Lieberman’s Betrayal
That’s no way for a Jew to act, Senator
| 7:00 am Dec 23, 2009 | Print | Email / Share
Lieberman leaving a press conference in the U.S. Capitol last week.
CREDIT: Mark Wilson/Getty Images
Much has been written in the progressive press about how Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman has betrayed, first, the party that elected him to the senate in the first place (and protected his seniority in the second place, when he got himself reelected to the senate as an independent); second, the Obama agenda that he supported as a candidate; and, third, the cause of universal health care and/or any health-care reform. Indeed, he is vulnerable on all of these counts.
But he is also guilty of a fourth betrayal. And it is this fourth betrayal that, in my view, accounts for much of the anger aimed at Lieberman, anger greater than that expressed at the Republican opposition, which has cynically voted as a bloc to block any health-care reform emanating from the Democrats. Lieberman’s fourth betrayal is the betrayal of his Jewish heritage.
It may quickly be pointed out that the neoconservative movement itself is populated mostly by Jews and that the so-called godfather of neo-conservatism, Irving Kristol, was himself a Jew. Therefore, some may think, it would seem illogical, irrational, and ahistorical to be angry at Lieberman for betraying his Jewishness by adopting a conservative stance. Maybe so. But in my (Jewish) judgment, it’s a fact.
And it’s a fact whether one regards Judaism as a religion or a culture. Whether one is Orthodox, Conservative, or Reform, whether one is a Zionist or an assimilationist, whether one is a Hasid or a heretic, what unites people of the Jewish faith, persuasion, or heritage is their internalization of the ethical imperative.
Whatever one’s politics, the threat of a fellow Jew to undermine all health-care reform if he does not get his way would seem to run counter to a people whose moral heritage includes wanting to take care of those less fortunate than themselves. (As Marissa Brostoff wrote in an earlier Tablet article, it all goes back to Maimonides, who in effect said that universal health care is an absolute necessity.)
Rabbi Jill Jacobs makes this clear in her new book, There Shall Be No Needy: Pursuing Social Justice Through Jewish Law and Tradition. “Jewish legal texts,” Jacobs writes, “impose on the community an obligation to provide financial and other resources for the ill.” No less a rabbinic authority than Shlomo Goren, chief Ashkenazi rabbi of Israel from 1973 to 1983, sounded a similar note when he argued during a doctors’ strike that “the government may not excuse itself from its responsibility toward the sick since the government is responsible for the health of the people, not the doctors.”
Cynics claim that Lieberman’s opposition to a competitive government-run health care option is prompted by all the private insurance companies in his home state, companies that have supported him through the years. But even if his principal objection is a matter of principle, his fellow Jews (and others) should wonder why not simply vote no rather than bring down the house (i.e., the Senate) and the whole health-care bill with it.
No wonder a people whose legacy is near-universal support for FDR’s New Deal are offended when one of their own invokes the public health insurance option as a pretext for undermining the principle of near-universal health care.
If Lieberman were a gentile, it would, for many Jews, be a mere political disagreement. But Lieberman being Lieberman, the feeling is that he should be ashamed of himself. And by the way, he should.
74 Responses to “Lieberman’s Betrayal”
Leave a Reply
India’s (Jewish) Mother
How Mirra Alfassa went from being a French bohemian to an Indian goddess
Paradise Lost
How the Mossad assassinated my tropical vacation
Up in Arms
A new book offers a history of Jewish terrorism in Israel from the Maccabees to the present
Senator Lieberman, did not vote wisely on the health care reform issue and he has put all American Jews and non-Jews in a very difficult and costly economic situation.
There have been many pointed responses here to Navasky’s slanderous and distortion filled attack on Lieberman.
Let me just thank Michael for reminding us that it was the Democratic Party that betrayed Lieberman when they tried to unseat him by supporting Ned Lamont.
Zach correctly notes Lieberman’s opposition to the first versions of the health reform bill was based on sound fiscal- and moral grounds.
Indeed, maybe the tzaddik Arthur Waskow, who’s trying to wrangle up a prove-your-orthodox-bona-fides campaign against Lieberman, would like to tell us how a bill that takes a huge bite out of Medicare(and will result in degraded care over time as more and more doctors refuse to accept Medicare, and as the government limits the procedures it covers) advances the cause of pekuach nefesh.
Finally, why doesn’t Navasky do a little hesbon ha-nefesh himself and admit that his support for Alger Hiss was so bloody wrong-headed?
Victor, Lieberman may be righto or wrong, but he is not the Senator of Jews.
He is a Senator of Conn. and it’s up to them to to decide if he should be reelected.
I doubt you would like it if a leftist Jewish Senator was accused of being not Jewish enough, or too Jewish.
I don’t think you are an antisemite but such views are in essence antisemitic.
You should know better, Victor.
Well’Well it don,t take long for fellow Jews to turn on each others does it.
instead of putting the blame were it belongs on the Obama administration.
who should stay out of the medical
health department.If anything Sen.Liberman should be commended for his
bravery to stand his grong against the current. which is not an easy thing to
up against a tide. how ever He was not alone in this. Our Lousiana, sen landew
mary also held out agaist the tide and allso had to put up with angry hostile
supports of the Obama bill .
if this is a demicratic system we live
in them people right to disagree.
also you no right to question this mans
religion what gives you the right to do
that . you seem to have made your self jugde and jury. remeber your not G-D.
sincerly karenJohnson
shalom
p.s. i believe mrs.landrew mary is a demercrat.
An old D.C. saying is that there are two things ordinary mortals should never see: the making of sausage and the crafting of legislation.
I may disagree with what Lieberman has done, but I won’t throw out the “betrayal” label. He represents his State of Connecticut and acts within his conscience. And that conscience is a Jewish one. Even if other Jews disagree with him, it’s possible for people to have disagreements in good faith.
Navasky,Goldstone-birds of a feather flock together.
Senator Lieberman may be hypocritical, vengeful, corrupt and a bad Jew but Mr. Navasky’s post crosses a dangerous border that conflates religion, ethnicity and politics in an amalgam from which Jews have never benefited.
I love it when non-Halachic Jews tell Orthodox Jews how to act. I also love it when Judaism is conveniently distilled into one teaching: “wanting to take care of those less fortunate than themselves.” (Or “tikkun olam,” for example.)
Maybe Mr. Navasky should worry about his own neshama before condemning another Jew for not being “Jewish” enough.
This is honestly one of the most offensive opinion pieces that I’ve read in a long time. A core principle of Judaism is a profound respect for differences of opinion; a cursory reading of the Gemara should make this clear to all, but the most obtuse. Ours is a profoundly non ideological religion, so the idea that one’s adherence to Judaic principle is defined by strict adherence 21st Century American liberal political ideology deeply misunderstands Jewish cultural heritage and thought.
There’s simply nothing in the Torah or Jewish law that compels Jews to support a Government run health care system. It’s possible, no likely, that two different Jews could believe that the current Health Care bills before congress, including the one that formerly had the public option, would either be for the best, or make things worse for Americans. Holding Jewishness up to a political ideology, any political ideology, is not a place where Jews should want to go.
Religion and Politics do not belong in the same room…So Leibermans being Jewish has NOTHING to do with his job…if it did, he would be fired. Secondly…Seeing as the US was built on Christian values…after the land was stolen from the natives….thirdly…the health care reform bill…which 95% of the people here are complaining about have not read it. Do you really think Taxpayers should pay for illegal Alien health Care? Do you think they should get the right to vote? If you do, then Israel should take them and have your citizens pay. By him opposing the bill…he has shown MORAL values…and obviously did his job in reading the bill. And as a senator..he is first and Foremost an AMERICAN as he took an oath..and his duty is to the PEOPLE not the just the Jews. He did the right thing..his decision was what was best for real american citizens holding citizenships and American Birth Certificates…he did what was best for AMERICAN Jews, Muslims, Christians ect.
This has nothing to do with Jewishness or a lack there of.
The chutzpa of the left to claim that their version of Jewishness is the correct one is personified by Navasky.
Good people can disagree about the health care bills. Unfortunately, many on the left in the US, Navasky included, no longer tolerate dissent or disagreement.
Torah does not call for government health care, nor does it require left-wing political views, especially not so-called “social justice.”
The unfortunate accident of there being so many Jewish Communists and Socialists has led to much oppression – oppression and murder in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere, of Jews and non-Jews, but especially of “religious” Jews.
Neuter the blue dogs!! The Dems need to get rid of vermin like Lieberman and Baucus.
The big secret is that the current bills as passed in each House leave millions of people uninsured. Proponents of this kind of health care “reform” care not one whit about the poor, but merely want more governmental controls on more aspects of our healthcare system. I would think that any elected official who is concerned about those who are least able to afford insurance would distance himself from this overly complicated and insanely expensive legislation that does not even pretend to reach the stated goal of universal coverage, no matter what his religion may be. If someone cannot afford adequate coverage, the government should help him pay his premiums until his income improves. If someone cannot get insurance at all due to pre-existing conditions, the government should help him by making direct payments to the professionals and facilities providing his care. The rest of us, the government should let alone. Because of the mindset that Jews must stick together, it’s natural for a lot of Jews to think that quasi-Socialist approaches are the best solutions to all of our worst problems. In Israel, this kind of thinking yields mixed results: it works really well in the areas of healthcare and security, but not very well at all when it comes to all of the tax sheckels and foreign aid money squandered by the Histadrut and the Jewish Agency. In case you hadn’t noticed, though, this ain’t Israel. There is no mixed bag here. Virtually EVERYTHING that our government touches quickly degenerates into a joke or a nightmare . . . or both! It is often said that government interference is the main reason that healthcare is already so expensive here in the States. The additional interference of Obamacare can only make matters worse. Calling Sen. Joe a bad Jew because he doesn’t want to impose yet another joke and/or nightmake upon his fellow citizens is pretty crazy. He is struggling to strip away the bad and keep the good. Personally, I don’t see any good there, but I’m not going to call him a bad Jew for failing to vote a flat no against this entire sordid scheme as I believe he should. That would make me no better than this libellous denizen of the lunatic left who wrote this bit of drivel.
Mitch, you’re full of it:
First, John (Yehonatan) is a JEWISH name, so I’m sure he’ll thank you for not assuming he’s a gentile from that fact alone.
Second, it is blatantly obvious that you have no understanding of Judaism. I mean, ACTUALLY no understanding of Judaism: you have not read one page of Talmud if you think that the Jewish conceptualization of private property rights is not so deeply ingrained in Judaism as to be inseparable. Judaism says that you own your property, to the exclusion of all others, and that right is not merely the product of a society allowing you to keep what is yours for some abstract social goal.
It might interest you to know that the first, the VERY FIRST PAGE of Talmud that a cheder talmid learns is that concerning lost property (Baba Metzia 21a). The next several hundred pages are much more of the same. That is, the fundamental teachings of Judaism are concerned first and foremost with the legal obligations towards others, along with the moral obligations.
Interestingly, there is no mention of the imposition of a legal obligation to health care. Sure, there are moral obligations, but along with the rest of Judaism, those are things you must choose when and how much to do. The choice is yours.
I’ll leave you with a quote from the Siddur, taken from a Mishnah that Jews say EVERY MORNING, VERY FIRST THING:
“The following have no prescribed measure (shiur): … deeds of kindness.” (from Birkat HaShachar, http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/bata/bata04.htm)
You can tell me that I should feel obliged to do something, you can even tells me that (your interpretation of) Judaism tells me that I should do it. BUT, you CANNOT say that Judaism requires me to agree to be COMPELLED to do ANYTHING.
Let us all just agree…Joe is a Putz
This article says two very important things- one true and one patently false.
First, the true. Yes, Lieberman is a disappointment to the Jewish people. His inability to pick and stick with one side of any political debate or argument brands him as a flip-flopper on a good day and a traitor on a bad day. Only problem, he’s a Jew everyday.
But the idea that Lieberman lets down the Jewish people by being liberal is absurd. Judaism is about having convictions and beliefs, doing what is right even when and especially when it is unpopular and about having the freedom to make up your own mind. Judaism is not about being a liberal or being a conservative. Saying that all Jews should be liberal is taking away that freedom of thought and action which is crucial to politics AND Judaism.
http://www.jewishisraelipowwow.com
Amazing that an assimilated jew thinks he can decide who is a “good Jew” or a “bad Jew”
Apparently you can all quote the parts of the Talmud to support their condemation of Sen. Joe, but missed the part where we are taught about Loshen Hara and where we are taught about the proper way to “correct” another Jew.
We are NOT to attempt to embarass other Jews in “public”. We are also to REFRAIN from any type of “correcting advice” if it will not be taken by the person to which it is aimed.
So how do you justify picking and choosing which laws to follow in a vain attempt to justify your own negative behaviors?
Would we seek a medical advice from Mr. Victor Navasky? Would we seek his advice on marriage,parenting…investments? And why not?
BECAUSE HE IS NOT AN EXPERT in those issues! So why would we consider giving any validity to what his thoughts are regarding what is Jewish and what’s not? Had he studied volumes upon volumes of true Jewish philosophy?
Does he have a never-broken tradition instilled in him and does he himself seek guidance from a learned wise Jew?
Judged by his arguments he is unfortunately stands very far from true Jewish System of Values…so his opinions regarding that matter are worthless. So, before making waves regarding Judaism and political issues in this country – Mr. Victor Navasky should first spend great deal of time to get very familiar with Torah and the Constitution.
Mr. Navasky’s analysis tends towards the glib as he fails to come to grips intellectually with just what it means to be a liberal, and a Jew; and for that matter the interaction of and the impact upon the latter by the former. Contemporary liberalism in its teleology posits as the end of Man self-authoriality and consequently the unfettered will, yet also strives for the ‘goods’ of the maximization of freedom and security. All is constructed, there is nothing of the essence in Man. Aside from the fact that that is rankest delusion, there is the inconvenient consequence that contemporary liberalism is actually self-defeating of the ends it claims it wishes to secure, namely the maximization of freedom and security. What is it that members of my generation may well say when accused of being bad liberals, or bad Jews, or bad what-have-you? ‘Piss of you stodgy old reactionary, it’s my life!’ The troubling thing is contemporary liberalism doesn’t provide much traction contra.
This from the man who continues to claim Alger Hiss was innocent. What a clown.
If Judaism is about anything valuable, it is about ethics and justice..given Lieberman’s position as a politician, he degrades the idea of “jew”. He has such an opportunity to be a mensch, but sadly, shows himself to be only a bad politician.
Senator Lieberman’s behavior is simply one more reason why those who profess to be Shomrei Mitzvoth should find a different symbol than wearing a kippah. In the past decade we have seen Jack Abramoff, Bernard Madoff, Rubashkin (Iowa meat processor scandal), the 5 Rabbis from New Jersey who went into the kidney business, among several others. What we have learned from all of these men is those who stand up and wear the ornaments of Jewish religious observance cannot be trusted to actually do the correct thing when it comes to daily business practice.
Senator Lieberman is merely another example of so-called Shabbat & Kashruth observers who fail to understand what it means to do Tzedakah.
I think Lieberman is an empty suit, and a obnoxiously self-righteous empty suit at that. Nevertheless, Navasky’s piece bespeaks a rather pathetic ethical provincialism. If Lieberman were Senator Smith, his What the hell does bad Jew mean that isn’t covered by rotten person? All the usual right wing blather you stir up is no reason to be pleased with yourself for this nonsense. It doesn’t take much to set that crew off.