Trending Topics:

The left needs to stop hounding Elizabeth Warren on Palestine, says Warren supporter

on 67 Comments

Yesterday I did a somewhat-snarky post on a N.Y. party to push Senator Elizabeth Warren to run for president at which the Palestine question came up. “Warren supporters can’t talk about Palestine” was the headline; and I quoted Reeves Wiedeman’s report in The New Yorker: 

A hundred and fifty people mingled in [Julie] Pacino’s loft, listening to speeches from Warren supporters. After one audience member posed a question about Warren’s stance on Palestine, the organizers decided that there had been enough dialogue, turned on the music, and told everyone to dance.

Charles Lenchner says that account is wrong. He was one of the speakers at the event. He told me that after a few speeches from members of Democracy for America, Moveon, and his group, “Ready for Warren,” the floor was opened to questions and a young filmmaker asked about Warren’s position on Palestine. Lenchner answered her, saying the issue was very important to him personally, as a longtime opponent of the occupation and former Israeli refusenik; but that people in the room had to respect “the process and rate of change” inside the Democratic Party. A Democratic presidential candidate was going to reflect that change, not lead it.

“It’s perfectly reasonable to ask why Warren’s positions are not more connected with the base,” Lenchner said. But anyone who works in politics knows why that’s the case. “Trying to extrapolate from how Warren behaves as a politician to what the organizations supporting her believe is a fundamental error. There’s no connection.” Lenchner said that her supporters “know the deal” about Palestine.
Warren has not ruled out running, but she has no association with the groups pushing her to run.
Lenchner also advised those in the grassroots left that if they want to sincerely engage in the Democratic primary process, “if the goal is to push people on Palestine,” they should drop the strident tone and stop taking potshots at Elizabeth Warren (he was talking about me, in part), which will only help hawks like Hillary Clinton, and actually try to promote change inside the party, say by joining Moveon’s remarkable petition to “boycott” Netanyahu’s speech.
That petition and the young filmmaker who asked about Palestine reflect a genuine shift in the party base that was also evident at the 2012 Democratic convention, the famous floor demonstration over the Jerusalem plank, Lenchner said. The young are moving on this issue, away from the older generation.
Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

67 Responses

  1. Bill in Maryland on February 13, 2015, 11:43 am

    Sorry, but “The left needs to stop hounding Lyndon Johnson on Civil Rights” doesn’t sit well.

    • Krauss on February 13, 2015, 1:00 pm

      Yeah, Lenchner’s plea is that of a sycophant. The only thing that creates change is grassroots pressure. If Warren will not change on her own, then we will force her to change because she obviously cares a lot about donations.

      For Warren, this is doubly problematic precisely because she positions herself as an anti-Wall Street candidate who often attacks political corruption, yet here she is, doing the same thing.

      Attacking Wall Street inside the Democratic party is not without its risks but it is still largely respectable and accepted among elites. Attacking Zionism is the third rail of Democratic politics – but only among the elites. The grassroots have already moved on and the fight ahead of us now is to connect the lagging and reactionary elite with the fast-moving and progressive base.

      Lenchner’s anti-progressive lecturing helps nobody but those interested in the status quo. Maybe he was a refusenik, but you can still be a Zionist. There’s lots of deluded young American kids who go on birthright with the fantasy of “changing the system from within”. Lenchner reminds me of those.

      • just on February 13, 2015, 3:31 pm

        Super comments, Bill & Krauss!

    • Stephen Shenfield on February 13, 2015, 1:51 pm

      It is impertinent for voters to want to know where a presidential candidate stands on important public issues. We shall be informed in due course, at an appropriate time. In the meantime we should decide whether to support a candidate on the basis of how we like the look of her face and the sound of her voice. In any case, it is futile to know a candidate’s positions because they are bound to change, perhaps repeatedly.

    • Ellen on February 13, 2015, 2:24 pm

      Johnson adopted civil rights reform because it was a very mainstream issue (on the coasts and NorthEast). It was not “left” by the mid 60s.

      Allowing the concern, outrage, disgust over US policy and practice regarding Palestine to be painted as a “left” issue undermines the work of so many.

      There are plenty of people who would never be considered left, but are deeply supportive of Palestine.

      Heck, anyone who is human, honest and informed knows what is right. This is not a left issue, it is a mainstream human rights issue.

      Stop feeding the beast with labels.

      The people are hounding Warren, not some imaginary club called the left, whatever that is.

      Like with Johnson, when enough PEOPLE start hounding politicians, the change will happen .

      Call your reps, start hounding.

      • Citizen on February 15, 2015, 11:20 am

        When the Left hounded Johnson for his escalating Vietnam policy, Johnson prevented the rescue of the USS Liberty crew and muzzled them for decades. He needed Israel Firsters in the Left who were entrenched in the main media, not to mention campaign dollars.

  2. Pixel on February 13, 2015, 12:12 pm

    Whether music was immediately turned up for dancing or CL responded to the question, in both cases EW didn’t answer.

    To me, that’s the issue.

    • tree on February 13, 2015, 4:44 pm

      It doesn’t sound like Warren was there. From the description it was an event sponsored by supporters of her candidacy, with speeches by them, not her.

  3. on February 13, 2015, 12:12 pm

    The Left needs to make the politicians understand that the day is approaching that this uncritical support for Israel will be a deathblow to their careers.

    • Citizen on February 15, 2015, 11:23 am

      Seems that day is far in the future, if at all–Soros, Adelson?

  4. John O on February 13, 2015, 12:25 pm

    “A Democratic presidential candidate was going to reflect that change, not lead it.”
    Why? What’s wrong with showing leadership if you want to be POTUS?

    I’m reminded of a joke I heard cracked by Tom Paxton, though I’m sure it’s old and well worn – “I’m not a member of any organized political party; I’m a Democrat.”

    • Philip Munger on February 13, 2015, 5:34 pm

      Sometimes attributed to Will Rogers.

    • Citizen on February 15, 2015, 11:25 am

      I recall Obama saying if you want him to get behind something, you have to show it in a tangible way before he will act.

  5. PeaceThroughJustice on February 13, 2015, 1:12 pm

    Those are two very different accounts of the evening, Lenchner’s and The New Yorker’s. Did the questioning stop and the dancing start or not? Guess we’ll never know. All we know for sure is that it’s Lenchner who is running the Warren Presidential Draft Campaign. Just possibly he could be in marketeering mode. (By the way, have we reached the point where Israelis running US presidential candidates is no longer commented on?)

    Maybe if we heard a little about what this “Israeli refusenik” has ever actually said and done on the subject of zionism, we’d be in a position to know whether to take him seriously or not. (After all, even the Dersh claims to be a “long time opponent of the occupation.”) Because otherwise this is just damage control undertaken by an ambitious courtier.

    I’d love to know if Lenchner expanded on his comment, “Trying to extrapolate from how Warren behaves as a politician to what the organizations supporting her believe is a fundamental error. There’s no connection.” I have no idea what this means. Is it something he’s proud of?

    “Lenchner also advised those in the grassroots left that if they want to sincerely engage in the Democratic primary process, “if the goal is to push people on Palestine,” they should drop the strident tone.”

    Why?

    • just on February 13, 2015, 3:33 pm

      +1!

    • gamal on February 13, 2015, 3:39 pm

      The call to inaction has finally come.

      • RoHa on February 13, 2015, 8:55 pm

        :-) for the sentiment.

        ):-( for the superfluous comma.

      • gamal on February 14, 2015, 4:23 am

        :-( for the superfluous comma.

        despite myself I am ashamed, i have a comma habit, script writing corrupts.

      • annie on February 14, 2015, 1:07 pm

        i fixed it for you gamal. no worries.

    • Ellen on February 13, 2015, 4:04 pm

      What does it mean? Nothing at all . And that is the point . Seemingly coherent rhetoric with the intent to overwhelm and confuse. It is another way of taking control of the discourse (I can’t call it dialogue.) and to silence . It is a sort of Prep School method. But revealing of Lenchner’s sophomoric mind.

      Is this guy Warren’s campaign manager? If so, very very creepy and telling that Warren may be nothing more than a puppet out of her league.

    • tree on February 13, 2015, 4:57 pm

      Maybe if we heard a little about what this “Israeli refusenik” has ever actually said and done on the subject of zionism, we’d be in a position to know whether to take him seriously or not.

      I am assuming that Charles Lenchner has posted here as “clenchner” a while back and now posts as “Newclench”, simply because of the similarity of the name to the the nom de plume, as well as the fact that clenchner/newclench has a habit of talking about “big tents”, which usually comes down to a plea to moderate and tone down arguments and actions that might make those closer to the status quo uncomfortable. This sounds like what Charles Lenchner is saying about the evening.

      The poster here also mentioned being a refusenik.

      I could be wrong of course. It could just be coincidence of names.

      Newclench comment archive here:

      http://mondoweiss.net/profile/clenchner

  6. a blah chick on February 13, 2015, 1:35 pm

    “Lenchner answered her, saying the issue was very important to him personally…but that people … had to respect “the process and rate of change” inside the Democratic Party. A Democratic presidential candidate was going to reflect that change, not lead it. ”

    Gee, I thought a leader was suppose to, you know, lead, at least sometimes. Silly me.

    “Lenchner also advised those in the grassroots left that if they want to sincerely engage in the Democratic primary process, “if the goal is to push people on Palestine,” they should drop the strident tone and stop taking potshots at Elizabeth Warren”

    One wonders if Mr. Lenchner would have found our tone “strident” if we were condemning the massacre of whole families in Israel due to Hamas missiles. I think not.

    “That petition and the young filmmaker who asked about Palestine reflect a genuine shift in the party base that was also evident at the 2012 Democratic convention, the famous floor demonstration over the Jerusalem plank, Lenchner said. The young are moving on this issue, away from the older generation. ”

    But it’s the oldsters that have the money.

    • ckg on February 14, 2015, 10:40 am

      If Jim Webb can lead, so can Elizabeth Warren.

      • Citizen on February 15, 2015, 11:27 am

        I think Jim Webb is a great leader, but most Americans never heard of him.

  7. Mooser on February 13, 2015, 1:41 pm

    Oh, I see, the first post was “snarky”!

  8. ckg on February 13, 2015, 1:47 pm

    Charles Lenchner is a refusenik, which implies that he holds (or held) Israeli citizenship, and he runs a U.S. political organization Ready for Warren. Is he a U.S. citizen too? Can he vote here? (I see he once wrote an essay titled, My Problem with BDS. )

    • just on February 13, 2015, 3:36 pm

      Thanks for the link~ it “clarifies” a lot.

      ahem.

    • pabelmont on February 13, 2015, 4:17 pm

      Lenchner’s essay “My Problem with BDS” includes this:

      My problem with the Boycott, Sanctions and Divestment (BDS) movement is that it treats the entire field of democratic contention in Israel as so much wasted breath. Was all that effort I put into inviting Jews to meet Palestinians for the first time just wasted? Were all those weekend seminars and visits to Arab villages, the West Bank and Gaza for nothing? All the time spent passing out election flyers and poll watching – just wasted effort? What about the months I spent in military prison as a refusenik?

      .He seems to think there is some sort of progress to be made by letting Israelis (Jews mostly) hash this out to their hearts’ content. Or if not progress, then at least comfort for them.

      Whereas BDS believes (as do I) that pressure must be applied to the whole she-bang (or much of it). We don’t want to wait because he might be uncomfortable.

      Same for democrats. Pressure. An old political line is: politician to lobbyist, “OK, you’ve convinced me. Now pressure me.” so we pro-Palestine folks need a PAC to funnel our contributions through.

      • oldgeezer on February 13, 2015, 4:40 pm

        Practically his entire section dealing with his problems with BDS could be reduced to – What about me? I need validation for my efforts and this doesn’t do it.

        And arguably all his efforts were a waste if you measure it by what was acheived.

      • Steve Macklevore on February 14, 2015, 11:57 am

        “Was all that effort I put into inviting Jews to meet Palestinians for the first time just wasted?”

        Yes. Israel loves dialogue – whilst you’re busy inviting Israelis to meet Palestinians, the settlers are stealing more land and building more settlements.

        “Were all those weekend seminars and visits to Arab villages, the West Bank and Gaza for nothing?”

        Yes, they achieved nothing. See above.

        “All the time spent passing out election flyers and poll watching – just wasted effort?”

        Yes I’m afraid your best efforts were in vain. Netanyahu was elected, and then re-elected.

        “What about the months I spent in military prison as a refusenik?”

        Full marks for your principled stand, but an activist in jail is next to useless.

        BDS is the only grass roots movement that Israel is scared of. The kinds of activities you’ve done in the past are at best a waste of time and at worst provide cover for land theft and colonisation.

      • annie on February 14, 2015, 1:00 pm

        thanks steve, that was perfect.

      • marc b. on February 15, 2015, 10:30 am

        Color me jaded, Steve, but some of these so-called ‘refuseniks’ are just tools, whether the intent was original or an evolution of sorts. If this DB now supported BDS instead of acting as a gatekeeper that would be a sign of courage. What a feckin’ dilettante.

  9. American on February 13, 2015, 3:05 pm

    What is it with these people who presume to tell us what not to do?
    They all sound like Slater and the ‘liberal zionist, –dont push the dems or else, dont be strident or else….

    Go back to Israel Lenchner.

    • Mooser on February 13, 2015, 6:06 pm

      “They all sound like Slater….”

      Well, now, Prof. Slater is a smart guy. Is he still talking like that? My impression is that Mr. Slater is coming to terms with the facts.

  10. kma on February 13, 2015, 4:09 pm

    “they should drop the strident tone and stop taking potshots…”

    um… the “snarky” post said “supporters can’t talk about Palestine”, and the response is, if you care about Palestine, don’t talk about it ! Phil could write the same post again and just add the update with the new quote. it’s not snarky.

    no wonder nobody votes in this country.
    Warren supporters should remember that Clinton couldn’t beat a Black man in the primary because he was seen as closer to popular opinion on issues. more “potshots”, please!

  11. Bumblebye on February 13, 2015, 4:29 pm

    Wasn’t he a commenter here, first as “clenchner” then as “newclench”?
    I suppose we could explore his archive…

  12. annie on February 13, 2015, 4:47 pm

    why should we vote for someone who can’t face up to the lobby? this guy is nuts if he thinks “the left” is going to listen to him.

    i realized (again) when i traveled to richmond virginia in the lead up to the last election to pound the pavement for obama that the “grassroots” of the party do most of the legwork. but then we’re supposed to sit on the sidelines while our politicians bend over to accommodate the gop. we actually have represented a good portion of the dem party, more than a special interest group. the issue of israel is not a left issue, it’s a vital american issue whose supporters very much dominate our foreign policy. so no, we’re not small or fringe and we’re not going to be laying off elizabeth warren. she’s not going to ever get enough support to counter hillary if she’s not offering something (PALESTINE) that’s vital to us. not going to happen!!!!

    maybe this kind of plea works in israel, but this is american politics and we’ll say what we want thank you very much. elizabeth warren needs to grow some cajons or she will remain fringe. we’ve the ones who have been taking israel to the middle of american politics and she’s trailing behind, big time. get with the program elizabeth!

    • Scott on February 13, 2015, 8:06 pm

      I’m not “the left” but I was canvassing just like Annie. Obama has faced up the lobby as much as any American president except GHW Bush, and oh yes, Eisenhower.

      • American on February 13, 2015, 8:38 pm

        You forgot Kennedy.

      • Citizen on February 15, 2015, 11:33 am

        Actually. JFK fought Israel’s quest for the bomb, and RFK fought to make AIPAC’s parent org register as a foreign lobby under FARA. Both were killed. Israel has the bomb, and stolen nuke triggers, and AIPAC lives unaccountable.

    • CigarGod on February 17, 2015, 9:27 am

      Obama gave us a bunch of vague lip service…and we thought we saw some kind of tangible promise/hope.
      Same thing happening here. We fall for it over and over again.

  13. Tom Callaghan on February 13, 2015, 5:28 pm

    Elizabeth Warren should do the following: 1. Make the decision to run; 2. Boycott Bibi’s speech;
    3. Announce her candidacy in Harlem, NY right across the street from Bill Clinton’s office and 4.
    run hard after the peace wing of the Democratic Party and African Americans who feel deeply insulted by the Dermer-Netanyahu-Boehner Joint Meeting caper.

    She’s got to announce her decision to boycott immediately. Its a golden opportunity sitting right in front of her. If she hesitates two things could happen to her detriment. First, Netanyahu might reschedule. Second, Clinton could go completely out of character and actually do something on principle, and announce that she would boycott if she were in the Senate.

    Any Democrat who boycotts, or announces they would if they were in Congress, has a fighting chance against any Democrat who doesn’t boycott.

    African Americans are reluctant to let on just how angry they are by this gross show of disrespect to President Obama. To a large degree, they’re keeping it in the family but they will have great affection for anyone who stands with them on this one.

    http://www.wednesdayswars.com

    • Ellen on February 14, 2015, 1:48 am

      Tom,

      Most astute! Thank you

      • Citizen on February 15, 2015, 11:34 am

        She won’t.

    • Scott on February 14, 2015, 9:15 am

      Second, Clinton could go completely out of character and actually do something on principle, and announce that she would boycott if she were in the Senate.

      Taking odds on that happening?

      • marc b. on February 15, 2015, 10:40 am

        Clinton as a candidate is sunk if she were to do that. Who are her supporters, financial and demographic? She is out of her mind as far as I’m concerned. It’s hard to imagine the circumstances in which I’d vote for her.

  14. John Douglas on February 13, 2015, 5:39 pm

    Gay Americans supported Obama in his elections even though his position was to give equal legal protections to gay relationships up to but not including marriage. He was an impure candidate and his failing was on the issue closest to them. The support of the gay community is very important to a presidential candidate and they gave it. My view is that they were smart to do so, in fact it was the obviously smart thing to do. The situation seems very similar to that of Warren supporters and the Israel/Palestine issue.

  15. Scott on February 13, 2015, 7:59 pm

    Well okay; but civil rights people didn’t push hard on Johnson or Kennedy until they were elected. There actually may be a real choice: Warren v. Hillary , and then Warren or Hillary against Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz or someone. And the choices could be enormously important. Sad Jim Webb has sparked little interest, but I recognize that as fact. I’m glad this pro-Warren character addressed the issue, and made a reference to the floor demonstration on Jerusalem which I and others here thought enormously important. I’m not dismissive.

  16. Donald on February 13, 2015, 8:39 pm

    It’s not the job of activists on a particular issue to keep their mouths shut and make it easy for a political candidate to ignore their issue. A candidate, on the other hand, may want to avoid talking about some issues because it might hurt her chances. It’s a conflict of interest. Welcome to the real world.

    I like Warren, but why would anyone who cared about an issue stay silent about a candidate’s lousy stance on that issue?

  17. DoubleStandard on February 14, 2015, 11:26 am

    How many Americans vote based on a candidate’s stance on IP?

    • annie on February 14, 2015, 11:37 am

      your guess is as good as mine. i know i do. probably a fair amount of jewish and arab americans do to. what’s your hunch?

      • a blah chick on February 14, 2015, 2:13 pm

        I must confess that back in ’88 I withheld voting for Dukakis because he said something about the I/P issue that so angered me. I remember being in the voting booth and thinking, “hell no. If you can say such things about Palestinians then you don’t really believe in human rights.” Only time I ever did that.

      • annie on February 14, 2015, 2:39 pm

        jeez, i’d hardly even heard of palestine in 88. i was decades behind you.

    • Donald on February 14, 2015, 1:11 pm

      Probably some Israel supporters do. And some donors. Most wouldn’t. I’d vote for Warren if she runs,but don’ t think this is a reason for staying silent when she is wrong. Too many of the political types think that every American should act like a member of a candidate’s campaign staff. If we all did that, there are some issues where no one would ever say anything honest.

    • DoubleStandard on February 14, 2015, 2:12 pm

      @annie Well you have an unusual obsession with the issue given that it is of little personal importance to you (you aren’t Jewish or Arab/Palestinian).

      My point is that the issue of I/P is not salient enough or relevant enough to Americans’ lives for it to be a real factor in elections.

      • annie on February 14, 2015, 2:56 pm

        I/P is not salient enough or relevant enough to Americans’ lives for it to be a real factor in elections.

        i think that’s changing doublestandard. and i don’t think “little personal importance” is relevant wrt i/p, plus i came upon it quite organically. israel, and then palestine for that matter, would not have even been on my radar if my country had not launched a genocidal war in iraq. i wasn’t even paying any attention to the middle east until that time. so i just dove right in to protesting that war (in the street and online), like any healthy person would do when their country goes off to war (unless they’ve been attacked by that country or something, which we had not) and what did i find? what did MANY american people find when they started peeling back the onion layers of cheney’s cabinet. what a nightmare! and then this constant repetitious drum beat of “israel our best friend israel our best friend israel our best friend israel our best friend israel our best friend” ad nauseam for i don’t even know how long (and we didn’t hear that all the time when i was growing up in this country). and only then did i start looking at israel and what they were up to, and how they were using my country to fight these wars … and while iraq was being fought they were building all these settlements!!!!! and only then did i really notice palestinians.

        so this is my duty as an american to get our country back and get those creeps OUT of our legislation and stop them once and for all from this awful expansionist nightmare because it’s not going to stop until we stop it. so no, it’s definitely NOT primarily a Jewish or Arab/Palestinian issue. it’s an AMERICAN issue, just like if we go to war with iran it will be an american issue. and when we are there is there any doubt israel will do EXACTLY what they did when americans had their eyes glued on the invasion of iraq? shove 100’s of thousands of settlers in palestine, only this time they will probably go for ethnically cleansing more of jerusalem or annexing the WB.

        anyway, don’t you worry. we’re growing like a virus in heat. more and more americans are becoming very aware of i/p thanks in part to your glorious lobby, doing things like shoving israel’s PM down our throats.

        anyway, gotta go. don’t you worry about my obsession, it will only give you a head ache.

      • American on February 14, 2015, 3:16 pm

        DoubleStandard February 14, 2015, 2:12 pm

        My point is that the issue of I/P is not salient enough or relevant enough to Americans’ lives for it to be a real factor in elections – >>>>

        It will be.
        Just let the fifth column and israel keep on doing what they’re doing.
        And they will keep on.

      • DoubleStandard on February 15, 2015, 5:44 am

        I don’t see how the war in Iraq benefited Israel, it just upset the balance in the middle east under which Israel was doing quite well.

        I think you spend too much time in the anti zionist conspiracy theory room and have lost touch with reality. American public support for Israel is high, evangelicism is gaining at the expense of Presbyterianism and Episcopalianism, and then vast majority of the American public is obsessed with their wallets and doesn’t care about giving the Palestinians s***

      • marc b. on February 15, 2015, 10:55 am

        So are you Ukrainian, DS, and if not does it stop you from worrying about the Ukraine? BTW, your use of ‘obsession’ gives you away, the intimation of mental defect, which naturally leads to the ‘anti-Semitism’ smear directed at ‘non-interested’ parties’ interested in I/P. And please note that many in the military, our military, believe that the injustice in Palestine supported by the US, is a significant driver of anti-US sentiment. But you might be correct at one level, since a mere few percentage points of Americans are Jewish or Palestinian, the US, under your theory, shouldn’t give a dried fig about what happens in/to Israel.

  18. hungrydave on February 14, 2015, 11:45 am

    I understand the responses here, but I think pragmatically the best course of action is to get warren elected then pressure her.

    • just on February 14, 2015, 1:12 pm

      Elizabeth Warren starts with skimpy FP cred, anyway.

      Her first trip overseas was to pay obeisance to Netanyahu. Yet she cannot answer questions wrt Palestine. This dude suggests that we leave her alone wrt Palestine.

      I say rubbish.

    • Donald on February 14, 2015, 1:16 pm

      What does not pressuring her before look like? Do we not say her position on the I/P conflict is wrong? What about her re-election campaign? The idea of pressuring a politician after they win makes no sense. (Should we wait until 2021 before pressuring her?)At best, you can hope you might persuade them to change their position, but that process should begin before they get in.

  19. American on February 14, 2015, 1:42 pm

    The groups pushing Warren to run.
    They are trying to hand pick another Obama. Only difference in them and the Chicago crowd that put Obama in is they dont have uber zionist money and are Israel ‘lite’ zionist.

    Largest one is :

    Moveon.org

    Anna Galland is the executive director of MoveOn.org Civic Action Ilya Sheyman is the executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action.

    LLya Sheyman
    Biography
    Sheyman first arrived in Illinois with his family over two decades ago as a Jewish refugee from the former Soviet Union.[3] Sheyman graduated from McGill University with a joint degree in Political Science and United States History.[3]

    Sheyman’s website articulates his position on Israel in great detail. The only issue on his “issues” page that features a link to a separate PDF statement is the section on Israel.
    In the three-page document, titled “Standing Up for Israel,” Sheyman calls for an active U.S. involvement in brokering peace — language that suggests a familiarity with the stances of dovish Israel groups — while insisting that a “final status agreement must come from direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority,” mirroring Israel’s insistence that Palestinians return to the negotiating table
    http://www.jta.org/2011/11/21/news-opinion/politics/in-illinois-faceoff-between-jewish-candidates-seen-as-bellwether-for-dems

    These Chicagoans Are Pushing Elizabeth Warren to Run for President
    http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/Felsenthal-Files/January-2015/These-Chicagoans-Are-Pushing-Elizabeth-Warren-to-Run-for-President/

    Ilya Sheyman, a former candidate for Congress
    Erica Sagrans and Christopher Hass, both veterans of the Obama campaign.

    They also operate under ‘Run Warren Run! ‘and Democracy for America.
    Sagrans also worked for Peliso and Hass also got a job on the hill afterward.

    • marc b. on February 15, 2015, 11:03 am

      Direct negotiations between Israel and the PA? In other words he can only imagine a negotiating framework in which an overwhelming imbalance favors the Israelis.

  20. tommy on February 14, 2015, 2:40 pm

    Sadly, Sen. Warren subscribes to the traditional use of American hard power in the exercise of foreign policy as delineated by the Truman Doctrine. She is just another Murtha when it comes to war spending.

Leave a Reply