Follow by Email

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Tablet Magazine, "Crossing a Line to Sell a Deal": Moderate Jewish Journal Accuses Obama of Anti-Jewish Incitement

In a Tablet article entitled "Crossing a Line to Sell a Deal," with the subheading "The White House and its allies shouldn’t need to smear American Jews–and a sitting senator–as dual loyalists to make their case," the editors of this moderate Jewish journal, some of whom support Obama's nuclear deal with Iran, conclude:

"What we increasingly can’t stomach—and feel obliged to speak out about right now—is the use of Jew-baiting and other blatant and retrograde forms of racial and ethnic prejudice as tools to sell a political deal, or to smear those who oppose it. Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple. Accusing Senators and Congressmen whose misgivings about the Iran deal are shared by a majority of the U.S. electorate of being agents of a foreign power, or of selling their votes to shadowy lobbyists, or of acting contrary to the best interests of the United States, is the kind of naked appeal to bigotry and prejudice that would be familiar in the politics of the pre-Civil Rights Era South.

This use of anti-Jewish incitement as a political tool is a sickening new development in American political discourse, and we have heard too much of it lately—some coming, ominously, from our own White House and its representatives. Let’s not mince words: Murmuring about 'money' and 'lobbying' and 'foreign interests' who seek to drag America into war is a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card. It’s the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally, not from the President of the United States—and it’s gotten so blatant that even many of us who are generally sympathetic to the administration, and even this deal, have been shaken by it.

We do not accept the idea that Senator Schumer or anyone else is a fair target for racist incitement, anymore than we accept the idea that the basic norms of political discourse in this country do not apply to Jews. Whatever one feels about the merits of the Iran deal, sales techniques that call into question the patriotism of American Jews are examples of bigotry—no matter who does it. On this question, we should all stand in defense of Senator Schumer."

Sorry, but this is not only about "stand[ing] in defense of Senator Schumer." Rather, this is about decrying Obama's surreptitious style of anti-Semitism based upon innuendo and insinuation, which is all too easily assimilated and adopted by his "progressive" audiences. Needless to say, Obama's anti-Semitism is not the overt kind professed by Iran's mullahs, but it is nevertheless again making anti-Semitism socially acceptable in the United States, and yes, it's dangerous.

Many of us knew what lay beneath the president's mantle of moderation, which has now been cast aside as he nears the end of his second term. In a nutshell, it was all waiting to happen.

1 comment:

  1. Anti-Semitism never disappeared in America. By the late 1960's, they took down the signs "No Jews or Dogs Allowed" about the time the Vatican ended their centuries-old Christ-killer dogma.

    Yesterday, CNN made sure, when reporting their opposition to this Iran deal, to add that Congessmen Eliot Engel and Brad Sherman are Jewish, so I guess CNN got the WH talking points on dual loyalty.

    Am listening to Zakaria now, up next is #44 on Netanyahu.

    It can happen here:

    fwiw, I see Iran using a nuclear umbrella to further Khamenei's Judenfrei Palestine by a reign of terror using conventional missiles. (The Shi'a can not make Jerusalem uninhabitable with radiation)

    UNSC resolution 1701 forbidding a post-2006 rebuild of Hezbollah's missile stockpiles worked just as well as the plan #44 is selling.