ‘Abrams Principle’ stands for the proposition that more Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank will result in a larger area for the Palestinian state. That’s why I say: “Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead” with the settlement actvity; so as to result in the largest Palestinian state possible (from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River)! “Let Right Be Done.”
RE: “The real estate the Times granted to Saban– funder of the Democratic Party and the Brookings Institution, and “an Israeli-American who cares deeply about the survival of Israel and the future of the Jewish people”– is a frank acknowledgment of the Israel lobby’s importance in the political process. The piece’s point of view is shockingly lobbycentric. Will folks wake up to the hold that these rightwing forces have in our politics?” ~ Weiss
MY COMMENT: Since the corporate/mainstream media is complicit with these “rightwing forces”, it will probably take a few more wars before Americans wake up.
SEE: “Haim Saban”, by Matthew Yglesias, The Atlantic, June 10, 2007
SOURCE – link to theatlantic.com
On a related note, I thought there was a revealing passage in Friedman’s column today. He speaks of Romney doing ‘some Arab-bashing to win over the Jews, some Russia-bashing (our “No. 1 geopolitical foe”) to bring in the Polish vote….’.
Now I don’t claim to be an expert on Polish Americans, but I have to believe that our talking tough to Russia has almost no effect on how they cast their votes. In fact, I kind of doubt that they have any sharply defined communal list of voting priorities, and question whether they actually see themselves as a distinct ‘community’ (beyond the 1st generation).
Which leads me to believe that their inclusion in the passage was intended to make the courting of the the Jewish vote seem more run of the mill, less unusual.
I wouldn’t even bet it was done consciously. It’s more like a journalistic reflex.
“Now I don’t claim to be an expert on Polish Americans, but I have to believe that our talking tough to Russia has almost no effect on how they cast their votes. In fact, I kind of doubt that they have any sharply defined communal list of voting priorities, and question whether they actually see themselves as a distinct ‘community’ (beyond the 1st generation).”
Polish Americans definitely see themselves as a distinct community. One of the “white ethnics” in the Northeast and Upper Midwest. I personally know a few older Polish Americans (3rd-ish generation) for whom talking tough against Russians is a definite plus. Not dispositive, by any means, but a plus. I think that kind of thinking was really big during the Cold War and has kind of died since the wall came down and Poland joined NATO. (Remember the joke, the Poles fought the Germans and then fought the Russians because it’s always business before pleasure.)
Woody -
As I said I’m no expert. But are the once strong Polish American communities in the Midwest still intact in a meaningful sense? Do the 3rd and 4th generations still identify themselves with this community (which would presume little or no intermarriage over the past century)? I grew up years ago in a a town with a very large Slavic population; the Poles, Lithuanians etc. had distinct neighborhoods and a strong sense of ethnic/religious identity. I think that sense of communal identity has really faded.
I don’t know about the Midwest. I do know in the Northeast.
There is a lot of intermarriage, but even still, you have people who feel an ethnic identity, but it has changed; it’s weakened in some ways, but it still exists. It think in some ways it’s even somewhat vicarious, through older members of the family. I don’t think people feel it the way their Grandparents did (who might still live in the same parishes, for example, where when they grew up, it really WAS an ethnic community) did, but I think they see that it was part of their family’s life; the family’s history, so they feel something of it. (If you get together at an Irish American wedding, you’ll see 20-year olds out there singing “Celtic Symphony,” not because they’ve any care about Scottish Football or because they have any real connection to the Troubles or even to Ireland, but because it’s an Irish thing; a family thing.)
I don’t think the intermarriage thing is an issue for the first few generations. Someone who’s half-Polish and half-Italian feels Polish when visiting Babka and Italian when visiting Nana.
But I don’t think it’s a very deep connection. The anti-Russian feeling in the Polish-American community, in my experience, is stronger the older you get. But young people in the community don’t care much at all about that stuff. For them, the sense of community is a sense of personal pride, of group belonging, not about the grievances of the old country.
Which leads me to believe that their inclusion in the passage was intended to make the courting of the the Jewish vote seem more run of the mill, less unusual”….evets
I have noticed that before….a pretty typical tactic to downplay the Jewish element or connection to Israel and Iran in the campaign.
Maybe if they’re first gen Poles, but after the first generation, theyr completely assimilated and no one gives two poops.
“Which leads me to believe that their inclusion in the passage was intended to make the courting of the the Jewish vote seem more run of the mill, less unusual.”
Yup.
I wonder if Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson are buddies. I bet they go to a lot of the same events and make small talk. They probably “mean girl” George Soros too… (“OMG- do you see what tie Soros is wearing today- so last season”) There isn’t really much of a difference between the two, except maybe Saban is willing to pay slightly more taxes than Adelson.
There isn’t really much of a difference between the two, except maybe Saban is willing to pay slightly more taxes than Adelson.
Nope, Saban is much more media savvy than Adelson:
*Univision Chairman Saban Takes Wider Role as CEO Uva Resigns After 4 Years
link to bloomberg.com
*Egypt-born Jew looks to buy 50% of Al-Jazeera: Haim Saban first showed a reported interest in the Doha-based network after a visit in 2004.
link to haaretz.com
What could the Times now oppose to its following official definition:
“Any propaganda for anyone with enough money, even if unfit to print on soiled toilet paper.”