Mr. Peretz, you obviously don't spend much time reading blogs (which may actually speak well of you), so let me bring you up to speed.  Hysteria in blog comments is the *rule*, not the exception.  You may have been misled by the generally more elevated tone of TNR blog commenters (ahem), but let me assure you that if you were to read, say, the typical comments on a politico.com blog, you would swear off this stuff forever.

I would never hit you in the groin, Mr P. You tripped yourself up with that last piece. Not up to your or TNR's standards.

rgds,

t

Marty, I figured you as one who'd find these comments amusing.  Please don't tell me you're offended.  That's not you.

Also, when you linked to the piece in Spine, the Spine people found each other and got right into it.  Here. This is what happens when you open the boards to everybody.  Which is why I don't bother reading those threads.

Shabbat shalom, tootsie.  

From the way you shamelessly proceed in you posts from the premise that Obama is the Second Coming and that the Clintons are the anti-Christ, I should say that being defensive about the inevitable backlash is more than a tad precious.

"...my defense of him against his paranoid critics who seem to think that he doesn't believe anything he has said himself but believes everything said by everybody who's a bit nutsy he has met in his life."

Paranoid critics?  Anything?  Everything?  Everybody? A bit nutsy?  In his life?  Now who's being hysterical, noot to mention disingenuous?

"Believe me, I do not endanger America or Israel..."

I believe you, I believe you!

"I do not 'self-hate' anything."

George W. Bush couldn't have put it better.

. "But to see how hysterical people have become during this campaign."

Sure, You have been hysterical during during this campaign. Most of TNT are being hysterical  in  their animal hatred of Clintons and seeing racism everywhere.

Once upon a time I stood atop the heap of 100 meter breaststroke crowd. I occupied the top dog slot for a period of three years. I even held a pool record which stood unbroken for seven years. There was a final swim meet in that third year in which one particular dogged challenger and pursuer touched me out for a his victory and my loss. I expressed my disappointment of that humiliating loss with defensive insouciance and an unplanned bellyflop from the high dive after the meet. Insult to injury and thank you very much.

Now let's count the lies Obama told:

he lied about his relation to Antoin "Tony" Rezko, he lied abut his relation to Wright till he was forced to confront it. These are substantive and not just narcissistic self aggrandizing les.

What else did he lied about?

Obama supporters can’t tell the difference, can they, Mr. Peretz?

jacobt1 said:  "Sure, You have been hysterical during during this campaign. Most of TNT are being hysterical  in  their animal hatred of Clintons and seeing racism everywhere."

Yes, and when Obama lies he just gives a speech on racism which satisfies his supporters' paranoia.

I repeat (all rights reserved)

A soulless pol named Obama

posed as being above all the drama;

but struck with bad luck,

when wrong Wright threw him a fuck,

right under the truck went his nana.

It all boils down to this:

Wright said some things that offended people. There are two kinds of people.

1. People who love to be offended, because it's like a match striking against the - whatever that thingy is on the matchbook - of their sense of grievance. People who nurse their grievances as part of their identities - lots of Jewish people I'm looking at you - love it when someone validates that grievance - woo hoo! In fact that's the kind of sentiment Wright had when he said those things.

2. People who flinch at what Wright said, and who TRULY want to make peace, understand others, get over it - Obama, for example. They don't want to believe the worst in people, and they look for ways to get past it, understand someone's point of view without sharing it - they love it when they hear a speech like Obama's, they get it and they respond to it. They know full well he didn't throw his grandmother under the bus.

Marty, to your credit, you belong in the second camp. The screechers - and make no mistake, it's a screech of ecstacy - belong in the first. That is all.

psantillana:  Wow, I couldn't have put it better.  I've been trying to say this for days, but couldn't come close to this.  Love your first sentence, too.

What I also find funny is how rabid the Clinton defenders are.  They seem incapable of realizing that it's not only the Obamaphiles, like me, who have biases.  Though a lawyer once told me that the definition of a bias is a prejudice of which one is unaware.  

"Lies," Jackson? That's a good one.  

Marty - Over the years, when it comes to your ability to take a punch, I have come to think of you as having the thick skin of a brontasaurus.  So I am sorry to hear that some of the ignorant barrage got you. You are in a tough business and often lead with your chin.  

But if you were to be asked in some hypothetical future: "Where were you in the election of 2008 when we had a real chance for redemption and renewal?" I would respond in your behalf that you answered the call, that you showed up and gave your best shot to the one candidate that might keep us all from becoming cynical about the fate and prospects of our beloved country, that you were willing to stand there and take all the slings and arrows that inevitably came your way, that in doing so you embodied the best of the profession of journalism, and that, indeed, you have been a true mentsch.

So Marty, on this occasion at least, I say: thanks for being so staunch. Screw your detractors and get yourself a kevlar jockstrap!

Sorry Marty but you are no Al Sharpton.

In the obsessiveness over offense that too frequently overcomes the American Popular Culture, there are certain individuals that carry more weight in these matters.  

Certainly Mssrs Sharpton and Jackson if the African Americans are involved.  And their absolution or agititation maybe arbitrary or seem unseemly, but they are the arbitrors.

Now if Leon Weseltier writes a piece that tells me Obama is all right, then maybe I'll listen.

And I noticed there were only a handful of replies to the threads about China but 120 about this (in addition to the thousands of other replies on this very topic)

One lesson of this for any politician, don't attend a church that allows videotaping. Non Mormons are not even allowed access to a Mormon temple, much less their services. Should we have demanded press access and cameras?

I just find the cost of opening up the religious lives of every candidate to far outweigh the supposed benefits. Or are we going to decide which churches are to be open for inspection and which are off limits?

Obviously, I realize the problem here is that Wright himself sold the dvd's, but as I respect his religious freedom to do so and also have no interest in becoming a member of the UCC that doesn't mean I have to buy them.

psantillana, Wright said that Israel is to blame for the Palestinian problems and for 911.

Wright let a high ranking Hamas official write in the Church's paper that Israel is developing an "ethnic bomb" which targets Blacks and Arabs.

If you think you can make peace with that, good luck to you.

btw: Peretz supports Obama not because he thinks he will make peace, but because he will be tough on foreign policy issues and especially on Palestinian terrorists.

I think he is wrong, you and others here (Molly Simon) for example also think that he is wrong.

So, who is right, you or Marty?

Marty, I don't who called you a self hating Jew. I certainly don't believe that.

I do believe that you are wrong about Obama though.

Even  self loving Jews like you and me could also be wrong at times.

What's really tragic is Obama's having to live up to the hype created by the political promoters and their publicists.  If he were allowed to season and mature, then he might indeed make a perfect candidate and a fine president.  But in this age of Me/Now, the Obama crowd are those who live only for the quarterlies.  Like Peretz, who may not live to see Obama run when he should -- being the supreme narcissist, he wants to see Obama run...Now!

Will somebody kindly tell me what this means:

"I do not 'self-hate' anything."

jackson, I see you saying essentially "yeah but Wright believes all this absolute garbage - and at what point does something get to be a dealkiller?" which is a fair point, if that's what you are saying. My response - and from what I understand Obama's too - is that he knows Wright - has seen much much more than the "greatest misses" highlight reel, and admires the guy on the basis of the non-crazy stuff. And when someone you really do know and admire says some crazy stuff, then what you do is try to figure out why he said it - you truly want to know this, and not just push the trapdoor button, dust your hands off and go, "next!' Obama chalked it up to a bitterness that comes from Wright's experience as a black man of a certain age [Emmett Till's age, fwiw], and Obama knows the dude, so I defer. And they do talk and argue about this stuff. That is all I would ask of the friend of a crazypants.

As for Marty's view of Obama's view of the Israel situation - ??? I do not know enough of the Marty canon to speculate on that topic. I just thought that what he said on the Wright ordeal sounded like what I thought.

And thanks, mollysimon!

Yeah Marty, when I have called you self-hating or endangering the security of America or Israel?

There are only two areas you've gone beyond the pale of respectable debate.  First is Darfur: you have used that tragedy for your own political agenda -- attacking Arabs, the UN, and two liberal newspapers and utterly ignoring the gutless presidential candidates and American institutions who have been no better.  If Samantha Power is "the genocide chick," you've become "the genocide pimp."  The other has been your attacks on Chelsea Clinton for not using her privilege and paid-for education to go into a profession nobler than finance.  I think that was a low blow, especially given the comparisons that I made to certain other children.  Isn't "first do no harm" something that came out of Judaism?  I'll accept the "hysterical" charge on thoes points!

psantillana,

First your last point: I do know that one of the reasons Marty endorsed Obama is that he believes that he will be tough on terrorist organizations and not press Israel into negotiations with them.

I share Marty's view about not pressing Israel to negotiate with terrorists but I am not sure that Obama agrees with Marty on that issue. This is a supposition on my part and it is based on Obama's comments about being willing to talk to all parties.

Second, on most domestic issues I have no disagreement with Obama.

Third, I had reservations about Obama as a candidate because of his lack of experience from day one. The Wright incident merely confirmed by hesitation to vote for him, but it wasn't the primary reason.

Finally, Marty contradicted himself when he attempted to excuse Obama's involvement with Wright. He says that anyone can disagree with their Pastor, Priest, or Rabbi’s views and still remain a member of the congregation. He may be right about this, though I certainly would not sit through one whole sermon if my Rabbi blamed the US for 911 or made comments that they US was as guilty as al Qaida because we bombed Hiroshima, much less would I sit through 20 years of them.

In any case, he also said that Wright was “like a father to him.” If the latter is the case, then their relationship was closer than that of congregant to Pastor and his earlier point that he should be viewed as just another member of a congregation is wrong.

However, you cut it there is a problem there.

To me Obama is just another political candidate which is fine, but his pretence and that of his supporters to treat his candidacy as something special, something above politics, grates on me.  I don’t want to sit through four or perhaps eight years of the reverend Obama’s preaching. This isn’t Iran, yet and we are not electing an Ayatollah.

Lymon the phrase “first do no harm” stems from Hypocrites:

“It is the opinion of many scholars that Hippocrates did, in fact, originate the phrase, but did so in his Epidemics, Bk. I, Sect. XI. One translation reads: "Declare the past, diagnose the present, foretell the future; practice these acts. As to diseases, make a habit of two things — to help, or at least to do no harm."

The Greek "First, do no harm" becomes "Primum non nocere" in Latin. A translation of the original perhaps, but some sources attribute "Primum non nocere" to the Roman physician, Galen.”

Maimonides, I believe borrowed this dictum from either Hypocrites or Galen.

jackson, I'm not sure that Marty's points on Wright as you present them contradict each other. I think they are just two separate reasons for not leaving the church. If he has a relationship with Wright beyond congregant, then all the more reason to talk to him and not just jump ship. And the first point that you mention [and disagree with] is that disagreeing with your pastor on some things is nothing that should force you to leave. That in itself doesn't contradict the other point, that I can see.

But I'll point out that I disagree with it myself, in that if the statements are egregious enough, and consistent with the pastor's worldview as reflected in what comes from the pulpit consistently, then of course you leave. But it's important also to say that this is not what happened here, that these outbursts were not in keeping with the message of hope and charity and all that Christian stuff that Wright usually puts out, and that attracted Obama to the church in the first place. And Obama agrees with us, because he said on The View that had Wright not resigned AND not admitted the error of these statements [I'm paraphrasing here] then he would not have felt comfortable staying.

jackson, further rumination on your comment, Israelwise, and negotiationwise: I see people responding to Obama's talk-to-people thing as worry that he'll compromise, hand over the store, roll over for enemies, etc. And sometimes, with some people, that is what that means. But it all depends on who is doing the talking. Obama has a history - most spectacularly in the death penalty reform he got passed, unanimously, in Illinois - of engaging the opposition in discussion, then getting exactly what he wants. This is someone you want speaking for you, is how I view it.

The death penalty reform thing is worth looking into, and here is a brief rundown and analysis of it:

www.samefacts.com/.../obama_against_police_torture.php

Thanks for the link psantillana, I'll take a look at it.

For the rest, we are all just speculating.  We will not know who is right till he becomes President, if he gets elected.

I am not a gambler, so I will withhold my vote for now.

I just the article in the Washington Post, psantillana.

Now, while I give credit to Obama for getting the legislaton he wanted, I would like to know what it was je gave in return.  Al the article said was"

"By showing officers that he shared many of their concerns, even going so far as to help pass other legislation they wanted, he was able to quiet the fears of many."

what kind of legislation did he help pass?  Politicos don't roll over for nothing.  

jack -- thanks for the correction!  Well, I'm sure it's not *incompatible* with Judaism!

The Wright affair shows that Obama's just another politician. A decent, intelligent politician, but a politician-- not the Great Uniter, not the messiah, not the one who will inaugurate a new birth of freedom etc. If his supporters would simply admit that and let the debate proceed on a rational, adult footing, we'd all be a lot better off, Obama included.

Don't whine Peretz. What you are is a piece of shit. If it suits your shitty arguments, you quote Maureen Dowd, that trollop who made anti-Semitism cute. If Israel depended on your help, we could all go to look for a tall tree fro which to hang ourselves.

Go fuck yourself Peretz. Go play with your true soul mates (both of whom match very closely your intelligence and honesty level), Alexander Cockburn and Noam Chomsky.

lymon1 said:  "jack -- thanks for the correction!  Well, I'm sure it's not *incompatible* with Judaism!"

Yes, it is very compatable with Judaic ideals.

I am glad to see I am not the only one finding the TNR's and Mr. Peretz's Obama-infatuation bizarre.  I used to like TNR for its balance, for different takes on issues, and for perspective.  Now it has all become semi-cultist, predictable, uninformative and so biased it makes me cringe.  I have been reconsidering my subscription (which I have had for many years). After all, it's a bit expensive to get the magazine just in order to read the Stanley Kauffman film reviews, the only unpredictable and balanced column left!  

I also enjoyed the Peretz blog until it became almost exclusively a soap box for Obama-praising and Hillary-bashing that are both often out of proportion with the actual deeds.  I do not find politicians lovable in general, and I expect that the longer they've been around the more stuff can be uncovered.  However, I find it difficult to swallow that sitting in Wright's church for 20 years, a deeply personal choice that should reflect who Obama is (with everything that followed - racist grandma, typical whites, almost leaving, race speech, etc.) For me it sounds worse than anything that has been written in pages and pages of the TNR about Hillary, which is piddly by comparison. Scratch any politician and you'll  find pretty much what they "uncover" about Hillary; scratch most politicians and you won't find in even long careers all that we have heard about and from young Obama.  This is not a pitch for Hillary, but rather a call for TNR to get some perspective and come back to its old balanced self instead of being an unpaid (by him) ad for the Obama campaign.

Hey Sleepyavl, why don't you either get yourself a life or else go back to sleep?  Some of us here actually want to engage in an intelligent and informed debate!  Keep the tone civil or else GET OFF THIS BLOG!

I know that you may feel entitled to curse and use foul language to attack people after 7 years of Bush-Cheney, but on this blog we find it reprehensible and completely unproductive.

When your better half has mastered your knee-jerk outbursts of profanity feel free to check back and express your opinion.  Until then, keep your trap shut!

Marty - don't take things so hard.  Decent human beings have always had to take a lot of criticism for telling it like it is.  My feeling is that a lot of the anger and vilification that folks project outward often says more about them than it does about the object of their scorn.

Take a page out of Ol' Obama's playbook - he gets attacked all the time, but he keeps cool and settles his score at the time and place of his choosing.

I feel bad. I have just returned from DC and left my laptop home. Get back and find that not only did I miss a chance to read your defense of Obama, but I also squandered a rare opportunity to actually defend you against the masses. I scrolled down and did read your defense. i liked it and I think, I really think, that you understand the difference between disagreeing with parents, friends, and mentors, and not throwing these loved ones under the bus to satisfy your critics. I admire that in Obama, and in you.

Hang tough old dude. I got your back on this one.

Hey Gavriel Meir-Levi, who the hell do you think you are to tell me what to do? Your reference to the Bush-Cheney shows you probably voted for them or like them.

Implying that I like them is a despicable tactic - it reminds me of the Hadash Communist jerks I met in Israel, who called me a racist because I wasn't fond of Hamas terrorists, they way they were.

In any case, shut the hell up. Yes, I have the right to tell that to you, given that you are the chump who told me to get off.

It's interesting that you aren't troubled by Peretz's defense of anti-Semites. You aren't troubled by him promoting a bunch of crazy anti-Semites such as Richard Wright and Samantha Powers or the creepy cult of personality of Obama. No no no, that's gooooood! It's only people like me who trouble you, eh? Some intelligent and informed man you are!

In fact, you yourself further that creepy cult of personality with that groveling, bootlicking "Ol' Obama". What has Obama done is his life to deserve a nickname associated with Abraham Lincoln?

Go have a coffee with your Hadash soulmates. Maybe you'll sing a song about Filastin biladna or have a blast with a Pastor Wright while he's explaining how whites are evil and Gaddafi is the man.

sanda, there are good writers at TNR - some fine, some truly great, some weak. But it's only this bastard Peretz that is completely nuts. He sounds like Soviet propaganda, or like Romanian TV praising Ceausescu circa 1984.

Peretz has no dignity and certainly no honesty. He poses as a Zionist and a defender of Israel, when in fact there's no anti-Semite too bad to promote in his blog if that fucking anti-Semite is in his camp.

If Marty Peretz is a Zionist, then Louis Farrakhan and Noam Chomsky are Zionists too.

jacksondyer, the people here are not supporters of Obama, they are believers. They don't think of Clinton as an adversary, but as an enemy. They don't want a president, but a king and a lover.

Their Obama is not a candidate, he's a saviour - he's called Ol' Abe!! Ol' Abe? Why not the Messiah?

Arguing with fanatics is like reasoning with a donkey.

Marty, Marty- a good chunk of your detractors does not resent you for defending the stance Obama has assumed with regards to Wright issue. It is your unqualified, uncritical admiration of the man, coupled with visceral hatred of Hillary Clinton, that grates on their nerves.

Personally, I was less than inflamed by the whole controversy. I do not believe that Obama shares viewpoints expressed by his preacher or that he ought to have shun him, given that he has likely seen Wright do much good in his lifetime. But I do by and large share the irritation expressed by sleepyavl, jacksondyer and j_m_rice. If the Obama supporters could anyhow evolve from being mere legions of the blissful into thoughtful and balanced individuals that do not jump at every opportunity to liken Hillary to Satan, I might have a lot more patience and goodwill towards the candidate himself.