Jack Ross takes exception to my framing the Chas Freeman drama as a story about Jews and WASPs contending for place in the establishment, and to me using Ned Lamont, who first beat Joe Lieberman then lost to him in the general election in '06, as an important case along the same lines:
My response: Jack's right that I overdid the tribal angle in the Freeman story. In fact, one of the great things about the Freeman narrative is that many Jews came to his defense. Jews who don't suffer that "delusion," as Jack puts it so well.
As for the delusion, OK fine; but I don't think you can take the power struggle out of this. The Israel lobby uses political contributions, always has. I insist that Lieberman/Lamont became a crisis for the Democratic party because as the JTA reported, big Jewish donors wanted to stay with Lieberman. This is always the fear surrounding Obama's Israel policy: If he puts pressure on Israel, there goes the donor base. Of course Jews are deluded about Israel; but the delusion matters because we are so crucial to political giving.
