An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
What Obama Is Up Against
This video was filmed in Jerusalem by Joseph Dana and Max Blumenthal. I found it at Philip Weiss’s blog. The language and opinions expressed in the video are extremely raw. You can consider that a warning:
opinions powered by SendLove.to
23 Responses to “What Obama Is Up Against”
Kathy, I saw that video over at Weiss's blog earlier, and spent a lot of time with it, mentally.
Still not sure I get the purpose. I saw a pathetically ignorant bunch of supremely drunk, college-aged, foul-mouthed kids who are, for the most part, Americans. Mostly, I came away with the impression that all the evil rumors about our failing educational system must be true. (How else to explain the absolutely moronic “poli-sci” major?)
If, as Dana said at the end of Weiss's post, this was meant to convey a sense of the general Israeli attitude, it's a complete failure, because using nearly unintelligible drunks lends zero credibility to the premise.
Maybe these assho##s could volunteer to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan!!
Polimom, Dana did not say that the video portrayed the general attitude of Israelis. In fact, he pretty much said the opposite. He said it was about the extreme attitudes of entitlement he and Blumenthal encountered among American Jewish kids from upper middle class families in the United States. He said that Jerusalem is filled with “droves of American Jewish kids that are sent to Israel to study for a period of time from Teaneck or Westchester.”
Clearly, this is not how large numbers of Israelis think. And Dana also says that he lives in Jerusalem and sees this all the time.
Kathy — So how, then, is it an example of what “Obama is up against”, any more so than the ordinary, besotted, entitled fools one could film in a bar in any city in America? And also — how is it then relevant that it was filmed in Jerusalem?
Well, because these American Jewish kids have families at home, in the United States, who presumably share these attitudes, and because Barack Obama is the American president of the United States, in which that portion of the American Jewish community that is hawkish on Israel and unwilling to see any expressions of American support or sympathy go to Palestinians, will be very much opposed to Obama's following through on the commitments in his speech.
And also because there is a very strong historic, financial, emotional, and political connection between American Jews and Israel. I don't know the exact statistics, but a significant number of American Jews have made alia to Israel, and of course they would tend to be the more conservative Jews, and in addition many American Jewish families travel to Israel on a regular basis, have family there, send their kids to educational programs there, etc.
My guess would be that the significance of its having been filmed in Jerusalem, rather than a bar in any city in America, is that in all probability, you would not be finding so many Jewish kids in one room who have such strong views on Pres. Obama's policies toward Israel.
Okay, now that it's morning, I wanted to look at this again and try to understand your perspective. I also went back and read Dana's additional commentary. He said:
The answers in this video reflect the education and worrisome perspectives that many American Jews harbor towards Israeli politics.
That, presumably, is where you drew the conclusion that the video is merely about a significant swath of American Jewish people, as reflected through their kids. However, he also said:
These people reflect the sentiments shared by many people in this country and this city. These people and their families are the core of the opposition to meaningful peace between Israel and her neighbors. This is what Obama is up against.
Jeepers, Kathy. You even named your post after his concluding, dramatic line, so I have to assume you read that part. He did *not* say his video was merely an expose of the entitlement-twisted children of American Jews.
Perhaps you've been to Israel, and can speak with more authority to this. I've never been there, and can only form my opinion by reading opinions and articles and polls — and what I've read has indicated mixed reactions to Obama's policies there. It may very well be that Dana and Blumenthal's video *does* reflect significant Israel opinion. Even if that's the case, though, I still don't see how someone can credibly present a bunch of drunken idiots as somehow representative of anything more than their own intoxication (or stupidity, in some of these cases).
You said:
My guess would be that the significance of its having been filmed in Jerusalem, rather than a bar in any city in America, is that in all probability, you would not be finding so many Jewish kids in one room who have such strong views on Pres. Obama's policies toward Israel in any bar in America.
Kathy, I've been in any number of towns, including my own, where you could easily find a bar full of inebriated idiots spouting off internet-driven stupidity and racism about President Obama, if asked. They might go off about his policies toward Israel, or they might go off about his handling of the auto industry, or (most likely) they might just react to nothing more than his name — and the words used would probably sound much the same.
It may very well be true that the bilious, racist kids in this video are associated with actual adults somewhere who hold strong, negative views about Obama's Israeli policies. Surely you don't have a problem with people holding opposing views. But if you (and Dana and Blumenthal and Weiss) want to demonstrate that informed opinion — in America or Israel or Antarctica — is supremely hostile and racist, then presenting drunken college kids isn't the way to do it. Because what Obama's “up against”, in this context, is the same thing he was up against during the primaries.
PM
Come on Poli – you/re not telling her what she can post, are you?
Nope. No more than I'm telling you what you can comment.
However, he also said:
These people reflect the sentiments shared by many people in this country and this city. These people and their families are the core of the opposition to meaningful peace between Israel and her neighbors. This is what Obama is up against.
Yes, you are correct. That was careless on my part, although not deliberate. I took the line about what Obama is up against without paying attention to the sentence before it.
I'm not sure, however, that this substantively changes anything about the value or significance of the video. It shouldn't come as a shock to hear that the sentiments expressed by these American Jewish kids are shared by many Israelis in general and Jerusalem residents in particular. I mean, if no one else, the settlers in the occupied West Bank exemplify that.
From what I have heard, Israelis are in general much more likely to support a two-state solution and the peace process in general than American Jews. But that doesn't mean there aren't many Israelis who are just as racist and ignorant about Palestinians as these college kids are. They might not express it as openly (although the settlers certainly do), but the sentiment is still there.
Whether in Israel or in the U.S., strong negative attitudes toward Obama's Israel policies are not limited to drunk college kids.
Just checking, but it seemed you were asserting her post was drawing a false equivalency between idiot drunks and right leaning Israelis.
If that's not what you're asserting, I apologize.
Surely you don't have a problem with people holding opposing views.
Responding to this after posting the other.
No, I don't have a problem with people holding opposing views, but nothing I wrote would suggest that I do. There's a difference between “opposing views” and the kind of toxic waste these kids are spewing. And it's kind of hard for me to believe that they picked up such language and such hateful attitudes all by themselves.
But if you (and Dana and Blumenthal and Weiss) want to demonstrate that informed opinion — in America or Israel or Antarctica — is supremely hostile and racist, then presenting drunken college kids isn't the way to do it.
Well, Polimom, I kinda think you're loading the dice when you say “informed opinion.” Obviously, the opinions of people who think and speak this way are not informed. “Informed opinion” is an entirely different subset of opinion from what is shown in that video.
Hemm, how in the world do you get from saying that PM pointed out that Kathy's post makes a false equivalency to claiming that this means she's telling Kathy what she can or cannot post? I presume that PM feels that Kathy has every right to post whatever the heck she wants, and then PM has the right to respond to it, including pointing out what she see's as sloppy analysis.
CS
long story short –
This is a carry-over from a discussion PM and I had the other day. I had questioned her premise in much the same way as she did here. I believe I was told that I questioned what she should be allowed to post.
Relativism and Anarchy post a day ago.
Whereas it may be pertinent withing that discussion, I'm sure I shouldn't have alluded to it in this thread.
HemmD, as much as I'd like to simply let this fall as the dead topic it should have been, I resent your misrepresenting the exchange. Your initial response to my post the other day was to ask where on TMV I'd seen the attitudes or responses about which I wrote. I replied that I wasn't talking about TMV specifically. To which you then responded: “Why post this?”
I don't see how my questioning the video Kathy posted here relates in any way to our dialogue elsewhere. If Kathy feels, though, that I challenged her post because it didn't relate to other TMV-internal posts, then I very sincerely ask her pardon.
Kathy, we're actually agreeing now, I suspect.
You said:
There's a difference between “opposing views” and the kind of toxic waste these kids are spewing.
And that's what I was trying to separate out. I don't consider these foul-mouthed drunks to be representational of anything but themselves — and I think it's a credibility stretch to suggest that it is. Being oppositional doesn't mean being vicious and racist.
And it's kind of hard for me to believe that they picked up such language and such hateful attitudes all by themselves.
Dear Husband and I talked about this specific question. Since near as I could see, they were young adults drinking themselves into stupidity in a bar, I thought they were college-aged. That doesn't, to me, say “kids spouting their parents' opinions”. College 'kids' are notoriously opinionated, but in my experience at least, it doesn't necessarily resemble anything my parents would recognize.
Obviously, the opinions of people who think and speak this way are not informed. “Informed opinion” is an entirely different subset of opinion from what is shown in that video.
I actually think the top set is “opinion”. Both “informed” and “uninformed” fall therein. It's quite obvious where this bunch falls. It's not at all conclusive, though, where others do.
it seemed you were asserting her post was drawing a false equivalency between idiot drunks and right leaning Israelis.
Yes, that is what I was asserting.
Once more into the breach (because I'm not sure this discussion has given my own views any air at all):
Kathy — I'm not at all trying to say there are *no* Israelis (or Jewish Americans) who share those views, at least as applies to “informed opinion” (rather than racist spew and drunken drivel). I would expect, in fact, to find them in certain specific groups… such as the settlement activists and their supporters.
Are the settlers representative of the wider Israeli view? I don't frankly know — but I don't look at them the way I view the 'kids' in this video. Hope this clarifies, at least to some degree.
Sure, Polimom, it clarifies, I guess, but I don't think I was ever in doubt of your views. The explanation you gave — I already knew where you were coming from. And needless to say (or maybe not needless) I do not agree with you.
Even drunk college kids don't say and do things that have no connection to their interior world. Quite the contrary — doesn't liquor loose tongues and lower inhibitions? I'm sorry, but I simply do not buy the idea that the kind of language these kids used and the sentiments they expressed are completely disconnected from anything they have encountered in their larger environment. Sorry. I mean, when I was in college, I would never have used the “n” word, or said any of the things these kids said, drunk or not. Reason being I just don't harbor those feelings. They're not inhibited, they're just not there.
The equivalency between idiot drunks and right-leaning Israelis (or American Jews) is that right-leaning Israelis (or American Jews), when idiotically drunk, will scream things in public and out loud that they would say (mostly) in private when not drunk, or with others who think as they do. Left-leaning Israelis do not scream racist imprecations or spew out foul language and sentiments about Palestinians and Obama's attempt to take Palestinian aspirations seriously simply because they are drunk. Getting drunk does not transform you into a wholly different person. It just brings out what may be inside that isn't expressed in that way when sober.
Furthermore, I would think that Joseph Dana, living as he does in Jerusalem, knows what he's talking about when he says kids like this are all over Jerusalem — that upper middle class Jewish families send their kids to Israel for summer programs, etc., and this is what they are like, at least in large part. Are you honestly saying to me that said Jewish families believe deeply in the legitimacy of Palestinian aspirations, think the settlers are vile racists and religious fanatics who act like they are entitled to everything because God says in the Torah that the land belongs to Jews, think Israel's mililtary policies toward Palestinians are indefensible, and that Palestinians have been dislocated and oppressed since 1948 — but their kids believe entirely the opposite, call Palestinians the “n” word, think they are entitled to nothing, scream insults at Obama because he dared to speak sympathetically about Palestinians, etc.? If so, we disagree. Most important, do you truly think these kids on the video do not believe and think exactly what they showed they do on the video — when they are NOT drunk? If I were sending my child to a summer program in Israel, I would want to know if the program was filled with kids like this.
Sure, Polimom, it clarifies, I guess, but I don't think I was ever in doubt of your views. The explanation you gave — I already knew where you were coming from. And needless to say (or maybe not needless) I do not agree with you.
Even drunk college kids don't say and do things that have no connection to their interior world. Quite the contrary — doesn't liquor loose tongues and lower inhibitions? I'm sorry, but I simply do not buy the idea that the kind of language these kids used and the sentiments they expressed are completely disconnected from anything they have encountered in their larger environment. Sorry. I mean, when I was in college, I would never have used the “n” word, or said any of the things these kids said, drunk or not. Reason being I just don't harbor those feelings. They're not inhibited, they're just not there.
The equivalency between idiot drunks and right-leaning Israelis (or American Jews) is that right-leaning Israelis (or American Jews), when idiotically drunk, will scream things in public and out loud that they would say (mostly) in private when not drunk, or with others who think as they do. Left-leaning Israelis do not scream racist imprecations or spew out foul language and sentiments about Palestinians and Obama's attempt to take Palestinian aspirations seriously simply because they are drunk. Getting drunk does not transform you into a wholly different person. It just brings out what may be inside that isn't expressed in that way when sober.
Furthermore, I would think that Joseph Dana, living as he does in Jerusalem, knows what he's talking about when he says kids like this are all over Jerusalem — that upper middle class Jewish families send their kids to Israel for summer programs, etc., and this is what they are like, at least in large part. Are you honestly saying to me that said Jewish families believe deeply in the legitimacy of Palestinian aspirations, think the settlers are vile racists and religious fanatics who act like they are entitled to everything because God says in the Torah that the land belongs to Jews, think Israel's mililtary policies toward Palestinians are indefensible, and that Palestinians have been dislocated and oppressed since 1948 — but their kids believe entirely the opposite, call Palestinians the “n” word, think they are entitled to nothing, scream insults at Obama because he dared to speak sympathetically about Palestinians, etc.? If so, we disagree. Most important, do you truly think these kids on the video do not believe and think exactly what they showed they do on the video — when they are NOT drunk? If I were sending my child to a summer program in Israel, I would want to know if the program was filled with kids like this.
Sorry for the duplication. I'm in the public library, since I no longer have an Internet connection, and I had some problems with signing in.
The question of posting was very poorly articulated.
My interpretation of your post was that extremists and their apologists are alive and well on both sides of the political spectrum. As such, your parallel drawn though accurate, seemed to me tangential to the ongoing apologetic comments that were being made on TMV about Tiller. A comparison between religious-driven anti-abortionists and religious-driven Islamic apologists of terror is almost exact. This, of course, is not what you were writing about. TMV regularly posts articles from http://worldmeets.us/index.shtml, and here is where I found the Muslim apologists I thought readers of TMV would be aware of. This was my thinking even though that was not what you were writing.
I posted to you right before going to work, and so I neither had time enough to flesh out my point nor word it in a way that anyone one outside my head could understand. Had I written more carefully then, we wouldn't be clearing this up now.
Your questioning of Kathy's use of drunks seemed equally tangential to the point she was aiming at, and so my post yesterday was merely alluding to what I perceived as a common criticism we made to separate posts. The crux of that criticism is if you wish to set up a comparison, don't rely upon unbalanced examples when you present it. In my mind, drunks and ELF apologists share certain dubious qualities, and their stated opinions taint the position they purport. I think in part that was what you were saying to Kathy.
Simply, I sincerely apologize for a demonstrated lack of artfulness in my comments.
[...] Kathy Kattenburg at Moderate Voice Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)videoingVideoMr Buns a-videoing [...]
Kathy, I'm trying to come up with a way to write a larger post about the question of 'kids', and at what point one can say that they have their own views, rather than defining them as mere mirrors of their parents. It's hard for me to do without going all autobiographical (it's just how I write). Suffice to say, though, that I've known any number of families with children who espoused views that were not only at odds with their upbringing and family, but totally appalled them.
That includes families who were/are racist who produced tolerant, open-minded children, and families who are/were tolerant/open-minded who produced children who were racist. There are conservative families with liberal children, and vice-versa. The potential list of opinions, issues, and combinations is endless.
Furthermore, I've seen these opposing views surface long before college.
Apparently you have never encountered such a thing, and therefore don't think it's possible. I'm totally amazed by that, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
“Are you honestly saying to me that said Jewish families believe deeply in the legitimacy of Palestinian aspirations, think the settlers are vile racists… but their kids believe entirely the opposite…?”
Kathy, you're setting this up as an absolute, and I refuse to play the game. Here's how I would write it:
“Are you honestly saying to me that some Jewish families believe deeply in the legitimacy of Palestinian aspirations, think the settlers are vile racists…, but their kids believe entirely the opposite…?”
Do some of them share their opinions with their families? No doubt.
Do some of them stand opposed to their parents' opinions? I would again say, “no doubt” — and apparently, that's where you and I disagree.