sitting on the edge of the sandbox, biting my tongue

July 31, 2012

A Lovely Conference

Filed under: Israel, politics — Tags: , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 7:15 pm

Guy Herschmann is a recent graduate of U.C. Santa Cruz.  What’s nice Jewish boy doing in a place like UC Santa Cruz?  Evidently, he was a campus coordinator for the Israel advocacy organization StandWithUs.  He recently went to a scary event held here in the Bay Area:

One might have expected the Birzeit Society’s 11th annual convention in Burlingame, with its schedule of family outings and festivities, to be a pleasant family affair. The society, established 25 years ago for Palestinians from the village of Birzeit who now live in the U.S., attracted approximately 700 people to its five-day gathering in early July.

But instead of a warm family atmosphere, I witnessed chilling anti-Israel extremism. Children were indoctrinated with anti-Israel and intolerant rhetoric. An emerging generation of activists was trained to proudly use deceit and manipulation to promote a “one-state” solution that has no room for Israel.

At the panel “Palestine: One State vs. Two State Solution,” criticism was heaped on the Palestinian Authority, not for its corruption but rather for normalizing relations with Israel. Mai al Kaila, the P.A.’s ambassador to Chile, tried to win over the crowd by commiserating about the difficulty of establishing Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, and by emphasizing that the P.A.’s goal is that “all refugees living in the diaspora have their lands in Haifa, Jaffa and everything.”

She tried to justify the P.A.’s promotion of a two-state solution as a necessary compromise. “What can we do when we don’t have a military power … or a nuclear power?” she asked. The crowd grumbled. “Our strategy now … is nonviolence.” The grumbling grew louder. The audience seemed unable to tolerate the idea of two peaceful states for two peoples. When she sat down, a man declared that “we need an intifada.”

The panel’s featured speakers were the Rev. Naim Ateek and the Rev. Don Wagner, both from Sabeel, a Jerusalem-based ecumenical Christian group known for its hostility to Israel. Panel moderator Ramiz Rafeedie called all supporters of Israel “your enemies.” He warned that advocating a one-state solution could alienate potential allies because it attacks the legitimacy of Zionism, so he advised audience members to refine their arguments to win supporters.

Ateek described a future Palestinian confederation with Jordan and Lebanon as a remedy for a two-state stalemate. “We need to have a third intifada,” he stated, adding that it should be “totally nonviolent.” Wagner contributed classic anti-Semitic canards, saying that Congress is “sewn up” by Zionists. Ateek’s closing statements summed up the tone of the convention: “We say no. We adamantly reject the two-state solution at any price.”

The audience response to these statements was the most disturbing aspect to me. The panel attracted an audience of more than 200, primarily families, including youngsters. They responded enthusiastically to calls for a third intifada, with children as young as 7 applauding with their parents.

I don’t suppose it’s very different from what’s your average Palestinian Authority meeting/public school function looks like.  But look at the persons of Jewish heritage in attendance:

A second panel, “BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) on American Campuses,” was equally extreme. Dina Omar, a Berkeley graduate and student at Columbia, joined Nora Barrows-Friedman, who writes for Electronic Intifada and al Jazeera, in laying out BDS strategies and goals.

‘Omar urged the audience to get BDS branded as “just one piece of a larger question of social justice.” She advocated outr each to any and all religious, racial and ethnic groups, economic justice groups, and environmentalists to insert BDS — thme collective punishment of Israel — into all progressive causes. Displaying Occupy Wall Street and Free Tibet flyers emblazoned with BDS slogans, Omar urged students to “use your institutions’ symbols, rhetoric, and propaganda … to turn or flip the message or to insert your message in however subversive a way you can.”

Barrows-Friedman called the message that “people just … need to get along” an Israeli plot against Palestinians.

The speakers advised against reaching out to pro-Israel students, especially if they are Jewish. When asked whether there are any Jewish groups with whom BDS activists can work, Barrows-Friedman, who is Jewish, responded, “It depends on your level of tolerance.” After a pause, Omar answered that the group Jewish Voice for Peace may be acceptable.

In fact, the BDS movement frequently uses token Jews to make its case and deflect charges of anti-Semitism. Barrows-Friedman awkwardly sidestepped an anti-Semitic comment from an audience member, making light of a canard about the “Jewish-controlled” global financial system.

For bonus, remember how the media declared that Romney was somehow wrong to point out the differences between the Israeli culture and that of their neighbors.  Well, shortly before it, World Bank issued a report saying that Palestinian economy can not support a state:

“The Palestinian Authority has made steady progress in many years towards establishing the institutions required by a future state, but the economy is currently not strong enough to support such a state,” economist John Nasir said in a statement accompanying the report, which was released July 25.

The P.A. says it is facing its worst financial crisis since it was founded in 1994, with debts of $1.5 billion and an immediate cash shortfall of $500 million, the French news agency AFP reported. Donor countries have propped up the Palestinian economy with billions of dollars in assistance.

In the report, the World Bank said the aid has led to 7.7 percent gross domestic product growth between 2007 and 2011, but only in government services, real estate and other nontradable sectors.

Oh.  There are two lessons for the Obama Administration in that news item.

June 4, 2012

Into the Basement We Move!

I’ve been doing a lot of non-virtual stuff lately, like going to Anthropologie.  DH, on his part, went to the track.  A few years ago, hipsters discovered horse racing, which was about time.  What else is there to do on a Sunday afternoon that involves light drinking?  So now they hang out at the track, semi-awkwardly, wearing big hats and having whatever fun hipsters are wired to have, which is to say not much.  On the way to the track we stopped by a bicyclist cafe in Berkeley where they don’t have Coke, only cola, and a huge stylized portrait of Anonymous hangs on the wall.  The bathroom walls are made of blackboard, and the establishment provides chalk, but there is still graffiti on the door.  The food is good, but if the anarchists who run the place would only know who they are serving, they’d have beat us out the door with a baseball bat.

After spending an hour at Anthropologie, I decided I wanted to wait for this blouse to go on sale.  There was a point I was trying to make, and it’s that I was planning on writing responses to several posts I read, but they came out a bit short.  So I’m putting it all in a single post.

In the future, everybody will be a minority for 15 minutes.  City University of New York now has White/Jewish category for its faculty.  And if CUNY decides to break off Jews into a separate category — uh-oh.  Considering that we are already overrepresented in pretty much every profession, including figure skating and, I’m sure, organic farming, today’s Jewish children will have nowhere to go.  I’m a bit puzzled by the fact that so many American Jews have embraced affirmative action.  Most of their grandparents fled state anti-Semitism in Russian Empire, and the list of their grievances included quotas (although that obviously wasn’t the biggest concern).  Racial discrimination was wrong then; it’s wrong now.

Speaking of anti-Semitism, there’s the newly redistricted NJ-9 Democratic primary race (via Maggie’s Notebook). Representative Steve Rothman, who is  Jewish, is accused of dual loyalties by supporters of Bill Pascrell, who, being neither Arab nor Muslim, is not accused of any kind of dual loyalties:

The race took an unprecedented turn on Monday when an Arabic campaign poster supporting Pascrell surfaced. It urged the “Arab diaspora community” to “elect the friend of the Arabs” and billed the race as “the most important election in the history of the [Arab] community,” according to a WFB translation of the sign.[…]

Observers such as Susan Rosenbluth, publisher of the New Jersey-based Jewish Voice and Opinion, say the race took an anti-Semitic turn in late February, when a prominent Arab supporter of Pascrell accused the state’s Jewish voters of being more loyal to Israel than America.

“Unquestionably, this primary election is pitting two otherwise harmoniously coexisting communities: the Muslim and Jewish communities,” Aref Assaf, president of the New Jersey-based American Arab Forum, wrote in a New Jersey Star-Ledger column headlined “Rothman is Israel’s man in District 9.”

“As total and blind support for Israel becomes the only reason for choosing Rothman, voters who do not view the elections in this prism will need to take notice. Loyalty to a foreign flag is not loyalty to America’s,” Assaf wrote.

Translation: “Shut up you Jew!  Or we won’t coexist in bumper sticker harmony much longer.”  Pascrell has some interesting supporters:

Pascrell in recent weeks has waged a charm offensive in the Arab community, campaigning alongside a Hamas-sympathizer and many who have expressed hostility towards Israel.

James Zogby, president of the American Arab Institute, recently helped Pascrell collect more than $50,000; Zogby is a longtime critic of Israel who has accused the U.S. of “being the coat holder and cheerleader” for the Jewish state.

Pascrell also has embraced Imam Mohammad Qatanani, a controversial Passaic spiritual leader who stands accused by the State Department of hiding a conviction in Israel for having ties to the terror group Hamas.

Last Friday, Pascrell held a high profile event at a local mosque where he was joined by Rep. Keith Ellison (D., Minn), a prominent ally of the fringe group J Street and the first Muslim member of Congress.

Pascrell, too, has come under fire for his association with J Street. In 2010, the lawmaker endorsed the so-called “Gaza 54” letter, which demanded that President Obama force Israel to end its “collective punishment” of those living in the Gaza Strip. It is a vote that Pascrell has said he “doesn’t regret.”

“By campaigning so hard with one group, were Congressman Pascrell to win reelection, it seems that his marginally supportive voting record on Israel may take a turn for the worst and become openly hostile,” said the New Jersey-based political operative.

Meanwhile in Israel they invented high-free medical pot.  According to inventors at Tikkun Olam (Hebrew for repairing the world), the new pot can be used by diabetic patients and those suffering from psychiatric disorders.  While they don’t claim that the herb will cure all conditions marihuana is thought to alleviate, discoveries like this one are sure to take steam out of the  medicinal marijuana movement.

Back in the US, King Shamus notes that while the US economy added 69,000 jobs in May, the same month about 1.7 million young people graduated from colleges.  Considering that the 85,000 H1B visas slated to be issued to foreign workers this year will eat up all job gains made by the economy this months, I’m not sure what it is that college grads are expected to do.  Given how #Occupy is all but dead, they will not be camping out in parks this summer, so I guess they’ll have to make do with mom and dad’s basement.  I saw the best minds of their generation destroyed by public education, starving hysterical by Ethnic Studies departments.

On a more positive note, everybody appears to play guess when PJ Mom’s next baby will be born game.  I hope not before she arrives at her destination.  I don’t know how military moms do it.

March 23, 2012

Free Speech Bay Area

Last night DH was looking over one of the two free local papers we still get delivered to our door.

“Is there anything I need to read?” I asked.

“Meh.  If you want to, you can check out the letter here about a “free speech” event for Jew-bashers.”

Under the heading Breaking Down Barriers I read the following:

For more than a year, visitors to the Saturday Alameda Farmer’s Market encounter bright orange traffic cones with notices proclaiming one small place at the very end of the vendor area a “Free Speech Zone” — all this fuss with signage and color that shouts “caution,” for one citizen’s effort to talk about matters of peace in Palestine and peace in the Middle East.

For those who desire to know more about the situation in Palestine, non-violent efforts to resist the military occupation and the international boycott; divestment and sanctions movement that is gaining steam around the world, I would like to extend an invitation to the Sabeel Conference tomorrow and Saturday, March 23 and 24, at Sunnyvale Presbyterian Church, 732 West Fremont Ave.

The conference will offer an opportunity to hear many voices of conscience — American, Israeli, Palestinian, Jewish, Christian and Muslim.

You won’t be put off by seeing “caution” cones or feel yourself restricted to talk “freely” in a small designated area. Instead you will be greeted with invitations to talk with people who live and work in Israel and in the Palestinian territories You will have the opportunity to learn to challenge the status quo, and act to promote freedom, justice and equality.

You might even find yourself challenged to hold onto this issue and join the ever growing call for peace in the Middle East here in the streets of Alameda! Additional information can be found at

— Paula Rainey

I’m curious about these orange cones: did I missed something entertaining a year ago?  Ms. Rainey is a local proponent of the boycott, divest, sanction effort currently in vogue with Israel’s enemies, and she did have an event planned at the Farmer’s Market at some point.

Not sure what boycott of and divestment from a besieged tiny nation has to do with  “peace in the Middle East” or “breaking down barriers,” if by barriers we mean barriers towards peace or at least  security, and not the defensive wall Israel had erected to protect her citizens from terrorists attacks in 2004.  Most of the said barrier is actually a fence, and it did effectively end the “Second Intifada”, or the wave of terror that swept Israel in the second half of the last decade following Yasser Arafat’s rejection of a generous Israeli land offer.  Those opposed to the Jewish state have been railing against Israel’s non-violent defense (which is what the said wall/fence has been since it was built).  The wall part of the construction is prominently pictured on the conference’s website.

The conference will feature a variety of speakers with consistent anti-Israel bias.  Who else signs on to promote the boycott of the sole democracy in the Middle East?  This event is being billed as some sort of an open mike.  Interesting that they feel censored, scary orange cones and what not, because there is another free speech twist.

In May 2010, the Turkish Islamist government sent a ship called Mavi Marmara, loaded with weapons and unusable medical supplies, to break the legal blockade Israel imposed on Gaza Strip in lieu of Hamas terrorists regularly firing rockets on Israel.  The IDF boarded the ship, were attacked and killed several armed crew members.  International outrage ensured as the media outlets the world over had the public convinced that Mavi Marmara was carrying peace activist with humanitarian aid.  Since it is Friday, here is the terrific Caroline Glick and Latma TV with “We Con the World,” a parody inspired by the incident:

Paula Rainy, who at least at one point was a member of the ultra-left Green Party, has long been obsessed with the Jewish State.  She was signing anti-Israel petitions as far back as 2001.  When, following the Mavi Marmara incident, lefties everywhere called for retaliatory boycotts of Israeli ships, Ms. Rainy participated in the East Bay Area efforts.  She wrote letters to local papers about the “historic achievement” of hers: together with her buddies she picketed a ship of Israeli Zim line, preventing it from docking in the Port of Oakland for 24 hours.

We read her letter in the Alameda Journal, another free local paper delivered unsolicited to virtually every household, and DH was pissed enough to write a response.  He did express some doubt before hitting that “send” button (“Basically, I am giving my name and address to every leftist organization in the country”), but mailed the letter.  Not surprisingly, Alameda Journal didn’t print it.

A week later we stopped receiving the paper at our door.  It is still delivered to all our neighbors as well as the empty, abandoned and foreclosed property in the vicinity.  Evidently, defense of Israel around here is beyond the Pale (pun intended).  Needles to say, the local papers and people writing letters to editors had no problem with Assad slaughtering his own people or the Muslim Brotherhood seizing power in Egypt.

Oh well, it could have been worse, we could be living in a real life people’s republic.

March 12, 2012

Jewish Liberals, We Need to Talk

A few days ago released the video of Barack Obama, then pushing thirty, embracing an anti-Semitic basket-case and all-around race-baiter (via Legal Insurrection) by the name of Derrick Bell.  Derrick Bell is the mind (or is it “mind?) behind a blaxploitation masterpiece about white Americans selling off their black compatriots to aliens — with a subplot of scheming cowardly Jews.

At the time of their embrace, Derrick Bell was a law professor in Harvard, so, I suppose, the authority he commanded explains why impressionable minds, like our future President in his early middle age, might had fallen under his spell.  Or else Barack Obama shared Bell’s views.  The later would explain why Derrek Bell got to visit the Obama White House twice in 2010 (via Capitol Commentary tweeter feed).  In 1994, between the Harvard bear-hug and the White House visit, the New York Observer interviewed Bell, and, of course, it’s racist creepiness galore.  Check out some exerpts at Commentary (via RS McCain).

The Breitbart tape shouldn’t had surprised anyone because we all know that Obama allowed Jeremiah Wright, another deranged race-baiter, to officiate his wedding and baptize (or is it “baptize”?) his daughters.  I happen to be of the opinion that Obama rarely went to his chosen “church”, but he heard of his pastor’s sermons and liked their tone and substance.  He probably admired Wright for being a part of Louis Farrakhan’s entourage when the latter went to visit Gaddafi in 1984.  (In a spirit of shameless self-promotion, check out my obituary of the late dictator.)

I’m sure Obama’s heartbeat didn’t go up in anguish every time he passed the house of Louis Farrakhan, another one of these random men in his great neighborhood, because he evidently collaborated with that race-bating anti-Semite on at least one occasion, when he helped him with the second Million Men March.

Sarah Palin caught a lot of flack for welcoming Pat Buchanan to Wasilla in 1999.  Me, I wouldn’t welcome Buchanan anywhere, but I understand that the mayor of Wasilla was flattered to have a one-time major party Presidential hopeful pass through her town.  I don’t expect a young mayor from a state that few Jews call home to be well-versed in politics of Holocaust denial and other forms of Jew-hatred.  Obama, on the other hand, lived in cities with large Jewish populations — New York, Chicago, Boston — and found it possible to collaborate with hard-core anti-Semites.

One hopes that the tape of Barack Obama toasting a PLO terrorist Rashid Khalidi would be truly damaging to the President, at least in our community.  The tape is in possession of the LA Times, and the paper won’t release it.  Mere existence of this tape should give pause to any Jew intending to cast his vote for Obama.  Do we know about it?

J Weekly, my local Jewish paper, didn’t cover the Khalidi tape story in ’08.  The Obama-Khalidi connection was mentioned twice — in an opinion piece and in a letter to the editor (go Russikies!).  That Obama hob-nobbed with the PLO should had been a major area of concern to the Jewish press, no?

During Netanyahu’s 2010 White House visit, Obama presented the Israeli Prime Minister with a list of demands and left for dinner.  ““Let me know if there is anything new,” he said.  There is something sadistic about it.  I can’t think of another international incident where the current White House occupant was doing something other than his usual “leading from behind”.  Did Barack Obama dream of treating the Israeli head of state this way when he was running for President, and what would another four years of his Presidency be like for the only democracy in the Middle East, considering that in his final term he will not have to worry about reelection?

Pro-Israel liberal Jews are fooling themselves if they think that Barack Obama has some sort of sympathy for the besieged Jewish state.  While I understand that many if not most American Jews are not particularly Zionist, I still think they need to consider what would happen if Israel ceases to exist.  Anti-Semites worldwide will be emboldened, and that includes anti-Semites in the United States.  And even if Israel’s destruction were not in question, I find it a bit icky to vote for an individual with Obama’s history.

Curiously, one American Muslim and most of her friends think of our forty fourth President as Muslim, if only in the same sense Bill Clinton was our first black President (Via I Own the World).  Could it be because of something Barack Obama is doing?

March 7, 2012

BREAKING: Barack Hussein Obama’s Favorite Law Prof Kidnapped by Aliens, HBO Not Involved

Filed under: film, politics, tv — Tags: , , , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 5:21 pm

I assume by now everyone heard about Derrick Bell, the Harvard’s racialist prof praised by the law student (not some undergrad) Obama at a rally in the 80s. Big Hollywood has more.  Turns out, after resigning from Harvard the distinguished man of letters penned a blacksploitation story, later turned into a mid-high brow (or is it high middle brow?) film by HBO.  And oh, what a story:

Imagine, if you will, that space aliens land in the United States and offer ”untold treasure” in exchange for surrendering all black citizens to them. What does white America do? It votes to accept the deal by overwhelming margins. So says the law professor Derrick Bell, who poses the question in an allegorical tale he calls ”The Space Traders.”

There is opposition, however. Jews condemn the trade as genocidal and organize the Anne Frank Committee to try to stop it. Empathy from another group that has suffered oppression? Not according to Bell. Instead, Jews worry that ”in the absence of blacks, Jews could become the scapegoats.”

Such parables pass for legal scholarship these days…

Fellow Americans, this is embarrassing.  This is the man our President held in high regard.

How did Derrick Bell get to teach in Harvard?  I’m beginning to believe law schools are a scam.

And, yes, I need to call my rabbi.

February 29, 2012

A Warning from Hillary?

Filed under: politics — Tags: , , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 8:16 pm

Looking ever more grandmotherly, Hillary Clinton went to Tunisia and met with local youth.  One of them hurled a question:

Questioner: After the electoral campaign starts in the United States – it started some time ago – we noticed here in Tunisia that most of the candidates from the both sides run towards the Zionist lobbies [emphasis mine, ed.] to get their support in the States. And afterwards, once they are elected, they come to show their support for countries like Tunisia and Egypt for a common Tunisian or a common Arab citizen. How would you reassure and gain his trust again, once given the fact that you are supporting his enemy as well at the same time?

Clinton: Well, first, let me say, you will learn as your democracy develops that a lot of things are said in political campaigns that should not bear a lot of attention. There are comments made that certainly don’t reflect the United States, don’t reflect our foreign policy, don’t reflect who we are as a people. I mean, if you go to the United States, you see mosques everywhere, you see Muslim Americans everywhere. That’s the fact. So I would not pay attention to the rhetoric. [Emphasis mine, ed.]

Secondly, I would say watch what President Obama says and does. He’s our president. He represents all of the United States, and he will be re-elected president, so I think that that will be a very clear signal to the entire world as to what our values are and what our president believes.

Thank you for fair warning Ms. Rodham-Clinton.  I’m also watching what Ron Paul says and does.  Having established a reputation for pandering to the Neo-Nazis, Paul is wasting no time forging alliances with Arab Jew-haters:

Ron Paul, who has consistently engaged in anti-Semitic nonsense over the course of the past few decades, has largely attempted to hide his anti-Semitism throughout his campaign. No longer. Ron Paul has issued this Arabic-language flyer outside the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, Michigan:

The flyer actually has two sides. The English side promotes Paul’s “Plan to Restore America” and touts his deficit cutting prowess and dislike of the Federal Reserve. The Arabic side, however – the side shown above – is far less subtle. It says that Paul will cut foreign aid, and specifically mentions only foreign aid to Israel as the target of cutting.

And that’s the point. Paul’s appeal to the Muslim community is strictly and completely based on his opposition to Israel. Paul’s anti-Semitism is well-documented; see his section on Zionism in Paul’s book Liberty Defined (better titled All The Weird Things Ron Paul Believes). His CYA maneuver, stating that he wants to cut all foreign aid, then determine to whom American should restore aid, is just that – a CYA maneuver. His real target is and always was Israel. I don’t see Ron Paul supporters handing out Hebrew flyers at my synagogue proclaiming his desire to cut off aid to Egypt, Libya, and the Palestinian Authority.

Via I Own the World.

February 18, 2012

MSNBC Fires MSNBC’s Foreign Policy Amen Corner

In August 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, threatening the world’s supply of oil.  International sanctions immediately followed.  As the world was readying for war, Pat Buchanan went on American television to opine that:

There are only two groups that are beating the drums for war in The Middle East – the Israeli Defense Ministry and its amen corner in the United States.

Also that:

The civilized world must win this fight,’ the editors thunder. But, if it comes to war, it will not be the ‘civilized world’ humping up that bloody road to Baghdad; it will be American kids with names like McAllister, Murphy, Gonzales, and Leroy Brown.

Blacks, Hispanics, Pat Buchanan has your back — at least when it comes to Jews.

I’m not sure why any of it should had come as a surprise.  In the ’80s and early ’90s Buchanan wrote a total of 9 columns defending John Demjanjuk — and that’s not counting other Nazi war criminals.  These columns included everything from accusing the Holocaust victims of mass hysteria to Holocaust revisionism.  In 2009 Buchanan outdid himself in a  Human Events column (reprinted by Ron Paul’s buddy Lew Rockwell, among other people) that compared Demjanjuk to Jesus.  Not a surprise either, considering that by then the distinguished paleocon was hosting Holocaust deniers at his website and wrote a book about the, you know, peaceful Hitler.

But I digress.  In 1991 William F. Buckley castigated Buchanan, and although the commentator amassed 3 million votes in his 1992 Presidential run, he fell out of favor thereafter.  During the events leading up to Golf War 2 Buchanan became the “conservative” amen corner of the liberal media.  Back then my gentile co-workers gushed over his “anti-war” editorial for the New York Times as my pacifist Jewish co-workers gulped.  Ten years ago conservatives didn’t consider Buchanan one of our own.  (In any event, why is this isolationist and protectionist a conservative?)

MSNBC hired Buchanan in 2002 because they agreed with him on the Iraq war, which was back then the most pressing issue of the day.  Buchanan’s racist anti-Semitic history was already well-known, and was not an issue.  He came on board because he was not a foreign policy conservative.  Moreover, as Alana Goodman eloquently put:

It always seemed odd that MSNBC, the far-left network, employed one of the most fringey, controversial, anti-Semitic figures on the right. But then again, there was probably a good reason for it. The left still wishes all conservatives were as easy to demonize as Pat Buchanan.

Now that our military is gutted out and foreign policy issues do not animate broadcasters, the liberal network has no use for poor Pat.

As a conservative with a libertarian bend I have no problem with a decision by a private news network to sever ties with a contributor.  I have to disagree with Profrssor Jacobson.  If MSNBC doesn’t want to hire conservatives, it’s their prerogative.  If they use Media Matters’ guidelines to select their lineup, that’s also entirely up to them.

Buchanan’s complains that he’s being “blacklisted” are laughable, particularly considering that he’s a defender of Joe McCarthy.  In any event, here is his statement:

The modus operandi of these thought police at Color of Change and ADL is to brand as racists and anti-Semites any writer who dares to venture outside the narrow corral in which they seek to confine debate. All the while prattling about their love of dissent and devotion to the First Amendment, they seek systematically to silence and censor dissent.

Nothing says “the narrow corral” like Holocaust revisionism.

I find Buchanan’s complaint that the ADL gets to to tell us who is an anti-Semite particularly noxious.  The definition of anti-Semitism should not be left to Buchanans and Mearsheimers of the world.  It’s the ADL’s job not merely to explain what anti-Semitism is, but to make racism and anti-Semitism socially unacceptable.  As a conservative with a libertarian bend I am entirely comfortable with private groups defining our moral standards.  And while the ADL loses credibility when it glides over or ignores anti-Semitism on the left, it’s correct about Buchanan.  Shame on conservative commentators like Sean Hannity for having Buchanan on his show as a regular guest.

Without a hearing, they smear and stigmatize as racist, homophobic, or anti-Semitic any who contradict what George Orwell once called their “smelly little orthodoxies.” They then demand that the heretic recant, grovel, apologize, and pledge to go forth and sin no more.

Is the Holocaust now a “smelly little orthodox[y]”, I wonder?  It’s irrelevant, though, because as I said, if MSNBC had a problem with Buchanan’s anti-Semitism, he would have never be hired in a first place.

Defy them, and they will go after the network where you work, the newspapers that carry your column, the conventions that invite you to speak. If all else fails, they go after the advertisers.

Nice try.  Color of Change did go after advertizes on Beck’s show, but what does it have to do with Pat Buchanan?  He insinuated that his former employer was threatened with a boycott.  In light of him failing to produce the evidence of such threat, I am going to assume that it’s paranoia speaking.

I know these blacklisters. They operate behind closed doors, with phone calls, mailed threats, and off-the-record meetings. They work in the dark because, as Al Smith said, nothing un-American can live in the sunlight.

What kind of conservative demands “a hearing” for being fired?  His bosses made a decision behind closed doors, alright, but Pat Buchanan has no constitutionally guaranteed right to a job with MSNBC.  Traditional stoic masculinity dictates that Mr. Buchanan deals; instead he issued a hyperbolic statement.

The drama queen knows what he’s doing.  With so many decades in the public eye behind him, Buchanan must had noticed that punditry is a high turnover business.  One day you are in, and the next day you are paling around with the Institute for Historical Review.  Seriously, we are dealing with middle brow entertainment here.  Buchanan is trying to generate some sort of controversy by championing his own victimhood.  Cry me a river.

Does refusal to put conservatives on its payroll tell us that MSNBC is kind of lame?  It does, but not so much because they hired Buchanan as much as because said paleocon was their token conservative.  They will go down in history as a news channel that employed a noted anti-Semite for a decade.  I dare them to put a respectable Goldwater/Reagan conservative on the air.

UPDATE: Link fixed.

Older Posts »

The Silver is the New Black Theme. Create a free website or blog at


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 382 other followers

%d bloggers like this: