Start your day with National Memo Newsletter
Know first.
The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning
Photo by Jonathan Ernst/REUTERS
Nothing in politics is more difficult than breaking with longtime allies, friends and supporters over an issue of principle. In recent years we have seen the "Never Trump" Republicans take that painful step, sometimes abandoning their party and severing relationships built over a lifetime, with bitter consequences.
And last week we watched as Sen. Chuck Schumer made an equally fateful and agonizing choice when he stood up on the Senate floor to urge elections in Israel that he hopes will oust the Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu and his government. As the Senate majority leader, Schumer is not only the top Jewish American elected official but the highest-ranking member of his faith in this country's history, which means his words carry weight not only in his party but among American Jews, who reliably vote for Democrats by overwhelming margins.
It was a decision that Schumer, as a devoted advocate of the Jewish state, could only have made because he feels an unbearable burden of responsibility for the horrific death and destruction that Netanyahu is inflicting on Palestinian civilians. In the wake of the barbaric Hamas attack last October 7, he supported military action to destroy the terror organization that controls Gaza — and yet he knows that just purpose cannot justify the reckless and inhumane conduct of that campaign, which is now causing the mass starvation of innocents.
"I'm anguished that the Israeli war campaign has killed so many innocent Palestinians," Schumer said. "I know that my fellow Jewish Americans feel the same anguish when they see the images of dead and starving children — and destroyed homes." No doubt he knows and laments the ruinous impact of this war on Israel's international standing, just when much of the Arab world has come to accept its existence.
While Israel's actions probably don't constitute the "genocide" its enemies have claimed, there isn't much question that the far-right government has perpetrated war crimes — and remains indifferent to Palestinian suffering. The rage provoked around the globe by their torment will not diminish for years.
For many Americans, and indeed many American Jews, including me, the outrages perpetrated in this war are simply unacceptable. For some of us, however, this was no surprise but instead the inevitable result of American action, or inaction, that permitted Israeli right-wingers to thwart any progress toward an independent Palestinian state.
While official US policy supported the "two-state solution," in practice presidents of both parties did little or nothing to insist that either side enter negotiations in good faith. Instead, most American politicians either cheered on Israeli intransigence, and Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, or looked the other way.
Meanwhile, as we have learned in recent months, the Netanyahu government used its own authority to bolster and finance the Hamas extremists, who provided an excuse for their own intransigence. Beyond irresponsible, that shady alliance led directly to the blood-soaked horror of October 7, the vilest atrocity against Jews since the Holocaust.
Until the other day, Schumer endorsed the foolish consensus that has bolstered Netanyahu and his destructive policies for decades. That is why Jewish leaders who continue to back those policies reacted to his courageous speech with anger.
The Council of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which has routinely rubberstamped Israeli policy with little discernible thought, declared itself "distressed" that the Senate majority leader would interfere in Israel's internal affairs, a criticism voiced by Israeli officials and their Republican echoes. (Never mind that Netanyahu has routinely intervened in American politics and diplomacy without a second thought.) The council was distressed, too, that Schumer would suggest the United States should "play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change [the] present course." Its statement accused Schumer of fostering "divisiveness when unity is so desperately needed."
What those Jewish leaders fail to understand — and what the senator from Brooklyn has come to realize at last — is that there can be no unity premised on the indiscriminate violence and reckless aggression epitomized by the present government of Israel. As thousands of civilians continue to die, Netanyahu has no incentive to seek an end to this war, to negotiate the release of hostages held by Hamas, or to pursue the only real prospect for peace and security in the region.
Let's hope Schumer's anguished bravery becomes contagious.
Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting newsroom formerly known as The Investigative Fund, and a senior fellow at Type Media Center. His forthcoming book, The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism, will be published by St. Martin's Press in July.
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Keep reading...Show less
Donald Trump
During the all-too-brief one-on-one contest between Nikki Haley and Donald Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, there was a good deal of analysis declaring it the last stand of the Reaganite vision for the GOP versus the MAGA takeover. That was the wishiest of wishful thinking — and not just because such large segments of the current Republican Party delight in Trump. It's also because the Reaganite wing has made such a poor showing for itself.
It's generous to call the desiccated exoskeleton of Reaganism a "wing" at all, and frankly, the use of the term "Reaganism" is not really accurate anyway. What people mean when they use the term is traditional Republicanism, which includes belief in free enterprise, smaller government, freer trade, respect for the Constitution, dedication to American world leadership and social conservatism, among other ideals. Republicans who continue to adhere to those principles embraced Haley as the last man (as it were) standing.
One reason there weren't more traditional Republicans was on display in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. The world might look very different if traditional Republicans had been willing to stand firm for their values when they came under assault from an ignorant, cruel demagogue. So I was briefly optimistic when I saw that an honest-to-goodness Reaganite, John Lehman, who served as secretary of the Navy under Reagan, had weighed in. The headline was promising: "Reagan Would Never Vote for Trump." But after that bold beginning, the subhead was deflating: "He also didn't care much for Biden. Like me, he'd be looking for a strong third-party candidate to support."
Let's unpack that subhead. Reagan may not have "cared much" for Biden in the 1980s; most conservatives didn't. But we cannot say how Reagan would view the 2024 Biden; many former Republicans like me consider him the more conservative choice in the most important respects, i.e., respect for the rule of law and adherence to the Constitution. As Lehman itemizes in his piece, Trump's departure from conservative ideals — or just plain American ideals — are "horrifying," including his "naked admiration of our enemies," "praise for Hezbollah," contempt for allies, and incessant denigration of America as a "third world country" and a "laughingstock."
One might suppose that given all of that and so much more, Lehman would counsel that Trump's reelection would be a disaster and, accordingly, that he would vote for Biden. But no, Lehman makes a feeble accusation in the final paragraph that Biden has "turned his platform over to socialist Bernie Sanders" and accordingly, Lehman will vote for the No Labels candidate.
That's rubbish. Biden has done no such thing. Lehman, like so many who should know better, is failing to take responsibility for the decision we must all make. His longing for purity is overwhelming his judgment. If Trump is reelected, none of the things he worked for as Navy secretary is safe.
Anything that erodes the anti-Trump coalition makes it more likely that Trump will prevail. So those who vow to write in a non-Trump Republican, or who, like Lehman, will vote for the No Labels candidate, are increasing the chances that a man who promises to pardon the Jan. 6 insurrectionists, imprison his critics and become an ally of Russia, will be elected.
The No Labels candidacy is cotton candy. Though advertised as providing a "unity ticket" that will provide "common sense" solutions for America's problems, the reality is that No Labels has no chance of winning 270 electoral college votes. Last year, they predicted that they would achieve ballot access in 32 states by now. Instead, they have access in only 16 states. Oh, and No Labels might as well be called No Candidate. Like dominoes, one possible candidate after another has turned down their offer to run: Jon Huntsman, Joe Manchin, Larry Hogan, Kyrsten Sinema, Nikki Haley, Ken Buck, Brian Kemp and, just this week, Geoff Duncan.
As William Galston, a founder of No Labels who broke with the group last year, has explained, there are more moderate voters in the Democratic Party than in the GOP. Accordingly, No Labels will attract more Democrats than Republicans.
No Labels claims that it is only interested in fielding a ticket that can win outright and has no desire to serve as a spoiler. But polling shows that even a nationally known figure like Haley would only claim 9% of the vote in a four-way race that also contained Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Their projections also presume that a No Labels candidate would carry states that Biden won by double-digit margins in 2020.
No Labels is playing a dangerous game. Some believe it has forfeited the benefit of the doubt and is a full-fledged stalking horse for Trump. It wouldn't be so dangerous were it not for feckless lightweights like John Lehman.
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
From Your Site Articles
- Trump Quotes Putin And Parrots Hitler In New Hampshire Rally Rhetoric ›
- Donald Trump And The End Of American Exceptionalism ›
- Biden May Have Lost A Step -- But Trump Is Dazed, Confused And Kooky (VIDEO) ›
- Why We Know Trump's MAGA Is A Toxic Cult, Not A Political Movement ›
- Is Trump The New Boss Tweed? ›
- Donald Trump, The Swaggering Blond Supervillain Of The GOP ›
Keep reading...Show less