US Elections

So the September 21 speech reveals the abandonment of previously stated US policy on Israel’s borders and of any US attempt to drive the peace process. In doing so President Obama indicated that he was uninterested in even appearing even handed between Israel and Palestine — which will further harm the US’s position in the Middle East. His reference to the Holocaust, which is of zero relevance to the Israeli treatment of Palestine, but which seems to be used as an excuse for Israel’s behaviour, confirmed that.

The consequence of Obama’s speech was that Netanyahu, at a press conference with Obama afterwards, said "I want to thank you, Mr President, for standing with Israel and supporting peace through direct negotiations" — remarks very different from the ones that Netanyahu made after the
May 19 speech.

It is reasonable to infer that Obama’s speech was approved by Netanyahu prior to it being given. It is inconceivable that Obama abandoned his previously expressed views without the slightest explanation and without knowing that Netanyahu would respond appropriately. Hence the appearance of the US President going cap in hand to the Israeli prime minister for approval.

What is even more amazing is that, in light of the lack of enthusiasm that American Jews, especially the younger ones, have towards the policies of the present Israeli government, President Obama felt that he needed such an endorsement. Such American Jews seem unwilling to abandon their liberal principles when judging Israel’s actions, despite the Israeli lobby urging them to do so. In this regard see Peter Beinart's “The failure of the American Jewish establishment” in the New York Review of Books on June 10, 2010, and the correspondence on June 24.

Hide

• Good government requires good governors, not just government reforms, argues Megan McArdle:

It seems to me that the ban on earmarks may represent another such case. Don't get me wrong: I intensely dislike what they represent. But they are not the source of our fiscal problems, and they clearly provided some vital lubricant for our nation's creaky legislative machinery.

• Betty Turbo is selling copies of this informative poster. I agree with the No Ketchup rule, but all that other stuff is why I'm no great fan of Chicago dogs. Fun Fact: In Seattle, they sell put cream cheese on the bun.

• Matt Yglesias explains how segregation facilitated bipartisan compromises during the first half of the 20th Century:

For a qualitative description, I think you can find no better example than the Glass-Steagall Act. Most progressives, whether or not they favor a return to the specific rules enacted by this law, would certainly cite it as an example of the kind of “get tough on the banks” attitude they favor. Why can’t we have real liberals in congress like that anymore? But these guys were both white supremacist southerners. Rep Steagall, the more moderate of the two, was apparently known as “Marse Henry” by black Alabamians. Senator Carter Glass, by contrast, was the kind of guy who looked at the state of Virginia in 1900 and decided that the problem with it was that living conditions were too good for black people.

• Hip-hop has been the most iconic and widespread soundtrack of the Arab Spring, writes Lara Dotson-Renta:

The song powerfully employs the shahada and a common humanity to de-authorize the self-imposed omnipotence of the Gaddafi regime while encouraging protesters “from Tunisia to Libya, Bahrain to Yemen” to rise up against oppression. It also points to a tightening of familial, political, and identity links between Arabs who have long lived abroad and younger generations who may have never visited the countries their parents originally hailed from. The fact that Can’t Take Our Freedom has been so popular and well received by Arabs both in the ‘West’ and in the MENA region speaks to a particular movement in which those who have chosen self-exile for political or economic reasons (or had it imposed upon them) are now collaborating in the rewriting of history with those who never left the country of origin but nevertheless felt internally displaced or dispossessed by the institutionalized power structures under which they lived. That Khaled M. is a multilingual Libyan-American with a dual identity and world-view is vital to seeing the Arab Spring for the multifaceted, globalized movement that it is.

• NBC comedy "Community," aka the best show on television, welcomes its cast back to the set for a new season after being snubbed at the Emmys.

• Tom Friedman lauds Americans Elect, an online group he says represents "the radical center":

The goal of Americans Elect is to take a presidential nominating process now monopolized by the Republican and Democratic parties, which are beholden to their special interests, and blow it wide open — guaranteeing that a credible third choice, nominated independently, will not only be on the ballot in every state but be able to take part in every presidential debate and challenge both parties from the middle with the best ideas on how deal with the debt, education and jobs.

• Friedman is wrong to pin his hopes on a third party, writes Greg Marx:

Friedman’s idea seems to be that if only we can find some reform that will allow us to “break the oligopoly of the two-party system,” it might, someday, be possible for someone who holds 90 percent of Barack Obama’s stated policy positions—plus support for a carbon tax—to assume a position of power. 

• Tom Friedman will be a guest at the USSC this week. He will appear at the Sydney Opera House on Tuesday August 2nd in conversation with Peter Hartcher. Tickets are $35 ($25 concession) and can be purchased here. I'm looking forward to hearing from him — particularly given the significance of the date.

• Ronald Dworkin argues that the 14th Amendment permits the President to disregard the debt ceiling:

Obviously, Congress may modify or even extinguish the Social Security or Medicare programs prospectively. But the Republican majority in the House now refuses to permit the country to meet debts duly authorized in the past that remain duly authorized now, unless the Democrats and the President agree to a radical reduction in essential public services that they would never otherwise accept. That is playing blackmail with the nation’s honor. It threatens exactly the kind of forced default that the principle behind the debt clause declares it has no authority to inflict. I believe the best, principled, interpretation of the clause gives the president authority to ignore that blackmail and to borrow enough to meet the nation’s standing legal obligations.

• Song of the week goes out to the House Republican Freshman contingent and their brinksmanship over the debt ceiling. May we hope they're not sorrowfully singing the Verve Pipe's 1996 one hit wonder "The Freshmen" while the economy crashes around them come Tuesday:

For the life of me, I cannot remember
What made us think that we were wise and we'd never compromise

Hide