Three cheers for Joe Lieberman, for describing his friend John Hagee as an eesh elokim like Moses --- the same John Hagee who believes that the Antichrist will be "a blasphemer and a homosexual" who is "at least partly Jewish, as was Adolf Hitler, as was Karl Marx."

Sheesh. What village do you have to start a pogrom in to be called an antisemite these days?

People say that John McCain and Joe Lieberman are joined at the hip, but that's not fair. John McCain is occasionally hit by pangs of decency; Lieberman never is. For example, when asked whether waterboarding is torture at a debate last fall, McCain answered, "I am astonished that…anyone could believe that [waterboarding] is not torture." Lieberman, on the other hand, observed that waterboarding "is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies." Good point, Joe!

Little Known Fact: Instead of sweat glands, Lieberman cools himself with a system of hydraulic sacs that inflate and deflate; hence the jowls So when it turned out last week that the Apocalypse Now theology of "Pastor" John Hagee includes the idea that Hitler was God's own personal gopher between Himself and His chosen people, McCain very quickly cut bait. Which meant that the countdown to Lieberman slobberingly embracing Hagee was on.

Sure enough, the news came on Wednesday that Lieberman will be the headline act at Hagee's annual conference for Christians who support Israel as a rope supports a hanged man. And yesterday, the AP reported Lieberman's rationalization: "while Hagee's comments were unacceptable and hurtful, [Lieberman] will judge him on his life work fighting anti-Semitism and building bridges between Christians and Jews." Which is, of course, complete horseshit. Lieberman has been a water-carrier for Hagee for years and the idea that Lieberman didn't know what Hagee and his followers think of Jews is risible. When Hagee was "only" in trouble for his anti-Catholic bigotry, Lieberman couldn't have been happier to rush to his defense.

Just how marginal is the fringe Lieberman has decided to occupy? It's not just reform rabbis like Eric Yoffie and David Saperstein who don't think Christian preachers and organizations actively lobbying for the annihilation of Israel are friends of the Jews. Abe Foxman, who had no objection to Hagee's bigotry as long as it was "not a Jewish issue," seems to have noticed that preaching that the Final Solution was divinely ordained is a Jewish issue. Think about that for a second: Foxman has the mental dexterity to deny the Armenian genocide, but not to deny John Hagee's antisemitism. Lieberman is making a bargain too corrupt for Abe Foxman.

Not, by the way, that Lieberman's total lack of scruples is a function of his transformation into an exhaust valve of the Straight Talk Express. Back in the long, long ago days of the year 2000, when Lieberman was busy doing for Jewish national candidates what Geraldine Ferraro did for women in 1984, he managed to suck up to Louis Farrakhan for votes. So maybe Lieberman will be remembered as a peacemaker in the end; who else could assemble a rainbow coalition of antisemitic religious charlatans with such aplomb?

(P.S. Lieberman's also a lousy senator. That huge clusterfuck in the Department of Homeland Security? Guess who's in charge of oversight.) 

For some reason, people are acting shocked about the news that John Hagee, the Three 'H's Of Zionism: Herzl, Hitler, and HageeTexas evangelical preacher who thinks buggery caused Hurricane Katrina, thinks Muslims are mindless, indiscriminate killers, thinks the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon, thinks Harry Potter fans are Satanists, and thinks the suffering of the Jews over the centuries is divine punishment, also happens to believe that Hitler was God's proxy on earth in His plan to return the Jews to Israel. But that's hardly news at all.

Yet on TV and all through the blogosphere, people are going nuts over the revelation that Hagee sees the Final Solution as God's work. Here's an example of our crazy political culture: It's a sure bet that Joe Lieberman will describe you as a latter day Moses and an "Eesh Elo Kim" if you organize millions of "pro-Israel" Christians to agitate for a war with Iran (so that Israel can be utterly annihilated in accord with God's wishes and you and your flock can build a stairway to heaven with Jewish bodies). Mention Hitler, however, and you might find yourself suddenly anathema. But since Hagee did mention Hitler in conjunction with his otherwise perfectly kosher, and indeed, Mosaic fantasies about finishing the job Hitler started, McCain—who was endorsed by the controversial pastor—finds himself in a pretty awkward position.

Of course, nobody thinks McCain shares Hagee's theology, though McCain apparently believes that it's legitimate to target his opponents with equivalent innuendo. Still, McCain didn't just wake up one day to find himself endorsed by Hagee; he deliberately courted Hagee's endorsement as part of a general strategy of shoring up his support among Evangelicals. Which could simply be chalked up to a poor vetting procedure by his staff, except that McCain specifically "admires" Hagee's foreign policy vision. It would certainly behoove McCain to clearly explain the differences between the belligerent policy towards Iran, Russia, and China that he wants to pursue, and the belligerent policy Hagee favors, but that would entail embracing nuance, which McCain has already made clear is tantamount to appeasement.

Moreover, McCain's support among religious and social conservatives goes back no more than a few months and is extremely fragile, compared to their now-dormant mistrust and loathing of McCain which were built up over years. What can McCain say about the surrogate he recruited as an ambassador to the Christian right who turned out to have endorsed the Final Solution? That Hagee is "an agent of intolerance"?

My prediction: McCain will impress us all with a bold stroke of mavericking that nobody could have anticipated.

Ta-Nehisi Coates on blacks and Jews:

There is this constant meme among black folks that we can never come together to do anything right. As Ice Cube once said, "Broke up the family forever\And to this day black folk can't stick together." The other part of that logic holds that other ethnic groups--Jews are usually cited--are somehow better at supporting their own. I remember, a few years back, me and my good friend Eyal Press were coming home from a party and Brooklyn. During the train ride, I explained to him that while black antisemitism gets all the headlines, there is a certain sector of black folks that worship Jews for their vaunted sense of unity. Eyal got a good laugh out of that, mostly because in his picture of Jewish life, debating and fighting were central.

Actually, I think it's often the same sector. Jews see that kind of admiration as threatening because to them it sounds a lot like traditional antisemitism, especially when you get into stuff like "Jews only spend money in their community.” But even when the most antisemitic Black Nationalist starts talking about the Jews, there's this grudging respect, like "You're ruthless, but we wanna be like you and run shit."

The most famous black Jew since Jesus: Sammy Davis Jr But even the idea that Jews "run shit" is based off antisemitic conspiracy theories. Yeah, there are a lot of Jews in high places, but the vast majority of people in positions of power are white gentile men. Stating that white men run things is simply stating the obvious—although don't mention it on TV, because Fox News will run a clip of you saying that one phrase for the next three months.

The reason people notice Jews in high places is that they're still kind of "not white." (Off-white?) You rarely hear about the Catholic conspiracy to control America anymore (except maybe from McCain supporter John Hagee) even though there are five Catholics on the Supreme Court.

It's not the same thing coming from black folks as it is coming from white folks. You don't have the same history of persecution, blood libel, and genocide. But most Jews won't make the distinction between admiration informed by stereotypes and plain antisemitism. Talking about Jewish "unity" and economic savvy sounds to them like it sounds when white people talk about how good at sports black folks are.

But really, you get the sense that the media focus on "black antisemitism" is not only to let more mainstream white antisemites off the hook, but also so that white people get really angry about black antisemitism—not because they care about the Jews, but because they identify with Jews as white people under such circumstances. It gives them an excuse to accuse black folks of racism while still insisting they possess no prejudice of their own.

In any case, back to unity:

Barack Obama won over 90 percent of the black vote in Indiana and North Carolina. I don't know what that is, if it isn't sticking together. Unity, in and of itself, isn't a virtue--black folks "unified" behind OJ. But I really believe, given the people left in the running, black folks really got behind the best man for the job. Last year pundits delighted themselves by pointing out that Barack Obama wasn't black enough. I don't know how you get any blacker than having 9 out of 10 of us behind you. I mean really. Malcolm couldn't even have gotten 9 out 10. To paraphrase Chris Rock, Obama is entering into Pat Riley territory.

Yeah but to be fair, Malcolm probably couldn't have won Iowa. I would have liked to see that shit.

How crazy is John Hagee -- the anti-Catholic, antisemitic, anti-Muslim, anti-gay evangelical preacher who serves as official Louis Farrakhan to the John McCain campaign?

In a sermon on the coming Russo-Arab invasion of Israel (and really, what's theApocalypse: The goal of the McCain-Hagee campaign difference between Russians and Arabs when you think about it?), which will drown the Jewish state in rivers of blood, Hagee bolsters his prophecy with some (to put it mildly) tendentious biblical interpretation, and ominously warns that if the US helps facilitate Israel-Palestinian peace, we, too, will be subject to divine wrath. Concluding his exposition of God's plan for middle Eastern politics, Hagee does the Lord's work of parting fools from their money. And he's got a unique marketing tool, namely this more than a little cracked take on symbolism of the one dollar bill:

George Washington wanted to do something to honor the Jewish people, so he put a tribute on the American dollar. It’s over the head of the eagle, it’s to the Jewish people. Right over the head of the American eagle is the star of David – that’s a six-pointed star. Around that star is the shekinah glory of god that’s a starbust. The shekinah glory of God that dwelt over the tabernacle. If you turn it upside-down this is the menorah – the flames of the menorah that are lifting up. For all of you who are now reaching for a dollar bill, we’ll take an offering in just a moment and receive every one of them.

Just as Moses, our Orthodox friends would tell us, wrote the very Bible that describes his death, I suppose it's possible that Washington designed the original greenback. But he would have had to do so from beyond the grave, since the buck went into circulation in 1862 featuring a portrait of the distinctly goyish Salmon P. Chase. Also, the menorah Hagee descries on the back of the bill --- no kidding --- is the eagle's tail-feathers.

So a preacher who blames the historical persecution of Jews on the Jews themselves for their refusal to accept Jesus, who propagates the Whore-of-Babylon strain of anti-Catholic bigotry, who sees Muslims as mindless killers, and blames buggery for natural disasters, is actively lobbying the government to adopt policies whose announced goal is to bring about the end of the world, and in particular, the annihilation of the Jewish state. This same ridiculous, hateful figure has the ear of a major party presidential candidate, and the support of senior legislative officials like Joe Lieberman.

One would think that John McCain's slobbery embrace of Hagee and his subsequent, chickenshit non-disavowal, would merit some media attention. One would be wrong. According to Steve Benen, the "combined number of articles" on McCain and Hagee "from the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, and Boston Globe is zero." So, at least until Hagee puts on blackface, it looks like he's going to get a pass.

At the Democratic debate in Ohio on Tuesday, Tim Russert pressed Barack Obama on the unsolicited endorsement he received from Louis Farrakhan. Russert evidently thought it important for Obama to provide a double-super denunciation, since weeks earlier, Obama remarked:

I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet Magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree.

Since that statement apparently was insufficient, Obama made a further point to "reject and denounce" Farrakhan. In total, he has now decried, strongly condemned, disagreed, rejected, and denounced. One can only speculate what will be the next hoop Obama must jump through to prove once and for all that he doesn't harbor sympathy for Farrakhan deep in the recesses of his heart.

In the meantime, though, it might be worth remarking that John McCain received the endorsement of John Hagee, a white Evangelical preacher whose views are every bit as vile as Farrakhan's.

Who is John Hagee? He is the leader of the group ChristiansThe Hate Talk Express: John McCain and the bigot he loves United for Israel, ostensibly dedicated to fostering good relations between the state of Israel and American Christians (though Protestants only; more on that in a moment). In fact, Hagee advocates a first strike against Iran on the grounds that it "will cause Arab nations to unite under Russia's leadership, as outlined in chapters 38 and 39 of the Book of Ezekiel, leading to an 'inferno [that] will explode across the Middle East, plunging the world toward Armageddon.'" In other words, the annihilation of Israel is a feature, not a bug of his brand of Zionism. Hagee supports the Jewish state, as Lenin would have put it, the way a rope supports a hanging man.

Hagee's philosemitism is likewise peculiar:

It was the disobedience and rebellion of the Jews, God's chosen people, to their covenantal responsibility to serve only the one true God, Jehovah, that gave rise to the opposition and persecution that they experienced beginning in Canaan and continuing to this very day.

Whose fault is it that the Jews have been an historically persecuted people? The Jews' fault, of course, and not their persecutors. Nor are Jews the only group for whom Hagee has, shall we say, an idiosyncratic way of showing his Christian affection.

Hagee on Muslims:

Islam in general -- those who live by the Koran have a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews.

Hagee on gays and New Orleanians:

I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that...[T]here was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came...I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans.

Hagee on Catholicism:

This is the Great Whore of Revelation 17. This is the Antichrist system. This is the apostate church...This false cult system that was born in Genesis 10 and progressed through Israel and became Baal worship, God says "the day is going to come when I'm going to cause this Beast to devour this apostate system"...This false religious system is going to be totally devoured by the Antichrist.

Hagee on Harry Potter fans:

As millions of people anticipate the release of the latest Harry Potter book and film, we're reminded once again of Satan's ongoing attempt to deceive and destroy. The whole purpose of the Potter books is to desensitize readers and introduce them to the occult.

So how did the Straight Talk Express react to support from a man who, by Russert logic, any decent person must reject and denounce pre-emptively? McCain immediately declared himself "very honored," and continued, "all I can tell you is that I am very proud to have Pastor John Hagee's support." And that's the least of it. McCain held a public event to celebrate the Hagee endorsement, and has worked it into his stump speech.

Imagine, for just one moment, what the headlines today would be if Barack Obama had lavished such fulsome praise on Louis Farrakhan.

This is my first post as Jewcy guest blogger and allow me to say how grateful I am to Jewcy's editors for allowing an obstinate Jewish progressive Zionist crank like me to speak my mind about a few of the big issues besetting Israel and the Jewish people over the coming week.

There is a rather vociferous group of Christian Zionist evangelicals calling themselves Christians United for Israel, who I call (with a nod to James Besser of Jewish Week) the "Not One Inch" crowd. These are the fanatics who support Israel to the hilt. They're opposed to giving back a single inch of land that God promised to the Jewish people in the Good Book. In truth, they don't so much support Israel, as support the agenda of the extreme fanatical settler movement.

The apogee of such evangelical fanaticism is Rev. John Hagee, who drew a standing ovation at AIPAC's last national conference when he called for Israel to start a pre-emptive war against Iran. There's a wee problem with the good Reverend's theology since he believes that in order for "Our Lord" to return there will be a massive world conflict in which fully one-third of the Jews will be killed. I assume the one-third includes most of the readers of Jewcy (unless of course you share a fundamentalist settler view of the Israeli-Arab conflict). I know it will include me.

But now you can rest easy knowing there are also evangelicals who don't want to see us fry in the End Times. They also support what I consider to be a far more reasonable, balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinians conflict. Laurie Goodstein, the NY Times' excellent religion reporter, writes that:

...Conservative evangelicals who claim a Biblical mandate to protect Israel have built a bulwark of support for the Jewish nation — sending donations, denouncing its critics and urging it not to evacuate settlements or forfeit territory.

Now more than 30 evangelical leaders are stepping forward to say these efforts have given the wrong impression about the stance of many, if not most, American evangelicals.

On Friday, these leaders sent a letter to President Bush saying that both Israelis and Palestinians have “legitimate rights stretching back for millennia to the lands of Israel/Palestine,” and that they support the creation of a Palestinian state “that includes the vast majority of the West Bank.”

They say that being a friend to Jews and to Israel “does not mean withholding criticism when it is warranted.” The letter adds, “Both Israelis and Palestinians have committed violence and injustice against each other.”

The letter is signed by 34 evangelical leaders, many of whom lead denominations, Christian charities, ministry organizations, seminaries and universities.

Evangelicals for Social Action have, over the past year, broken from some of the most conservative social and political positions espoused by the likes of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Goodstein reports that they've acknowledged, to the chagrin of the more radical members of the evangelical community, that global warming is a serious environmental issue. They've also denounced the use of torture in dealing with terror suspects.

You may read the letter they drafted for President Bush. It's the picture of moderation, something that cannot be said of Pastor Hagee's views:

As evangelical Christians, we embrace the biblical promise to Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you"...We know that blessing and loving people (including Jews and the present State of Israel) does not mean withholding criticism when it is warranted. Genuine love and genuine blessing means acting in ways that promote the genuine and long-term well being of our neighbors. Perhaps the best way we can bless Israel is to encourage her to remember, as she deals with her neighbor Palestinians, the profound teaching on justice that the Hebrew prophets proclaimed so forcefully as an inestimably precious gift to the whole world.

Historical honesty compels us to recognize that both Israelis and Palestinians have legitimate rights stretching back for millennia to the lands of Israel/Palestine. Both Israelis and Palestinians have committed violence and injustice against each other. The only way to bring the tragic cycle of violence to an end is for Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate a just, lasting agreement that guarantees both sides viable, independent, secure states. To achieve that goal, both sides must give up some of their competing, incompatible claims. Israelis and Palestinians must both accept each other’s right to exist. And to achieve that goal, the U.S. must provide robust leadership within the Quartet to reconstitute the Middle East roadmap, whose full implementation would guarantee the security of the State of Israel and the viability of a Palestinian State.

This development probably won't be music to AIPAC's ears since it prefers its evangelicals to be unquestioning boosters of Israel. But think of it--do we want evangelicals rooting for Israel to fight to the last drop of Israeli blood for a maximalist resolution of the conflict; or do we want evangelicals friends telling us what is truly in our long-term best interest even if it causes us momentary discomfort by forcing us to realize we may have to make compromises we'd prefer not to make?

I know which type of friend I'd prefer. The one who tells it like it is and not as I'd prefer it to be. The one who deals in reality rather than fantasy. The one who really cares for me on my terms instead of the one who sees me as a means to an end.

As indicated by this article in today's Jerusalem Post, the verdict is not out on whether Jews (both in and outside of Israel) should embrace the Evangelical community's growing support for Israel. But with the fairly recent establishment of Knesset's Christian Allies Caucus, a cross-party parliamentary caucus that works with Christian friends of Israel all over the world, even the State of Israel itself is, for better or worse, warming up to the possibility that Jews and Israel could benefit from the support of a group as large and loud as the Evangelicals.Looking For an Apocalypse Now: John Hagee's wildly successful fundraising efforts.

The increasingly influential parliamentary lobby, which is made up of 12 Knesset members from seven political parties across the political spectrum, has come to epitomize Israel's newfound interest in garnering the support of the Christian world, especially the largely pro-Israel Evangelicals.

In some ways it's simply an issue of whether or not the ends justify the means. Do we overlook Evangelicals' literalist readings of the bible that see Jews and Israel as tools to usher in Armageddon in order to benefit from their support in the meantime? Should we close our eyes to their tenacious tendency to want to proselytize others? I'm just not sure what the answer is.

[Likud MK Gilad] Erdan said an alliance between Jews and Christians was absolutely critical in the war against Islamic extremism.

"If there is a chance to overcome the forces of Islamic extremism, it is by making them see that they have no chance of success, through an increasingly flourishing relationship between Christians and Jews," he said.

With the Evangelicals," continues Erdan, "we have common, shared Bible-based beliefs, and there is no need to convince them at the core." Right -- many shared beliefs, except when it comes to that whole thing about the Messiah. But that's neither here nor there.Waiting For Armageddon: It Will Happen Right About Here

Of course, it's impossible to have this conversation without referring to John Hagee (who recently said that the Jews are to blame for the Holocaust), an influential evangelical leader from Texas who founded the national lobbying group "Christians United for Israel."

Hagee's fundraising events have, to date, raised more than $10 million for charitable causes in Israel. Now, this can't be a bad thing, right? According to an article in The Forward:

The funds sometimes flow directly into the coffers of the Jewish federations. This past summer, when philanthropic efforts were focused on raising wartime aid for Israel’s embattled northern region, $1 million of the money raised in San Antonio was donated to the Jewish Federation of Greater Houston for the Israel Emergency Campaign.

Another $3 million went to an orphanage in the Galilee, and $1 million was donated to Nefesh B’Nefesh, an Israeli not-for-profit organization that helps Jews settle in Israel. Hagee and his wife, Diana, were recognized by the national body of federations, United Jewish Communities, as “honorary chairs” of the $350 million emergency campaign.

I think this is awesome. Charity is charity, right? But one wonders what the trade-off here will be -- not to mention the creepy presence of Jerry Falwell on the board of Hagee's organization.

Critics complain that Hagee’s hawkish, biblically based views on Israel do not serve the Jewish state, and that his conservative domestic agenda — including opposition to gay marriage, abortion and immigration — is squarely at odds with the liberal views of most American Jews.

“I don’t like that they would not like to see Israel trade land for peace, because in my view that’s a very important formula,” said Rabbi Jonathan Biatch of Temple Beth El in Madison, Wis. “The real bottom line is the fact that this organization would like to exacerbate tensions in the Middle East so it will lead to Armageddon.”

And, on a final note . . .

“To get in bed with the hard Christian right on Israel is a dangerous path,” said Daniel Sokatch, executive director of the Los Angeles-based Progressive Jewish Alliance. “This is a hard-driving, extremely smart and successful movement to essentially recast the U.S. as a Christian nation, and if Jews don’t think that empowering that group in American foreign policy isn’t part and parcel of empowering that group on domestic policy, they’re wrong.”