Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumSecret Donors Finance Fight Against Hagel
<snip>
"A brand new conservative group calling itself Americans for a Strong Defense and financed by anonymous donors is running advertisements urging Democratic senators in five states to vote against Chuck Hagel, President Obamas nominee to be secretary of defense, saying he would make the United States a weaker country.
Another freshly minted and anonymously backed organization, Use Your Mandate, which presents itself as a liberal gay rights group but purchases its television time through a prominent Republican firm, is attacking Mr. Hagel as anti-Gay, anti-woman and anti-Israel in ads and mailers.
Those groups are joining at least five others that are organizing to stop Mr. Hagels confirmation, a goal even they acknowledge appears to be increasingly challenging. But the effort comes with a built-in consolation prize should it fail: depleting some of Mr. Obamas political capital as he embarks on a new term with fresh momentum.
The media campaign to scuttle Mr. Hagels appointment, unmatched in the annals of modern presidential cabinet appointments, reflects the continuing effects of the Supreme Courts 2010 Citizens United decision, which loosened campaign finance restrictions and was a major reason for the record spending by outside groups in the 2012 election. All told, these independent and largely secretly financed groups spent well over $500 million in an attempt to defeat Mr. Obama and the Democrats, a failure that seemed all the greater given the huge amounts spent."
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/us/politics/secret-donors-finance-fight-against-hagel.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Weird that Obama nominated Hagel when people were saying "The Lobby" would never allow such a thing to take place.
Perhaps some myths are being shattered finally.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Sometimes you've got to call it how it is, oberliner.
On the other hand individuals like Adelson, not so much. Didn't he waste a ton of $$ on Gingrich?
Isn't it more correct to say that "The Lobby" would try to bar a (perceived) anti-Israel appointment to go through, and "The Lobby" is very well connected in DC? In spite of taking a back seat on the Hagel appointment, there seems to be enough noise in the air suggesting that AIPAC isn't exactly pleased by Hagel. Perhaps AIPAC, as with the US "leading from behind" foreign policy strategy, finds that current circumstances (political heat) make it expedient to play it low-key while making moves in private, in 1-on-1 sessions etc. Anyway, we'll see how the Hagel appointment turns out. If the appointment doesn't fail it will show that "The Lobby" isn't omnipotent, but it takes more than one occurrence to suggest anything of real note.
Same goes for "The Wall St. Lobby". It most certainly exists and is powerful, but isn't omnipotent.
I do wish that people like Adelson saw the world a bit differently. For example, I think that promoting Israel's health care system as being one of a few good examples during the US health care debates might've been a positive thing for both Israel's image and for US progressive/liberal resolve. Opinion polls showed that a move (in the debate) in that direction would have been very well received by a majority of the american public.
But the right wing that Adelson hangs with, Gingrich and co., can't be happy with that aspect of Israeli policy, and so it goes...
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Not sure why you would even bring them up.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)snip*In a statement Tuesday, Schumer said Hagel addressed his concerns over Israel and Iran during a 90-minute Monday meeting at the White House, saying the former Nebraska senator had been forthcoming and sincere. Regarding Iran, Schumer said Hagel rejected a containment strategy regarding the country and said the U.S. would do whatever it takes to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
Planning military contingencies against Iran would be Hagels top priority as defense secretary, Schumer said.
snip* Moreover, Hagel told Schumer that he backs unilateral sanctions against Iran. On Hezbollah, Hagel pointed to past comments in which he referred to it as a terrorist group. And despite previously calling for direct talks with leaders of Hamas, Hagel said he now believes there should be no negotiations with Hamas, Hezbollah or any other terrorist group until they renounce violence and recognize Israels right to exist.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/chuck-schumer-says-hell-support-chuck-hagels-nomination-86215.html
delrem
(9,688 posts)I wouldn't've posted my reply if I read this first.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)And if the lobby is not 100% successful 100% of the time that is more "proof" it's
a myth they yield any power.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)<snip>
"Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) on Tuesday became the first Republican to indicate he would vote to confirm Chuck Hagel as defense secretary.
Democrats appear to be lining up behind Hagels confirmation, but so far six Repulicans have said they will vote against Obamas pick.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Monday he was prepared to place a hold on Hagels nomination until Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testifies on the Benghazi attacks. With Democrats holding 55 Senate seats, at least four more Republicans would need to join Cochran to eliminate the threat of a filibuster on Hagels nomination."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/01/30/gop-sen-cochran-will-back-hagel/
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)MJ Rosenberg @MJayRosenberg
I spent a couple of hours with Hagel a few years ago. Talked about Israel. Happily, he is lying today & knows it. He'll be a good SeDef.
5:30 PM - 31 Jan 13
oberliner
(58,724 posts)He is a riot.