Trending Topics:

The future of Zionism

on 28 Comments

Now listen up folks. You get to write about movies and artisanal cheese and American politics, but keep your hands off foreign policy coverage and Israel. Got that? 

(Former Jerusalem correspondent Ethan Bronner, who I believe is a liberal Zionist, writes about the Supreme Court’s landmark decision today and makes the wise comparison of John Roberts to David Souter.)

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

28 Responses

  1. MarkF on June 28, 2012, 1:07 pm

    “…keep your hands off foreign policy coverage and Israel. Got that?”

    A guy’s gotta eat..

  2. Matthew Taylor on June 28, 2012, 1:11 pm

    Phil, my apologies for possibly being thick, but what’s your point? I don’t really get what you’re trying to say here.

    Glad to see Ethan Bronner covering an issue where his Zionist bias does not distort his reporting. If only the Times assigned unbiased reports to Israel/Palestine we’d be getting somewhere. Jodi Rudoren doesn’t qualify as unbiased; her cultural background means there’s a built-in bias. Why doesn’t the Times send atheist Korean reporters with no cultural, religious, or ethnic ties to cover Israel/Palestine?

    • chet on June 29, 2012, 12:44 pm

      I’d like to meet that Korean atheist reporter who speaks Hebrew :-)

  3. yourstruly on June 28, 2012, 1:32 pm

    the future of zionism is as an entry in a compendium of discarded ideologies.

  4. Matthew Taylor on June 28, 2012, 1:33 pm

    Okay, I think I get it now: “you” being Ethan Bronner. Spiking the football a bit are we, Phil?

  5. joemowrey on June 28, 2012, 1:41 pm

    Obamacare is a gift to corporate america. It comes as no surprise that Roberts would support it. The notion that this decision marks some historic change in Roberts’ pro-corporate agenda is just plain silly.

  6. American on June 28, 2012, 1:59 pm

    I don’t exactly get it either, but praising Roberts as “sorta” liberal is probably misplaced.
    What’s not to like about O’s health care plan by capitalist type conservatives?
    It still keeps ‘mandated’ heath care entirely in the ‘for profit insurance sector’ with the added benefit of taxpayers subsidizing the premiums.

    • MRW on June 28, 2012, 3:59 pm


      If 99% of the people in this country understood how federal accounting works, we would have free medical care for everyone in this country.

      I fault progressives for their ignorance and failure to educate themselves about how federal accounting works, and I fault regressives for pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes.

      The United States of America is the issuer of the currency, and the people of the United States of America can have anything they want as a result (the ‘ole of the people, by the people, for the people line). That has been true since August 15, 1971 when Nixon took us off the gold standard. What he did when he did that was allow this country to have untold prosperity. The problem is that few, a handful, understood what it meant. Took me four decades to bother to check it out.

      The USA is the issuer of the currency. Think about what that means. [States, businesses, and households are currency users. Neither you nor I can create dollars to pay our bills.]

  7. YoungMassJew on June 28, 2012, 3:26 pm

    Zionism will be seen in the future as the Jews’ Nazism. It’s already seen that way by honest non-Jews here at Mondoweiss. Even though Zionists haven’t engaged in genocide according to the legal defintion, the ideology of the Zio-supremacists of Jewish people being seen by them as superior to others and the dehumanization of the Palestinians by Zios in the Nakba via ethnic cleansing demonstrates the dangerous ideology of the bots. There’s a song by the rapper Immortal Technique called “The 4th Branch” that describes vividly the injustices inflicted upon the Palestinians. I can’t listen to this song without getting teary-eyed by the end, especially by the end. I think this song gets me so emotional because it just shows the extent of my white Jewish privilege in America.

  8. DICKERSON3870 on June 28, 2012, 11:07 pm

    RE: “Bronner…writes about the Supreme Court’s landmark decision today and makes the wise comparison of John Roberts to David Souter.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I’ll believe it only when I see it in a lot more than one decision. In the meantime, put me down as a skeptic.

    P.S. Whatever happened to your hobbyhorse, Phil? Not to mention “jetsam and flotsam”. Enquiring mimes want to know.

    • DICKERSON3870 on June 29, 2012, 3:56 am

      P.P.S. Election-wise, I suspect that Obama would have been better off if the Supreme Court had “struck down” the health care law (“Obamacare”). Then he could have campaigned as poor, little “David” standing up (“for the people”) against the big, bad, unelected, elite, Goliath of a Supreme Court! I can see that being very effective with swing/undecided voters.
      But what do I know?

      • Citizen on June 29, 2012, 1:48 pm

        So, we now have “taxation” as a means of forcing any or all citizens to do whatever the government wants. I don’t understand what why the chief justice did this–not to curb the formerly ever-expanding Commerce Clause, because he could have just added his name to the four conservatives’ opinion to assure that. If memory serves, the “functional test” to determine if a tax exists is totally new in the federal courts. The Obamacare legislation enactors and its supporters, including Obama himself, went out of their way to claim Obamacare was NOT a tax; afterall, Obama had always said he would never tax the middle class. Obamacare does not fit in any of the three Constitutional types of tax. Hence the chief justice pulled the functional tax” out of his ear. Why? The justification he gave was the general welfare clause, something never before, to my legal knowledge, was meant to take the place of the specific powers granted the government in the constitution.
        We now have an unfettered government–it can coerce whatever it cannot mandate simply by passing legislation that incorporates fines or penalty fees for not joining the legislated cause, in this case, health care.
        Anything that passes “it functions like a tax as money comes in if you refuse to literally buy into the government scheme.”

        The IRS is the designated agent to extract/enforce penalty fees for refusing Obamacare (a wonderful feast for Big Insurance & Big Pharma).

      • annie on June 29, 2012, 2:03 pm

        now have “taxation” as a means of forcing any or all citizens to do whatever the government wants

        hmm,not sure it works like that citizen..checkout this video
        “There is no Individual Mandate requirement in the Health Care bill. Republicans are lying to you. ”

        and thanks to kathleen or whoever it was who linked to this yesterday..

      • Citizen on June 29, 2012, 3:36 pm

        The swing vote by the chief justice validated Obamacare legislation solely on the theory it’s a form of taxation. Annie, do you deny this? The individual mandate is in the form, not of a mandate, but of “do whatever you want or not do it” but if you refuse to get health insurance, you will be fined, and the IRS will be the enforcement agency. What are you talking about?

      • DICKERSON3870 on June 29, 2012, 4:54 pm

        RE: “So, we now have ‘taxation’ as a means of forcing any or all citizens to do whatever the government wants. I don’t understand why the chief justice did this. . .” ~ Citizen

        MY REPLY: I have my suspicions!

        SEE: ” ‘Obamacare’ ruling gives GOP an ‘It’s. A. Tax.’ opening”, By Jon Healey, L.A. Times, 6/29/12

        [EXCERPT] The Day Two spin has begun on the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and much of the chatter has been about taxes. In particular, it’s been about Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s finding that the individual mandate was a tax, not a penalty, and how that could hurt President Obama in November.

        It’s hard to argue that Obama would have been helped by a ruling that declared his signal legislative achievement to be unconstitutional. The decision was, without a doubt, a triumph for the president — a potential legacy preserver. But the political ramifications are complex, and my hunch is that on balance it helps the GOP by energizing a group — tea partyites — that hasn’t been wild about the putative Republican nominee, Mitt “Romneycare” Romney.

        And although I won’t speculate on Roberts’ motives (and in fact would resist arguments that electoral politics influenced his reasoning; go here and here for some fascinating forensics about Roberts’ thought process), the opinion he wrote sustaining the individual mandate could not be more politically damaging to Obama. . .

        ENTIRE COMMENTARY –,0,2432634.story

        P.S. ALSO SEE: “Mitt Romney rakes in $4.6 million just 24 hours after ‘Obamacare’ ruling”

  9. YoungMassJew on June 28, 2012, 11:45 pm

    “The 4th Branch” by Immortal Technique

  10. Citizen on June 29, 2012, 1:36 pm

    “Every healthy people seeks land expansion for its survival.”–Adolph Hitler

Leave a Reply