The Gateway (Jews and Jerks Edition)
On Pesach, we always bring out the good Silver. Fake Sheldon Silver (@ShellySilver) on Twitter twitter.com
There are a few smart points in this left/liberal denial of Obama's drop in Jewish support, but 62% approval amongst a group where you got 78% last time is serious attrition.
The author states "This reoccuring non-controversy and speculation about the American Jewish vote has little to do with its actual influence on elections, which is fairly small." This is true enough nationally, but Presidential elections aren't won nationally, they are won state by state--and Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Nevada are all swing states this year, which raises somewhat the level of "actual influence."
The author states "despite being repeatedly debunked, the narrative that American Jews are about to defect en masse to the Republican Party will never permanently be put to bed..." which is true enough, but besides the point--it is not about Jews deserting “en masse;” it is about the GOP permanently increasing its share in particular places where it will impact negatively against the Democrats and swing elections, like, (if you need an example) Southern Brooklyn. “As you take slivers of the core Democratic strength, those matter” says Palm Beach County Florida Republican Chair Sid Dinnerstein, “We need one-third of the Jewish vote and 20% of the black vote, and the Democrats don’t win anything.”
However, the author does make one smart point I agree with: "If Republicans ever actually succeeded in getting pro-Israel Democrats to abandon their party, bipartisan support for Israel in Congress would be adversely affected." Survey: Jewish Voters Still Heart Obama motherjones.com
Here we have thoughts from the Martinez faction:
Jon Reznick: A local politics blogger just un-friended me on Facebook because I disputed some of his complicated (and yet somehow totally wrong) conclusions about a friend of mine who is a candidate for office. This, folks, is one of those places where a blogger and a journalist are very different animals.
Mr. Reznick contended that I was wrong in attributing Mr. Martinez’s prior election fraud to anything but his being young and naive.
The public record shows that a judge believed that Mr. Martinez had his campaign, with malice aforethought, change the addresses of people who signed his petitions so that the signatures would appear to belong to actual eligible signatories instead of those who actually signed them.
Pardon me for my quaint belief that one does not need to be a political veteran to know this is the moral and legal equivalent of forgery and therefore morally wrong. One does not need to possess a law degree to understand this; only a moral compass.
Mr. Reznick also takes issue with my conclusion about what occurred when Martinez stepped down from his District Leadership ten months after his election to take a job as Assistant Director of Intergovernmental for the state AG, under Director Carl Andrews (right arm of then Kings County Democratic Leader Clarence Norman). He thinks I was obligated to interview Norman and Andrews before concluding this was some sort of patronage payoff.
If we were at the Bronx Zoo and I said “Hey, look at the elephant,” Mr. Reznick would probably tell me I must interview it first to make sure it wasn’t a mouse with a glandular condition.
However, Mr. Reznick is correct that I may be wrong in implying that Mr. Martinez is not a sincere supporter of the goals (whatever they are) of “Occupy Wall Street.”
Since Mr. Martinez clearly believes he belongs in Congress, he may well be delusional, so I suppose his sincerity should not be questioned.
While the evidence of Mr. Martinez’s personal history seem sufficient to indicate he is a cynical player who understands he is now doing a favor for the current County Leader for which he will later extract a reward, it may well be that Mr. Martinez actually believes he is not acting as Vito Lopez’s de facto agent.
But whether he believes it or not is really a distinction without a difference if his impact his exactly the same in either event.
A Dan O'Connor fan also complains about Gate:
Plus no one admitted that there was a conspiracy, it was very very slightly insinuated by someone who didn't have any real involvement with any of the candidates."
You may remember Dodge, who at 22 is already in the process of becoming the Harold Stassen of the East Village. In fact, he is a self proclaimed Eisenhower Democrat, which is OK, since the GOP no longer has any room for such people. However, someone should tell Dodge that unlike Dan O’Connor, Ike and Stassen did not support the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration (which had been created by moderate Republicans).
And actually, Dodge, when City hall News called the guy "who didn't have any real involvement" with the campaign, Dan O'Connor was in the room with him and was passed the phone by the person "who didn't have didn't have any real involvement" with the campaign.
On opinion and belief, talking with Dan O'Connor himself would constitute fact checking. Conspiracy Theory About Velazquez Race Turns Out To Be True | City and State www.cityandstateny.com
And, just to be clear, Dan O’Connor is a full-fledged, abolish the Food and Drug Administration, Ron Paul supporting libertarian; the type of guy who goes down to Occupy Wall Street and explain to people why they really don’t want unemployment insurance extended.
Dan O'Connor is a full-on Ron Paul supporter masquerading as a democrat. (Reply #2) - Democratic Un sync.democraticunderground.com
And Ron Paul supporters agree:
Which, I should add, is OK if that's what bunches your panties.
Deb and Dodge, .can we expect you to be consistently supporting candidates who support the abolition of even the most basic function of government?
Or is this merely a one-time bout of insanity?
The problem with continually attacking Romney for having no real beliefs is that the thing you are attacking him for is the entire basis of his appeal. Romney's Future Base: Moderate Cynics andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com
I don't mind candidates contradicting themselves, but can't Romney at least wait until he gets to the next paragraph? Romney Wants to Run Against Nothing at All nymag.com
National Review succinctly explains why they fired the author of a despicable piece: "His latest provocation, in a webzine, lurches from the politically incorrect to the nasty and indefensible. We never would have published it, but the main reason that people noticed it is that it is by a National Review writer. Derb is effectively using our name to get more oxygen for views with which we’d never associate ourselves otherwise. So there has to be a parting of the ways. Derb has long danced around the line on these issues, but this column is so outlandish it constitutes a kind of letter of resignation. It’s a free country, and Derb can write whatever he wants, wherever he wants. Just not in the pages of NR or NRO, or as someone associated with NR any longer."
Post new comment