As a non-subscriber, I don’t keep up with NYT op-eds the way I used to, so I didn’t read Thomas Friedman’s thumbsucker “Obama and the Jews” until today. And I don’t read Friedman much anymore anyway, finding his unchanged (for decades) views so predictable my head falls onto the page (or computer screen) in near sleep by the time I have read the second paragraph.
But several people have written asking me to comment on the above article, so I cruised on over. The first few graphs were, as usual, mega-predictable. Friedman sets up the straw man of a whisper campaign among Jews about what Obama truly thinks about Israel (by “tricking” us by reciting Bush’s views). Ho-hum. Although there’s not much in this oh-so-coventional-wisdom I would disagree with, I didn’t quite see the point (other than slavish fealty to the Democratic Party and its nominee). Furthermore, I haven’t heard much of this supposed whisper campaign, but maybe I’m not on the right mailing lists.
What was missing from Friedman’s piece… and amazingly and glaringly so… was the subject of many emails I have received from Jews and Jewish organizations – Jeremiah Wright. Although the fuddy-duddy Friedman titles his op-ed “Obama and the Jews” there is not one word about the Democratic candidate spending twenty years in the pew of and taking the title of his book from an anti-Semitic admirer (even idolater) of the racist Louis Farrakhan. There is nothing more abhorrent to me as a human and as a Jew than racism. Evidently, it doesn’t mean much to Friedman. Or not enough. Now almost habitually disingenuous, the New York Times columnist tries to pretend the real (and justifiable) reason many Jews will not vote for Obama isn’t there. Shame on him.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
21 Comments
1. BobWang:I had dinner with some colleagues and wives last week. One is an Elder in his Christian church, another is a Reform Jew. Discussion got around to Obama, and Christian was explaining how one can be against Israel and its policies without being anti-Semitic. Pretty thin semantic hairs.
May 19, 2008 - 4:12 pm 2. David Thomson:Thomas Friedman is, at best, naive. The Democratic Party’s establishment intellectuals adamantly believe that Israel’s “belligerence” is the primary cause of tensions within the Middle East. Subtly, but most assuredly, they contend the Palestinians are victims of Israeli imperialism. Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic may be a quintessential example of this phenomenon. Earlier today Max Boot wrote a piece on Contentions entitled “Israel’s Goldberg Problem.” Here is the link:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/boot/6981
May 19, 2008 - 4:28 pm 3. Barry Dauphin:Back in the day (pre 9/11) Friedman had some interesting things to say about globalization. Problem is that he became infatuated with is own catchy phrases. Back then, some of his catchy phrases actually helped provide a reasonably accurate (and pithy) way of describing some economic phenomena. But he began to like the sound of his own computer keyboard.
He now writes as if a catchy phrase is insight. It is not. In fact it can become quite the opposite. It is hard to imagine, but Friedman has actually gotten more naive as he has aged. That whisper column was puerile. Living in NYC is dangerous to your intellectual health. Case in point—Peggy Noonan.
May 19, 2008 - 6:05 pm 4. belladonnarogers:The following is must reading: http://jewishdemocraticsupport.blogspot.com/
May 19, 2008 - 6:23 pm 5. Joseph (formerly Samuel):Obama won’t read it, but I hope my fellow http://www.rogerlsimon.com readers will.
Roger,
I haven’t read and don’t plan on reading the piece in the NYT. I am so sick of the MSM I can’t even stand much anymore. My mind is so hardened about these things that very little could change my mind or my vote. As far as this…
Now almost habitually disingenuous, the New York Times columnist tries to pretend the real (and justifiable) reason many Jews will not vote for Obama isn’t there.
The above description I accept at face value because it is so typical and disgustingly true throughout the MSM. Further, as a Jew I can tell Mr. Friedman that my instinct most certainly would be to support, giving complete benefit of doubt, the first viable woman/minority period, especially a Democrat! The problem is Obama is not viable and Hillary was just plain outflanked in the primaries and she has too much political baggage, but a more worthy potential leader than he.
To be frank I believe I am understanding enough of my previous and current proclivities to say that even in my pre-911 (non neo-con) mindset a prospect of voting for Obama would have sent me at a minimum to Nader and possibly if available to someone like Bob Dole. (I always respected Bob Dole). I certainly would have voted for Hillary baggage and all. Tom Friedman is a major jack-ass because he is smart enough to know why Obama would lose Jewish votes and that he in fact will lose Jewish votes, I have the right to my opinions concerning his reasons for shielding such a discussion and none are flattering.
I’ll add that if his column summed up all the reasons without even mentioning Reverend Wright then he in fact has omitted the truest reason for Jews potentially not supporting him. This gives readers an invitation to fill in the blanks with all kind of suppositions concerning Jews.
My pre-911 self would have rejected Obama for the same reason many Republicans would have rejected a candidate that spent 20 years a close confidant to a right wing bigot. The Reverend Wright is not just a donater or even confidant to one’s campaign, but a “father figure”, yes the one that married Obama to his wife and baptized his children… YUCK! Besides he makes Bob Jones or Jerry Falwell extreme moderates by comparison.
Many of my liberal friends have felt that a friendship with someone like Jerry Falwell should have been a disqualifier for any Republican, yet if these same people can decide to overlook a Reverend Wright then what would that say about the state of the Democratic coalition? What does the racial tension and polarization existent in the Democratic campaigns suggest? People can only declare to be the principled bearers of certain values for so long if they are being trampled under their own very feet.
Tom, I have your answer, his name is Reverend Wright, he is why Obama is not viable. Many of us Jews got onto the left side of politics for the cause of social justice, is this lost on all of us?… No! As you and your ilk omit the very reason from not just your analysis but even your minds. How many liberals truly remember and follow what made them a liberal? I am one Jew that hasn’t forgotten! The Republicans may have lost their political minds on small government or fiscal responsibility but fortunately not so much on what constitutes true human rights where it matters, especially when one compares them to the Democratic Party these days.
As I said in a previous thread my wife and Mother in Law will vote for McCain when Obama wins the Primaries because unlike Tom Friedman all has not become list on them. Some Jews will jump ship because Reverend Wright can not be justified, especially with a moderate on the other side.
Many people (Jews included) will accuse those siding with Republican as bigots, all while they vote for Obama… What is the definition of irony?
May 19, 2008 - 9:47 pm 6. jedrury:For a more reasoned and less biased view than Tom Friedman
May 20, 2008 - 5:32 am 7. ajacksonian:on “Obama and the Jews,” read Bret Stephens in the Journal today.
Yes, Rev. Wright is a part of the problem and his ability to twist history and even the written words to fit his own agenda is horrific. Taking just a bit to break down and analyze one of his somewhat less incendiary talks had me giving up after a few short paragraphs because the outright lies, distortions and fabrications would take a major tome to do it justice. That, for a single sermon. I am no follower of any known religious species, but I can pick up the Good Book like Martin Luther wanted folks to and read it for myself and interpret it for myself.
When I see what is being preached and Sen. Obama sitting out there in that man’s pews for 20 years listening to this tripe and saying nothing, I would say that I know the character of the mushroom sitting out there. And yet he said nothing? Did nothing? Had his children go to Sunday School led by this man?
I can see why Jews just might be a tad upset as the Old Testament covers much of their history, and if Rev. Wright is willing to twist the New Testament to his whims, I would be a bit frightened of what he would do to the Old Testament and Jewish history.
I’m just worried from the history angle *alone*, as the common history is also being distorted beyond belief… either Sen. Obama doesn’t know it, in which case he is unfit for the office, or he is willfully exposing himself and his children to these distortions for political reasons… and that is far worse in my eyes than mere ignorance.
May 20, 2008 - 7:22 am 8. shannonlove:I think that Obama membership in Wright’s church doesn’t bother a lot of people because they believe he only joined for cynical political reasons. These people just assume he joined the church not because he agreed with its doctrines but because he knew that a politician without religion cannot seek higher office in America and that Wright’s church offered the best political return.
I afraid I must count myself in this camp. Given Obama’s ideology and intellectual background I think it unlikely he has any strong religious beliefs or indeed and religion at all. I think he views religion as merely another tool to manipulate the yokels.
May 20, 2008 - 7:39 am 9. AlanC:Shannon, love, ;^)
I wonder if your “…he knew that a politician without religion cannot seek higher office in America …” is really true anymore?
Would an honest agnostic or deist really be shut out?
Anyway, your analysis of why Obama’s cynicism is spot on, most likely. What it also does is resonate with the mindset of the same people that believe roughly the same thing about the Amadinnerjackets of the world. These same people that blithely accept Obama as a cynical religious “abuser” also don’t believe that the Islamofascists really believe what they say.
That’s one reason that the idea of “reasoning” with the terror leaders and supporters makes sense to them.
May 20, 2008 - 8:19 am 10. BigJohn:As a non-Jew, I can’t understand for the life of me why Jews vote Democratic. The libs seem to be the most anti-Semitic group this side of the Arabs and Nazis. Just look at any liberal protest event in the U.S. (especially CA) and you’ll see the kafiya wearing, anti-”Zionist” hacks everywhere. Generally, Repubs are much more supportive of Isreal and I’m glad Isreal exists. I respect their courage. American Jews just must not really appreciate how good they have it here. That’s the only thing I can figure anyway.
May 20, 2008 - 8:51 am 11. Roger:shannonlove, you have a point, but I doubt Wright is a believer either. He is simply exploiting the black community for his own hands. So what you have is exploitation squared. What it leads to is the danger that I describe in my PJM article “What, Me Mullah?” this morning. It’s all related.
May 20, 2008 - 9:49 am 12. Johan Amedeus Metesky:Reverend Wright is just the tip of the iceberg. Virtually all of Obama’s foreign policy advisers tilt towards the Arabs and against Israel. He’s a personal friend of Rashid Khalidi, a leading academic Palestinian critic of Israel. By personal friend, I mean that Michelle and Barack Obama were frequent dinner guests at Khalidi’s home when he was at the Univ. of Chicago.
While Obama has been careful to say all the right things in public about supporting Israel, his support in the Arab and Muslim communities in the US and abroad is strong. Palestinians in Gaza are manning phone banks to call US primary voters to vote for Obama. Palestinian propaganda web site Electronic Intifada’s co-founder Ali Abunimah has written about how Obama explained to him how he has to support Israel in a pro-forma manner to get elected, and Abunimah is understanding of that political need.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article6619.shtml
Obama represents the wing of the Democratic party that is most hostile to Israel.
May 20, 2008 - 9:56 am 13. Boojum:AlanC
Rep. Pete Stark from California is an admitted atheist.
May 20, 2008 - 9:59 am 14. Laura:As a Jew, BigJohn, I can’t understand why so many of my co-religionists vote Democratic either.
I think, for many reform and secular Jews (those who don’t practice in any way, but consider themselves ancestrally and culturally Jewish), left-liberalism has *become* their religion. They just take it on faith that the Democrats are good and mean well, and the Republicans aren’t and don’t. And as anyone knows, you just can’t debate away a person’s *faith*, no mantter how many counter-examples, statistical studies, or historical events you cite.
I remember, back in the mid 1990’s, my mother having a conversation with another Jewish woman after their Hadassah meeting had broken up (Hadassah is the international Jewish women’s charity organization). Mom and this lady were talking about some of the current events and issues of the day; the lady described how she thought welfare was necessary but isn’t healthy if it lasts longer than a couple of years, that politicians should perhaps have term limits so they don’t get too entrenched in power and influence, and so on.
My mom listened, nodding, and when the lady finished, Mom said, “Do you realize that you just echoed most of Newt Gingrich’s platform?”
The lady looked aghast, and replied, “Don’t talk to me about that devil!”
And there you go. The only things this woman reads or listens to (MSM in all its forms) villify Republican ideas, as do all this lady’s Jewish friends. It’s just accepted – by Jews- that part of the Jewish *identity* is voting Democrat, and no decription of the actual issues at stake will convince them otherwise.
It’s faith to them, and they see me – a Jewish woman who is a libertarian-conservative politically- am a bewildering, ridiculous apostate.
*sigh* Sometimes I just weep for my silly people.
May 20, 2008 - 10:01 am 15. Barry Meislin:Forget about Jeremiah Wright.
Forget about Louis Farrakhan.
Forget Robert Malley, Samantha Power, Zig Brezinski, Michelle, Tony.
Forget about all of ‘em. Pretend they don’t exist. That they never existed.
Now, remind me what makes Obama a qualified presidential candidate?
Because he is defined by what he isn’t and stands for what he’s not?
Sorry. I’m not convinced. And I don’t care what color he is. Or isn’t.
May 20, 2008 - 10:05 am 16. submandave:“[H]ow one can be against Israel and its policies without being anti-Semitic [splits p]retty thin semantic hairs.”
Depends. I agree that often the claim of being “anti-Zionist” is often a thinly veiled cover for anti-Semitism, but I don’t see a disconnect between my being uncomfortable with how some of the settlements were established (especially those “founded” by sqatters) and tacit governmental approvement of them and my supporting Israel and Jews. After all, would you presume to imply that those Israelis in oppositin to the government are asti-Semites?
“I think that Obama membership in Wright’s church doesn’t bother a lot of people because they believe he only joined for cynical political reasons.”
And this is supposed to be an endorsement or a positive that offsets Rev. Wright? Maybe I’m too old fashioned and idealistic, but I’ll be damned if I would ever vote for any candidate of any party of whom I believed they phoned in twenty years of spiritual commitment to anything just to improve their electability.
May 20, 2008 - 11:26 am 17. AlanC:Subman….
If you want to read the ultimate put down of anti-Zionism you need to look to Alan Dershowitz. (You know that radical right wing Rethuglican /sarc)
Basically it comes down to this…..the anti-Zionists insist on a perfection and standards of Jews that they would never hold for non-Jews.
Every thug dictatorial regime gets a pass but Israel? They better not cause a Paleo hangnail or they are worse than the Nazis.
Is Israel perfect? No. Is it far better than most of the world ESPECIALLY any Arab land? You tell me.
May 20, 2008 - 1:11 pm 18. photoncourier.blogspot.com:BigJohn & Laura…traditionally, Jews have placed a very high value on education. When “education” meant studying calculus, Shakespeare, and the Torah, this was a *good* thing. But today, “education” often means exposure to “progressive” propaganda, and people who have been taught to value education are at risk for succumbing to this propaganda.
May 20, 2008 - 2:12 pm 19. heather:photoncourier: you are so right about the pernicious effect of Education upon students and therefore on Jewish kids. I am encouraging my very bright grandson to NOT go to university (unless he sticks to science.) His school (he is in grade
had the students all watch Al Gore’s Idiot Movie. Fortunately, because of all this, Max is studying up on climates and the solar system, and has read Lomborg, etc (and lectured me on the connection between sunspots and global warming, and etc.)
As learning has become devalued at the universities, the main reason families beggar themselves to send their child to higher ed is… status. Once upon a time, I hired a harvard grad, and – though a charming girl – her brain was a cultural wasteland.
The scary thing about anti-semitism is, I truly believe – a symptom of intellectual decadence, a harbinger of societal failure. Anti-Zionism is anti-semitism attempting to be respectable.
May 20, 2008 - 10:07 pm 20. homesickamerican:a lousy piece from a guy who sometimes says things worth listening to.
“focus first on what kind of America you think he’d build and second on whether you believe that as president he’d have the smarts, steel and cunning to seize a historic opportunity if it arises.”
“smarts, steel and cunning”, huh?
sounds like mccain to me.
May 21, 2008 - 2:47 am 21. AlanC:Re: the propagandising in education…..
Went to my youngest son’s graduation Monday (Emerson College – TV / video production )
Two and a half of the 5 speakers made explicit anti-Bush / anti-war statements. The half speaker, the college president, only made an implicit anti-war statement.
The two? The Rabbi that gave the invocation and the Unitarian that gave the benediction.
“…nefarious administration…” “…illegal and immoral Iraqi war…”
Yeah, I know it’s Boston, but what ya gonna do?
Best commencement speaker I’ve ever heard though. They had an alum class of ‘81 who just happens to be president of MTV (comedy channel, spike, etc.)
Great presentation, smart words and wisdom and no politics.
May 21, 2008 - 8:53 am