Trending Topics:

The Israel lobby rallies inside the Republican Party

US Politics
on 99 Comments

There have been signs in recent days that the Israel lobby is solidifying inside the Republican Party, opening the possibility that the Democratic Party will begin to have a freer debate over the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel. Let’s look at the straws in the wind:

–Gallup sees a trend of Jews leaving the Democratic party for the Republican Party. The shift has happened since 2008: 71 percent of Jews called themselves Democrats in 2008, now it’s 61 percent; 22 percent of Jews called themselves Republicans in 2008, now it’s 29 percent. Frank Newport writes:

The percentage of the general population that identifies with or leans Democratic has fallen by about seven percentage points since 2008, compared with the 10-point drop among Jews. The percentage that identifies with or leans Republican among the general population is up three points, compared with the increase of seven points among Jews.

–Last night on MSNBC, former governor Ed Rendell said that Jeb Bush’s big challenge was in foreign policy, to distinguish himself from the neoconservative policies of his brother George W. The country does not want another war in the Middle East, Rendell said. Rendell was certainly speaking for the Democratic Party base. If Hillary Clinton runs, she will have to be very careful about her messaging on Iran. The party faithful do not want a confrontation with Iran, even Israel supporters like Rendell.

–Two nights ago on Hardball, Chris Matthews said the establishment wing of the Republican Party that is supporting Jeb Bush is the big east coast money, and it’s “hawkish.” Matthews was surely echoing a Politico story on pro-Israel Republicans gathering big donors: “Jewish Republicans gird for a fight.”

Politico and others reported that the Republican Jewish Coalition had an event last night in D.C., bringing Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, John McCain of Arizona, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, and Rob Portman of Ohio, together with Sheldon Adelson, who funded Republican presidential candidates last go-round. Not to mention former Vice President Dick Cheney.

Politico quotes Ari Fleischer, former Bush speechwriter, saying that Rand Paul is off limits to Jewish Republicans, and notes indications that Jews are becoming more Republican in recent years:

Republicans have made gains in recent elections, as they’ve emphasized a more hawkish approach to supporting Israel’s defense and security. In 2014, they captured 33 percent of Jewish votes, up from 12 percent in 2006, according to an analysis of exit polls by the Pew Research Center.

There is big money in being hawkish:

Several top Republican Jewish donors — including [Mel] Sembler — are lining up behind Jeb Bush’s potential presidential campaign, as is Charlie Spies, a top GOP election lawyer who helped Mitt Romney’s super PAC raise millions from Jewish donors. Though Bush, a former Florida governor, has little foreign policy experience in his own right, he’s expressed support for a muscular interventionism that seems to echo that of his brother, former President George W. Bush.

“It’s very important that whoever emerges to be the Republican Party nominee for 2016 is someone who recognizes the consequences of America being weak and inconsistent with our foreign policy,” said [Lee] Zeldin, a former state senator and Iraq War veteran [and now the only Jewish Republican in Congress]. He asserted that concerns about President Barack Obama’s sometimes frosty relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had created “a growing opportunity to expand our reach to voters who have voted Democrat in the past.”

Charlie Spies is now Bush’s campaign lawyer. Jewish Insider says that Spies and his wife Lisa are major bundlers in the Jewish community, “the power couple of Republican Jewish money in politics,” according to a recent book. “Lisa Spies is the leading Republican fundraiser in that niche of American Jews for whom Israel was top voting issue.”

Lisa Spies described her work for Romney in 2012 to the Jewish News Service. What leaps out from this interview is how rightwing and religious the Jews she’s tapping are.

I was hired as Jewish outreach director about two years ago [2010]. At that point, no other primary candidate had a paid staffer focused on the Jewish community. The first goal was to coordinate meetings and conference calls with Jewish leaders and supporters. We reached out to organizations such as AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), ZOA (Zionist Organization of America), OU (Orthdox Union), and RJC (Republican Jewish Coalition)….

I made sure there was glatt kosher food and prayer services at every donor retreat.

Prayer services for Jewish donors– believe me, that’s not happening in the Democratic Party. The 60 percent of Jews who are Democrats are surely more secular and liberal.

Hawkish money, the east coast establishment. That’s the reconstituted Israel lobby; and the indication here is that the lobby will have less and less purchase inside the Democratic Party. Obviously I am hopeful on this question, but when you combine this data with the fact that young Democrats and Hispanics are increasingly critical of Israel and a majority of Americans favor democracy over Jewishness when it comes to Israel and see the I/P conflict as fostering ISIS, I predict some real debate about these issues in Democratic primary races in 2016.

I don’t mean to suggest that the Israel lobby will abandon the Democratic Party. Haim Saban and Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Chuck Schumer will see to that. The lobby functions by getting behind winning candidates of either party. But the hard-core lobby is solidifying inside the Republican Party. And if the Israeli elections crown Netanyahu, we’re going to see more and more Crisis Zionists at the heart of the Democratic Party– J Street and Peter Beinart, which will leave room for non-Zionists to emerge.

Update: The Democratic National Committee is also slavering over the Israel lobby in this post attacking the Republican Jewish Coalition for hosting Rand Paul.

Tonight, as Rand Paul heads to the Republican Jewish Coalition’s congressional reception, here are four key facts to keep in mind:

…Rand Paul supports eliminating all U.S. foreign aid to Israel.

The post offers four examples of Rand Paul stating that view. Thanks to Janet McMahon.

Update: Rand Paul ain’t buying. His latest press release, today, a “Defend Israel” act:

Sen. Rand Paul today introduced S.34, the Defend Israel by Defunding Palestinian Foreign Aid Act of 2015. This legislation will call for the immediate halt of U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority until it withdraws its request to join the International Criminal Court (ICC). Under the current U.S. law, America is prohibited from assisting the Palestinian Authority if it seeks ICC claims against Israel. Thus far, the Obama administration has not committed to taking any actions and appears disinclined to cut off aid. The bill text can be found below.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

99 Responses

  1. Blownaway
    Blownaway
    January 7, 2015, 12:44 pm

    Have no fear Paul’s pandering continues with his latest convoluted name bill
    so-called “Defend Israel by Defunding Palestinian Foreign Aid Act of 2015”.
    Hours before introducing the bill, Rand met with a group leading Jewish donors to the Republican Party, including casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, the Journal reported.The junior Republican senator from Kentucky is openly exploring a run for the White House in 2016. Observers see his bill as being part of a bid to win the support of Republican pro-Israel hawks, who tend to regard the libertarian Paul with skepticism, if not outright hostility……..this was reported honestly I. Haaretz you won’t see these words in the NYT

    • just
      just
      January 7, 2015, 3:09 pm

      Is this the one?

      “Rand Paul moves to ban aid to Palestinians until ICC bid withdrawn

      The U.S. senator met with a group of Jewish donors to the Republican Party before introducing his bill, according to the National Journal.”

      http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.635818?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

    • Atlantaiconoclast
      Atlantaiconoclast
      January 7, 2015, 6:59 pm

      But Rand will find a lot less support from his father’s fervent base than he expects. Liberty minded folk do not support the subsidizing of Israel .

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 8, 2015, 7:24 pm

        “But Rand will find a lot less support from his father’s fervent base than he expects – See more at:

        That’s what I would think.

  2. just
    just
    January 7, 2015, 12:46 pm

    “The Israel lobby rallies inside the Republican Party”

    Fine by me.

    “opening the possibility that the Democratic Party will begin to have a freer debate over the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel.”

    Fingers crossed that this comes to pass~ and quickly!

    Thank you for this important piece, Phil.

  3. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    January 7, 2015, 1:02 pm

    Personally the best thing that could happen to the Palestinians is for the PA to be defunded. The Zionist need the PA not the Palestinians. That’s why it will never be defunded.

    Rand Paul either knows this and is a slimy opportunist or doesn’t, in which case he’s stupid and uninformed.

    • Krauss
      Krauss
      January 8, 2015, 2:34 pm

      The PA will not be allowed to collapse. It’s an institution that was created and managed by US/EU.

      They fear what’s coming if it goes down. As for Paul, yeah, Rand Paul is more interested in power than his father was, who was crazy but at least had principles. His son doesn’t, he’s desperate to get elected at whatever price.

      But honestly, the amount of cash you get from pro-Israel groups compared to the benefits on the other side of taking a stand is just so extreme as of now. Only a grassroots pressure campaign can change that but it has to be within the Democratic party.

  4. American
    American
    January 7, 2015, 1:02 pm

    ” “opening the possibility that the Democratic Party will begin to have a freer debate over the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel.” –

    Wont happen imo. They will try to outdo the GOP on who loves Israel the most to keep their 30 pieces of silver coming to their campaign chest.

  5. Scott
    Scott
    January 7, 2015, 1:03 pm

    Depressing, because Jeb will probably beat Hillary. I was hoping Jeb would resurrect his Dad’s views a bit, run as a realist against a liberal interventionist. Oh well.

    • Blownaway
      Blownaway
      January 7, 2015, 1:40 pm

      Set aside foreign policy for a second (or not) but for the last 28 years we have had either a Bush or Clinton or Obama as Pepresident. Is the world or even the U.S. better off? It’s time for fesh thinking, no dynasties here. Anybody but Bush or Clinton

      • CigarGod
        CigarGod
        January 8, 2015, 8:47 am

        That would make every republican president since 1989…a Bush.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 7, 2015, 1:40 pm

      No way Jeb will beat Hillary. For every women I know personally, Hillary’s time has come. How can GOP offset that?

      • Scott
        Scott
        January 7, 2015, 3:42 pm

        There was a famous comment like this about ’72: Everyone I know voted for McGovern. . .. Joan Didion? Bella Abzug?

      • CigarGod
        CigarGod
        January 8, 2015, 8:52 am

        A rare instance where i disagree. But, I could do a Street Talk survey on it. It would be a Wyoming perspective…so i might be wasting my time. I bet we agree on the results of a wyoming survey…before i do it.

      • mariapalestina
        mariapalestina
        January 8, 2015, 1:30 pm

        Don’t know whether Jeb would beat Hillary, but I wouldn’t vote for Hillary, and I have an awful lot of women friends who wouldn’t vote for Hillary. I wouldn’t vote for Bush either. So far I haven’t seen any prospective candidate I’d vote for. I decided I’m no longer willing to settle for the lesser of two evils.

      • ckg
        ckg
        January 8, 2015, 6:04 pm

        @Scott–I think Pauline Kael, former film critic for the New Yorker, gets the credit.

    • Blownaway
      Blownaway
      January 7, 2015, 1:41 pm

      Set aside foreign policy for a second (or not) but for the last 28 years we have had either a Bush or Clinton or Obama as President. Is the world or even the U.S. better off? It’s time for fesh thinking, no dynasties here. Anybody but Bush or Clinton

    • bilal a
      bilal a
      January 7, 2015, 10:27 pm

      Hilary’s Bill was a close acquaintance of the pedo rapist pimp trafficker Epstein as mentioned by Dershowitz. Judge Paul Cassell is opening up the files.

      She won’t run.

  6. Mooser
    Mooser
    January 7, 2015, 1:04 pm

    “I made sure there was glatt kosher food and prayer services at every donor retreat.”

    Gotta hand it to ya’, you got one up on Rabbi Wise!

  7. Mooser
    Mooser
    January 7, 2015, 2:18 pm

    Ah, here it is, and it’s long, but worth every word, the event, and it’s context.

    Gosh, I hope Sean doesn’t see it. It might upset some of his ideas about….Oh, what am I saying, forget it.

    • just
      just
      January 7, 2015, 2:46 pm

      I’ve gotten through 1/2 of it so far…… I have read about this affair before, but your link is fascinating. Thanks.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 7, 2015, 5:49 pm

        Thanks for reading it, “just”. I think this little dinner, what led up to it, what followed on it, has a lot to tell us. That’s one heck of an article on it!
        BTW, the actual menus are posted on line, too. Whoever did the catering broke kashruth almost every conceivable way except one, they didn’t serve pork. And as I read it, was a Jewish caterer.
        “Currier’s Orchestra” provided the music.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 10:55 am

        Ah, “just” we seem to be the only two people in the world who remember this fateful dinner!
        The place settings were so fancy, some of the Rabbis burst into an impromptu rendition of “Hello Doily” , or so I’ve heard.

  8. hophmi
    hophmi
    January 7, 2015, 2:30 pm

    You seem to be skirting this part:

    “The diminished Democratic skew among American Jews in recent years is slightly more pronounced than the same trend among all Americans. ”

    There have been shifts in the American Jewish community like this in the past, particularly in 1980. I wouldn’t read much into it.

  9. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 7, 2015, 4:12 pm

    Are you actually saying that Schumer, Waserman Schultz are not hard core supporter of Israel no matter what they do. Boxer would fall into that category also. I just don’t see the Dem party opening up on this issue. Just do not see it coming. So called “liberals” have not only fallen into the hard core I lobby line many so called “liberals” have sponsored anti Palestinian legislation.

    On Jeb Bush he allegedly helped write the mission statement of the PNAC. He certainly signed the mission statement. Just do not see how he will get by his brothers warmongering disastrous policies. I believe Hillary has it wrapped up. Billions could be saved…

    • CigarGod
      CigarGod
      January 8, 2015, 9:01 am

      I am surprised at the support for hillary among our group here. Wyoming may not be the heartland…but i get a diffetent read. Btw…save billions? I can easily see hillary being a warrior president…if elected.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen
        January 8, 2015, 10:11 pm

        Hillary’s vote for the Iraq war resolution, always votes with the I lobby..always. Has repeated unsubstantiated claims about Iran. She is a warmonger…she is right in camp with Bush, Cheney team. Ok on domestic issues..better than most..but on foreign policy not much distance between her and Cheney.

  10. JLewisDickerson
    JLewisDickerson
    January 7, 2015, 5:18 pm

    RE: “Last night on MSNBC, former governor Ed Rendell said that Jeb Bush’s big challenge was in foreign policy, to distinguish himself from the neoconservative policies of his brother George W. The country does not want another war in the Middle East, Rendell said.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: Jeb Bush signed the June 3, 1997 Statement of Principles of The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) with the likes of Elliott Abrams, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.

    PNAC Statement of Principles – https://web.archive.org/web/20071211192357/http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

    ■ PNAC ON NPR’S “FRESH AIR”
    This audio segment from April 1st’s Fresh Air program on National Public Radio starts with an excellent summation of the PNAC’s goals, as explained by Joseph Cirincione from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He’s opposed to the PNAC’s plan for the world, but he gives a pretty fair appraisal of the benefits that the PNAC folks claim to seek, which he follows with a very succinct statement of why he opposes them.

    He outlines the development of the PNAC coalition, discussing the 1992 Defense Planning Guidance document drafted by Paul Wolfowitz, the 1998 letter written by PNAC members to President Clinton urging regime change in Iraq, the 2000 “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” report, and the 2001 National Security Strategy, as well as a number of other episodes that have come together to bring us to the U.S. foreign policy stance that we see today.

    The next half of the segment features William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard and Chairman of the PNAC. He offers responses to many of the criticisms advanced by Mr. Cirincione, and answers host Terry Gross’ further questions.

    The two segments together total about 45 minutes, and require either Real Player or Windows Media Player 9 in order to listen to them.

    Joseph Cirincione and William Kristol on NPR’s “Fresh Air” with Terry Gross, April 1, 2003 – http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/2003/04/01/13060176/

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    • Project for the New American Century – http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

    • The Project for the New American Century. – http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm

    • THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY – http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin13.html

    • PNAC Links Archive (Redux) – http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=110×80

    • “Project For The New American Century”:
    I N T H E I R O W N W O R D S – http://www.masters-of-war.org/pnac.html

    • PNAC Think Tank – http://www.historycommons.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=pnac&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=Go

  11. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 7, 2015, 6:29 pm

    Thanks J Lewis.

    Just wondering why anyone would think that “hard core” Israel supporters are not still rockin and rollin in the Dem party. Haim Saban, Jane Harman undermining the federal investigation into the Aipac espionage, Schumer, Wasserman Schultz always protecting Israel no matter what they do. That is one of the biggest myths ever that so called “liberals” were any different when it comes to foreign policy when it comes to Israel. A myth for decades now.

  12. piotr
    piotr
    January 7, 2015, 7:57 pm

    Those are not good news, but a hopeful indicator.

    GOP lives on wedge issues. Hoi polloi who provide votes do not care for, say, drug companies (or any other type of companies) racking billions, consising in large proportion of tax money, due to tweaks in the law, so other issues are required. Over the years, those issues change. Thus while for decades “demographic trends” favor Democrats, GOP has dominant (or at worst, very competitive) position.

    However, the pattern is that once GOP latches on an issue, it is a passing trend. Not so many years ago, it seemed that opposition to gay marriage will provide votes forever. A few years ago, resolutely favoring torture and foreign interventions, in the name of “doing everything for national security” was also an excellent wedge issue. Abortion issue is kept alive by splitting it into ingenious sub-issues like “partial birth abortion”.

    Thus when preventing any “daylight between USA and Israel” (I never grasped what is wrong about the daylight) becomes a pet wedge issue for GOP, we may expect that in 10 years nobody will pay much attention to it.

    • Pixel
      Pixel
      January 8, 2015, 12:17 am

      I’m a proud card-carrying member of the Hoi polloi.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 10:57 am

        I once had to correct a friend of mine who referred to non-Jewish people as “the Goy polloi”.
        Of course, he’ll never do that again, I talked to him about it.

  13. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 7, 2015, 9:38 pm

    Was thinking about some of the things that Sibel Edmonds reported about Dem Congressman Lantos allegedly accessing classified intelligence then passing it on to Alan Makovsky (Aipac) onto Israel. You know one of those liberal Dems who supported Israel in all ways no matter what. I think this was in an article by Phillip Giraldi.

    Just really do not see how the I/P issue will open up to real dialogue in the Dem party just because there is a shift in the Jewish vote. Just can’t seen how this will make a difference. When it comes to the I lobby vote both parties are “hard core.” You get a few who stand out against anti Palestinian legislation and don’t automatically vote for all anti Iranian and Palestinian legislation..Like Moran, Kucinich (not there any longer) Sanders does not always go along.

    • CigarGod
      CigarGod
      January 8, 2015, 9:05 am

      I agree. Here in Wyoming…liberals dont even know there are two different Jewish positions on Palestine. Seriously.

  14. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    January 7, 2015, 10:16 pm

    The movement of Jews towards the Republican party reflects two facts: 1. That is the tendency in the wider society and 2. The Jews are “disproportionately” Democratic. That is their socio economic situation would indicate a much higher affinity to the Republican party by all “rational” measures of “what’s in it for me” politics and their traditional liberalism and Democratic party affiliation are an anomaly. Thus there is something “wrong” with so many upper income Jews being Democrats and this is merely the correction of that anomaly.

    • piotr
      piotr
      January 8, 2015, 4:42 pm

      There is no anomaly. It is not like Democrats are some kind of Communist Party. On issues related to preservation and increase of incomes of upper middle class and the rich, there is not a hell lot of difference between the two. I would generalize that GOP is more prone to accept, and fight for, concepts developed by think tanks and lobbying group, which are in SHORT TERM interest of various rich groups, but Democrats try harder to reconcile those with wider needs and some analysis if the concepts make any sense. If you are a Republican, you may perceive it differently.

      But a majority of wedge issues that GOP selects is quite repulsive to non-Christian educated upper middle class. Gay bashing. Denial of global warming. Denial of evolution. A weird type of Christian religiosity (e.g. how to use Biblical teaching in designing Randian tax reforms??? a theme of a workshop for freshmen GOP congresscritters). Death penalty. Attacks on abortion rights. Hostility to sex education. Why is GOP so unpopular among college professors? It is not like Communists are in charge of hiring there.

    • OyVey00
      OyVey00
      January 8, 2015, 9:13 pm

      Jews are supporting Democrats mainly because they are for multiculturalism and against American Christian identity. That they are slowly switching to the GOP now just shows how liberal the GOP has become in the last decades. Pretty much all mainstream conservatives have adopted social liberal views and betrayed their hardcore Christian base in favor of the Jewish progressive Israel lobby.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 11:04 am

        Jews are supporting Democrats mainly because they are for multiculturalism and against American Christian identity.”
        courtesy of “OyVey00”

        Ah-ha! Jews and Democrats, you are sooooo busted! So that’s why there’s a 70% out-marriage rate and a 50% divorce rate! Love ’em, despoil ’em, and leave ’em!

        (Watch out, American Christians, we’re comin’ for you. And you better take it seriously, after all, we are vastly, vastly outnumbered!)

        So, “OyVey00” is this some more of the (and I quote you, ver-freaking-batim, baby) “anti-Jewish sentiment” which you told us actuates you?

      • CigarGod
        CigarGod
        January 9, 2015, 11:06 am

        Motherlode Mooser.
        Have a cigar!

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 11:08 am

        “Pretty much all mainstream conservatives have adopted social liberal views and betrayed their hardcore Christian base in favor of the Jewish progressive Israel lobby.”

        If laughter is the best medicine, you may not be a rocket scientist, “OyVey00”, but you could qualify as a brain surgeon.
        I feel like I’ve been cured, cured completely.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 11:15 am

        “Have a cigar!”

        I love the scent of cigars, and from when I was a kid, the smell of cigars, the cheaper knock-offs of Chanel No. 5, the sound of ice clinking in cocktail glasses, adult conversation, soft Jazz, and the polite rustle of organdy dresses, all scented and heard from my bedroom after I’d been introduced and packed off to bed. And my Mom let me keep any clothes I found the next morning to play dress-up with.

      • CigarGod
        CigarGod
        January 9, 2015, 11:26 am

        So, that’s the recipe for genius!

  15. Marnie
    Marnie
    January 8, 2015, 1:21 am

    Off topic but that picture – yikes! Besides Adelson’s “bad hairs” day, he has to prop himself up against a man who doesn’t look real happy about it. Maybe Adelson is strong-arming this guy about something?

    Speaking of strong-arming, Rand Paul? Seriously? “Do this or else?” Blackmail all out in the open and in a bill. The United States sinks ever faster into the abyss, with Sheldon Adelson riding Mitt Romney into the sunset shouting Yippee Ka-Yay Mother F*ckers!

  16. doug
    doug
    January 8, 2015, 2:21 am

    The idea that Jews are abandoning the democrats more so than others is simply not supported by Gallup’s own data and this interpretation of the recent poll is wrong.

    I must point out that the percentage of democrats in the overall population that ceased to identify as democrats declined MORE than the percentage of Jewish democrats that similarly stopped identifying as democrats.

    Specifically, there are 14% fewer Jewish democrats while there are 17% fewer democrats overall. Said another way a democrat was more likely to drop out than a Jewish democrat.

    The reason the absolute percentage of Jewish democrats dropped more is because Jews are far more likely to be democrats in the first place.

    Here are the absolute numbers of democrat percentages from Gallup:
    Jewish democrats declined from 71% to 61%
    Overall democrats decreased from 36% to 31%

    Unfortunately, the more wealthy and activist, Israel centric Jews, are increasingly republican.

    • Walid
      Walid
      January 9, 2015, 3:58 pm

      Yonah, I compared you to Witty because you keep acting like him with your constant reminders to Phil that he’s Jewish. Your explanation looked more like you were wiping the egg all over your face than a sincere apology to Phil for having been impatient with him.

  17. bilal a
    bilal a
    January 8, 2015, 2:37 am

    VOX Ezra Kline proudly boasts of re-printing Paris cartoons showing hook nosed swarthy arabs and black monkey politicians: — to defend free speech. But some push back.

    Yousef Munayyer ‏@YousefMunayyer
    If an editor of a white power mag is killed for publishing anti-black or anti-jewish content, should it be republished to save free speech?
    Sean Lee ‏@humanprovince
    Radical proposition: one can despise violence against #CharlieHebdo w/o signing off on their racist bullshit.
    Saladin Ahmed ‏@saladinahmed
    Yesterday, tweeting caricatures of hairy, big-nosed Arabs with bombs made you a racist asshole. Today? It still makes you a racist asshole.
    Max Blumenthal ‏@MaxBlumenthal
    Even when supposedly deployed in response to racism, it’s hard to see how black politicians drawn as monkeys passes as clever satire.
    Max Blumenthal ‏@MaxBlumenthal 3h3 hours ago
    ukas Hermsmeier ‏@lukashermsmeier 3h3 hours ago
    @MaxBlumenthal strange.this conversation started with you criticising charlie hebdo for drawing a black woman as a monkey
    @lukashermsmeier disproportionately mocking a marginalized immigrant group (French Muslims) vs occasional mockery of French Catholics
    https://twitter.com/maxblumenthal

    Ali Abunimah @AliAbunimah · 33m 33 minutes ago
    Many Muslims are too easily offended by invasions killing millions, destroying countries, torture, US, Israeli & NA
    TO massacres. Lighten up!

    Ali Abunimah @AliAbunimah · 46m 46 minutes ago
    High schooler Mourad Hamyd couldn’t have taken part in Paris attack. His schoolmates saw him in class at the time http://www.europe1.fr/faits-divers/charlie-hebdo-le-suspect-entendu-etait-en-cours-de-8h-a-midi-2337901
    Glenn Greenwald retweeted Ali Gharib @Ali_Gharib · 16h 16 hours ago
    Umm, Breivik? MT @shashj Frmr dep. director of CIA: “This is the worst terrorist attack in Europe since the attacks in London in July of 05”

    https://twitter.com/AliAbunimah

    • American
      American
      January 8, 2015, 1:19 pm

      Having seen examples of most of their ‘cartoons’ I have no sympathy for Hebdo.
      They were gutter trash producing trash of the sake of trashing and inciting.
      Everyone may have a right to free speech but they also might be called to account for *how they use it*……their choice, their risk.

      And it was selective in who it trashed:…..mainly Muslims and blacks…it looks like just another Zio Jewish front rag for inciting hate of Muslims and ‘colored’ people.

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/01/07/what-to-say-when-you-have-nothing-to-say/

      In 2002, Philippe Val, who was editor in chief at the time, denounced Noam Chomsky for anti-Americanism and excessive criticism of Israel and of mainstream media.
      In 2008, another of Charlie Hebdo’s famous cartoonists, Siné, wrote a short note citing a news item that President Sarkozy’s son Jean was going to convert to Judaism to marry the heiress of a prosperous appliance chain. Siné added the comment, “He’ll go far, this lad.” For that, Siné was fired by Philippe Val on grounds of “anti-Semitism”. Siné promptly founded a rival paper which stole a number of Charlie Hebdo readers, revolted by CH’s double standards.

      Then they tried to charge Sine with anti semitism:

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/4351672/French-cartoonist-Sine-on-trial-on-charges-of-anti-Semitism-over-Sarkozy-jibe.html

      No hate speech laws in France for the Muslims?…gee, we all wonder why not. Not.

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 8, 2015, 8:22 pm

        Charlie Hebdo is trash, American, as it has nothing to say.

        A weekly satirical that has lots to say on current political, social and economical events is found in “Le Canard enchaîné” (The Chained Duck)that’s been around since 1915. It was this hebdo that made a fool of the pseudo- philosopher, Bernard-Henri Lévy 5 years ago when he started quoting a Canard fictional character in his philosophical discussions on Kant’s sex life. Oddly, cartoonist-journalist Jean Cabut (Cabu) aged 76, one of the victims and shareholders at Charlie Hebdo spent years working at the Canard.

        http://lecanardenchaine.fr/?p=4948

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew
      January 8, 2015, 5:40 pm

      Frankly rather shocked that Phil has not commented on the Charlie Hebdo story. A major story with middle east implications involving murdering journalists and no comment here? Maybe we’ll hear from him tomorrow.

      • just
        just
        January 8, 2015, 6:15 pm

        yoo- hoo yonah:

        308 Israeli violations against journalists documented in 2014 BEIRUT (PIC) 6 Jan – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/01/palestinian-children-israeli#sthash.V5zMOpgZ.dpuf

        and yes, some were gunned downed by the IOF.

        RIP to those in Paris and those that were trying to document the truth everywhere,

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 8, 2015, 7:13 pm

        just- It’s the front story around the world, but Phil gives it a pass. Hopefully just for a day and tomorrow he will enlighten us. Until then he has given the job to the denizens of the comments section. Not a trustworthy delegation of responsibility from the looks of it.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 8, 2015, 7:34 pm

        “Not a trustworthy delegation of responsibility from the looks of it.”

        Yonah, when they make you editor, like they should, you’ll really clean things up around here!

        “It’s the front story around the world, but Phil gives it a pass.”

        Very suspicious, don’t you think, Yonah? You should set yourself to investigating any possible link!

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 8, 2015, 8:26 pm

        “Frankly rather shocked that Phil…”

        Who appointed you to replace Witty as the voice of Phil’s conscience?

      • Kris
        Kris
        January 8, 2015, 8:38 pm

        Why would Phil comment on Charlie Hebdo? What is there to say, beyond how sorry we all are for the victims and their families?

        To date, there are suspects, still at large, and lots of theories, still unproven.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 8, 2015, 8:52 pm

        This is a middle east story with controversies about freedom of speech and ramifications of Islamophobia and I am somehow presumptuous for expecting a comment?! i assume phil will comment tomorrow.

        but because you idiots jump to his defense. let me put it in inciteful terms. phil has to wait until omar barghouti tells him what to write. has to get it lined up with the party line first.

      • Kris
        Kris
        January 8, 2015, 9:20 pm

        @yonah: ” but because you idiots jump to his defense. let me put it in inciteful terms.”

        Maybe you are making a pun (“inciteful” does not mean “insightful”), but maybe you are over-tired. It might be a good idea to turn off the electronics, take a shower, and get some sleep.

        Research has shown that too much time in front of the computer is not good for your health.

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 9, 2015, 1:10 am

        “This is a middle east story with controversies about freedom of speech and ramifications of Islamophobia and I am somehow presumptuous for expecting a comment?”

        Not a reason to get into name-calling, Yonah. This is a story about religiously sick people, somewhat like your WB settler thugs, killing many people at a trashy magazine in Paris as a result of France being too busy building an empire elsewhere to attend to social volcanos building up at home. The most you’d get out of Phil is a sign of solidarity for fellow journalists that were killed by crazy people. The Islamophobic comment you’re hoping for will not come from him unless you feel he should have immediately become Islamophobic because of the killing.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 11:22 am

        “but because you idiots jump to his defense. let me put it in inciteful terms. phil has to wait until omar barghouti tells him what to write. has to get it lined up with the party line first.”

        Yonah, don’t you ever think before opening your mouth?
        Listen, Yonah, the more uncivil and “inciteful” (sic) you are, the better chance Salaita has of being re-hired.!!! You understand that don’t you?
        All they will have to do is bring your comments to the meeting, and say, if Yonah can talk like a begoola a mogchufta, a hoodnik, why can’t Salaita?
        And people will blame you for it the rest of your life!!!!

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 9, 2015, 3:12 pm

        Obviously the topic did deserve comment from real contributors rather than the commentator committee down here. One day later there is a thoughtful post by scott long, covering the topic quite completely. It is okay that mondoweiss waited 24 hours before publishing thoughtful words on the topic rather than the twitter ized minute by minute coverage of the cable networks. that is fine and i guess my “shock” that there was no immediate comment was silly. it is better to respond a day late than to say something incomplete or half cocked.

        the reaction of commentators here to my “shock” exemplifies the atmosphere of stupidity that reigns in the comment section with the hosts with the most down here and their imitators. bringing up richard witty’s name after he has been exiled is the latest type of schoolyard nonsense that stinks like a frustrated housewife’s empty chatter. the level of discourse here is two clicks above a fetid chicken farm river.

      • Walid
        Walid
        January 9, 2015, 4:15 pm

        Yonah, sorry my reply to you ended up on top someplace about 15 posts upthread; nothing really important, just returning the insult.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 9, 2015, 5:43 pm

        >> y.f.: … the level of discourse here is two clicks above a fetid chicken farm river.

        Your guilty pleasure appears to be pissing in that river while you swim in it. Feels good, don’t it? ;-)

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 6:13 pm

        “It is okay that mondoweiss waited 24 hours before publishing thoughtful words”

        And an audible sigh of relief is heard throughout Mondoweiss Plaza, from the tops of the towers, high above the metropolis, to the underground parking garage, below the city streets:
        “Yonah says it’s “okay”!! they all shout and high-five each-other, except Phil, who is still smarting over that “inciteful” (sic). C’mon Phil, cheer up, Yonah says it’s “okay”!

  18. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 8, 2015, 5:58 am

    UN chief Ban Ki Moon accepts Palestinian ICC membership! And now the Israeli lobby in our congress cuts of Palestinian aid. Pathetic and telling. Contact your reps..let them know what you think

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 8, 2015, 9:17 am

      If Palestinian aid is cut, doesn’t that mean voices will call for Israel to take over aid to Palestinians as a duty of the occupier? I guess that would mean yet another AIPAC bill for more US aid to Israel.

      • steven l
        steven l
        January 8, 2015, 10:20 am

        Contested territories.

      • annie
        annie
        January 8, 2015, 11:38 am

        everyone knows israel contests that they are occupied territories.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 8, 2015, 11:45 am

        >> steven l: Contested territories.

        The rapist’s belief that the woman chained in his basement belongs to him doesn’t make her a “contested victim”.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 8, 2015, 12:52 pm

        No country in the world contests those territories except Israel. They are not contested under international law either.

      • ckg
        ckg
        January 8, 2015, 4:06 pm

        contested territories.

        Have Netanyahu tell it to the ICC judge.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 11:30 am

        “Contested territories.”

        “Your Honor” said the prosecutor, “the defendant, ‘steven l’ was seen running down the street with the stolen TV” And a voice from the defendant’s seat calls out “contested TV, you mean. If I had gotten away, it would have been mine!”
        And of course, the Judge has no choice: “Case dismissed!”

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 9, 2015, 11:47 am

        @ Mooser

        Heh
        Ever see the movie “Henry, Portrait Of A Serial Killer”?
        See the contested tv scene in there?
        Takes place in Chicago, my hometown for 30 years….seedy environs evoke nostalgia….Now THAT was a real horror flick! Just following some human beans, doing what some human beans do–no fancy or hi-tek costumes, etc.

  19. steven l
    steven l
    January 8, 2015, 10:19 am

    History repeats itself. Jews have been systematically ostracized from the “left” in every country of Europe where they were members. The same happened finally at the 2010 US democratic congress.
    Jews should create a centrist party that belongs neither to the right nor to the left. It looks like neither the Western world nor the Jews have any intention on learning from history.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 8, 2015, 4:42 pm

      “Jews should create a centrist party that belongs neither to the right nor to the left.”

      And then we do Get-out-the-vote campaigns through local Temples and Jewish organizations! With a turn-out like that, we would have a crushing majority in every election!

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 8, 2015, 7:39 pm

      ” It looks like neither the Western world nor the Jews have any intention on learning from history.”

      Off Course! Isn’t it obvious? If only we could learn from history, we would form a Jewish political party (which belongs neither to right nor left!). What could go wrong, and who could get in our way?

  20. ckg
    ckg
    January 8, 2015, 11:53 am

    In 2014, 61% of American Jews identified as Democrats or leaned Democratic, down from 71% in 2008, a 10-point drop (=0.71-0.61). For all Americans, the respective numbers are 52% and 45%, a 7-point drop. The former represents a 14.1% (=0.10/0.71) relative drop, while the latter a 13.6% relative drop. These similar drop percentages suggest that the changes in party identification among Jews merely reflects changes in the broader population.

  21. Boomer
    Boomer
    January 8, 2015, 1:36 pm

    We often discuss politics as if it could be described on a single dimension, a simple left-right spectrum. In our two-party system, the voter’s choice ultimately becomes binary, but of course there are many dimensions. No issue illustrates this better than the question of the U.S. role and relationship with Israel/Palestine. The neocons and liberal Zionists make common cause, while some paleocons can sound like non-zionist liberals.
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-u-s-israel-politics-gap/

    Unfortunately, the non-zionists remain a minority in each party.

    • Boomer
      Boomer
      January 8, 2015, 1:51 pm

      PS: what I should have said is that the non-zionists remain a minority among the elected officials of each party.

  22. Doubtom
    Doubtom
    January 8, 2015, 2:06 pm

    So there’s a U.S. law preventing aid to Palestine if it seeks to join the ICC. Who wrote that law? Who sponsored that law? This is what the American people need to know.
    Why should either the United States or Israel give a hoot if Palestinians decide to join the International Court? Why isn’t the United States or Israel a member of the ICC? What have they to hide?

  23. Citizen
    Citizen
    January 8, 2015, 2:28 pm

    Former US congresswoman talks about the pledge of allegiance to Israel every politician must make to get funding for his or her campaign–go to 14min in the clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1y3maNzFo4

    “What does Stone Mountain Georgia have to do with Israel?”
    Turns out, everything. AIPAC is most influential special interest group any US politician must deal with if he or she wants a political career in USA.

    • ckg
      ckg
      January 8, 2015, 4:19 pm

      “What does Stone Mountain Georgia have to do with Israel?”

      Stone Mountain is a monument to the defenders of a deeply religious ethnocratic state where freedom and democracy didn’t apply to those with brown skins.

  24. ckg
    ckg
    January 8, 2015, 5:56 pm

    After Rand Paul introduced S.34, Glenn Greenwald tweeted Rand Paul is a panderer and a fraud. https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/552831600199995392

  25. J.G. Sandom
    J.G. Sandom
    January 8, 2015, 9:11 pm

    It’s time to add the products/services produced by these family’s businesses to your Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement list. Not only is 90% of the money helping to finance Bibi’s right-wing, racist policies coming from the US, but just 3 American families are responsible for most of the contributions. The vastly wealthy Falic family of Florida, owners of the Duty Free Americas airport shops as well as several high-end fashion fragrances (including Vivamore – Selena Gomez; Killer Queen – Katy Perry; Taylor – Taylor Swift; Truth or Dare – Madonna; Rogue – Rihanna; The Key – Justin Bieber; 222 – Adam Levine; Reveal the Passion – Halle Berry; True Reflection – Kim Kardashian; Lady Gaga Fame – Lady Gaga; and Pink Friday – Nicki Minaj, among others) have been one of the most consistent donors to Netanyahu’s campaign. Four members of that family were Netanyahu’s top contributors, with each giving close to the maximum of $11,500 per donor. Closely following them were the Book family of New Jersey, owners of Jet Support Systems, with four members each contributing $11,000 each, and the Schottenstein family, owners of the American Eagle fashion chain, whose four members donated $10,000 each. #Rihanna! Really? You ought to be ashamed of yourself to be in bed with the Falics, supporters of racist, Zionist policies that persecute the Palestinians in the apartheid Occupied Territories.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/01/06/netanyahu_american_donors_small_group_funds_huge_share_of_israeli_prime.html

  26. Bandolero
    Bandolero
    January 8, 2015, 11:15 pm

    I disagree with the interpretations of this article.

    To me interpretation of all this is quite different: it’s all about the Israel lobby to stop Rand Paul from becoming president 2016. It’s true that the voter base in democrats is less pro-Israel and more so. But for 2016 the Israel lobby has pocketed in Hillary already. She will do whatever Israel wants her to do. The Israel lobby knows this because Hillary always was like this. The only chance that anyone else than Hillary will get the Democratic ticket for 2016 is that the Israel lobby wants it. There is no serious contender other than Hillary – and no non-zionist at all.

    In the Republican party the situation is completely the opposite. The base is hawkish, very much pro-Israel and all things the Israel Lobby likes, but there is a huge danger for the lobby in the person of Rand Paul. He may turn everything upside down. That he now supports pro-Israeli positions doesn’t make him more trustworthy in the eyes of the lobby, but more dangerous – because it’s harder to build pro-Israeli opposition to him this way. the problem for the lobby is that nobody knows whether he would – once elected president – keep his newly found pro-Israel positions or return to his fathers positions. All bets are on.

    For the Israel lobby that uncertainty is true horror and that is why it concentrates most of it’s resources to fight Rand Paul.

    So, that’s my interpretation of these events, hope it’s unterstandable.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 9, 2015, 11:24 am

      Did you see the latest thing Rand Paul sponsored?

      • Bandolero
        Bandolero
        January 9, 2015, 12:43 pm

        Yes, I did.

        That’s why I wrote: “That he now supports pro-Israeli positions doesn’t make him more trustworthy in the eyes of the lobby, but more dangerous – because it’s harder to build pro-Israeli opposition to him this way. the problem for the lobby is that nobody knows whether he would – once elected president – keep his newly found pro-Israel positions or return to his fathers positions.”

      • annie
        annie
        January 9, 2015, 12:59 pm

        but rand’s father is a noninterventionist, therefore he would agrue funding neither palestine or israel wouldn’t he? rands statements surrounding the legislation are disturbing but the legislation itself doesn’t surprise me. and i would love it if the US got out of the palestine/israel picture altoghter. by not funding palestine our true face in this effort becomes more transparent.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 9, 2015, 6:16 pm

        “Yes, I did.”

        Yes you did, and I knew that, but I worded it badly. It was supposed to be sort of a gasp of amazement and disgust, at what he did. Thanks for your polite reply.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 9, 2015, 6:22 pm

        I got an email from Rand telling me how those nasty Palestinians need to have their foreign aid cut off, and asking me to donate to help him. Most be exciting at the Rand family bbq on weekends.

    • ritzl
      ritzl
      January 9, 2015, 12:48 pm

      Agree, Bandolero. He’s an unknown quantity on this issue, as opposed to two knowns/captives. That’s attractive.

      That attractive uncertainty may overshadow his weaknesses in other areas. Hard to tell.

      Let the games begin.

  27. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 10, 2015, 9:57 am

    Rand pulled me in a bit based on his past stances on foreign policy. He just paid his public dues to the I lobby and Israel he lost the foreign policy edge that made him distinctly different from other contenders. He just lost that edge.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 10, 2015, 7:18 pm

      Yeah, Rand must have calculated he needed AIPAC donors more than those of us who thought he was a breath of fresher air–clear indicator he’s thirsty to be POTUS, not any sort of statesman, not a more principled sort like his father. Reminds me of when Obama reneged on his Cairo speech–and he was already POTUS.

      • piotr
        piotr
        January 11, 2015, 12:51 am

        American politics works more perversely than that. Rand was and remains a long shot. If he gets the beneficence and munificence from folks elated with his proposal, it can be a wash by discouraging many “paleo-Conservatives”.

        But it is quite rewarding to run a well funded campaign. All family members and friends can get paying jobs from the campaign itself and from campaign consultants. The trick is that the hopelessness of the campaign should not be obvious, with luck, not before, say, 20 primaries.

        I would also add that Rand is quite consistent. As a fiscal libertarian, he does not want to fund anyone, so any reason to “cut funding” is good. Starting a war is a different issue: it actually increases the government speding.

      • Bandolero
        Bandolero
        January 11, 2015, 1:53 am

        Citizen

        I do think Rand Paul just calculated that – if he wants to be president – he must move in the direction of the middle, ie he must water down the positions many others find outlandish, even if his fans don’t like that. You see that with every radical lefty or liberal – as soon as they try to climb the political ladder they water down their positions regarding unions, banking and so on. In case of Rand Paul it means watering down the assumed anti-Israel stance. If he is working – like I think he is – on becoming POTUS, he will currently do anything what improves his chances to win the Republican primaries – and since the Republicans are very much pro-Israel he’s now working to present himself as being pro-Israel, too. I think he has a fair chance to become president, probably the Republican primaries being a bigger hurdle as the final battle against Hillary.

        The huge problem, for the voters, but even more for AIPAC, is, that nobody knows what positions he will take once he became president – if he manges that. AIPAC wants presidential elections where both candidates are reliable and trusted friends – or better say: stooges – of Israel. Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush all fulfill this criterium, Rand Paul doesn’t. And that’s why AIPAC and Bibi’s buddies in the US are currently working hard to stop Rand Paul – they hate uncertainty.

      • annie
        annie
        January 11, 2015, 2:12 am

        smart comment bandolero.

        AIPAC wants presidential elections where both candidates are reliable and trusted friends – or better say: stooges – of Israel…. And that’s why AIPAC and Bibi’s buddies in the US are currently working hard to stop Rand Paul – they hate uncertainty.

        a gambler- i am not, yet i’d much rather gamble on an imperfect/questionable uncertainty than vote for a surely pro-zionist outcome.

Leave a Reply