Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Democratic Party Defends Israeli Attack
Tens of thousands of Israelis protested in the streets of Tel Aviv last weekend against their right-wing government's attack on an unarmed humanitarian aid flotilla sailing in international waters. International condemnation of the raids continued in foreign capitals. Meanwhile, in Washington, Democratic congressional leaders were lining up alongside their Republican colleagues to defend the Israeli assault. Countering the broad consensus of international legal scholars who recognize that the attack was in flagrant violation of international norms, prominent Democrats embraced the Orwellian notion that Israel's raid, which killed at least nine activists and wounded scores of others, was somehow an act of self-defense.
The offensive by the Democratic leadership has been led by Gary Ackerman (D-NY), who serves as House Democrats' unofficial spokesman on Middle East policy from his position as chair of the House Foreign Relations Committee subcommittee on the Middle East. According to Ackerman, the killings were "wholly the fault and responsibility of the organizers of the effort to break through Israel and Egypt's legitimate closure of terrorist-controlled Gaza." According to Rep. Ron Klein (D-FL), due to the determination of activists on the ships to deliver humanitarian aid to the people of the besieged Gaza Strip, "Israel was left with no choice but to ensure the safety of its people." Similarly, Democratic majority leader Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) insisted that in attacking an unarmed flotilla carrying humanitarian aid in international waters, Israel had simply "invoked its right to self-defense."
To rationalize what virtually the entire international legal community recognizes as an act of war, congressional Democrats have engaged in a series of falsifications and radical reinterpretations of international law. The first involved a radically overextended notion of maritime sovereignty. The attack took place in international waters, roughly 85 miles from the Israeli coast. International maritime law has long recognized that territorial sovereignty extends only 12 miles out to sea. A Libyan effort in the 1980s to extend its claim of sovereignty into the Gulf of Sidra beyond the 12-mile limit led to a series of deadly clashes between U.S. and Libyan armed forces in order, according to then-President Ronald Reagan, to enforce America's "global Freedom of Navigation program" to defend "our rights on and over the high seas under international law." At the time, congressional Democrats joined their Republican colleagues in defending the use of force to challenge Libya's illegal overreach of its maritime boundaries.
However, congressional Democrats are quite willing to grant allied governments in the region far more latitude in extending their claims to Mediterranean waters. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) argued that responsibility for the violence lay with the organizers of the flotilla, not with "those who defended Israel's borders." Rep. Michael McMahon (D-NY) made a similar argument that the Israeli action was justified because Israel "has the right to maintain and defend its own borders." The flotilla was aiming directly toward the port of Gaza, not toward any area close to Israeli territorial waters, and no country recognizes the Gaza Strip as part of Israel. Nevertheless, Rep. Kendrik Meek (D-FL) insisted that Israel's assault on the flotilla was justified because the ships were "on the verge of breaching its sovereign borders." Similarly, Klein insisted that the ships were "threatening to breach Israel's defenses of its coastal border," and therefore "Israel was left with no choice but to ensure the safety of its people" by attacking the flotilla.
Redefining "Self-Defense"
The Free Gaza campaign had made clear that the cargo was exclusively humanitarian. Indeed, all of its previous eight voyages over the past two years were completely free of any weaponry or weapon parts. The plethora of peace and human rights groups participating in the flotilla would have never taken part were there any hint of arms being on board. Most crucially, customs officials rigorously inspected all the ships at their disembarkation points. Indeed, no weapons bound for the Gaza Strip were found on any of the six ships on the flotilla seized by Israel or on the seventh several days later. As a result, no reasonable person could claim that the Israelis had reason to suspect arms smuggling. The congressional Democratic leadership, however, is apparently not very reasonable.
For example, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) insisted that the Israelis attacked the flotilla to ensure that "dangerous resources do not reach the terrorist organization Hamas." This kind of paranoia was evident on the Senate side as well, as Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) justified the Israeli attack on the grounds that the peace activists might have been trying to smuggle missiles or even a radiological weapon. Similarly, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) declared that "Israel has every right in the world to make certain that weapons are not being smuggled in." Rep. Jim Costa (D-CA) insisted that "Israel has every right to defend itself against radical activists" in order "to prevent innocent civilian aid from being used as a façade for arms trafficking" by those "threatening the safety and security of our ally Israel."
Despite the participation of large numbers of pacifists on the ships, Rep. Elliot Engel (D-NY) claimed that the flotilla "was really a Trojan Horse designed to attack the Israelis." The assault against the unarmed flotilla, according to Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), was simply a case of the Israeli government "defending…their citizens" and "exercising its right to self-defense." Paul Hodes (D-NH) argued that Israel's intent in attacking the flotilla was simply "to protect itself and its citizens" while House Majority Leader Hoyer insisted that "Israel — rightfully so — invoked its right to self-defense on the Mavi Marmara." Rep Patrick Murphy (D-PA) also insisted that Israel was simply invoking its right to self-defense," while Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) insisted that "those aboard the Mavi Marmara never intended to carry out a peaceful humanitarian mission" and that "It was only when faced with violence that the soldiers reacted in self-defense."
The Israelis confiscated all recording equipment from those on board, only showing their carefully edited version of events surrounding their assault on lead vessel in a widely circulated videotape. The refusal to return any of the recording equipment to the kidnapped activists would normally raise questions as to what the Israeli government might be trying to hide. But that didn't bother Democratic lawmakers, who repeatedly cited the Israeli video as "evidence" to support their case that the people defending their ship, not the ones attacking it, were the aggressors. There are conflicting reports of what happened when Israeli forces illegally boarded the Mavi Marmara, but what is known is that Israeli commandos initiated the attack on the ship using stun grenades, teargas, paintballs, and rubber-cased steel bullets. The initial response from those on board was to try to fend off the attackers off with water hoses while the ship's passengers attempted to form a defensive cordon around the wheelhouse to prevent the attackers from seizing the ship.
Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the United States, acknowledged that the flotilla was simply "too large to stop with nonviolent means." Despite this, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schulz (D-FL) insisted that "the Israeli Navy worked to plan a non-violent interception of the flotilla and only used force when soldiers' lives were at risk." At least 48 activists suffered gunshot wounds and scores of others were badly beaten.
The British newspaper The Independent reported that soldiers fired down on the activists from their helicopters prior to any Israeli soldiers boarding the Mavi Marmara. One journalist reported that a man standing next to him was shot through the top of his head, killing him instantly. Rep. Gary Peters (D-MI), however, insisted that the killings were all "acts of self-defense," while Rep. Shelley Berkeley (D-NV) blamed "passengers on the vessel, not Israeli forces, as the instigators of violence." Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) said the "violent force [was] in fact initiated by those whose boat was boarded." Though the overwhelming majority of those on the ships were from peace organizations like War Resisters International, the International Fellowship of Reconciliation, Pax Christi, and others, Rep. Engel insisted that the ships were actually "filled with hate-filled provocateurs bent on violence." Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) claimed the responsibility for the killings were "those who chose to run an internationally recognized blockade and attack uniformed personnel." Though there were no guns found on board any of the ships, Quigley insisted that the activists "shot Israeli soldiers as they landed on the main ship."
Autopsy reports reveal that most of the victims of the Israeli raid were shot in the head at close range. Fulkan Dogan, a 19-year old U.S. citizen, was shot five times from less than 18 inches away. Similarly, despite Israeli troops using stun guns and severely beating passengers on the other ships who offered no violent resistance, Rep. Shelley Berkeley (D-NV) insisted that the Israeli seizure of the five other vessels took place "without incident," demonstrating that "Israeli personnel had no intention to use force and only did so in self-defense."
The Turkish crew — which, unlike the vast majority of people on board the ships, had not gone through the mandatory nonviolence training — should not have fought back. It should be noted, however, that international maritime law clearly gives crew members the right to defend their vessel from attacks in international waters. Apparently, these congressional Democrats believe, however, if you are attacked by the navy of a strategic ally of the United States, you have no right to defend your ship.
Accusations of Terrorist Ties
The most dangerous accusation by congressional Democratic leaders involves charges that the activists on board and the organizers of the flotilla had ties to terrorism. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) chair of the House Foreign Relations Committee's subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation, and trade, called on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to prosecute American participants in the flotilla. Because the Gaza Strip is currently ruled by Hamas, according to Sherman, any humanitarian aid to the people of that territory is "clearly an effort to give items of value to a terrorist organization." Sherman also announced he would be working with the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that the more than 700 non-U.S. citizens who took part in the flotilla would be permanently barred from ever entering the United States. This would include European parliamentarians and Nobel laureates, as well as leading writers, artists, intellectuals, pacifists, and human rights activists, virtually none of whom is in the least bit sympathetic with Hamas or terrorism.
A series of Democrats in Congress have joined in insisting that the organizers of the flotilla have, in Sherman's words, "clear terrorist ties." Indeed, Frank insists that these groups are "pro-Hamas people" and that, rather than provide aid to the people of the Gaza Strip, they were actually "seeking to land in Gaza to aid and support Hamas." Engel insisted that the organizers of the flotilla have "links to Hamas and reportedly played a role in the attempted Millennium bombing in Los Angeles." Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) insisted that the United States "must stand up for the right of Israel to defend herself against terrorism — which is what Israel did when she blocked the attempt by the Flotilla to forcefully breach the blockade." And Rep. Ackerman claimed that the humanitarian relief effort was "to provoke a confrontation with Israel for the benefit of Hamas and as part of the international effort to delegitimize Israel's existence."
The very idea that pacifist, feminist, Jewish, and Christian organizations like CODEPINK, Jewish Voice for Peace, and the American Friends Service Committee would ally with a violent, misogynist, Islamic group like Hamas — much less any group that engages in terrorism — should be recognized as absurd on face value. When prominent Democrats — including the head of the House subcommittee on terrorism — imply that leading American and Israeli peace groups are linked to terrorism, it is no longer simply heated rhetoric in defense of the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip, but a dangerous attack on civil liberties.These congressional Democrats also ignore the fact that the Free Gaza campaign is supported by such Israeli groups such as Yesh G'vul, the Coalition of Women for Peace, New Profile, and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, among others. Such organizations and their members were already being subjected to violent attacks by far right-wing groups, some of whom have openly called for the murder of Knesset members who supported the flotilla. By falsely accusing these groups of being part of an effort that supports Hamas and other terrorist groups, these members of Congress appear to be willing to put the lives of Israeli peace and human rights activists at risk.
Shutting Out the United Nations
Democratic congressional leaders were quick to praise the Obama administration for blocking the United Nations from criticizing the Israeli attack. Hoyer reiterated how the "administration and Congress are determined to prevent condemnation of Israel at the UN Security Council." One clear role for the United Nations — given the conflicting accounts of what transpired during the Israeli attack — would be to launch an international investigation. A recent public opinion poll shows a clear majority of Americans — including 65 percent of Democrats — favor an international inquiry over allowing Israel alone to investigate the circumstances of the attack.
Despite this, congressional Democrats have also joined the Obama administration in insisting that Israel, not the UN or other international body, should conduct any investigation into the attack. This comes despite reports from Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International documenting the right-wing Israeli government's notoriously poor record at conducting credible internal investigations regarding possible war crimes by its armed forces. Rejecting such detailed reports from reputable human rights organizations, Frank nonetheless insists "the Israeli government…has a very good record of holding the Israeli government to account," and that "the Israeli government has a better record of legitimate self-criticism than almost any other government in the world." Turning the consensus of international human rights organizations on its head, Frank argues that the only a group "commissioned by the Israeli government" would have credibility, while "clearly no inquiry chartered by the U.N. would have the credibility."
Other congressional Democrats have also been lining up insisting that the right-wing Israeli government of Benyamin Netanyahu be entrusted with the investigation. Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN) insisted that "We must allow Israel, not the United Nations. . . to conduct a formal investigation into the flotilla incident." Similarly, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL) has called for an "Israeli-led investigation" as have Rep. Michael McMahon (D-NY) and Rep. Sestak (D-PA), who is currently the Democratic nominee for Senate. Reid underscored his confidence in the right-wing Israeli government in noting how "Israel has pledged to carry out a transparent and thorough investigation of this incident, and I look forward to its findings."
Denying the Humanitarian Crisis
Democrats have also lined up to defend the blockade of the Gaza Strip, even as corporate media outlets such as Newsweek acknowledge that the blockade has little to do with preventing weapons smuggling. Some have gone as far as challenging the credibility of the UN and a plethora of aid agencies that have documented the public health crisis and food shortages in the Gaza Strip. For example, Sherman insists "the health circumstances in Gaza are better than they are in many American cities." In reality, UN officials have called the situation "grim," "deteriorating," and a "medieval siege." A bare minimum of 400 truckloads of goods needs to enter Gaza each week, and only an average of 171 get in. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), one in 10 Gazans suffer from "chronic malnutrition," and the UN says six in 10 Gaza households are "food insecure."
As reported in the Israeli press, as elsewhere, Israel has repeatedly refused to allow humanitarian goods into the Gaza Strip. This fact did not stop Reid from claiming that Israel "put in place a process to ensure that legitimate humanitarian relief reached Gaza." Similarly, Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ) praised Israel for "allow[ing] trucks loaded with humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza on a daily basis," ignoring that such vehicles allowed by Israel are far less than what's needed. Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) insisted that "there are alternative methods of delivery that are available," ignoring the fact that restrictive Israeli checkpoints have repeatedly turned away WHO medical supplies and rejected or delayed the delivery of UN food aid. Despite efforts to blame Hamas, Israel is in fact the source of the humanitarian crisis. Yet Democrats continue to be in denial.
'Creating an Incident'
Israel had allowed five of the previous eight ships from the Free Gaza Campaign carrying humanitarian supplies to deliver their goods to the port of Gaza without interception. So there was some genuine hope that the Israelis would allow this flotilla to dock unimpeded as well. To leading Democratic lawmakers, such as Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), however, "this flotilla was more about creating an incident than helping people." Similarly, Mikulski insisted that the activists "cared more about inciting a confrontation that they did about delivering aid."
These lawmakers seem to have forgotten, however, the longstanding tradition of strategic nonviolent direct action to "create an incident." The four African-American students who sat at the Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro back in 1960 weren't just interested in a cup of coffee. Similarly, when civil rights activists protested in downtown Birmingham in 1963, there was reason to suspect that Sherriff Bull Connor would use force to break up the demonstrations.
When people struggle nonviolently for justice against an oppressive state apparatus, there is no contradiction between helping people and creating an incident.
Relations with Turkey
Much of the wrath of congressional Democrats centers on the government of Turkey, a longstanding NATO ally. Pallone demanded that Obama condemn the Turkish government for supporting the relief effort and reacting negatively to the attack, which killed nine Turks on board. According to Rep. Anthony Wiener (D-NY), "We know this tragedy was instigated by Turkey." Though Turkey remains in NATO, Wiener went as far as referring to Turkey as "our former ally." Similarly, Rep. John Sarbanes (D-MD) argued that criticism of Israel's action "neglects the role that Turkey played in staging the flotilla and Turkey's readiness to condone this kind of brinksmanship."
Putting the blame on Turkey for the deaths of its own citizens in international waters taking part in a multinational humanitarian relief efforts is particularly ironic given that, as recently as two months ago, many of these same members of Congress refused to support the recent House resolution commemorating the 1915 Armenian genocide on the grounds that it would offend the Turkish government.
In the world view of congressional Democrats, however, defending what is essentially an act of piracy and the murder of nine Turkish citizens is worth damaging relations with this key NATO ally, but acknowledging the genocide of one and half million Armenians is not.
Withdraw Support from the Democratic Party
This is certainly not the first time that Democratic congressional leaders have defended violations of international legal norms by U.S. allies. The history of supporting the Salvadoran junta, Nicaraguan Contras, Indonesian occupation forces in East Timor, and Moroccan occupation forces in Western Sahara all attest to the way the Democratic Party, like the Republican Party, is wedded to the notion that U.S. allies should be held to a lower standard of adherence to international law than perceived adversaries.
Indeed, one can imagine the reaction of these same Democrats had it been the Iranian navy that attacked a humanitarian flotilla in international waters, killed passengers and crew members, and kidnapped 750 people (including journalists) and held them incommunicado for several days in Iran.
Republican congressional leaders have certainly done no better in supporting Israel's raids. Yet many Democrats who have engaged in these right-wing attacks on human rights and international law consider themselves "progressive." Democratic members of Congress have ended their defense of the Salvadoran junta, the Indonesian dictatorship, and other criminal policies only when pressured by their constituents. Peace and human rights activists should similarly raise an outcry in response to the dangerously intemperate and inaccurate statements from congressional Democrats and then deny support for the re-election of any member of Congress who continues to support this latest Israeli atrocity.
For More Information:
All quotes from congressional representatives taken from the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, "Congressional Statements on the Gaza Flotilla Incident, June 9, 2010; http://www.aipac.org/Publications/Congressional_Statements_on_Flotilla.pdf
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
181 Comments so far
Show Allwhen at least 90% of the US lawmakers are bought and sold by Israel, what did you expect? The US is run by only ONE party. The myth of a two party system is just that...a myth.
Only fools in the country think that they have two parties.
Sam Clemens said there was no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.
To put things in perspective, remember that slavery was supported by both political parties before the Civil War. In accordance with the provisions of the notorious Fugitive Slave Act, Americans were prosecuted and imprisoned for helping slaves.
It took a bloody civil war to break that eminently American institution, but otherwise humanity and our political system have changed little since then.
There are parallels between activists of the Free Gaza movement and radical abolitionists in the U.S. Somewhere, there is a reincarnation of John Brown waiting to use violence to help the eyeless in Gaza when all government institutions have taken the side of the oppressors.
Israel-firsters of dubious loyalty like Representative Brad Sherman should be careful. If he turns the mob loose on opponents of Israeli apartheid, who will care if the mob ultimately turns on him?
So, who's still voting Democratic? Only a fool I imagine!
There seem to be a lot of "fools" in the country.
So only Israel has the right of self defense..not Iraq,Iran and afghanistan,We are so exceptional we have the right to destroy and exploit any country in the world..just call them terrorists if they take offense or resist.Only the US and their allies have the right of self defense.Give them all nuclear weapons and see who commits suicide first..Name a nuclear power that has so far. Israel controls everything that goes in gaza..bet Israel would let this happen to them...exceptionalism is their only defense
You got it. That is also why when they fly planes in to our buildings they are called terrorists. But when we drop bombs on their countries we are called liberators. Anyone familiar with The sword of Truth series recognizes that we have the imperial army and americans are from the old world.
Good to see Zunes speak out so strongly against the Democrats.
The Democrats are scum! Stop voting for them or giving them any support whatsoever.
Correct, he strongly criticized the democrats but did not come out against them.
"Withdraw Support from the Democratic Party"
Yes.
The Green Party supports Palestinian rights, just as it supports Native American rights. Actually, it's the only party here that supports a one-state solution, difficult but the only one likely to work long-term. (That is, a new, secular state composed of all of Palestine and all of its residents, without ethnic or religious distinction. You know, a modern, secular country, not a theocracy like Iran - and Israel.)
A further thought: how is Israel anything but an albatross around this country's neck? I just don't see how they serve our strategic interests. They mostly just cause trouble in the most strategic area in the world, trouble with our name on it. How does this blind, lock-step loyalty to anything Israel cares to do serve US interests?
I question the loyalty of any American politician promoting blind support of Israel. A new diaspora would be a nightmare for the whole world, including the Palestinians, so we should be working for a peaceful, just solution - ANY peaceful, just solution. THAT would serve American interests. Blind US support for Israel no matter what is the chief barrier to any real resolution. Why are so many politicians acting like they have dual citizenship (even when they obviously don't) and divided loyalties?
Unlike Af-ganef-stan, the United States does indeed have 'government in a box'. The box is a coffin.
The main purpose of the empire's propaganda machine: create smiley-faced consumers who automatically go about their daily lives, surrounded by the newest high-tech devices, leaving the critical thinking and decision-making to those who know best - their representatives in government, the corporate-nominated experts, and the pundits who relay the important information to them via TV, radio and newspapers.
And it's working. The majority of the populace haven't a clue.
Here's one of today's examples of this brave new world's insanity:
"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has informed Israel's representatives the world over that there were never any humanitarian supplies or equipment aboard the Mavi Marmara, where Israeli commandos were ambushed by armed mercenaries posing as peace activists. The commandos opened fire and killed nine of the attackers after three soldiers had been brutalized and temporarily captured. ...
The equipment includes:
1. 300 wheelchairs
2. 300 new mobility scooters
3. 100 special mobility scooters for the disabled
4. Hundreds of crutches
5. 250 hospital beds
6. 50 sofas
7. Four tons of medicine
8. 20 tons of clothing, carpets, school bags, cloth and shoes
9. Various hospital equipment - closets and cabinets, operating theater equipment, etc.
10. Playground equipment
11. Mattresses
The MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) noted that: The equipment does not constitute humanitarian aid in the accepted sense (basic foodstuffs, new and functional equipment, fresh medicines). ...
The medicines and sensitive equipment (operating theater equipment, new clothing, etc.) are being kept in cool storage at the Defense Ministry base. Some of the medicines had already expired, and some will expire soon."
See: It's Official: There was No Humanitarian Aid on Mavi Marmara at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/137997
The only thing we can really count on these days is things will only get crazier.
McGuyver could build at least 3 nukes and a battleship with that inventory.
This is what happens when you challenge power--for real.
It forces you to see with your OWN eyes.
And now people have an opportunity to see the Democrats for who and what they truly are.
It's like turning over a rock. Yuck.
Petitions, open letters, "push" campaigns and rallies, etc. won't achieve this kind of clarity.
Now, this article seems to limit the clarity to how "Democratic congressional leaders have defended violations of international legal norms by U.S. allies."
But in fact, the Democrats' subservience to those in power at the expense of regular people and justice is equally complete in domestic affairs as well.
And maybe it's not just because they're Democrats.
As the author of this piece points out: "many Democrats who have engaged in these right-wing attacks on human rights and international law consider themselves "progressive."
Maybe they truly are "progressive"--and liberal too. I mean, maybe this is what is to be expected from progressives and liberals all along.
The last few years have really opened my eyes to the fact that not just Democrats, but liberals and progressives do not hold the interests of people and justice over the interests of those in power.
For instance, many if not most progressives/liberals, were not only perfectly willing to accept the human injustice that is inherent in the market's role in today's healthcare--but the Obama plan as well.
Likewise, many progressives/liberals were not only willing to accept the human injustice of an occupying force--but the condemnation of the UN's Goldstone report as well.
Maybe it's time to take leave of the liberals and progressives and their murky moral nether world between "maturity" and worldly sophistication that always seems to side with those with power.
gregsdiary:
"But in fact, the Democrats' subservience to those in power at the expense of regular people and justice is equally complete in domestic affairs as well."
Let's face it folks, no one represents the people's interests in govt., which is totally corporate dominated.
They all do a little jig, take their hats off while acknowledging our presence, then turn around and turn over the writing of the regulations to corporate reps.
Remember, Remember, the second of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason
Why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!
Remove all incumbents this November 2.
Thank you Stephen Zunes, for this uncovering of the extent of complicity, and one-sided, atrocious wrong-thinking of our dem reps. Shocking and reprehensible.
Does the author, or anyone, know of a site where we can let all these reps know our disgust with their words?
I sent this letter to my Rep asking him to sign onto the Kucinich letter:
I am appalled at reading stephen zunes' article about statements by Democratic reps blaming those on the flotilla for the Israeli attack, resulting in 9 deaths, 4-7 disappeared, serious wounding of 60-100 people, kidnapping of 700 people from 43 countries and stealing of all their cameras, luggage, cell phones etc. THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS AND WRONG.
See today's commondreams.org for the article.
I am asking you to sign Kucinich's letter which demands the right thing:
Washington, Jun 2 -
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is today beginning to circulate to colleagues the following letter concerning the commando raid by Israel upon a Turkish ship in international waters:
June 2, 2010
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
Israeli commandos, acting at the direction of the State of Israel, attacked and seized a Turkish ship in international waters, in the Mediterranean Sea.
At least nine were killed in the incident aboard the Mavi Marmara. Hundreds of civilians were taken into custody and goods were confiscated. Since the United States considers Israel our most important ally in the region, whose survival is a primary concern, it is incumbent upon the Commander in Chief to call Israel to an accounting for its conduct in planning and executing the deadly military attack in international waters upon a peaceful flotilla carrying citizens from over 50 countries.
The State of Israel's conduct, attacking a Turkish ship in international waters, constitutes an act of belligerence against Turkey, which at one time Israel considered an important ally. It also undermines United States’ troops efforts in Iraq, since your administration's efforts to achieve stability in the region and to withdraw troops from Iraq has depended upon Turkey's cooperation through use of its air bases.
In its violent commando raid on the Mavi Marmara, the government of Israel showed no concern as to how its conduct may affect the lives of defenseless, innocent people, its friends and allies, and in particular the United States. The United States must remind Israel as well as all of our other friends and allies:
It is not acceptable to repeatedly violate international law.
It is not acceptable to shoot and kill innocent civilians.
It is not acceptable to commit an act of aggression against another U.S. ally.
It is not acceptable to continue a blockade which denies humanitarian relief.
It is not acceptable to heighten tensions in a region while the United States continues to put so much blood and treasure on the line.
The State of Israel's action necessitates that the United States, which is Israel's partner in the region, begin to redefine its relationship and to establish such boundaries and conditions which are sufficient for mutual respect and cooperation.
It is incumbent upon Israeli officials to bring forth the truth about the planning for and the attack upon the Mavi Marmara.
No one questions the right of Israel to defend its border, but that defense does not extend to shooting innocent civilians anywhere in the world, anytime it pleases.
Israel must account for our support, for the lives of our soldiers, for the investment of billions from our taxpayers. Israel owes the United States more than reckless, pre-meditated violence waged against innocent people.
The attack on the Mavi Marmara requires consequences for the Netanyahu Administration and for the State of Israel. Those consequences must be dealt by the United States. They must be diplomatic and they must be financial. The U.S. can begin by calling for an independent international inquiry of the Mavi Marmara incident. The integrity of such inquiry necessitates that it not be led by the nation whose conduct is under scrutiny. If our nation fails to act in any substantive way, the United States licenses the violence and we are complicit in it and our own citizens will be forced to pay the consequences.
We the undersigned deeply regret the loss of life. We are also fully aware of the dangers to world security which exist in the region, which is why the United States has been unstinting it its defense of Israel. We have a right to expect that Israel not add to those dangers with military conduct which all people of good will know is neither defensible nor moral. There must be consequences for such conduct. We await your response.
The Moral Failure of American Liberals
A defense of Helen Thomas
by Jonathan Cook, June 11, 2010
“…..The ostracism of Helen Thomas, the doyenne of the White House press corps, over her comment that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home" to Poland, Germany, America, and elsewhere is revealing in several ways. In spite of an apology, the 89-year-old has been summarily retired by the Hearst newspaper group, dropped by her agent, spurned by the White House, and denounced by long-time friends and colleagues. Ms. Thomas earned a reputation as a combative journalist, at least by American standards, with a succession of administrations over their Middle East policies, culminating in Bush officials boycotting her for her relentless criticisms of the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. But the reaction to her latest remarks suggest that, if there is one topic in American public life on which the boundaries of what can and cannot be said are still tightly policed, it is Israel. The reasoning of one, Lanny Davis, counsel to the White House in the Clinton administration, was typical. Mr. Davis, who said he previously considered himself "a close friend," asked whether anyone would be "protective of Helen’s privileges and honors if she had been asking Blacks to return to Africa, or Native Americans to Asia and South America, from which they came 8,000 or more years ago?" It is that widely accepted analogy, appropriating the black and Native American experience in a wholly misguided way, that reveals in stark fashion the moral failure of American liberals. In their blindness to the current relations of power in the US, most critics of Ms. Thomas contribute to the very intolerance they claim to be challenging. Ms. Thomas is an Arab-American, of Lebanese descent, whose remarks were publicized in the immediate wake of Israel’s lethal commando attack on a flotilla of aid ships trying to break the siege of Gaza. Unlike most Americans, who were half-wakened from their six-decade Middle East slumber by the killing of at least nine activists, Ms. Thomas has been troubled by the Palestinians’ plight for much of her long lifetime. She was in her late twenties when Israel ethnically cleansed three-quarters of a million Palestinians from most of Palestine, a move endorsed by the fledgling United Nations. She was in her mid-forties when Israel took over the rest of Palestine and parts of Egypt and Syria in a war that dealt a crushing blow to Arab identity and pride and made Israel a favored ally of the US. In her later years she has witnessed Israel’s repeated destruction of Lebanon, her parents’ homeland, and the slow confinement and erasure of the neighboring Palestinian people. Both have occurred under a duplicitous American "peace process" while Washington has poured hundreds of billions of dollars into Israel’s coffers. It is therefore entirely understandable if, despite her own personal success, she feels a simmering anger not only at what has taken place throughout her lifetime in the Middle East but also at the silencing of all debate about it in the US by the Washington elites she counted as friends and colleagues….”
http://original.antiwar.com/cook/2010/06/10/the-moral-failure-of-american-liberals/
This is the first reasonable thing i have seen here in defense of Helen.
It is not the same in the sense that she is not a native dispaced person herself.
She is in fact an Arab-American of Lebanese descent as you have said.
It is understandable for instance if a hopi woman says the white people should go back over the sea where they came from and stop telling everyone what to do.
from her perspective she is stating an obvious and simple fact and she may not be aware of the fact that a half a billion white people now live on the land surounding her reservation.
Helen Thomas however does understand that 4.5 million jew or so live in palestine.
most of them just like in America are actually the descendants of the people that perpetrated the crimes you mentioned and not the actual perpetrators of the crime.
If Morality is our goal and i agree with you it is then we also have to remember that for instance in 1492 Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain expelled all the Jews from their lands and thus, by a stroke of the pen, put an end to the largest and most distinguished Jewish settlement in Europe. I could go on and on about the extensive history of crimes comitted agains jews that often ended in expulsion after many year of regressive laws and murder.
So i think from a moral perspective it is indefensible for a liberal American of any stripe who is not directly a part of the opressed group within Israel to call for the expulsion of 4.5 million jews from palestine.
Nobody gets to roll back history. history is one of those things that moves forward.
And if you think it's OK to roll back history then some has to make the arbitrary discision as to what date to set the clock back to.
Is Helen's anger understandable ? the answer is yes and the irony is that many many jews themselves share in the anger. We must remember that there were jewish peace activists as well
on the aid flotila itself. I think even an elderly holocuast survivor.
Helen is saying that even some of the people on the flotila that put their lives on tline every day to try to stop the horrible march of zionism need to be expelled from their homes.
exactly where is the morality of that ?
It is of course possible to condemn Helens statement as racist while at the same time loving her and her work over all these years and fighting for her not to lose her job.
some of you no doubt dont understand anti-semitism and racial scapegoating of jews at every turn. But others of us unfortunately do not have the luxury of ignorance of the subject.
We wish we could be blissfully ignoant of anti-semitism but we cannot.
we see a world in economic chaos and are just waiting for the next person to say it's our fault.
that all the worlds problem are our fault. why because it has happened so often to us it is a given fact.
Once again, claims of Israel as the victim to rationalize their occupation and stealing of Palestinian land.
WW2 is long over, how much longer must the world be subjected to this tiresome excuse for Israeli barbarism.
And Poland and Germany stopped killing Jews 65 years ago.
Enough, already!
susan: the jewish state itself is terroristic, founded on the murder of count folke bernadotte, a u.n. mediator who proposed boundaries for the new state in 1948. the count had freed 10,000 jews from nazi death camps, and israel's gratitude was expressed by 6 bullets through his heart. the killer cohen was prime minister david ben gurion's valet and personal friend. one of the conspirators was yitzak shamir, who later became prime minister of israel. they killed the count's driver, using 18 bullets because they thought he was american ralph bunch, our nation's first african-american diplomat. now streets all over tel aviv are named after the killers of count folke bernadotte. this outlaw state must end! the count's only crime was to recommend narrower borders than the jewish terrorists wanted. he also wanted to make jerusalem an international city. no one was ever prosecuted for these crimes, and the killers bragged openly about their deeds once the israeli-shortened statute of limitations had run on their murderous conspiracy.
johnny u
Please have your library use ILL to obtain microfilm of The New York Times for the month of September 1948. The plan created by BOTH Folke Bernadotte and Ralph Bunche -including maps of proposed divisions- is printed in entirety for future generations, of which we are but one. Newsweek and LIFE also had decent coverage. Suggest photocopy as many pages as you can afford and consume yellow Hiliter.
It was not Harvard PhD Ralph Bunche's job to drive a goddamn car. French Col. Andre Serot, who was in the back seat with Folke, was darker skinned than Ralph because as a U.N. Observer he had been toasting under the sun. Dr. Bunche was a diplomat for the United Nations, not an American diplomat. Of all recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize, he is one who truly earned it, working from from January to July 1949.
Please join me in rescuing the following footnote to history.
Rhodes is known for pottery. Ralph Bunche recorded the names of all participants to the peace negotiations and submitted them to a local potter. Ralph designed and ordered a Commemorative Plate made for each person, with their name fired into it.
When the treaty had been signed and a celebration was in order, Ralph Bunche passed out his wrapped gifts. General Moshe Dayan unwrapped his and inspected both sides of his plate carefully. Then he spoke up.
"Ralph, you had to have ordered these plates to be made at least a month ago. What would you have done if we had not come to any agreement?
"I'd have broken them over your fucking heads," Dr. Bunche replied.
Trylon
SusanY,
You go too far yourself by saying "Helen is saying that even some of the people on the flotila that put their lives on tline every day to try to stop the horrible march of zionism need to be expelled from their homes. exactly where is the morality of that ?"
First, Helen was pissed with justification and she apologized. You did not give her that.
She was not telling Jews everywhere to go to Europe. She was talking in context of the Jews in Palestine and the history of that land grabbing, ethnic Cleansing, collective punishment criminal state..
She did not advocate the expulsion of anyone, and if anyone took that as her purpose that is why she apologized. Helen was pissed like I am, but freedom of speech does not include ISRAEL. and she was fired and shunned now by the zionist controlled USA establishment after she apologized and that is the real crime here about freedom... and you still jump on her.
If you are worried about the Jews being blamed for the next war and financial bankster blowout, do you think you are being fair or that your unforgiving condemnation will bring anyone peace?
Shalom
"The very idea that pacifist, feminist, Jewish, and Christian organizations like CODEPINK, Jewish Voice for Peace, and the American Friends Service Committee would ally with a violent, misogynist, Islamic group like Hamas — much less any group that engages in terrorism — should be recognized as absurd on face value."
...whatever hamas does or doesn't do, it was created cynically by israel itself to counter the at the time growing power of the p.l.o., fatah, and arafat, and now that the p.l.o. has been pacified, it is hamas which is under attack,.. hamas exists and acts as a function of a brutal, murderous illegal occupation. it is the legally elected representative of the people of gaza.
..the true terrorists are the nation states of israel and the u.s.! ...
There have been conflicting reports about whether Russia’s S-300 missiles are covered by the new sanction.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/
ALeqM5jwgjCj_5_J7wBULdtaiWmKFgtj1QD9G990401
S-300 missiles are defensive weapons. If above is true, Obama is preparing for a military attack.
In addition, now the US is against the international investigation of the Gaza flotilla.
On the top of that “At the IAEA on Thursday, US envoy Glyn Davies described the inclusion of the Israel issue at the IAEA’s regular June board meeting as “untimely and uncalled-for.”
Obama is turning out to be a non-con in chief.
P R O P A G A N D A
POLITICIANS
RAGE
ON.
PROTESTORS
ARE
GRIEVOUSLY
ATTACKED.
NUMEROUS
DEMOCRATS
ABET.
Why are the peace movement and social justice movement (and progressives, in general) STILL deluding themselves about "working with" Democrats? From Obama on down, most of them are corporate-sell-outs and LOVE the Global U.S. Empire. This is the classic cliche of insanity: continuing to do the same stupid thing over and over again and expecting a different (better) result. Since at least Truman, Democrats have been war-mongering imperialists, only slightly less than Republicans.
Truman got us into the Korean War (more than 2 million Koreans killed; more than 50,000 U.S./U.N. killed). JFK expanded Eisenhower's involvement in Vietnam & then LBJ escalated based on the Tonkin Gulf lie (with Nixon, between 2 & 3 million Vietnamese killed; more than 58,000 U.S. killed). Clinton ordered the non-stop bombing of Kosovo for 78 straight days (tens of thousands killed) and maintained Bush I's Iraq sanctions which killed more than 500,000 Iraqi children. Now Obama has escalated in the Afghan quagmire and increased drone bombings in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and okayed assassinations of Americans abroad while continuing torture in Bagram and Guantanamo.
Here is an excerpt from a recent FiredogLake column ( “Effing Retarded” in Obama’s White House: How to Alienate Democrats | The Seminal http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/53812) which sums things up:
"So let’s see. In just the last year, the White House has managed not merely to ignore and disappoint but often gone out of its way to mislead, lie to and betray liberals/progressives, labor unions, teachers, Hispanics, gays/lesbians, anti-war groups, dedicated environmentalists, respected pro-employment/pro-growth Nobel economists, climate scientists, financial reformers, defenders of Medicare and Social Security, mainstreet populists, civil liberties and women’s rights advocates, defenders of public interest regulation, alternative energy/efficiency supporters and even scarecrows.
In case you don’t recognize the list, they’re the core, the heart, the brains and the foot soldiers of the Democratic Party."
We MUST start a true People's Party, funded by all of us, not by corporations (as the astroturf Tea Party "movement" is) which will dedicate itself to social/economic justice at home and abroad. We cannot continue to fall for the Democrats' lies any more while they support and fund wars, torture, oppression, militarism, and the U.S. Global Empire. The "lesser of two evils" is STILL EVIL!
Fantastic response ED.
ED...Amen,well said!
The Democrappic Party have no morals when it comes to war and peace issues.
The Democraps are every bit the war mongers that their cousins in the RepubliKKKan party are.
The Democraps did not indict Bush for war crimes, reign in torture or defund the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.
As a matter of fact, the Democraps are leading the USA into another war and this time on Iran or will give Israel the green light to invade and attack Iran, perhaps, by this August-of 2010.
The Democrappic Party are useless and worthless and yes, supported, Bush's wars for the mere fact they funded them and continued to do under Obama.
I know that many "liberals" hate to hear it that Mr. Obama and the Democraps have continued the Bush war policies, but that is the TRUTH HERE.....
We have a Zionist government, period.
Israel first, last, forever.
America, not so much.
Why are US taxpayers paying for a Congress that supports a foreign nation over ours? WTF do they think they're doing?
Let the Israeli's pay their salary, expenses, and all their other BS. If Israel is so important to them, there's no reason for any American to vote for a single one of these traitors. It's sickening.
Throw them all out. Keep throwing them out, one term and give em all the boot till this shit stops. May take twenty years, but it's gotta stop. They discust me beyond words.
Politicians are the most unpunished criminals in the world.
There is one party in the US - the Demonic-Repugnant - which represents the interests of Big Oil, Wall Street, the Military/Industrial/Media complex, and Israel.
The Democratic stampede to follow the dictates of their AIPAC handlers and eagerly spew their toxic lies in regards to the Israeli act of piracy, murder, and mass kidnapping on the high seas is depraved - a spectacle so disgusting as to defy adequate verbal description.
Their loyalty is clearly to Israel instead of to the American youth shot 5 times by Israeli bullets considerately given by us free to their armed forces.
Explain this one to the school children of America.
Israel can kill American citizens and elected politicians will just view these people as "terrorists" and wash their hands of it afterwards......
The Congress whitewashed the Israel assault on the USS LIberty in 1867 and the direct murder of Rachel Corrie by the IDF.......
Yes, Israel can and will kill American citizens any time they desire or want to do and these politicians will take Israel's side 100% of the time, no matter what and no questions asked.
Technically, what you're describing is treason.
Ordering the Navy not to defend the Liberty was an especially egregious betrayal. That was Johnson, a Democrat and the most liberal president we've had.
I think we all agree that the media is corrupt and totally corporate---they want this country to move further right.
So here's the problem:
Progressives stay home this fall, or they vote for Green candidates, etc. This tactic results in a sweeping victory for the Republicans because they're all fired up. Ok, we know that the Democrats deserve to lose. But here's the rub: the media will convince the masses that what really happened was that Obama tried to do too much---he's too liberal, etc. And progressives lose not only the election, they lose any hope of turning this country around---we slip further into the right-wing abyss.
Am I missing something here---or is my analysis flawed somehow?
Did you read this article?
The so-called democrats ARE the republican's whores.
You are advocating voting based on fear and illusions.
I would rather have integrity than be a condom.
Vote Green.
Be brave are CARE.
I'm not really advocating anything. I'm trying to find an answer.
I'm always amused to read about people who are so proud of their Green votes; how they place themselves above all those other fools who buy into the two-party duopoly. I'm glad you're happy and can live with yourself.
Meanwhile, our nation continues its drift toward the extreme right and corporate fascism. The Police State is growing stronger with every election. And the planet is frying. But hey, at least the Greens will be content knowing that they didn't cause any of it.
I'm thinking the whole voting thing is useless; and I'm fairly certain that that is exactly what the elites want---no one voting.
What we need is a revolution---too bad it wont be televised, because if it's not on TV it probably wont happen
"Higgs Boson"
I do not believe there is any "drift" toward the right. It is a forced march and both the democrats and the republicans are supplying the weapons to the growing "Police State".
Voting Green is not about Superiority. It is about caring. It is a gift. There is no guarantee that the Greens will not become corrupt, but it is also BLATANTLY clear that the republicans and the democrats are deadly co-conspirators in a dead-end game of patriachal corruption based on the false belief in human (males especially) superiority over nature.
I live in a "conservative" community. I had to make the polling "officials" open the Green ballots so I could vote. It was NOT a proud moment for any of us, but I did it and I think my sincerity may have helped, in some small way, for some of those officials to see beyond the grip of the two-faced machine of death we accept as politics-as-usual.
I apologize if I seem "uppity", but any real revolution cannot be televised because it is within yourself.
BE the change.
We are all Palestinians now!!!
Sen. Chuck Schumer talking to the Orthodox Union about Israel and Palestine, and particularly the situation in Gaza
Excerpt:
"The Palestinian people still don't believe in a Jewish state, in a two-state solution. More do than before, but a majority still do not. Their fundamental view is, the Europeans treated the Jews badly and gave them 'OUR' land - this is Palestinian thinking. [...] You have to force them to say Israel is here to stay. And there's been good progress over the last year. In a sense, there's a division, because the West Bank is actually prospering [...] The contrast with Gaza is glaring. And that's why the boycott of Gaza to me has another purpose -- obviously the first purpose is to prevent Hamas from getting weapons by which they will use to hurt Israel -- but the second is actually to show the Palestinians that when there's some moderation and cooperation, they can have an economic advancement. When there's total war against Israel, which Hamas wages, they're gonna get nowhere."
For years, I have advocated voting for the "right" candidate, regardless of whether or not they belong to one of the major parties. I can't stand hearing that it is a wasted vote, or listening to others' scenarios of how that kind of voting will play out. As I informed the last person who gave me the "wasted vote" argument: I am SOOOO happy that I voted for the Green Party candidate in the last presidential election. A vote for either of the major party candidates would have been a truly wasted vote -- as it seems to be more obvious to so many now, with either party, the same interests hold the power, with little or no concern for the greater good. My vote did what I want my vote to do -- support the candidate who best represents my concerns. No one person's vote ever makes the difference; we can only each do our part. I did. I can only encourage and hope that others working for the greater good will do the same.
(By the way, I am also very happy that Kucinich is one of the candidates that I am able to vote for. I believe that he is working for the greater good, within a system that makes it almost impossible.)
"AnniKe"
I too am grateful that I voted Green, but what will you do if there is a Green challenger to Kucinich?
Personally (and I don't live in that district), I would vote Green.
I cannot trust Kucinich after he gave Obama that blow-job.
Birdbrain,
You hit the nail on the head!
Chelsea :)
why are we still behind the country that killed count folke bernadotte, who was only trying to make peace in jerusalem? behind the country that ike had to stop from taking the suez canal and kennedy from building an atomic bomb at dimona? ben gurion promised kennedy israel would not go nuclear, but he lied and israel did go nuclear, hanging their nuclear sword over the whole world as they were losing to egypt in 1973. behind the country that killed 41 of our best sailors in 1967, when israel attacked the uss liberty in broad daylight, her flag unfulred on that bright june 8 day? behind the country that turned beirut into rubble, strafing traffic jams in lebannon? behind the rapists and murderers of deir yassin, where they terrorized the natives with soviet weapons? behind the country that has demolished over 12,000 palestinian homes since 1967, killing with bullets the boys who throw stones to protest it? no more aid to israel! not a single cent! this terrorist state is a pox on the behind of all humanity!
When it comes to Israel, most Dems and repubs are equallty wrong in their defense.
how can we tell 50 million iranians not to have 1 nuclear weapon when israel, with a population of 7 million, has over 700 nuclear weapons, some thermonuclear? according to mordechai vanunu, a christian israeli tortured in israeli prisons because he told the truth about israel's nuclear weapons. they kidnapped him before they tortured him. don't take my word for it. it's on the internet, but never in the new york times.
Earl, you got that right, "We are all Palestinians now!!!" If the USA supports these actions then it will one day have grounds for doing the same in America.
There's a new book out that about a small town that stands up to federal tyranny & they end up 'occupying' the town. It could one day be ur town or mine. This is what scares me if Israel can do this then we will have martial law.
I recommend it cause it's that good.
www.booksbyoliver.com
"The Turkish crew — which, unlike the vast majority of people on board the ships, had not gone through the mandatory nonviolence training — should not have fought back." -Stephen Zunes
I suppose you could just assume the Democrats mentioned in this piece are merely hopelessly corrupted by the money and influence of Israel.
But as I mentioned in my other comment here, I think the rot goes a bit deeper.
"The "corruption-causes-poverty narrative" has become so hegemonic that it has often marginalized policy issues from political discourse. This narrative appeals to the elite and middle class, which dominate the shaping of public opinion. It's also a safe language of political competition among politicians. Political leaders can deploy accusations of corruption against one another for electoral effect without resorting to the destabilizing discourse of class."
-The Poverty Trap By WALDEN BELLO
That is, instead of viewing the Democrats' position on the flotilla as merely corruption from greed, taking a broader view of today's liberals/progressives in general provides some insight.
Over the years, I've found the two most popular reasons for liberal/progressive inaction in the face of blatent injustice are something along the lines of:
1. The "being realistic" i.e. "effectiveness" argument: This type of argument asks: "Can you be more effective on the street or rotting in some unnamed unknown jail cell?"
2. The--I'd rather be passive than "wrong" argument. This type of argument is for those above fighting for justice--or anything. It leaves the holder of this argument in the "right"--if not at the margins--at all times.
Since both of these arguments take positions that advantage those in power, the best answer to both therefore should be one that focuses on advantaging justice:
To fight injustice, you have to challenge power.
That entails risk. (such as jail or in some cases "being wrong")
You can't effectively challenge power and avoid risk at the same time.
...
What's important to note about both arguments one and two is that they both effectively accept the prerogatives of those in power.
But out of the two, I think liberals/progressives have the most connection with the second argument. That is, of all the attributes that go into the kind of thinking and motivation held by many liberals/progressives, one of the most dominent is maintaining a sense of elitism with regard to personal control and personal purity.
Argument number two does that.
In addition, what's absent in both arguments is not only an approach that advantages justice, but one that allows for risk. Or more specifically, one that allows for the use of human judgement in evaluating the necessity of the types of risk mentioned.
Is there anything left at all in the Democratic Party?
I don't seem to be able to lower my expectations enough.
"I don't seem to be able to lower my expectations enough."
The last 30+ years have been one long limbo dance with the Democrats--how low can you go?
Sooner or later, you would think it would dawn on liberals/progressives to change expectations instead of lowering them. Ah, but the dance is in their blood.