Trending Topics:

Mark Halperin excommunicates Rand Paul, over Israel

News
on 56 Comments

I found this demoralizing, as another register of where the Establishment is on the conflict. Last night on “Hardball,” at 7:30 or so, Joy Reid, sitting in for Chris Matthews, reads a report from Time that Sheldon Adelson will spend a lot of money to take down Kentucky senator Rand Paul if he tries to become the Republican nominee for president because of his views on Israel.

Reid says the pro-Israel community mistrusts Rand Paul, but that Paul has said he is “evolving” on Israel.

Mark Halperin interrupts her:

That guy could evolve from Passover to Easter to Christmas to every holiday in the world. He could spend his whole life evolving. He will never evolve enough for the pro Israel wing of the party. And that’s not an insignificant thing, not only against people in the nomination fight, but in the general election. That is an important part of the current view of foreign policy. He can evolve all he wants, I just don’t think he can get over that hurdle with a lot of people.

“A lot of people.” Meaning, the right people.

Former Republican chair Michael Steele gets in, “He’s the only one doing it right now.” Meaning, Paul is the only one taking on the neocons inside the Republican Party, and taking on Sheldon Adelson, who wants Obama to nuke Iran.

Again, I find this deeply demoralizing, including Joy Reid’s passivity– a smart person who knows a lot about minority rights. And yes, Halperin’s father is a bulwark of the Israel lobby. And Halperin’s book on the last election leaves the Israel factor completely out of the political equation, even as he swears to its importance on MSNBC. “An important part of the current view of foreign policy” — trying to reinforce a dubious tenet by affirming it. Almost sounds like a papal bull.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

56 Responses

  1. on April 18, 2014, 2:31 pm

    The more they arrogantly expose their treasonous tendencies to the general public, the better.

    Could be the Sea Change is nearing. The Lobby goes after guys like Jones in No Carolina and Rand Paul and loses. It’s over for them, expose as the paper tiger they are.

    • lysias
      lysias on April 18, 2014, 3:09 pm

      They already lost over Syria. They are not invincible.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr on April 18, 2014, 8:05 pm

        so much concern for 100s of 1000s of the Syrian war victims I can feel oozing from your being. But anything and everything if it defeats anything AIPAC.

      • on April 19, 2014, 8:59 am

        Feigning concern for the victims of Zionist policies as an attempt to deflect criticism of those very Zionist policies. Habara 101 does not work on people who know what’s up DaBakr.

      • quercus
        quercus on April 19, 2014, 9:21 am

        DaBakr. I’ll bet you lose lots of sleep over those 100s of 1000s of Syrians who have died in a civil war. That is intended as sarcasm. What would you have the United States do? Send in the U.S. Marines and kill more Syrians — pro government Syrians, pro Assad Syrians? They are fair game, I suppose. Assad too, I suppose? After all, Assad kills his “own” people, and that is so beyond the pale of decency and humanity. Killing those not your “own people”, however, is just perfectly acceptable is it?

      • talknic
        talknic on April 19, 2014, 9:24 am

        @ DaBakr “so much concern for 100s of 1000s of the Syrian war victims I can feel oozing from your being.”

        Many Syrian war victims being offered refuge in Israel DaBakr?

        Say, is that the same Syria from which Israel has illegally acquired the Golan? http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/un497.htm

      • lysias
        lysias on April 19, 2014, 5:55 pm

        The sooner Assad wins his civil war and order is restored in Syria, the fewer Syrians will die.

        If we had actually intervened, far more Syrians would have died.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on April 20, 2014, 1:49 am

        lysias- If you believe in freedom for Palestinians, one would assume you would also believe in freedom for humans in Syria. Assad’s record vis a vis such freedom is paltry. I accept that all sorts of positions vis a vis the civil war might rise to the level of acceptability and that yours which seems to be that since Assad was successful importing Hezbollah to defeat forces that also used nonSyrian forces, therefore one is allowed to wish for the cessation of hostilities. (Order that you refer to- is that Assad’s version of order.)

        If you are honest about your support for Liberation in Palestine, you need another paragraph or two telling us, your long range plan for liberation in Syria. Liberation in Palestine and order in Syria shows a split type of concern that is inconsistent.

    • Krauss
      Krauss on April 19, 2014, 12:54 am

      Sheldon Adelson demonstrates perfectly that what was behind the rise of neocons was essentially Likudnik sentiments. They have never had a real base within the party.

      Whenever people talked about this previously, they all cried “anti-Semitism” and they could count on their liberal helpers to bash the critics inside the GOP as anti-Semites. That period is gone.

      However, it is telling that you can only have this discussion in progressive media and not in the mainstream GOP publications. Why? Because the owners of the mainstream GOP publications are all owned and/or operated by neocons. That is why Kristol runs his own little GOP media empire, largely because of his concern for Israel.

      I ultimately don’t think Paul will win, but that would be the best outcome from a foreign policy perspective. From a domestic perspective, he is a total disaster.
      Either way, the GOP is demographically wiped out henceforth. We are entering a Californification of national politics(Congressional races still lag).

      Also, what is Bret Stephens if not a one-issue guy whose only reason to being a “Republican” is really trying to advocate for Israel.

      Walt/Mearsheimer got a lot of heat from people – and still do – for saying the neocons were responsible for the Iraq war. They were. And they pushed it for the same reason they are now trying to destroy Rand Paul: Israel.

      For me it is amazing that the rest of the GOP base hasn’t shown a lot more hatred towards people who are fundamentally disloyal to America and who only lobby for wars on behalf of Israel. It says a lot more about the GOP base than the hateful characters in the neocon donor/media clique of the party, disconnected from everyone else.

  2. seafoid
    seafoid on April 18, 2014, 2:36 pm

    Israel is not going to win the GOP enough votes to make a difference. It is not up there with jobs. It doesn’t put food on the table.

    • doug
      doug on April 18, 2014, 2:47 pm

      Views on Israel are the dominant factor for many sources of electioneering funds. Marketing translates this mother’s milk into votes.

      • doug
        doug on April 18, 2014, 3:51 pm

        Paul will likely attract some money from the techie billionaires club since they have a more libertarian bent than old money types. Thiel is of that ilk, Gates is not. However the money there is interested in maintaining the financial order and Israel isn’t that important a factor. For some, Sheldon in particular, Israel is the only factor. Outside of Israel, Sheldon’s politics are quite similar to Paul’s yet he has declared himself willing to spend large amounts to defeat Paul. This is the value of focus. Other highly focused lobbies can be effective as well. The NRA is one such classic, narrow focused, lobby.

      • lysias
        lysias on April 18, 2014, 6:45 pm

        The tech companies are upset by what the NSA has been doing, at least now that it has become public. It hits them in their wallets. And that’s an issue on which Paul is strong.

        I really wonder whether all the NSA news has not also been affecting on-line sales. Maybe the retailers will join up with the tech companies.

      • seanmcbride
        seanmcbride on April 18, 2014, 7:44 pm

        lysias,

        The tech companies are upset by what the NSA has been doing, at least now that it has become public. It hits them in their wallets. And that’s an issue on which Paul is strong.

        This situation (and sector) potentially provides Rand Paul with a huge opportunity to rake in major campaign contributions. I wonder if his political organization is smart enough and capable enough to exploit it.

      • piotr
        piotr on April 18, 2014, 10:50 pm

        I still like the theory that all this talk about Israel is simply the cover of Adelson’s true agenda, which is to outlaw online poker. For that you would prefer wingnuts with a more statist bent rather than libertarians.

        What I find fascinating that until recently, the idea to spend millions to keep a libertarian away from GOP nomination would qualify for jokes. It would be like storing road salt in Miami (to melt snow and ice). And with reverse Midas touch that Adelson seems to have (you touch gold and it changes to dirt), Paul could even get nominated.

      • puppies
        puppies on April 18, 2014, 11:32 pm

        @piotr – From your lips to God’s ears. Not that the Rand brat is anything to write home about but it sure would drive them all crazy. I’d prefer to have him try his touch in the UN or some such, though.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on April 19, 2014, 7:26 am

        There is little consistency of opinion between the plutocrats who fund the politicians and the masses who vote. The GOP learnt that last time around. Libertarianism is not going to win over undecideds, neither is Israel.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka on April 18, 2014, 2:50 pm

      It’s not about votes, because the USA isn’t a democracy. It’s about money, because the USA is an oligarchy.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones on April 18, 2014, 5:07 pm

        It’s about money because the USA is a moneyarchy AKA capitalist.

        A socialist or feudal oligarchy would not really care about money either.

      • American
        American on April 18, 2014, 7:40 pm

        lysias says:

        April 18, 2014 at 6:45 pm

        The tech companies are upset by what the NSA has been doing, at least now that it has become public. It hits them in their wallets. And that’s an issue on which Paul is strong
        >>>>>

        yes I noticed that Paul had made several speeches and press releases about favoring net freedom—–maybe that will get him some financial backing from the tech billionaires.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr on April 18, 2014, 8:08 pm

        agree. If not now-soon enough it will be. lobbies lobbies lobbies

    • puppies
      puppies on April 19, 2014, 1:00 am

      @seafoid – So fluting what? Is GOP the only show in town? Demolicans are probably way worse in re Zionism as they lack a patriotoid wing and a libertarian one, too.

  3. seanmcbride
    seanmcbride on April 18, 2014, 2:41 pm

    It’s always enlightening to see members of the Israel lobby expose the operations of the Israel lobby so frankly.

  4. American
    American on April 18, 2014, 4:04 pm

    ” ”An important part of the current view of foreign policy” >>>

    Only to the I-People and cash hungry politicians.
    Out here in the real world Israel (or Iran or Russia) is not no. 1 in the citizen’s FP views—-not starting any more wars and spending any more money on them is it for both liberals who want more done at home and conservatives who are opposed to our huge debt load.
    To get the majoirty of your average down home liberals or conservatives to go for any FP policy that includes more war or money the campaign would have really pull out all their scare tactics, more mushroon clouds, buring US flags.
    Thats the kind of scare ads the ECI is using right now in our district.
    I dont know how effective it would be this time around…..dire threats of imminent attack and disaster are now like ‘living in normal times’ for the public. Its been a decade of Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!.
    Most liberals think they are more likely to be killed by a american with a gun and most conservatives think are more likely to be killed by a american if they dont have a gun– than by a foreign attack or terrorist.

  5. W.Jones
    W.Jones on April 18, 2014, 5:03 pm

    I’m afraid that it probably isn’t just the Republican party that does this. I can imagine that the Big Donors may actually not fund a real peace candidate in the Democratic Party like Kucinich because they think the same way: namely, maybe they would actually worry (Imagine that!) that the candidate would push for peace all over the world. Kucinich proposed a Department of Peace. That should be awesome, right? Yes, that Democratic Donors would do this should not make sense to the normal person.

  6. on April 18, 2014, 5:07 pm

    Or I could put it another way. Halperin has a serious conflict of interest which he sometimes is able to cover up, but not today.

  7. ToivoS
    ToivoS on April 18, 2014, 6:05 pm

    I don’t find this story depressing at all. It should be exciting to see a politician who stands up in public and takes on the lobby. It is hard to imagine seeing Paul win, but the public fight could definitely turn into a Pyrrhic victory for the lobby. At the very least it would educate a new generation of Americans that Rand Paul is surely to appeal to.

    • annie
      annie on April 18, 2014, 6:31 pm

      it really excites me. i’d love to see a massive showdown in the primaries over israel. i cannot think of an opportunity more ripe to expose israel’s crimes.

      and frankly, i think paul is the only gop who could go up against hilary and win. why? because he is the only gop candidate who could pull votes from democrats. i’d love it if, in this election, israel got the attention it deserves. love it, finally.

      And Halperin’s book on the last election leaves the Israel factor completely out of the political equation, even as he swears to its importance on MSNBC.

      outrageous!

      • Daniel Rich
        Daniel Rich on April 18, 2014, 6:42 pm

        @ Annie Robbins,

        Having a female POTUS is long overdue, but not Hillary. Not another Clingon Clinton in the WH.

      • RudyM
        RudyM on April 18, 2014, 6:47 pm

        I don’t know. Hillary seems pretty defeatable in general. I think the Democrats will be making a mistake to make her their presidential candidate. I certainly won’t be voting for her, though that doesn’t necessarily mean I’d vote for Rand Paul.

        Then again, maybe you are right. The Republicans seem to have a really hard time coming up with anyone buy lunatics and morons to run in their presidential primaries.

      • seanmcbride
        seanmcbride on April 18, 2014, 7:51 pm

        RudyM,

        I don’t know. Hillary seems pretty defeatable in general. I think the Democrats will be making a mistake to make her their presidential candidate.

        Hillary was stale, dull, boring and uninspiring in 2008 and she will much more so in 2016. She’s a crude neocon and a tool of the most corrupt elements of Wall Street and the Israel lobby.

        If Elizabeth Warren made an effort I think she could easily defeat Clinton — just as Barack Obama buried her in 2008.

        She is not nearly as bright as Bill and has no political accomplishments of note on her resume. We have never seen her lead from convictions on any issue. She is running because she is addicted to power and expects to be coronated by an equally corrupt Democratic Party.

      • RudyM
        RudyM on April 19, 2014, 10:02 pm

        Right, she thinks it’s “her turn.”

      • piotr
        piotr on April 18, 2014, 11:09 pm

        I spent some money to support “anyone but Hillary” (I am not a tycoon, so it is merely a record of my attitude), and the consensus is that not only we did not get “Hillary without Hillary”, but we actually got Hillary as well. One can find it sad or hilarious.

        Concerning morons among Republican contenders, this is simply the case of sticking to the proven formula. Reagan elected twice, Bush Sr. once and Bush Jr. twice, that clearly shows that the people do not want a clever Republican president. Perhaps Romney lost to Obama because he merely pretended to be stupid.

      • Bandolero
        Bandolero on April 18, 2014, 11:50 pm

        piotr

        I completely agree with you. And I would even go further: the Republicans have with Rand Paul a serious candidate who could stand up against the Israel lobby.

        What’s missing is a serious candidate who could stand up against the Israel lobby in the Democratic party. Bernie Sanders? I doubt he has the guts to take on the Israel lobby. I’ld love to see Alan Grayson as a candidate – he played it really well rallying against bombing Syria and he recently also made a very sensible speech on the Crimea becoming part of Russia – but would it be enough? I doubt it.

      • puppies
        puppies on April 19, 2014, 12:54 am

        @piotr – So what? After every genuine moron from the Repucrat aisle comes a truly intelligent, high-fuel scholar from the Demolican fraction who makes it way worse. Just as an example among many, Obama dared do what even Bush fils could not imagine: proclaim himself Sole Ruler and legalize seizing, jailing and murdering anyone on his royal say-so. Beat that.

        On the whole, I start thinking that I like the morons better; they’re more human-like.

        The only thing we may well have to remember (limitedly to Palestine for this site): anything any of these lesser-worse-evils do, if we voted for them we are personally accessories. No other interpretation possible.

      • Keith
        Keith on April 19, 2014, 4:59 pm

        PUPPIES- “The only thing we may well have to remember (limitedly to Palestine for this site): anything any of these lesser-worse-evils do, if we voted for them we are personally accessories. No other interpretation possible.

        Glad to hear someone else say it. Voting for either of the corporate candidates provides them with electoral legitimacy. Far from being a “wasted vote,” voting Third Party provides the only hope. Unless there is a revolt at the polls, nothing will change for the better.

      • CloakAndDagger
        CloakAndDagger on April 18, 2014, 8:07 pm

        @ annie

        it really excites me.

        Me too! This one will be for the history books. I don’t believe Hillary has a chance to win anymore – she took quite a public beating as SoS and has nothing to point to as accomplishments. Sure, a lot of people will vote for her as the first female POTUS, but not nearly enough.

        Rand has a really good shot at winning the Republican nomination, because the other contenders are far too weak and damaged goods (like Christy, Cruz, etc.). The only real contender could be Jeb Bush – but it is far too soon for another Bush in the WH – so I doubt he will even run.

        Between Rand and Hillary – Rand has a pretty decent shot. A lot more young people voting in 2016 – and that is Rand’s strong point. Meanwhile, the supporters of Adelson are aging and dying off faster than they can be replaced. More and more Americans are waking up to the reality that we don’t want to be in any more wars. Whether they care about Palestine or not, many like me are worried about the economy, our jobs, and ability to keep up with our mortgages, while we live from paycheck to paycheck. More people are aware that our taxes are not being used at home where we would like it to be, and instead are being used to enter us in even more wars and meddling in other people’s businesses, without any profit to the US, and a spiralling loss of our prestige abroad.

        I think the US is about to become much more nationalistic (not ethno nationalists – more patriotic for tribe USA).

        No supporter of Obama, but – we are whom we have been waiting for.

      • American
        American on April 18, 2014, 8:10 pm

        ‘and frankly, i think paul is the only gop who could go up against hilary and win. why? because he is the only gop candidate who could pull votes from democrats. i’d love it if, in this election, israel got the attention it deserves. love it, finally’…annie

        so would I … but Paul cant come out totally ‘against’ Israel or he will lose those electorial votes in Fla where the 80 year old Jewish crowd is and maybe in some other old Jewish centers too.
        He needs to be cagey about his policy on Israel.

        I like my idea—lie your head off about how much you love Israel and sign all the AIPAC MOU’s the moneymen put in front of you and then if elected say you changed mind, now that you’ve seen Israel in the nude she isnt that pretty, and toss your signed MOU pledges to Israel in the Oval office fireplace.

      • Citizen
        Citizen on April 19, 2014, 9:22 pm

        @ American

        I think that you have captured Rand Paul’s philosophy re “evolving”. But Adelson sees it, and so too the other rich Zionists.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr on April 18, 2014, 8:22 pm

        personally-i think you might be underestimating the hay that the GOP is going to make out of the diminishing status of the US in FP. Regardless of where the blame lies-and there is plenty of blame for the GOP-I suspect that the only candidate the GOP has a real chance with is either an x-military or FP background. Unless of course they dig up a character like Reagan (which would be their w-dream). Hillary is coming off much stronger on FP and could make a case for strengthening it more then could Paul. While Paul might lure some Dems-I would bet that Hillary could lure a lot of upscale republican women in the upper-middle to middle class. It will be exciting nonetheless.

    • piotr
      piotr on April 18, 2014, 10:54 pm

      “It should be exciting to see a politician who stands up in public and takes on the lobby.” This news item is rather mixed in that respect: if Rand is really “evolving”, then it would not be the case of “standing up” but of failing to satisfy the ever more exacting criteria of ZOA ilk.

  8. Daniel Rich
    Daniel Rich on April 18, 2014, 6:56 pm

    Side note: All about Money, Power and Dinero Democracy

  9. ritzl
    ritzl on April 18, 2014, 9:39 pm

    Paul has the Adelson kow-tow and nuke videos for campaign commercials. They are shocking enough to make this a contest by visually and viscerally trumping the Halperin/Beltway CW, in Republican primary terms anyway.

    Who votes for a guy (all of Paul’s competition) who has his head so deeply and demonstrably up someone else’s butt?

    I think Halperin’s views are borderline wishful thinking at this point. I’m not sure they should be demoralizing.

    Further, you guys got the story on Adelson’s “nuke Iran” comment. As lysias said upthread, the US voter is sharply opposed to any such policy. Couple the kow-tow with the “nukem” videos and you get voter disgust for Adelson-affiliated candidates (if the videos are used).

    Think LBJ’s “Daisy Girl” ad against Goldwater, only with cause and video backup.

    http://youtu.be/63h_v6uf0Ao

    Aside from the fact that that’s why Boteach got into it with you as you were recording another of his little “forums” (i.e. you’re having individual effect), there’s every likelihood that you all have provided some pretty large-caliber rhetorical ammunition for Rand Paul (or somebody) to counter Halperin-like analysis. That’s Major Political effect, at least potentially. That too might be the opposite of demoralizing…

    • Citizen
      Citizen on April 19, 2014, 9:10 pm

      Daisy Girl–With Adelson’s image in the sky, showering cash. It would work. Nobody will do it.

  10. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia on April 18, 2014, 10:59 pm

    Antiwar,anti intervention ,pro domestic issues and pro domestic constituency evoke disdain and hatred from both sides of the aisle and from both sides of the imperial coin

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/04/17/the-establishments-war-on-rand-paul/

  11. chris o
    chris o on April 18, 2014, 11:09 pm

    I got to give Halperin credit for a change with his analysis. He is providing a window into the the power of the Israel Lobby in the Republican camp.

  12. Citizen
    Citizen on April 18, 2014, 11:18 pm

    I don’t see any white guy being the next and subsequent POTUS. I only see white women in that spot, and eventually, a latina women. These two groups of females hold the cards. What their foreign policy will be? Good question. They don’t have a clue themselves.

  13. Scott
    Scott on April 19, 2014, 5:56 pm

    Hey, I thought Joy Reid pretty good. And Steele too. But Reid–she closed by saying Paul not popular with the “neocon wing, the war wing.” Chris Matthews no have the cojones to say something like that!

  14. Citizen
    Citizen on April 19, 2014, 9:24 pm

    Anybody want to read about Woody Allen’s thoughts re Israel-Palestine? Try here: http://www.jewishjournal.com/bloggish/item/woody_allen_talks_about_israel_20120711

  15. wondering jew
    wondering jew on April 20, 2014, 2:04 am

    I don’t see how a reporter reporting a fact- that for a large contingent of the republican party ron paul is ex communicado is the same as that reporter excommunicating him. I assume that Halperin is a democrat, how could his comments about a republican candidate be anything other than straight up reportage.

    • puppies
      puppies on April 20, 2014, 2:48 am

      @Friedman – Continue to pretend you are deaf and blind. It’s not in their function as “a large contingent of the republican party” that the creeps reject Rand, *not* Ron Paul, who has absolutely no chances of ever getting in their good graces, but as Zionists (Repucrat or Demolican or Chameleon or Zebra-striped all in it ad maiorem Zionis gloria). Of course, nobody ever tells you anything.

Leave a Reply