New Republic Trashs Pelosi, Etc
I know that I'm one of the very few but I actually read the new vanity blog by Marty Peretz, owner of the New Republic.
It's pretty interesting once you understand that Peretz has only one yardstick by which he judges people: pro-Israel and anti-Israel. The subcategory is Jewish or not Jewish.
Jews are always good and right (as compared to non-Jews) unless the Jew in question favors Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
Knowing the Peretz code makes the column fun to read.
Peretz shouldn't like Barney Frank (old-fashioned LIBERAL and Peretz is a neocon Democrat) but he does. Why? He's Jewish and rarely strays from the Peretz line on Israel. Same with Scooter Libby, a rightwing Republican who Peretz should not like but does. Why? Jewish and pro-Likud. Then there are the people he should like but doesn't, like the late crusading journalist IF Stone. Jewish but a critic of the occupation.
Note: Peretz dislikes anyone who critcizes Israel including Israelis. like the great novelist, David Grossman, whose son, an IDF officer, was killed in the Lebanon war this summer. Peretz acknowledges Grossman's loss but then dismisses his writing (which consistently opposes the occupation) as "precious."
Peretz's latest bad guy is Nancy Pelosi. Why?
Because Pelosi is kicking Jane Harman off the Intelligence Committee. Harman is, of course, Jewish and very rightwing on Israel.
So now Nancy, whose views on Israel aren't very far from Harman's (although she is decidedly in favor of negotiations and the two-state solution) is a Peretz enemy. Today he actually compares Nancy to Bella Abzug (in my opinion, a compliment) which is a terrible slam coming from Peretz because Abzug was, oh the humanity, a liberal Jew who was a moderate on Israel.
Why am I telling you all this. I'm telling you this because everyone needs to know that Marty Peretz and his neocon buddies in the media are now all going to be bashing Pelosi nonstop.
It's not because they think she's anti-Israel but because Nancy Pelosi planted the nail in the neocon coffin and has now put Democrats in a position to end the Iraq war.
Peretz is not very important anymore but he does have a following in a few corners of Brookline and the West Side. So we need to know how he thinks.
Here's a test. If next year's Oscar contest for Best Actress is between Scarlett Johannsen and
Gwyneth Paltrow, who will Peretz support?
Answer: Johnannsen, because she is not only Jewish but, unlike Paltrow, self-identifying. (Really). But what happens if Natalie Portman is also in the race? Peretz switches to her because she is both Jewish and born in Israel.
Also, Portman is kind of rightwing on Israel.
But what if Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal are up for Oscars again. Both Jewish. But Jake wore a crucifix in Jarhead and he's never been to Israel. Maggie is married to Peter Saarsgard (not Jewish) BUT he played the editor of the New Republic in the amazing film, Shattered Glass.
Not to worry, Peretz will ultimately make a pronouncement on the Gyllenhaals.
My guess is that he is anti-Gyllenhaal because their mother is Naomi Foner Gyllenhaal who is either the sister or ex-wife of Prof. Eric Foner of Columbia who is, as we all know, a progressive Jewish anti-Iraq Democrat who opposes the occupation.
Watch out, Jake. Maggie too. Peretz will soon be on your case.
Comments (26)
Very nice post. Spencer Ackerman over at TAP agonizes a bit over the new TNR editorial which repudiates the earlier TNR stance supporting the war and savaging anyone antiwar but never says why. Indeed TNR insists even tho Iraq was a mistake or wrong or whatever the US must continue (?) to have a "moral" foreigh policy. Of course that begs the question of what is "morally correct"; but you have answered it. Anything that superficially favors Israel is moral; anything else is "crap" to paraphrase SNL. Of course that is why TNR pimps for Bush on Iraq. The irony of course is that these policies not only are a disaster for the US and Iraq but they are bad for Israel and Jews and particularly Israelis. Just as Peretz, TNR, neoconservatism, Beinart, are bad for Israel, Jews and particularly Israelis.
November 17, 2006 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi is going to face all kinds of sniping and griping, carping and harping and snickering and bickering. It's going to be nearly a daily occurance for as long as she's speaker.
The proper response to all of it is "GOP, STFU."
Unfortunately, "GOP and Marty Peretz STFU" doesn't have the same ring to it.
-- "Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable." (John Kenneth Galbraith)
November 17, 2006 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess all of life can be reduced to mere tribalism.
You are my friend if you are a member of my tribe, unless you are a member of the tribe who questions the tribes leaders. Then you are my enemy. If you are not a member of the tribe, you are my enemy.
A very simple view of the world. A view Peretz shares with a lot of unthinking people.
Did you know that chimpanzes share the same world view?
Ron Byers
November 17, 2006 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Peretz can be pendantic. He also can be ideological. I presume you don't oppose his expressing his views. Also the New Republic, the Atlantic, the Nation, the National Review and the Weekly Standard are all vanity publications. However, doesn't Peretz come closer to speaking for the more Israelis than Grossman?
Mr. Rosenberg you are never clear. I am in agreement with you that Israel ought to get out of the West Bank. However, I have no problem with the IDF wiping out the Palestinian State if as I guess it attacks Israel's Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem. What is you view of what the Palestinians will do with their state and what Israel's response should be?
Daniel A. Greenbaum
November 17, 2006 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is there someplace one can go on TPMCafe to complain about posts advocating genocide?
November 17, 2006 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
When Andrew Sullivan edited TNR, it had two litmuses tests for every single person on the planet: gay marriage and Israel.
Now the only litmus test is Israel. Actually, it's not Israel. It is Netanyahu-ism.
The sad thing is that Peretz's obsession has caused TNR's circulation to drop almost to the vanishing point. A once-great liberal magazine is noe considered whacked out. The NATION, however, is growing by leaps and bounds -- its circulation is 4 times larger.
Kind of sad.
But Peretz is fun is an AM Rosenthal kind of way.
November 17, 2006 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
To Daniel G--I suggest you reframe your question.
November 17, 2006 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
not, apparently, if the proposed target is Arabs.
November 17, 2006 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even sadder is the dead end to which the right wing Netanyahu/AIPAC/neocon policies have contributed. Maybe Peretz with his phony moral rectitude could occasionally remind himself that Israeli Jews suffer from the impasse in the Middle East, not just Arabs.
November 17, 2006 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
That Peretz may speak for many Israelis does not translate to speaking for Jewry.
Why on Earth would a Palestinian state invite a crushing counterattack? There is no question that if a formally constituted state attacked Israel absent overt provocation there would be a regime-changing invasion.
You of course are only guessing, as you say, but you may also be conflating continuation of Kassam rocket attacks with a formal state-sponsored attack. What passes for a Palestinian state has not endorsed any attacks.
November 17, 2006 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
have no problem with the IDF wiping out the Palestinian State if as I guess it attacks Israel's Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem
Daniel the problem is wiping out.
Those words never are right to apply to an entire population- not to the Germans in 1945 ,despite the Holocaust nor to the Japanese , despite their atrocities.
(There always must be
Children who did not specially want it to happen,skating on a pond at the edge of the wood-
Auden-Musee des Beaux Arts)
We got a glimpse into that darkness at Hiroshima and it didn't look good. I'd like to think you don't mean it , that it's just an unfortunate choice of words. Try again.
November 17, 2006 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Daniel means undoing the state structure, defeating a Palestinian state, that is not genocide. Many feel that is also what most anti-Israel Arabs mean, although most wouldn't miss the Jewish population.
However, if he does mean eliminating the population, and non-Jews mean the same, they're even. Personally, I would prefer neither population be eliminated.
Daniel is why outside pressure is necessary. He is passionate, as are the Palestinians, and neither Israelis nor Palestinians are able to shed their reasonable grievances.
November 17, 2006 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
(trying to channel Marty Peretz)
"Rosenberg...you are an unfit Jew and you will burn in Hell for it."
(think I am close?)
If you were Catholic I think Pope Peretz would excommunicate you. ;-) Thanks for giving me the recap MJ so I didn't actually have to read it and ruin my appetite...dinner is coming up soon, lol.
November 17, 2006 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for writing this. I think it's important that we carefully distinguish b/t being anti-Israel and anti-Likud party policies, and I think many authors/bloggers/commenters on both sides have a tendency to address these issues a bit too cavalierly.
Things can easily be misconstrued.
The Likud party policies have not brought Israel peace and have only made things worse.
November 17, 2006 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
As someone pointed out elsewhere, the Likud party is favored by a minority of Israelis.
November 17, 2006 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The other very sad thing about TNR is that they actually have very good writers and very good coverage of domestic politics. Unfortunately, anything remotely related to foreign policy is unreadable.
November 17, 2006 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the nail has been hit on the head. Well Done.
November 17, 2006 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh, and I use "Morning Edition" as my link to what the Neocons are planning. If the Democrats are really smart, they will figure out how to get the neocons out of NPR, but I don't hope for much. Actually, I assume only neocon democrats won at this point.
November 17, 2006 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jews holocaust holocaust jews. If how Israel is treating the palestinians is how they behaved before WW2, they have no one to blame but themselves. WAKE UP WORLD! They are living on stolen land, trying to grab more, have a fascist government, and we should be threatening them with sanctions and war, not Iran. I say, they actually have a chance to keep their state, but will lose it. We should remove their support unless they withdraw into their own stolen borders and admit the IAEA for full inspections, and complete disarmament. NEVER FORGET they live on stolen land! At least they could be humble and grateful. Removing our support is their only hope for keeping their country. It will never happen. War and Death is what they are sowing, and what they will reap.
November 17, 2006 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Likud party is favored by the largest segment of Israelis and would win 29 Knesset seats followed by Kadima with 16, Labor with 15 and Avigdor Lieberman's party, Yisrael Beiteinu with 14.....
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13820
At this point, Likud is on the rise and creepy Bibi is doing his best to stoke the fears of his American fans.
November 17, 2006 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agree-with Tom
November 18, 2006 3:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. She is about to be the white equivalent of Cynthia McKinney, for the exact same reason, the perception of being against Israel's interests. For that Pelosi will be tarred and feathered in the press and smeared unrelentingly simply because she is percieved as 'anti-Israel'. McKinney questioned Israels role subsequent to 9/11 and Pelosi is not supporting Harmon as chair for the intelligence committee. The power of the Jewish lobby for Jewish interests contrary to American interests is incredible.
Will Pelosi be re-elected to the House after this or will AIPAC pour money into her district to defeat her as they did McKinney?
November 18, 2006 5:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it is like trying to find someone in Congress who will take complaints against AIPAC seriously.
November 18, 2006 5:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I deleted TNR from favorites months ago, perhaps years. It started to be like cold spam for lunch--you have to be really hungry.
November 18, 2006 6:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
TNR chanels the Washington conventinal wisdom. These people have been programmed over many decades to reflexively trash Dems/liberals and swoon over GOP/conservatives. Hence the fawning coverage of John McCain, the right wing senator who is portrayed by the press as a "moderate". For the last 6 years these people have been worhsipping at the altar of Karl Rove. In 2000 they told us they wanted Bush president because he was the guy they wanted to have a beer with.
The only Democrat these people like is Joe Lieberman. That ought to tell you something.
The Permanent Govt in DC is Republican. TNR like the WP reflects the mindset of the Permanent Govt.
November 18, 2006 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay Mr. Rosnberg, Peretz only supports that which is pro-Israeli. YOU only support everything anti-Israeli. Other than being at the opposite extremes, what the hell is the the difference?
November 21, 2006 1:44 AM | Reply | Permalink