| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Anti-Semitism on the Left: more on Wesley Clark |
| 2007-01-24 |
| Left-leaning pundit Jonathan Chait, writing at the Left-leaning New Republic's group blog, "The Plank." I've admired Wes Clark for a long time. But his comments to Ariana Huffington about wealthy Jews pushing the country toward war with Iran strike me as nutty and disturbing. Either I seriously misjudged the man, or his comments were misquoted or taken wildly out of context. Here's a hint: they weren't misquoted or taken wildly out of context. [Left-leaning American Prospect pundit] Matthew Yglesias, however, thinks Clark's comments are perfectly spot-on. Indeed, he says they're not just correct but obviously so. As he writes, "Everything Clark said, in short, is true. What's more, everybody knows it's true." Well, I don't know it's true. Moreover, I find Yglesias's defense of the proposition that it's obviously true, and his further contention that criticism of Clark's comments amounts to Israel hawks stifling debate, to be wildly unconvincing. Really, though, does being alarmed about Iran mean you favor war? I'm extremely alarmed at the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, but I think an American military strike would create more problems than it would solve. . . . |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #11 Its been so long since ive read Yglesias ive forgotten how much of a jerk he can be. *snicker* A very pretty insult, liberalhawk. Not only a jerk, but so uninteresting you long since chose to neglect his writings in favour of sites like Rantburg. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-01-24 21:13 |
| #10 Don't slag him too hard, Frank. He's catching on. Some people take a while to come around, but when they do, they end up on the side of the angels. |
| Posted by: Mike 2007-01-24 20:43 |
| #9 Chait: "I'm shocked, shocked, to find Wake up and grow up, Jonathan. The left can't stand the jews or Israel. Paleo-love is right up there with Fidel and Che idolism |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-01-24 19:01 |
| #8 "I don't think it's anti-Semitic to say that the pro-Israel lobby has considerable influence in American politics, and could flex its muscle on issues like foreign aid to Israel, just as the pharmaceutical lobby can heavily influence health care legislation or the gun lobby can squelch gun control." I love the standard Dem whipping boys references there. Lord knows liberal lobbies would never attempt to heavily influence any legislation. |
| Posted by: xbalanke 2007-01-24 17:11 |
| #7 It's the eyes. |
| Posted by: ed 2007-01-24 16:42 |
| #6 some senior officers having real problems with his personality It wasn't his personality, it was said to be some sort of integrity issue that got him relieved early. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-01-24 16:32 |
| #5 Clark is at like 2% in the polls. Just behind the Joe Biden behemoth, and just ahead of Dennis Kucinich. While its early, I dont see any excitement about him among Dems. Hes always been a bit of a loose cannon type - stories about him almost starting a war with the Russians in kosovo, and some senior officers having real problems with his personality. Frankly he always gave me the creeps. And oh yeah, he voted for Reagan back in the 80s, didnt he? Its been so long since ive read Yglesias ive forgotten how much of a jerk he can be. That hes piling on TNR is not surprising. TNR for years has been the smartest liberal (but hawkish) voice out there. Lots of folks have been gunning for them for years, and now that they look really wrong on Iraq, its every lefties chance to take them down, and hope they dont get up. I have every expectation that TNR will survive and will recover. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2007-01-24 15:27 |
| #4 It would not surprise me to hear coded, or even uncoded, anti-Semitism (and anti-Catholicism, but that's another topic for another day) coming from the podium at the '08 Dem convention. Don't forget anti-Mormonism if Romney's the nominee. It WOULD be interesting to see how the left's bigotry will be treated in comparison to, say, and "anti-Islamic" statement made at the Republican convention. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-01-24 14:21 |
| #3 Perhaps they are sensing the Jews are gonna leave the Democratic party and are preparing excuses beforehand. Wonder what Clarke thinks of George Soros as he's the most obvious example of a rich Jew trying to ram his politics down the throat of Americans with his bankaccount. I don't think he's getting through to the Bush admin though. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-01-24 13:44 |
| #2 ...more on Weasley Clark There. Fixed. |
| Posted by: mojo 2007-01-24 13:33 |
| #1 I read that, too, and while I thought Chait's piece was boring, the comments were fascinating. There was one which said, in essence: "It's interesting how the charge of anti-Semitism is now used to stifle criticism. Clark an anti-Semite? Come on! Does anyone really believe Clark hates Jews?" Why no, I'm sure he doesn't hate Jews. He just apparently believes that Jewish campaign contributions drive the Administration's foreign policy toward Israeli interests and away from American interests. In other words, rich Jews secretly control US foreign policy. What could possibly be anti-Semitic about that? Yglesias says: The irony factor, however, seems worth noting as, though I didn't mention it in the article, The New Republic is clearly one of the major American Jewish organizations pushing for war with Iran and this post is part of the push. Is it my imagination, or did Yglesias just say: "Chait's Jew-masters made him write this to encourage war against Iran."? There's your irony factor. |
| Posted by: Angie Schultz 2007-01-24 13:02 |