Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
Back to Main

May 16, 2008
Rovian Appeasement

Yesterday Bush gave a speech in front of the Knesset that accused Obama of appeasement.

This was a sole U.S. political issue – the Knesset degraded itself to a rent-out high school stage.

The Rovian idea behind this is to move the Jewish votes, two thirds of which usually goes to Democrats, towards the Republican candidate.

But given that McCain lacks serious fund raising capacity, moving more zionist billionaires to cough up more money for McCain and the party, may have been the more important issue here.

Rove, a mass mailer by trade, always thinks in the frame of arranging statistical ‘blocks’ of ‘targets’. Rove is essentially trying to buy off, give in to, or appease a certain group of voters.

But these voters no longer have the demand he assumes and tries to appease. There are many  signs that the Jewish vote in the U.S. has moved beyond radical zionism.

His efforts have therefore some general utility in the monetary range. But I doubt the utility of such assumed appeasement in the electoral dimension.

Then again, Diebold may take care of that.

What’s your take on this?

Posted by b on May 16, 2008 at 20:12 UTC | Permalink
Comments

Never forget that it was Hillbillary who first used the Code Word against Obama (He’s Not Like US) and thwn Bush (He’s Not Like US, an Evil Monger) then today Huckabee, bumping it up a notch, a little more fundamentalist KKK (He’s Not Like US … and We Know What To Do), but they’re all cut from the same white supremacist Birch cloth, and for that reason, deserve the full contempt of the American people, none of US whom are American ‘native’, none entitled to royalty except what they have stolen from others on the zero-sum game Neo-Zi frontier, turned gulag. Huckabee, for his veiled threat against a sitting Congressman, should go to a holding cell at Guantanamo, like the other fundamentalists and n’erdowell’s who’ve threatened US government officials, but (Code Word) were ‘not like US’. We need a Change.

Posted by: C Little | May 16 2008 23:16 utc | 1

As long as Americans view their political sphere as a two-party system, painted Blue and Red, representin’ Left and Right as if they were street gangs in suits, that sphere will remain a scam, a royal casino game, with the ‘house’ winning by every day’s end.
The full political sphere that human beings are capable of conceiving and pursuing is much wider than what Americans consider Left and Right. It’s a joke, like the joke from the “Blues Brothers” movie where a club owner blithely says, “Oh, we play both kinds of music — Country AND Western!”
The entire American political sphere exists in a narrow band on the far right of the full political compass, and nothing outside that narrow band of corporatist, expansionist, militaristic exceptionalist blathersphere is permitted on the air, except perhaps out in the narrowest fringes of the internet.
So, watching millions of truly bright minds invested in worrying about which Party is getting something or other over on the other Party this week is just what we here at the Upper East Side Liberation Army delight in. We already own both these Parties, just as we own the money and property in America. Whomever wins, we will continue business as usual.
Say you go out to the horse track, bet on your favorite steed, win or lose, and then go home afterwards — who came out ahead? Even if you won, no you.
The track owner did, every day he operates. You paid to park in his lot, you paid to enter the stands, you paid to bet, you paid for drinks, you paid and you tipped to dine in his restaurant, and you went home thinking of what a horse race that was.
That’s how the American political system works. What a horse race!
C’mon — which horse wins the political race doesn’t mean a thing to the money and power behind both Parties. They both obey money first, second, and all them other numbers, too.
But go ahead. We do thank you for your money.

Posted by: UESLA | May 17 2008 0:07 utc | 2

It will be a combination of Diebold and the spin of the machine. Enough of the polls will show McCain and Dem candidate close enough in percentage of “American” approval that stealing it via Diebold, etc will seem plauible to the masses. When that happens, the cosmos will continue to exist and humanity will be that much closer to shortening its participation in that unfolding.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 17 2008 1:30 utc | 3

Umn, in this connection it is good to remember, as b pointed out earlier that the Senator the Codpiece referred to was Borah, R Idaho — and as was mentioned in the comments there that grandad Prescott Bush made the family fortune trading with the Nazis.
Talk about callng the kettle black!
In regard to Huckabee’s recent sick joke/taunt/nudge nudge hint at assasination, does anybody know what happens if the prez- and veep elect, uh, die before inaugaration?
If the sitting prez and veep die or are incapacitated, the Speaker of the House gets the reins — but if they are not yet in office, what happens? Does the sitting prez remain in office until new elections can be, uh, arranged?

Posted by: Chuck Cliff | May 17 2008 6:36 utc | 4

Clinton adviser Ann Lewis tacked to the right, criticizing Obama for saying he’d meet with the President of Iran and for suggesting that a US President needn’t have to echo the policies of the Likud Party in order to be “pro-Israel.” “The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel,” Lewis said. “It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties.”

link

Posted by: b | May 17 2008 8:50 utc | 5

@1, Yes you are absolutely right. (He’s Not Like US) is the paradigm that prepare us for whatever may ultimately lie ahead for Obama. More & more it looks like a silent unspoken conspiracy to sub-frame the humanity of an individual — Obama. And if anything should happen to Obama, there will be no shortage of people with blood on their hands.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | May 17 2008 9:31 utc | 6

@ 6 — Yes, indeed, blood on the hands and blood on the ground and a great big puddle of blood all around.
We know how the Springer press’ rabid smears against Rudi Deutschke led to the shooting, the effects of which he later died.
Remember the born-agains in Georgia who sang, “Imagine — if John Lennon was dead”? A hanger-on wannabe bozo blew John away with four shots from a hand-held gun. Or the hate campaigns against Rabin or MLK (I’m assuming these killings weren’t “organized” elsewhere.)

Posted by: Chuck Cliff | May 17 2008 9:48 utc | 7

Chuck Cliff:
Remember the born-agains in Georgia who sang, “Imagine — if John Lennon was dead”? A hanger-on wannabe bozo blew John away with four shots from a hand-held gun. Or the hate campaigns against Rabin or MLK (I’m assuming these killings weren’t “organized” elsewhere.)
Yup same old same old:

The U.S. government saw Lennon as such a serious threat that President Nixon attempted to have him deported in 1972. In addition, the F.B.I. closely monitored his actions and amassed a file on Lennon of over 300 pages.
…
AMY GOODMAN: “Imagine” is a song that has tremendous power through the decades, through the ages. After 9/11, it was reported that Clear Channel had it on a list of songs that would not be allowed to be played on their stations, and that was significant, because Clear Channel owns more than 1,200 radio stations in this country.
…
JON WIENER: Yeah. Well, he does say, “Imagine no more countries. It isn’t hard to do.” And he also says, “Imagine no religion. It’s easy if you try.” Of course, the Christian right in the United States finds that a completely outrageous statement, and they have been campaigning against that song ever since he recorded it in 1970.

History Professor Jon Wiener Discusses Lennon’s Politics
They re-elected Nixon despite the Mai Lai massacre and they re-elected Bush despite the Abu Graib scandal. Both were warmongers and spying on their own citizens and both were supported by the Christian Right. The only difference is Nixon was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, but acquitted by the Senate. Today impeachment is not even on the table. Just like then young people are turning away from their warmongering parents and showing up in record numbers to vote in the Democratic primary, despite the billions poured into think tanks. How interesting that only the moral innocence of youth can undermine the lack of moarality in the elders. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

Posted by: Sam | May 17 2008 13:42 utc | 8

There are many signs that the Jewish vote in the U.S. has moved beyond radical zionism.
Maybe, maybe not. Gore beat Bush 79-19 among Jewish voters, Kerry beat him 72-26, a 14 point swing in one election cycle. Is that an anomaly or a trend? Abe Foxman, head of one of AIPAC’s franchises, said in 2004 that Bush had been the best president Israel ever had and Kerry had to give some personal assurances to AIPAC bigwigs that he would be even better for Israel than Bush to get endorsements. Republicans have been trying to make the case for over 10 years, with some success, that they are more reliable supporters of Israel than Dems because of the beliefs of a significant part of their constituency – the religious right. Obama has made some negative comments about Likkud, and AIPAC – the primary source of Dem money from Jewish interests – has been supportive of the Israeli right, i.e, radical zionism. (btw, is there a moderate zionism?) I doubt AIPAC would endorse an outright rejection of Likkud, esp with the Israeli right in power. We’ll see this time, but I suspect that the trend is that the Jewish vote – and money – will be split more in the near future rather than go overwhelmingly to Dems. If that happens, Rove would count it as a victory for his tribe.
Yes, it’s all part of USELA’s horse race, but some of those wealthy AIPAC donors are also among the track’s owners.

Posted by: lg | May 17 2008 14:38 utc | 9

I don’t think either party really cares about Jewish votes. They are a very small sectcion of the electorate, and geographically concentrated in a way that means Republicans would not benefit from getting their votes anyway. I am not sure that Bush’s love of Israel has anything to do with domestic politics or Rove at all. AIPAC has been so successful in getting actual Zionists into presidential administrations (both Bush II and Clinton) and getting Zionist ideology accepted on capitol hill that I think Republicans actually see Israel’s goals as their own.
There are many signs that the Jewish vote in the U.S. has moved beyond radical zionism.
It doesn’t matter. No-one in Washington cares what Jewish voters think. They don’t have clout. Congress only cares what AIPAC thinks and for the forseebale future AIPAC = Zionism.

Posted by: swio | May 18 2008 8:37 utc | 10

Back to Main