REVISED, 8/11/15 9:45 AM, ET:
Jews often find themselves in an untenable position: If we take a position against the official position of the State of Israel, we run the risk of being called "Self-hating Jews." If, on the other hand, we support the position of the State of Israel, and that position disagrees with the position of the US administration, we run the risk of people "Murmuring about 'money' and 'lobbying' and 'foreign interests' who seek to drag America into war" in "a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card."
Tablet.com has a well-meaning editorial based on a faulty premise, titled, Crossing a Line to Sell a Deal, which, among other things, attempts to defend the position taken by Senator Schumer. There is different line, one other than that to which they refer, a line drawn by Bibi Netanyahu, which has painted Jews -- and Congress -- into a corner.
The article attempts to take a middle ground, but there is no middle ground, as explained after the squiggly:
As heated as the arguments between us can get, we can all agree that all of these positions, and their many variants, are entirely within the bounds of legitimate political debate—and that none of them are evidence of anyone’s intent either to rush America to war or to obliterate the State of Israel.
NO. We
CAN'T all agree on that. If we could, that sentence would not have been needed to be written. Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu
wants us to get into a war with Iran. There is speculation that
Netanyahu has been pushing the US Congress for such a war, and that
Israel may yet still attack Iran without without us.
After pretending that a majority of Americans oppose the agreement (not true), and comparing accusations of loyalties to foreign governments, quizzically, to Jim Crow bigotry, the editorial continues:
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.
To that point, it would be
MUCH easier to dismiss arguments that those in Congress are not "acting as agents of a foreign power," if the
Prime Minister of said foreign power had not been granted an audience with said Congress - behind the back of the President - urging said Congress to do the bidding of said
Prime Minister in the
interests of said "foreign power"!
In short, Netanyahu, in lobbying Congress to act in the best interests of Israel, set up those in Congress who would vote in favor of the position of HIS Administration, AGAINST the position of OUR Administration, to be vulnerable to EXACTLY the "dual-loyalty" criticisms that the article deplores.
I, too, deplore the anti-Semitism implied in the notion of "dual-loyalties," the "murmuring about 'money' and 'lobbying' and 'foreign interests' who seek to drag America into war" over which the article wrings its hands. It's instructive, though, to note that of the GOP Senators united in opposition to the President, NOT ONE of them is Jewish -- because there are, currently, no Jewish GOP Senators. And, of the GOP Congresspeople opposed to the agreement, only ONE is Jewish - because, in Congress, there is only one Jewish GOP Congressperson!
In fact, an argument can be made that a vast majority of the alleged "dual-loyalty" comes from non-Jews - the "Rapture" crowd, which believes that Israel must remain one nation, including the West Bank, in order for the Christian Messiah to return. In fact, 60% of American Jews support the agreement, and a recent poll shows "American Jews are much likelier than non-Jews to back the Iran nuclear deal."
The editorial implies that those who accuse Congresspeople who oppose the agreement of having "dual-loyalties" are "Jew-baiters." Yet, those in Congress who invited Netanyahu, and Netanyahu himself - you know, the guy who spoke to the Joint session of Congress to say "Don't listen to YOUR President; listen to me, the leader of a foreign country, instead" - are the ones responsible for that very perception of "dual loyalty!"
But one can hardly "Jew-bait" Speaker John Boehner, or any Republican Senator, or Governor Mike Huckabee, or Senator Lindsey Graham, or Senator Ted Cruz, or Governor Jeb Bush, or Donald Trump, or any of the rest of the 17 Republicans running for President, because, though they clearly have "dual-loyalties" - or maybe just single-loyalty towards Netanyahu, since they clearly have no loyalty to President Obama -- none of them are Jews! They are Christians, all, with a constituency of people who believe in the Rapture! If anything, then, perhaps the proper term should be "Rapture-baiting."
Except that no one is describing John Boehner or Lindsey Graham or Mike Huckabee as a double-agent for Rapturites. No one is "Rapture-baiting," but perhaps we should. Because, as mentioned, aside from one Congressman, 100% of Republicans in the House and Senate who oppose the agreement are not Jews! There are far more non-Jews in Congress who are loyal to Netanyahu and oppose the deal, than there are Jews in Congress who oppose it.
But that is not likely to happen. The whispers and murmuring about "money" and "lobbying" and "foreign interests" who seek to drag America into war will continue, because those who are anti-Semites will continue to look for reasons to hate Jews, and will find them, even when the behavior they condemn is engaged in more by Christians than by Jews.
Which brings us to Senator Schumer. If he feels compelled to oppose it on behalf of his constituents, than why does Senator Gillibrand, with the same exact constituency, support the agreement? There have already been many diaries here attempting to guess the answer to this question, and so I will leave that be for the moment.
The editorial closes with the idea though, that however we feel about the agreement, we "should all stand in defense of Senator Schumer." Nonsense. This Jew from Brooklyn does NOT stand in defense of that two-faced, political hack known as Senator Schumer, nor will he ever get my vote again.