-
Benedict and the Harlots
February 12, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Too Much Brotherhood
January 23, 2013 | 10 comments
-
Does Egypt Need Advance Aircraft?
December 11, 2012 | 15 comments
-
Clash of Civilizations Department (cont.)
December 1, 2012 | 8 comments
-
Another Blow to the Democracy Export Industry?
March 23, 2012 | 7 comments
The Spectacle Blog
In what has got to be a prizewinning display of that peculiar skill that consists of joining chutzpah with execrable taste, California’s Henry Waxman, a leading liberal, blames the loss of one of the safest Democratic seats in Congress on rich Jews. The voters in New York’s Ninth, which encompasses parts of Queens and Brooklyn, elected businessman Bob Turner to fill the seat vacated by Anthony Weiner, who resigned because he was caught waving his member on YouTube, or something.
In the special election, the Democrats nominated David Weprin, a former NYC councilman who happens to be an Orthodox Jew and whose family has long been prominently involved in the politics of this district, which is about 25 percent Jewish and which has not elected a Republican to Congress since 1920. In a pre-emptive strike against the negative PR such a loss represents for his party and particularly its most liberal wing, Rep. Waxman told the Hill even before the votes were counted that rich Jews voted their pocketbooks, seeing as how Republicans are soft on the rich. It does not strike him, perhaps, that voters might not want to be represented by a party that embraces sex maniacs and that is perceived as down on Israel.
But anyway, why shouldn’t the rich vote for their interests, up to and including for a party that promotes and protects wealth? Does Waxman, who is a rich freeloader off the American taxpayer, complain when union members vote their interests to protect their advantages over other workers, which include keeping those workers out of the labor market? And why should not a constituency that cares about American policy toward Israel not send a message to a party that is following its leader in what appears to be an anti-Israel direction?
Irving Kristol noted long ago that for all manners of historical and sentimental reasons, the Jews seem to be the only group — if such they still are — in America that votes against its own interests, and he reproached them for it. In a recent book Norman Podhoretz made the same case at somewhat greater length.
Rep. Waxman, who represents California’s 30th Congressional District, which includes Santa Monica, Malibu, Beverly Hills, and a few other proletarian neighborhoods, perhaps liked it that way because so long as Jews vote against their own best interests, they will elect the likes of Henry Waxman. Observe in passing, however, that his attitude is almost beyond caricature. He has no idea what level of prosperity the Jews of the 9th district have attained; the truth is that, economically, it remains one of the relatively mixed New York districts, with plenty of Jews — and Chinese — who earn a lot less than sanctimonious Congressmen.
View all comments (22) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Roger Kaplan
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/09/16/waxman-blames-rich-jews
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
martin j smith| 9.16.11 @ 11:47AM
Waxman sounds like a name of Jewish origins. However, I have no idea that this guy has any connection with Judaism at all including any level of observance. He sounds like a self-loathing Jew ( if he is Jewish ) otherwise is just an ordinary Anti-Semite. This kind of rhetoric fits right in to Obama's civility crusade.
If Waxman considers himself a Jew I would label him a false Jew. Sadly within the ranks of the Socialist Party( formerly the democrat(ic ? ) Party
there are many of these. Adolph Hitler would be smiling in his grave.--
Mike w| 9.17.11 @ 9:06AM
Of course Waxman is Jewish. The writer should have said this but instead he chose to imply that Waxman is an anti-semite.
ds80| 9.17.11 @ 11:30AM
Of course Waxman is Jewish
And how do you know this? We are supposed to believe it just because the high and mighty Mikey said so?
martin at least said he did not know.
Oldefarte| 9.16.11 @ 12:03PM
Wait "Waxman Blames Rich Jews"....are you sure Paul didn't instead claim that? Joking aside, Irving Krystol had it right, in that Jews have historically voted against their own best interests in supporting Democrats [whole ultra-leader in the WH currently has brazenly come out of the Democrats' closet in his shamefully throwing Israel under the international bus]. Koch rightfully summoned the Jews of that NY district to SEND A MESSAGE with their vote, and they obviously did so, thank goodness [and here's hoping they continue to do so through November of next year and beyond]!!!!!
martin j smith| 9.16.11 @ 1:15PM
The hateful rhetoric on the LEFT in more dangerous than many realize. Apparently Mayor Bloomberg talks of riots if the unemployment levels do not improve. In this I smell a rat in which Bloomberg says he thinks Obama has good ideas--so I guess if Obama does not get support
riots will happen and are justified !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,
Waxman's rhetoric is dangerous on many levels not just Anti-Semitic, They contribute to our social breakdown.
CalMark| 9.16.11 @ 3:15PM
If anyone but a Democrat had said this, an obvious observation would be made. Imagine if a Republican had said something similar. Yet no one has made the necessary comment, so I will:
Waxman (and anyone who says the things he did) is a bigoted creep.
Trinacria| 9.16.11 @ 3:42PM
The Jews?!!!!! Shazam! And here I was thinking it George Bush's fault all along...
Occam's Tool| 9.17.11 @ 2:25AM
Yup, Waxman's Jewish. And an asswipe. And a Liberal---although that's a redundancy---Liberal and asswipe.
It's nice to see my brethren starting to vote Republican, since the Republican party is firmly in favor of Jewish values, unlike the Democrats.
C Bowen | 9.16.11 @ 7:31PM
If they were voting for their pocketbook, that would be an improvement.
If they were voting regarding policy towards a country not their own, then Kaplan is alleging dual loyalty, a place the loathsome Waxman did not go.
FastJohnny| 9.16.11 @ 10:19PM
I disagree, I am not Jewish and I very much dislike the way the present administration is handling the situation with Israel. It could certainly be one of the factors that would decide my voting preferences among many other things, which would also include my wallet.
C Bowen | 9.17.11 @ 6:41AM
I agree in so far as Obama has sent Israel and other Middle Eastern countries billions and billions in foreign aid, when of course, we should not be propping up socialist states like Israel or any of the Islamist states.
That is what you meant, right?
Occam's Tool| 9.17.11 @ 2:26AM
No, Mr. Bowen, opposing Islamism and Sharia is in the Jews' best interest. That would mean supporting Israel.
C Bowen | 9.17.11 @ 6:38AM
So are they Jews or Americans?
Wait--you thought Iraq was scary, yet you continue to comment on foreign policy issues? LOL
Mike w| 9.17.11 @ 9:09AM
Many conservative Jews appear to be Israelis first. If the USS Liberty happens today you will hear how those 34 murdered US sailors had it coming. They must have provoked the Israeli jets over the course of 3 hours while they were being bombed and strafed.
Occam's Tool| 9.17.11 @ 9:31PM
No, I don't say that the men of the USS Liberty deserved anything bad. What happened to them was dreadful I do note that the leader of the raid, Iftach Spector, has/had a history of having his head up his ass.
But I do note that you gentlemen seem to ignore the problem of radical Islam. You also don't look at population numbers or dynamics. Eventually that will bite you in the ass, and then people like me will have a tougher job than we would otherwise if you had nipped the problem in the bud, like Hitler in the Ruhr in the 30s.
Now the problem is Iran getting Nukes. Bowen, you have the historical understanding of Clint.
C Bowen | 9.18.11 @ 12:06PM
I do understand about Iran.
That was one of the reasons I was against the Iraq war, which the Iranian Agent Chalabi and his neocon/traitorcon friends in DC, manufactured a bogus document that claimed Saddam had purchased yellow-cake.
I suspect the investigation into who pulled that caper is going as well as OJ's search for the real killers.
The point is that you have no credibility to speak on foreign policy issues since you thought Iraq was a threat.
Secondly, Kapalan pulls that typical neocon switcheroo where he accuses a group of dual loyalty--only in a good way, dontchaknow.
bluecollarbytes| 9.16.11 @ 8:25PM
'Voting in one's best interests' bothers me somehow. Perhaps it's because so many special self-interest groups have already twisted the govt/citizen relationship into knots, which also has the effect of having indebted future generations not yet born.
but if the issue of Israel is in 'one's best interests', that's a different matter altogether. Go Israel, you'll have the U.S. as a true ally again in less than 15 months. You can hold off against a forced palestinian state till then.
Oldefarte| 9.17.11 @ 3:46PM
'....we should not be propping up socialist states like Israel or any of the Islamist states...' SHAZAM, and I thought Israel was a CAPTALISTIC country....EXCREMENT!!!!
'.....If the USS Liberty happens today you will hear how those 34 murdered US sailors had it coming. They must have provoked the Israeli jets over the course of 3 hours while they were being bombed and strafed....' Joke: What's the difference between the USS Liberty and the USS Cole? A. The first was attacked by accident by the Israelies [friendly fire] who later apologized for same; while the second was purposely attacked, and the Arab Muslim country from which its state sponsored attackers come from refulled to allow the FBI to investigate same.
HEY STUPIDS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Clint| 9.17.11 @ 4:45PM
'USS Liberty' veterans demand investigation
Jun. 3, 2007 12:00 AM
Conclusions submitted in October 2003 to the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense by the USS Liberty Veterans Association, Inc., in demanding a congressional investigation into the aborted rescue during the attack of the USS Liberty and subsequent alleged cover-up.
The group also calls for a new Naval Court of Inquiry and that June 8 be officially recognized as USS Liberty Remembrance Day.
1. That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against USS Liberty, the world's most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 173 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of 70 percent, in a crew of 294);
2. That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on USS Liberty's bridge and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;
3. That the torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but the machine-gunning of Liberty's firefighters and stretcher-bearers as they struggled to save their ship and crew; the Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded;
4. That there is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA Director Richard Helms, former NSA Directors Lt. Gen. William Odom, USA (Ret.), Adm. Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret.), and Marshal Carter; former NSA deputy directors Oliver Kirby and Maj. Gen. John Morrison, USAF (Ret.); and former Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon in 1967;
5. That in attacking USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States;
6. That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty by recalling Sixth Fleet military rescue support while the ship was under attack; evidence of the recall of rescue aircraft is supported by statements of Capt. Joe Tully, Commanding Officer of the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, and Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis, the Sixth Fleet carrier division commander, at the time of the attack; never before in American naval history has a rescue mission been cancelled when an American ship was under attack;
7. That although Liberty was saved from almost certain destruction through the heroic efforts of the ship's captain, William L. McGonagle (MOH), and his brave crew, surviving crewmembers were later threatened with "court-martial, imprisonment or worse" if they exposed the truth; and were abandoned by their own government;
8. That due to the influence of Israel's powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people;
9. That due to continuing pressure by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, this attack remains the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress; to this day, no surviving crewmember has been permitted to officially and publicly testify about the attack;
10. That there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history; the existence of such a cover-up is now supported by statements of Rear Adm. Merlin Staring, USN (Ret.), former Judge Advocate General of the Navy; and Capt. Ward Boston, USN, (Ret.), the chief counsel to the Navy's 1967 Court of Inquiry of Liberty attack;
11. That the truth about Israel's attack and subsequent White House cover-up continues to be officially concealed from the American people to the present day and is a national disgrace;
12. That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel's interests when they conflict with American interests; this policy, evidenced by the failure to defend USS Liberty and the subsequent official cover-up of the Israeli attack, endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States.
Occam's Tool| 9.17.11 @ 9:34PM
What should we have done to Britain over the Cambridge Five, Clint? Nuke 'em?
Wayne| 9.17.11 @ 8:35PM
Who's Henry Waxman? How is he relevant?
Occam's Tool| 9.17.11 @ 9:33PM
Mr. Waxman is a powerful Democratic long serving rep from CA, Wayne. And a blithering idiot. Of course, like calling Paulbots antisemitic, that is redundant.