‘NYT’ columnist says Hillary Clinton is not pro-Israel enough!

The New York Times continues to indulge the most right-wing and Israel-narcissistic views in its opinion columns. Here is regular contributor Shmuel Rosner, a rightwing Israeli, holding out the hope that a president Donald Trump would be more friendly to Israel than Barack Obama.

In “Can Israel Handle a President Trump?” Rosner says Hillary Clinton is wobbly on Israel:

Hillary Clinton[‘s] history of thorny relations with Israel’s prime minister began in the mid-1990s, when her husband clashed with the first Netanyahu government, and continued through her tenure as Mr. Obama’s secretary of state….

From a President Clinton, Israel’s hawkish government would come under more of the same pressure it received from the Obama administration.

What is he talking about? Hillary Clinton has been more pro-Israel than any other candidate besides Marco Rubio. She brags that she was born within months of the Jewish state and vows to take the relationship “to the next level.” She wants to fight BDS and have PM Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House in her first month. That’s not good enough for Shmuel Rosner, though!

And the narcissism! Does the Times run op-eds that have their heads so deeply immured in a foreign country’s interests when that country is Myanmar or France or Turkey? Would any other foreign columnist feel so empowered to voice such undiplomatic views as these in an American newspaper?  Rosner:

Israel depends on an America that asserts itself abroad. Israel needs bipartisan support. It needs stable, predictable American foreign policy. It desires candidates who sing Israel’s praises as often and as loudly as they can. Mr. Trump, who looks poised to capture the Republican Party’s nomination, offers Israel none of those. Mr. Netanyahu has every reason to be concerned and disappointed by what the American political system has produced this election cycle…

Israel’s government hoped a new president would restore a more traditional definition of friendship — one based on mutual trust and support.

America readers, do you really give a f***** f*** what Netanyahu wants?

Thanks to Donald Johnson.

31 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Why doesn,t someone ask these ingrates to make a list that lay,s out exactly what the US needs to do to make them happy and then make that list available to every American through Mass Media , (includes the NYT(, so Dick and Jane will be aware of just how much their leaders in Tel Aviv demand of them.

I am not an American , but if we had traitors like that in Ireland , they would find themselves on a fast boat to their beloved Israel with a free one way ticket.Are Americans insane or just plain naive.

Zio-supremacists here at MW are happy to tell you that Israel doesn’t need America. Apparently Mr. Rosner didn’t get their memo.

‘NYT’ columnist says Hillary Clinton is not pro-Israel enough!

I guess these einsteins haven’t figured out what happened, or is happening, in the US. and they’re counting on what the senior GOP official said, “We choose the nominee, not the voters.” Guess they haven’t factored in a reaction.

I said over five years ago here, America’s support for Israel is 3,000 miles wide and an inch deep, if that.

Support for Israel is, among the hoi polloi who are not religious fanatics, in the same category as liking Levalor® Blinds, or thinking increasing ‘curb appeal’ helps get a better price for your house. . . . something you heard on TV and presented as a good idea.

But I guess we wait until we hear from DT at AIPAC. If he has the balls to stick to his guns from before, we can expect more entertaining fireworks from out-of-touch Israeli-Americans who think their country matters more to Americans than America’s own sons and daughters and grandkids who need jobs and charity to start at home.

I hate to be like eljay and repeat myself over and over again, so instead, go to the link.
https://mondoweiss.mystagingwebsite.com/2016/03/romney-echoes-neocons-trump-will-lead-u-s-into-the-abyss/#comment-828163

Which astounds more: The author’s hubris? Or the editor’s acquiescence?