Jewish World Review Feb. 28, 2001 / 5 Adar, 5761
Thomas H. Lipscomb
Clintons' Court Jews
Sunday's Los Angeles Times carried a refreshingly honest and well-argued article by Walter Reich, a professor at George Washington University and a Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center and a former Director of the Holocaust Museum in Washington, urging his fellow Jews to disassociate themselves from the "reckless betrayal of trust" shown by the paid-off claque of Israeli and American Jews who promoted the obscene Marc Rich pardon.
The Reich article is excellent as far as it goes, but the underlying problem is larger than this one incident. For the dirty little secret no one ever seems to want to discuss is that for eight years the Clinton Administration itself was primarily funded and supported by liberal Jews. Drawn together by sheer affinity for the values the Clintons claimed to stand for, rather than grist for any conspiracy mill, Clinton's Jewish supporters were far more secular than observant in their religious practices and the kind of Jews critics like both the left's Alan Dershowitz and the right's Eliott Abrams accuse of ignoring their responsibility to carry on the great traditions of Judaism already so eroded by a sea of American secularism.
An astonishing number of the Clinton Administration's major appointments went to liberal, secular Jews, their kids filled the junior White House positions, and Jewish liberal attitudes represented the mindset that it supported through the policies of its Administration's departments and agencies in both the for profit and nonprofit sectors of society. So it is hardly surprising the Clintons moved to the city with the largest Jewish population in the world-- New York. Where could they be closer to the primary source of their funders, their enablers, and the media coverage that enhanced their effectiveness?
And that is why what Lenin called the "commanding heights" of society-- the media, the professional associations, and the most prestigious academic centers which are largely controlled by liberal, non-practicing Jews at present-- were lockstep in covering up Clinton's outrages. From the American Bar Association's weird choice as their keynote speaker of the only President fined by a Federal judge for obstruction of justice who also had the entire Supreme Court boycott his State of the Union Address, to the hundreds of "celebrity" signatures available in an instant for ads backing Clinton in newspapers and the talking heads on television, liberal, Jews made up a vastly disproportionate number of his most visible supporters.
So the real problem with the Marc Rich case is not that it is some bizarre exception that risks reviving an antiquated anti-Semitic "stereotype." It is rather that it is simply so blatant and outrageous an example of reality that it threatens to reveal the larger shape of what has really going on for the past eight years.
One cannot blame any minority from trying to exert all the political power in its own interest that it can accumulate and deploy. Irish, Italians, blacks and even Mormons have tried and succeeded in monopolizing areas of political power at various times in American history. That is one of the constant risks representative democracy has to run. And that is precisely why Theodore Roosevelt pointed out that it is in the best interest of all Americans to give up hyphenated ethnic politics in favor of inclusiveness and "equal justice under law" according to the Constitution that can protect all Americans rather than just some of us who happen to be in power at a given time.
But it is their fellow Americans' fault if far-left Jews have built up this disproportionate power in the Democratic party. And no small reason for this is that we have allowed ourselves to be blackmailed into silence by the notion that criticizing liberal, irreligious Jews for the errors they commit as well as other Americans must be avoided lest one be condemned for "anti-Semitism" or be called "a self-hating Jew."
But there is no better time than now to strip liberal, Jews of their sanctimony and let them see what they have become today-- die-hard supporters of the most corrupt First Family in the history of the presidency and the primary enemies of almost every Amendment in the Bill of Rights from Freedom of Speech and Assembly, to the Right to Bear Arms and the Free Exercise of Religion. Without their realizing it, the great liberal Jewish tradition of protecting the rights of the individual has morphed into a total devotion to the power of the State itself
Ironically, this is the same Bill of Rights which gave all our immigrant ancestors the protection from the power of the State that enabled us to make use of our talents and abilities in a multi-cultural society. And this was the same Bill of Rights which great American Jewish jurists like Louis Brandeis and Felix Frankfurter had to remind their fellow Americans in courageous and unpopular decisions was essential to maintaining the balance that made democracy work.
JWR columnist Jonah Goldberg, editor of The National Review Online, often challenges liberals with a question that goes to the heart of the problem: "Other than murder and genocide, just what is there about National Socialism you don't like?"
Given the danger we all face in "becoming what we hate," liberal Jews have good reason these days to ask themselves this question. The birth control organizations they heavily staff and fund treat the life of the unborn as superfluous; their civil liberties organizations spend millions trying to exterminate any public religious expression; organizations funded to prevent outrages like anti-Semitism now choose to attack the right of others to speech they disagree with now that their own statistics prove anti-Semitism is at the lowest level since they were first measured. The environmental organizations they support argue in favor of taking away the property rights of thousands of Americans without compensation in favor of some Arcadian paradise untrod by corrupt humans and the labor unions they support and staff use their members as compulsory cash cows for whatever political causes interest their leadership. A good Nazi could only applaud this kind of single-minded suppression of the chaotic claims of individual rights in favor of the superior value of the State which supposedly represents everyone in a more orderly fashion.
While the media may expend thousands of column inches over the years expressing "concern" over the influence of two Christian Scientists in the Nixon White House, or a few fundamentalists like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the Reagan or Bush Administrations, we have no reason any time soon to expect it to admit its own complicity in covering up the far bigger story of liberal Jewish power in Clinton's Administration.
And this explains why they are so "shocked, shocked" at the Marc Rich affair. It must be an isolated scandal, right? So let's forget fixer Nathan Landow's attempts to keep Kathleen Willey quiet and his odd meeting alone with Vince Foster the weekend before his death, Terry Lenzner whose IRI secret police was the heart of Clinton's brutal White House blackmail machine, Red China's favorite defense contractor Bernard Schwartz of Loral, or the disinterred Arlington "war hero" Larry Lawrence who might have been doing some very interesting financial maneuvering as Clinton's ambassador to Switzerland and dozens of others who may begin to form a pattern the press might actually have to cover.
But even "isolated" scandals are too delicious to ignore. And at some
point the question media people are already whispering about will come
out-- did Marc Rich lay down his ex-wife for his country in her White
House visits over the last two years as well as a few million dollars
through various intermediaries? And we will see the liberal Jewish
Clinton claque breathe a sigh of relief as it can finally stop dragging
around the bloated carcass of a useless and powerless Bill Clinton who
betrayed them in the end like everyone else in his life. Now they can
concentrate their effort and line up behind the perpetually
"disappointed and heartbroken" shark-like Hillary as she may finally
find a cause for a political and marital divorce she can understand that
may well lead them all back to a restoration of
Thomas H. Lipscomb is the director of the Center for the Digital Future in New York. An an editor and publisher for many years, most recently as head of Times Books, he is also the founder of two public companies in digital technology. To comment, click here.