Rosenberg leads off with his typical bombastiy:
"It didn't take much. Just the power of the presidency, the State of the Union, and the whole country watching.Plus the president's will.And AIPAC's entire campaign to destroy America's chance to reach an agreement with Iran crumbled. Within hours, three senators announced they were no longer cosponsoring AIPAC's bill to kill the Iran negotiations (Gillibrand, Coons and Manchin), and AIPAC's hopes to override Obama's veto ended with a whimper, AIPAC's whimper."As always, you have to love Rosenberg's continual lies about the Iran sanctions bill being a "campaign to destroy America's change to reach an agreement with Iran." I could just as easily call President Obama's decision not to sanction Iran exactly the same thing, because in my opinion additional sanctions are required to keep Iran honest and at the negotiating table. I don't because I, unlike Rosenberg, am aware that people can disagree with me about policy without having evil ulterior motives.
Anyway, three senators pulled out of the Iran sanctions bill (or as Rosenberg would describe it, "AIPAC's bill" because apparently only AIPAC wants Iran sanctioned). I guess that means the bill is dead? I'll defer to Rosenberg on that one.
So how did the Great One defeat the evil Lobby and ring in a new century of happiness for everyone?
"For a dozen years, the centerpiece of AIPAC's annual confab has been fear-mongering about Iran and making members of Congress enact more and more sanctions bills. And then, since Obama announced his breakthrough, they lined up clear majorities in both houses to defeat him. And, yet, with two sentences [at the State of the Union], Obama crushed them."Um, OK. It's almost like AIPAC isn't as all powerful as Rosenberg (and only Rosenberg) claimed them to be. You gotta love how Rosenberg continues to lie and claim that AIPAC and only AIPAC is responsible for the Iran sanctions bills ("making members of Congress enact more and more sanctions bills"). Those poor members of Congress, dancing on strings controlled by
Rosenberg continues to push the idea of disloyal Jews by quoting an AIPAC leader:
"In 1983 or thereabouts, during my four-year stint at AIPAC, I asked Tom Dine, its executive director, if a president of the United States could ever defeat the lobby, even in a case where U.S. national security interests, and lives, were clearly at stake.Dine responded that AIPAC would win on matters not directly related to U.S. national security but not on an issue that was.He elaborated: We can never defeat a president who reaches over the heads of AIPAC and Congress and invokes his prerogatives as president of the United States or, even more, the national interest.The logic behind Dine's thinking was simply that American Jews would never allow themselves to be perceived as putting Israel's interests over America's because, to put it simply, they don't. And the perception that they do is dangerous."No wonder Rosenberg left AIPAC. He wouldn't be able to spread his lies about disloyal Jews when AIPAC itself wasn't disloyal. But enough about Dine's opinions, let's hear Rosenberg's!
"That is why any criticism of the lobby that even hints at the lobby's putting Israel's interests above America's produces such fury, hence the hysteria over the use of the term "Israel Firster."American Jews will not tolerate the suggestion that they are anything but good Americans. Fighting a president over a national security issue is simply not sustainable. Especially when it is only the fat cats of the lobby and not the Jewish community at large that is opposing the president. That is the case now."This is the typical Rosenberg tripe. Anyone who opposes the president (well, President Obama) is "not a good American." What's wrong with calling anyone who disagrees with me an "Israel Firster"? The fact that you get upset about having your loyalty questioned proves you're disloyal!
We weren't monitoring Rosenberg or the Huffington Post during the Bush years. But if you go through his archive, I'm confident you won't find many blog posts declaring anyone who disagrees with Bush to be a "____ Firster" or "anything but good Americans." This is the typical hypocrisy we can expect from partisans like Rosenberg.
But don't worry, it's not ALL American Jews who are "Israel Firsters". It's only the
Rosenberg wraps up with what everyone besides him already knew:
"It appears that the president is starting to understand that. Tragically, Obama is not likely to defeat the monied special interests on matters like guns or income inequality, but he can defeat them on foreign policy. That is because when it comes to matters like risking U.S. security and American lives, it is impossible for even the most powerful lobby to defeat him."Most lobbies only have so much influence. This isn't news to anyone besides Rosenberg. If only he had accurately described AIPAC as a lobby like any other, then he wouldn't have been so surprised when they don't get their way, which happens all the time.