it’s trump’s bar miztvah and i think he went with “fascist dystopian horrorscape” as his theme! pic.twitter.com/ZHyHwlHb0T
— Adam Freelander (@adamplease) March 21, 2016
In Judaism, when you want to use a kitchen utensil or oven to prepare kosher food, you have to kasher it; or make it kosher. You have to raise the heat in your oven to burn off any possible food that was previously prepared in it that was treif.
That is precisely what Aipac did for Donald Trump today. They took a candidate who was treif; someone who advocates positions diametrically opposed to those of the vast majority of American Jews; values which are racist, intolerant and xenophobic; and they made him and them kosher.
Yes, Trump was very careful in this speech. He didn’t speak off the cuff. Gone were any references to controversial views he previously espoused that were viewed as anti-Israel. He did an about-face on Jerusalem and said he’d move the embassy there. Instead of offering to be neutral regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict, he said he’d be pro-Israel.
But despite satisfying the skeptics at Aipac, Trump remains a candidate whom no Jew except a wealthy, fat-cat 1%er could support. If Obama got 75% of the Jewish vote in the last election, Hillary will get 85% or more. Which serves to show you how completely out of touch Aipac is with the Jewish grassroots.
The news media observed that the walk-out planned during Trump’s speech fizzled. The hall didn’t empty out. It was jam-packed. And what did anyone expect? That Aipac would turn from being what it’s always been–a venue to celebrate Israeli triumphalism–into a font of tolerance and wisdom? Anyone who feels surprised or disappointed that Aipac didn’t do the right thing needs is living in a dream-world.
Aipac is doing what it does best: currying favor with the power elites in American politics. It hardly matters who the candidate is or what he stands for. He could be a white supremacist–as long as he was the expected presidential candidate of a major party and supported Israel, he would be welcome.
One anomalously honest statement did say was to acknowledge that Israel might not want to wish to make the compromises necessary for a peace agreement:
“A lot will have to do with Israel and whether or not Israel wants to make the deal, whether or not Israel’s willing to sacrifice certain things,” Trump said at the time. “They may not be, and I understand that, and I’m okay with that. But then you’re just not going to have a deal.”
Thoughhe did say this would be OK with him, no candidate ever acknowledges what is self-evident, that Israel refuses to make compromises for the sake of peace. Trump is the closest any candidate has ever come to saying this at an Aipac conference.
This speech was a maiden voyage of sorts for Trump into the American political mainstream. Despite Aipac’s staking out positions on the far-right of the American and Israeli political agenda, it is at the heart of American political power. To be a credible candidate in terms of the power elites (foreign policy wonks, corporate executives, etc.), he must be accepted before gatherings like this one. And he was.
When he made the unpardonable claim that he would tear up the Iran nuclear deal on his first day in office, he received a thunderous ovation. When he called Pres. Obama “maybe the worst thing to happen to Israel,” the supposedly bipartisan body erupted in cheers. This is how Trump kashered himself.
Now Sheldon Adelson can proudly come out of the closet and endorse Trump fulsomely. Now the right-wing think tanks, Freedom Works, and other political operatives can get on board.
Donald Trump owes Aipac a debt of gratitude: they’ve turned a piece of bacon into filet mignon. They turned a far-right extremist with un-American and un-Jewish values into a credible candidate (at least for some voters). And that’s a schandeh. It represents the new lows to which Aipac has sunk.
I am an American Jew. All praise to Bernie Sanders for standing up Aipac. Aipac does not speak for me.
— Tikun Olam (@richards1052) March 22, 2016
To my surprise and delight, this tweet I posted earlier this afternoon now has over 200 Likes and Retweets.
I am proud that Bernie Sanders stood up Aipac and refused to speak there. He did the right thing. I recently wrote a Mint Press piece claiming that Bernie would be damned if he spoke to Aiapc and damned if he didn’t. Indeed, he would’ve faced that dilemma had he won a few of the most recent state primaries (Hillary won all five). In that case, he would still be competing neck-and-neck with Hillary and all eyes would’ve been on him for any possible gaffes he might make. But since Bernie has unfortunately lapsed into a second tier candidate, no one is second-guessing his every move.
But Bernie stood up to pro-Israel power and said I’ve got better things to do than hobnob with a bunch of pro-Israel fatcats. I’ve got primaries to win in the west and that’s where I’ll be.
AIPAC needs to make nice with all viable general election candidates, and in most cases the converse is true as well. As long as a viable candidate isn’t grossly anti-Israeli (or anti-semitic), AIPAC will not repudiate the candidate.
Of course anything any candidate will say at AIPAC is pandering to say the least. Just about all of them, in recent years for instance, promise to move the embassy to Jerusalem before they are elected… And ignore this promise (as well as many others to the Jewish crowd and other special interest groups) after the elections.
Conversely, while AIPAC may publicly give the floor to all viable candidates (as long as they didn’t cross the pale) and accept them publicly – what really counts in what is done in *PRIVATE* – donations, rallies, “grassroots” organizations, activists, consultants, etc. etc. etc. – the ground game.
Am I right in understanding from this piece that while you prefer ‘Bernie’, you see ‘Hillary’ as much better than ‘Donald’, sorry, Trump? Or did I misunderstand?
From where I am looking (UK), Clinton (sorry, I’m not on first name terms with your candidates) is just as completely OTT pro-Zionist and ant-Palestinian as Trump. Biden made a few minor criticisms of settlement policy and got a few boos before joining the AIPAC mainstream consensus.
Of course, form a wider perspective, Clinton is not a populist toying with fascism, like Trump, and therefore Jews should feel safe under a Clinton led government. Whereas with Trump, who knows what the future would hold as his supporters get emboldened to attack those they despise, in which liberal (or any) Jews are certainly included.
@ Paul Seligman: Hillary is better than Trump. But I have no enthusiasm for her & will not vote for her. She will for certain get us into a war with someone, somewhere.
Trump is a wild-card. He could turn out to be Hughey Long (an infamous Louisiana governor who morphed from a progressive populist to a near-dictator) or a sharp shrewd populist. The chances of the latter are very slim.
Richard.
You omit to inform your readers that BOTH Trump AND Secretary Clinton were invited to give speeches at the AIPAC convention.
The two leading candidates for the Presidency were both asked to speak, and both agreed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/us/politics/hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-vow-to-protect-israel-but-differ-on-means.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article
And are BOTH you AND Barbar going to continue trolling here with your dumb posts, you shameless fake?
Do you get double pay now?
@ Leffe/ Barbar: You deliberately ignored my directive to publish comments only using ONE identity, your FIRST one here (Barbar). What you have done is fraud & a comment rule violation. Therefore you will be banned. So long, it’s been not so good to know ya. Send the next hasbaroid in as you close the door on the way out.
You can’t do this to me. I won’t allow it.
@ Barbar/Leffe: Just watch me.
Professor Dov Waxman, who has a chair in political science, international affairs and Israel studies at Northeastern University wrote recently about Sanders:
“nor does Israel appear to figure much in his own Jewish identity, which is more connected to the memory of the Holocaust than anything else.
In this respect Sanders is no different from many other American Jews. In a 2013 survey by the Pew Research Center, 73 per cent of American Jews said that “remembering the Holocaust” was essential to what being Jewish meant to them, compared with 43 percent for whom “caring about Israel” was essential. “Working for justice and equality” was also ranked significantly higher than caring about Israel. In his staunch commitment to advancing social justice, Sanders also clearly embraces this strand of American Jewish identity.
Sanders’ relative silence on Israel, therefore, serves as a reminder that Israel is not all that important to many, if not most, American Jews.”
AIPAC is out of step. That it embraces a shyster like Trump shows to what extent.
How does letting Trump speak show how “completely out of touch Aipac is with the Jewish grassroots”. Clinton (and all the other candidates) spoke also, and she got the most applause of anyone by all accounts.
@Uberchacham
“Trump opponents who had said they would protest the speech because of his broadsides against minorities and his sanctioning of political violence were not visible during his speech, which earned repeated standing ovations. Trump’s enthusiastic embrace of pro-Israel orthodoxy appeared to resonate with the AIPAC activists at the Verizon Center, and the loud applause inside the Washington, D.C., arena was not the only indication …”
They were willing to overlook the fact that he is in many ways a disreputable candidate who espouses flagrantly illiberal positions merely because he paid lip service to “pro-Israel orthodoxy”. If Waxman is right this attitude is quite unrepresentative for the majority of American Jews who care more about liberal values than about Israel.
[comment deleted for comment rule violation]
well now they’ve officially repudiated him, what does that mean, pray?
AIPAC president Lillian Pinkus read a statement from the stage on Tuesday to disavow Trump’s remarks. She also castigated attendees who responded positively to Trump’s comments. She said: “Last evening, something occurred which has the potential to drive us apart, to divide us. We say unequivocally that we do not countenance ad hominem attacks, and we take great offense against those that are levied against the president of Pindostan from our stage. While we may have policy differences, we deeply respect the office of the president of Pindostan and our president, Barack Obama. There are people in our AIPAC family who were deeply hurt last night, and for that we are deeply sorry. We are disappointed that so many people applauded a sentiment that we neither agree with or condone.” Pinkus said that Trump’s comments hurt the group’s efforts to broaden the base of the pro-Israel movement. She concluded unsyntactically: “Let us take this moment to pledge to each other that in this divisive and tension-filled political season, we will not allow those who wish to divide our movement from the left or from the right will not succeed in doing so.”