2/3 of McLaughlin Group devoted to Israeli politics?

[kynn]

(I realize that this post will have me branded, instantly, as an "antisemite", because that's the reality of political discussion about Israel in the US today, but that's the breaks. The only question is by whom.)

I just watched the McLaughlin Group and I am shocked, SHOCKED!, that about 2/3 of the show's time was devoted to Israeli politics (on the occasion of the political vacuum created by Sharon's incapacitation). Even America-firster Pat Buchanan was deeply engaged in this discussion! He seems to have burnt much midnight oil boning up on Israeli politics. What on earth is going on here??? Are we a colony of Israel? I don't think I have ever seen so much time of an American political discussion show devoted to the internal politics of another country.

The media has received well-deserved condemnation for its unwillingness to tell the American public the truth about many important issues, but of all these issues, the one that takes the cake<1> is the relationship between the US and Israel. I think the public deserves to understand why its political commentators feel it is more important to discuss the internal politics of a tiny country the size of New Jersey than our own.

kj

<1> With the possible exception of the issue of the Democrat's possivity in congress, which is a hidden but colossal scandal in its own right.

[Dudley_DUright]

1. Yes, but the other third was devoted to the crucial issue of

British pubs being allowed to stay open later. :beer: :sarcasm:

[acmavm]

2. Although they devoted very little time to the Abramoff scandal I was

totally shocked, amazed, and surprised at some of the comments. They ALL agreed (even fat Tony) that it was a repub scandal. And Pat Buchannan said it was the biggest scandal during his lifetime.

Which idiot said it wouldn't be as big as Watergate? I missed that one remark.

[kynn]

4. ...huge scandal but...

...even Eleanor Clift rated the Democrats' ability to profit politically from it a 4 (out of 10).

I think it is highly significant that the wimpiness of the Democrats in Congress has been turned into an old, tired joke, something that commentators throw into the banter for comic relief, and not treated as a massive scandal in its own right, possibly even the mirror image of the Abramoff scandal.

[acmavm]

6. There might be some big surprises coming down the pike for people

who think like you.

At one time I was sure that we'd never get rid of DeLay or Cunningham or Ney.

I was wrong. You may be too.

[Wilms]

10. And it figures she knew nothing about Boulis, except Ney's slam.

Very disappointing.

[peekaloo]

9. I think fat Toadie made the "not bigger than Watergate" remark

because "the President and Vice President wouldn't be brought down because of it".

I, too, was shocked to hear Blankley say it was Repug scandal, so shocked I giggled.

[GrumpyGreg]

3. I can't imagine why you would waste your time even watching

The McLaughlin Group.

[enigma000]

5. World news focused on New Orleans in September

for over a week. Is the whole world a colony of the US?

[kynn]

7. No comparison...

World news focused on New Orleans in September for over a week. Is the whole world a colony of the US?

The comparison is quite weak, for at least three reasons:

1. The destruction, largely due to neglect, of a major city in the world's most powerful country is more newsworthy than the departure from public office of the prime minister of some minuscule country half a world away. The latter is relatively routine (I bet it happens every year at least once), while the former was simply unprecedented.
   



2. The US media is notorious, compared to the international media, for devoting little attention to politics outside the US. This is not a commendable trait, but it is unquestionably true, and hence the deviation from this norm that I noted in my original post is highly significant.



3. The idea that the rest of the world is a colony of the US may be an exaggeration but only a mild one. As the last remaining superpower, it's a rather abusive one, one that has little regard for the wishes of the rest of the world, in particular with respect to the exploitation of the world's natural resources, the US does behave in many ways as a colonial power vis-a-vis the rest of the world.

In light of all this, to see an American political analysis show devote most of its time to the politics of a remote country the size of New Jersey is highly noteworthy. As Michael Kinsley has written, Israel, or rather the US-Israel relationship, is the proverbial elephant in the room.

[karynnj]

11. Israel has been a place where the peace of the world

has been vulnerable since 1949 (and likely before when it was part of a British protecturate). This is a very tenuous time and who the leader is makes a huge difference. Sharon, a chief architech of the settlements turned 180 degrees and gave up the idea of a Greater Israel. This, and the death of Arafat, openned a window of opportunity. Admittedly, I would believe "peace" when I saw it, but some of the likely successors may not be able to do what Sharon was moving to do.

The interest is not just the special relationship with Israel (as with England), but the liklihood that chaos in Israel will make the ME even worse.

[NYCGirl]

8. You have a problem with ONE HALF HOUR TV SHOW?

Seriously, take a breath, dude.