The manipulation of the American political machine is the sole privilege of Jews.  Everyone knows that.  Or rather, everyone in the American political machine knows that, of course.  But nobody else should, and no one needs to.  And really, what’s it to ordinary disempowered Americans where policy comes from?  Nothing whatsoever.

Brave little Israel they must know about, of course ... the Holocaust ... MLK ... white guilt.  That sort of thing.

But the Israel Lobby?  Are you nuts?

So here, from a couple of years ago, is Eliot Cohen in the Washington Post ritually demonising the Walt & Mearsheimer paper out of existence.  He hopes.

Inept, even kooky academic work, then, but is it anti-Semitic?  If by anti-Semitism one means obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews; if one accuses them of disloyalty, subversion or treachery, of having occult powers and of participating in secret combinations that manipulate institutions and governments; if one systematically selects everything unfair, ugly or wrong about Jews as individuals or a group and equally systematically suppresses any exculpatory information—why, yes, this paper is anti-Semitic.

Trouble is, those three little words “The Israel Lobby” have escaped into the public consciousness and cannot so easily be recalled, especially while some dumb Jewish journalist can lose the plot as royally as Dana Milbank did.  Reporting for the Post on a public meeting last Monday called by a “group of Jewish leaders” to discuss the 2008 presidential election, he actually wrote:-

The Audacity of Chutzpah

... Daroff said he had “heard in the hallways here” that Obama “doesn’t see the U.S.-Israel relationship as much of the mainstream of the Senate or the Jewish community sees it.”

Kurtzer [supporter Obama - Ed] blamed such sentiment on “attack dogs” and writers of scurrilous e-mails. “He’s right within the mainstream of American society and Jewish community concerns.”

... Next question to Kurtzer: Obama’s assertion that he needn’t have a “Likud view”—that of Israel’s right-wing party—to be pro-Israel. Kurtzer explained that Obama wanted to see a “plurality of views.” Silence in the room.

To that, Lewis [supporting Hilary - Ed] retorted: “The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel. It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties.”  The audience members applauded.

So let’s run that thought-crime from Ann Lewis by once more.  Remember, this is a senior advisor to the Lizard Queen speaking.

“The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel.  It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties.”

Well, it didn’t go down too swimmingly with the goy readers of the Post.  The really interesting thing is the number of commenters in the long thread to the article who understand all about the Lobby.  The outrage speaks for itself.  One comment, from EdFromNH, stands above the rest for its articulacy:-

That comment, by Ann Lewis, one of Hillary Clinton’s most trusted aides and the other comments recorded in Dana Milbank’s enlightening article “The Audacity of Chutzpah,” prove the current treasonous extreme of America’s pro-Israeli lobby—the lobby many say is the most powerful in America—the lobby that many believe almost single-handedly pushed America into its ill-considered and ill-fated war in Iraq.

This lobby has now become so hyper-arrogant that they claim it is the “duty” of the President of the United States to support the will of the electorate of a foreign state no matter how much it might conflict with the interests of America. They are, in effect, demanding that any candidate for President must surrender America’s sovereignty to Israel, a state founded for the purpose of discriminating against people based on whether or not they are Jewish.

My family was in the media. We repeatedly received letters from Rabbis, co-signed by all our Jewish sponsors, threatening to put us out of business unless we carried pro-Israeli or pro-Jewish propaganda, which we did. If you understand the power of the pro-Israeli lobby, not only in Washington, but also in the news media, the article “The Audacity of Chutzpah” explains why Barak Obama is being smeared by certain loud voices in our media.

Now, let’s get real.  EdFromNH is sufficient of a bien pensant to still believe in the fundamental goodness of Man, meaning in this instance Dana Milbank and all the Jews who did not sign those threatening letters.  He has no real conception of ethnicity, and misses the Manichean character of genetic interests and resource competition.  So, inevitably, he reaches for an abstract, liberalistic measure of the good, and concludes that “Zionism and anti-Semitism are evil twins.  They are both ideologies founded on discriminating against people based on whether or not they are Jewish.”  He appeals to American Jewry to “condemn the offensive discrimination, censorship, McCarthy-like smear campaigns, and treason of the Zionist-racists who force our politicians to subject the sovereignty of America to the will of Israeli voters.”

So despite experiencing the sharp end of Jewish activism, EdFromNH is none too sharp on the JQ.  He displays no interest in escaping his cocoon of comfortable illusion.  Probably he will never escape.  But the one thing that might encourage him - and those millions like him - would be the four-year get-down of the black son of Dar al-Harb in the Oval Office.  Neither Clinton Two, the Horror Movie nor Lie Hard offer quite the same heady mix of stress fractures between the “sole manipulators” and the “soul manipulator”, as well as between the White House and white America.

If I had a vote on 4th November 2008 - and of course I do not - I would cast it for whoever would unwittingly do the most for my people.  He’s black.  That’s how dire the choice is.