Wednesday, October 14, 2009

The real reason Chris Mathews and his left-liberal Jewish panel declined to play 'Hardball' on Israel

Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss notes that Chris Mathews had left-leaning (Jewish) investigative journalists David Corn of Mother Jones and Michael Isikoff of Newsweek on Hardball yesterday to talk about Liz Cheney's new think tank, Keep America Safe , and while the trio yucked it up about how it is essentially yet another Neocon front financed by guys like (Jewish Zionist) hawk Sheldon Adelson and prominently features (Jewish Zionist) Neocons like William Kristol, there was no mention whatsoever made about the Israel-connection, nor about ginning up yet another war for Israel being a motive behind the creation of the new organization.

Weiss says Mathews subtly served up the opportunity for both Corn and Isikoff to raise the subject of Israel without bringing it up directly himself, and each demurred.
"The segment was a disgraceful charade. Adelson and Kristol care about Israel. That is the core of their political engagement. That is why Kristol, a proudly parochial Jew, wants to attack Iran. The subject was never broached...What is the role of Jewish money in our politics, and how much of that Jewish giving is wrapped around a dedication to the Jewish state? How many liberal hawks also care about Israel? Why did Chuck Schumer vote for the Iraq war? Why did Hillary? Matthews would never cut Christians a break in a similar religious/political context."

Good point. If Corn and Isikoff had been a couple of Catholics, and the Iraq war had been fought on behalf of the Vatican, as dedicated members of the left-liberal media, they would have been all over the subject in a second, and would be pounding away at whether or not the Vatican was behind the gestating war with Iran, and whether deep-pocket Catholics were funding think tanks out of loyalty to the Vatican.

The question is, did Mathews give Corn and Isikoff a "pass" because they are Jews, or because Jewish money is by far the largest block of funding behind the Democratic Party , and because the party has disproportionately large numbers of Jewish Zionists in national elective office and in the party's hierarchy?

I submit that Chris Mathews is just another party hack who doesn't want to raise the issue of Israel mainly because it would damage the Democratic Party if its rank and file realized that party dogma is being formulated primarily at the behest of Zionism in much of the foreign-policy realm, and at the behest of pseudo-secular, left-liberal Jewish interests in much of the domestic-policy realm. Raising the issue of Israel and Jewish money in the Democratic Party opens up a can of worms that left-liberal phonies, who want to continue to shuck, jive and deceive their way into authoritarian power, don't want opened. Ever.

And I further submit that Corn and Isikoff didn't want to open the can of worms for the same reason.

Just like the Judeofascist-Right and its useful idiots, the Judeofascist-Left and its useful idiots all tend to be closed-mouthed and cohesive on the subjects of American wars for Israel and the role of Jewish Zionist money and influence on party policy. In both cases, such a discussion would betray the corrupt, unprincipled and venal nature of each party's hierarchy.

On a sidebar, while apparently David Corn did acknowledge on Hardball that the Neocons are spawn of the "Communist/Trotskyite/Stalinist sectarians of the 30s" (as Weiss puts it) Corn failed to acknowledge that his own statist, centralizing and deeply disingenuous, Zionist-coddling left-liberal politics are spawn of the same heritage. -- By Chris Moore

No comments: