The Next Hurrah: Marty Marty Marty

« CT-Sen: Memo To The Press: It's MARE - IH - DEN Not MER-ID-E-AN | Main | What CT Wants IS What The Country Wants »

August 09, 2006

Marty Marty Marty

by emptywheel

I'm going to take a guess and say that Marty Peretz has been designated as the guy who will give Joementum cover for joining the Republican party, in fact if not in name. I say that for two reasons. First, there's this little bit of nuttiness:

Worse can be said of Bill Clinton's stumping in Connecticut for Joe (and Hillary's endorsement, too.) When Clinton came into the state, Lieberman and Lamont were running dead even in the polls, more or less. Clinton's appearance began Lieberman's decline. Within two or three days, Lieberman was down by ten points. (In the last few days of the campaign, Lieberman recovered considerably ... but not enough.)

Obviously, Marty is wrong on the facts. Clinton's campaigning came after Joementum saw he was losing big. Clinton came in. Joementum made up lost ground.

So what's the reason for Marty's delusions? Well, it probably has to do with the fact that Clinton said he will support the winner of the primary (and Hillary has already sent off a big check to that effect). The guy who helped Joementum keep this close is about to endorse his opponent. So Marty does Joementum's backstabbing for him, diminishing the value of a Clinton endorsement just before he endorses Joementum's opponent. Hey Bill?!?! After Joementum's shiv during Monicagate, did you really expect any better behavior this time?

And then there's Marty's earlier nuttiness (yeah, I know, someone must have doubled his dose of stupid pills). Well, perhaps not nuttiness. Rather, honesty and cowardice. You see, Marty admitted on Hugh Hewitt's show that he doesn't really want the Democrats to take back Congress.

HH: Do you want the Democrats to win majorities in the House or the Senate, Martin Peretz?

MP: I'm...I'm appalled by some of the people who would become head of Congressional committees.

HH: Is that a no?

MP: Uh, but I'm also appalled by some of the shenanigans...

HH: But is that...I've got five seconds. Is that a no, Martin Peretz?

MP: It's a cowardly refusal to answer.

HH: (laughing) Okay. We'll carry it on, later. Martin Peretz, thanks.

Now, to figure out who and what he's talking about, it might pay to look at who else is peddling similar scaremongering at precisely the same time. Such as the GOP, in a smear that extended from internal party meetings to the most remote extremes of online shillery. See the similarity between this talking point and Marty Peretz' fears?

Remember, should the Democrats take over the House of Representatives, Dingell would chair the Energy and Commerce Committee. Dingell is also one of only eight, count ‘em, EIGHT, Democrats who did not chose to vote in favor of the recent House Resolution supporting Israel against terrorist aggression.

What a coinkydink! Now I'm sure the GOP is afraid of Henry Waxman with subpoena power (thing of beauty, if you ask me). Perhaps Marty is too. But I find it really curious that both Marty and the GOP are afraid of John Dingell, Mr. Clean Air, Mr. Medicare. Of course, the GOP also throws in Dingell's even-handedness on the Middle East, which may be the real issue for Marty, too.

Hey Marty??? What's your problem with Clean Air? Or is your real problem, like that of the GOP, that John Dingell advocates fairness in the Middle East?

Whatever Marty's reasons, by attacking Clinton's value as well as future Democratic Committee Chairs, Marty's spewing precisely the same line as the GOP. Marty, as self-appointed spokesman for Joementum, seems to be facilitating Joementum's rejection of the Democrats and adoption of GOP talking points.

August 09, 2006 at 09:29 in Contributor--emptywheel, Elections--2006, Press and Media, Republicans | Permalink

Comments

nice job of connecting some dots.

looks like you might have exposed one of the republican themes for fall 2006.

Posted by: orionATL | August 09, 2006 at 10:01

nice job of connecting some dots.

looks like you might have exposed one of the republican themes for fall 2006.

Posted by: orionATL | August 09, 2006 at 10:02

Joe ought to just change parties.
I might even respect him a little for that clarity.
But will he do that, the honorable thing?
Fuck no, becuase he is a coward and a weasel.
Rip my flesh weasel boy.

Posted by: John B. | August 09, 2006 at 10:55

What people fail to understand is that the current version of "Zionism" that is dominant in both Israel and among a significant group of American Jews is better defined as "Jabotinskyism." This is the old far-right perversion of Zionism that looked favorably on Mussolini's fascists in the 1930s and was willing as late as 1938 to come to an accommodation with the Nazis. From the ascension of Likud to majority status in Israel in the late 1970s, this philosophy has become the dominant political power in Israel in exactly the same way "movement conservatism" has in the United States. And Jabotinsky-Zionism has about as much to do with actual Zionism as American neocon "movement conservatism" has to do with actual conservatism.

Guys like Peretz are really neocons, so no wonder he's upset at the thought of the Democrats taking power in Congress.

I think it's time to recognize The New Republican and that group of GOP shills for the turncoats they are, and to let Peretz go bankrupt keeping his little toilet paper factory in operation.

Posted by: TCinLA | August 09, 2006 at 11:01

It is all about keeping US arms flowing to Israel. Nothing else matters to Mr. Peretz.

Posted by: Powerpuff | August 09, 2006 at 11:29

knock knock Marty, knock knock Joe, knock knock Lanny, the people came to your door last night, can you hear them now? They are the voice, not you.

Posted by: mainsailset | August 09, 2006 at 11:39

The GOP is terrified of the prospect of losing control of Congress not only because of the subpeona power, but because this will stop the rubberstamping that has enabled this most unamerican of presidents to continue to undermine the our most fundemental and closely held liberties.

I can image that there will be quite a scramble to get Specter's bill passed along with the "protect the President at all costs" rewriting of the War Criminal's code that are coming up. The next Congress won't be so amenable to this sort of imperial behavior.

Posted by: yam | August 09, 2006 at 13:07

Dingell is so easily understandable you have to wonder what kind of political suicide the likes of Marty Peretz expect of elected officials. His District includes perhaps the largest Arab American and Muslim American communities in the country -- roughly centered on Dearborn, and if he didn't represent their interests, Dingell would be long gone. And while that community has existed for many years -- it has grown substantially over the last decade.

The Peretz issue has a great deal to do with the most healthy and intelligent way to build political coalitions within the Democratic Party. At its root, this problem emerged in the wake of the Civil Rights movement when black democratic voters had to be fully integrated into the coalition -- receive authentic influence in policy circles, be supported for elective office, accorded power in congress based on seniority. Now what that means is if the Dem's win the House -- Conyers will head Judiciary and Rangle will head Ways and Means, and Peretz and those who politically calculate as he does really don't want that arrangement in the Democratic Party or Congress. If the Democratic Party proves able to open the Coalition up fully to the new voting block of Latino's -- elect their representatives, and eventually move those into positions of power and influence, Peretz's calculations understand that as a zero sum game, and they will fight it. At some juncture Peretz will need to be pushed out of the circle of influence with the help of Democratic Jewish Politicians who do not share Peretz's ideology -- people such as Waxman, Finegold, Levin, and perhaps Boxer and Finestein. Dropping back to my posts here about the 1990 Minnesota Senate Campaign between Wellstone and Boschwitz -- and the "Bad Jew" letter that Boschwitz threw into the mix in the last days of that campaign, -- this has been ongoing for a good long time. In fact, this season yet another chapter of it is being played out in my CD. With Martin Sabo's retirement, one of the most safe Democratic Seats in the country is open, and the DFL nominated an African American Muslim to it. The primary is in early September, and the DLC is here with the money trying to challenge the party endorsement, supporting one of the DLC founders for the seat. But having been through that with the Wellstone campaigns decisions have been taken that are enlightening. Keith Ellison is literally campaigning out of Temple Israel -- and the suburban Jewish Community Center -- they are sponsoring the debates and forums, and helping raise Ellison's money. I recently received an invite to a joint Somali Community/Jewish Community campaign event. (We have one of the largest Somali Refugee populations in the Country, and they are becoming Citizens and joining the DFL). That is not precisely what Peretz has in mind as the future Democratic Coalition.

Posted by: Sara | August 09, 2006 at 13:19

Actually, Dingell COULD be less fair on Israel. His half of Dearborn is more of the white working class/rich Ford exec half. And the center of population currently is Ann Arbor/Ypsi. Still a lot of Arab-Americans, though, compared to your typical CD.

It's Conyers that has the big chunk of Dearborn's Arab-American population, though.

Posted by: emptywheel | August 09, 2006 at 13:29

Per My DD and FDL, ABC reporting that Rove has contacted Lieberman saying, "the boss wants to help."
I don't buy it for a second. I think Rove's been helping since January, but it's nice for Ned, nonetheless.
OT, imo TURNOUT was as much a wakeup to all US politicians as the Ned win.
FDL reporting that Barbara Boxer endoresed Ned this morning.

Posted by: John Casper | August 09, 2006 at 13:36

Lieberman is SO in a bind. It is delicious to watch. I cannot forsee him winning in November short of a Lamont meltdown, and Ned has already proven his talent.

Posted by: crab nebula | August 09, 2006 at 13:44

TCinLA,

Do you have references on "Jabotinskyism"? It sounds like a useful term for our political vocabulary.

Posted by: KdmFromPhila | August 09, 2006 at 16:19

first they ignore you

then they ridicule you

then they fight you

then you win

fortunatly for us, the repuglicans are too dumb to realize that they should be fighting us now

the repuglicans are going to ridicule the Democrats into majority status in both houses of Congress

fear mongering only works when people belive the outcome would be bad

Posted by: freepatriot | August 09, 2006 at 16:21

Stamford Advocate and AP reporting that Lieberman fired campaign manager and spokeswoman.

Posted by: John Casper | August 09, 2006 at 16:53

Hmm. I wonder ... fired before they could quit?

Posted by: al-Fubar | August 09, 2006 at 18:23

While I am sure some would disagree with me, I think the Jabotinskyism idea set is well covered in Avi Shlaim's "The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World" Norton, 2001. Shlaim is native to Iran, but grew up and was educated in Israel, but teaches at Oxford. Shlaim is one of the "revisionary" historians who began research and publication in the late 1980's when archives both in London and Israel became available regarding the pre-48 and the early post 48 period. These historians challenged many of the founding myths -- and thus are controversial particularly in the US, but are quite mainstream in Israel. Other authors in this collective would be Benny Morris, Simha Flapan, Ilan Pappe, and I would add for good measure a non-historian, Baruch Kimmerling, Professor of Sociology at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The Nation and the New York Review of Books on occassion commission articles from this collective -- so you may find it useful to google them, and see what might be available on line.

Posted by: Sara | August 09, 2006 at 22:04

Posted by: Sara | August 09, 2006 at 22:06

Just a small correction. Shlaim is actually from an Iraqi Jewish Family. You can read an interview with him by The Nation:

Interview With Middle East Scholar Avi Shlaim: America, Israel and the Middle East.

Definitely worth a read if you are interested in these issues.

Posted by: tgs | August 09, 2006 at 23:22