FURTHER: Same author who dumped on Beto O, talking up Jay Inslee??? That's talking up a guy for VP. Whose money backs Inslee?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Given the Ilhan Omar commentary and the over-the-top "She blasphemes" response from a segment of our people; Haaretz published today a sympathetic item on Beto, and his past experience on Israel Zionist voting. Beto seems silent now and not going as far as other Democratic Party presidential contenders on dissecting the Omar storm in a way cordial to Omar instead of saluting Likud, while not publicly caving in either. It touches again the core question; what is proportional and what instead is exceptional expectations; being met. And in fairness, Beto had to run against such a hateful evil egreigious and unctions man, who'd have gladly worked days and nights as Bibi's butler if that would have assured keeping his Senate seat.
But it is go to Washington DC, learn the straddle; and Omar has courageously if inartfully called the straddle into question, in the sense of how far bending over backwards for one constituency is simply bending too far? The tactic of shouting "anti-Semetic" anytime some person feels the itch can be an overplayed card, as the little boy crying "Wolf" too often seeing a dilemma because nobody really listened anymore when the real wolf came.
____________UPDATE_____________
The Haaretz item on Beto reflects the Second Omar comment, the vexation over "allegiance" to another nation being expected; whereas her "Benjamins" comment may be reflected by websearch "Miriam-Adelson" which returns several items about a complex personality, a pro-Zionist medical clinician and clinic founder and more, e.g. Jerusalem Post, Fortune, and Hadassah Mag items. Any such search shows how she and spouse hold great wealth and use it proactively in promotion of politics of their choice. The Adelsons own a popular free Israeli "newspaper" outlet; see, e.g., this item published there about Ilhan Omar and figure for yourself whether it makes even a marginal attempt at a level of objectivity, or is primarily or perhaps totally shrill name-calling propaganda.
Last to prove U.S. Jewish opinion is not slavishly nailed to any part of the U.S. political spectrum, though frequently favoring Israel and Zionism as a nation and objective and a topic of interest, online today, "Level of Idiocy Continues to Rise," noting recently passed Israeli legislation reported per Jerusalem Post, here and here. That author and the Adelsons may be thought to disagree; e.g., this excerpt:
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who grew up in or around Omar’s Fifth Congressional District in Minnesota, wrote a very strong column about Omar and Israel a week ago. In it, Friedman agreed with Omar about the noxious influence that AIPAC — the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — has wielded and continues to wield in Congress.
Friedman wrote: “I believe Aipac for many years has not only become a rubber stamp on the right-wing policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which has resulted in tens of thousands of Israeli settlers now ensconced in the heart of the West Bank, imperiling Israel as a democracy. Aipac has also been responsible for making support for Israel a Republican cause, not a bipartisan issue, which poses a real danger to Israel’s support in America in the long run …”
I part ways with Friedman, however, when he wrote, three paragraphs later: “Everything I have heard from her leads me to conclude that she dislikes Aipac because she dislikes Israel, because she does not really believe the Jewish people have a right to an independent state in their ancestral homeland. She seems to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, known as B.D.S.”
Friedman says unequivocally that he believes Congresswoman Omar does not dislike only Netanyahu’s policies, but that she dislikes Israel itself.
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions are a matter of tactics. Did the boycotts of South Africa and divestments 30 years ago hasten the end of apartheid? I believe they did.
If Omar does back BDS, does that mean she hates Israel? I can’t see it that way.
The item continues with explanation that Crabgrass readers are urged to read, as sensible analysis instead of histrionics.
Omar opened a dialog that needed sunshine, and however one feels about her commentary, it is good the dialog saw daylight. Inattention fostered the status quo, indeed, inattention from questioning minds always favors or fosters a status quo.
FURTHER: That op-ed in the Adelson owned outlet is a republication of a U.S. campus item, per a situation that reflects campus BDS sentiments being expressed with an immediate attentive counterpoint published; in this instance not personally attacking the first author in the second author's response; which is refreshing in the counter item eschewing "tool of Hamas" types of inflammatory rhetorical response to BDS advocacy. The BDS question is one with the jury still out; but with opinions flying around, sometimes irresponsibly.
If you are awaiting Beto defining his BDS policy position, good luck, but don't hold your breath waiting. Once bitten, twice wary. Said differently, experienced politicians seldom grab lightning rods in a storm.