The AIPAC letter 76 Senators signed. Kerry & Lugar not among them.

[beachmom]

Here are the signers:

http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressionalAction/Signatories_to_Boxer-Isakson_Letter.pdf

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0410/76_Senators_sign_on_to_Israel_letter.html

More than three quarters of the U.S. Senate, including 38 Democrats, have signed on to a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton implicitly rebuking the Obama Administration for its confrontational stance toward Israel.

The letter, backed by the pro-Israel group AIPAC, now has the signatures of 76 Senators and says in part:

We recognize that our government and the Government of Israel will not always agree on particular issues in the peace process. But such differences are best resolved amicably and in a manner that befits longstanding strategic allies. We must never forget the depth and breadth of our alliance and always do our utmost to reinforce a relationship that has benefited both nations for more than six decades.

...

Signatories include key Democrats like Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, Chuck Schumer, and Robert Menendez as well as all but four Republicans, with signers including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, John McCain, and Scott Brown.

Majority Whip Dick Durbin, however, did not sign; nor did Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry and ranking member Richard Lugar.

The full Senate letter, circulated by Senators Barbara Boxer and Johnny Isakson, is here.

At the Politico link, you can read the whole letter whereby Senators like Russ Feingold and Barbara Boxer sided with a foreign government (and a right wing one at that) over the POTUS. Sigh.

[karynnj]

1. I am glad that Kerry and Lugar (and Durbin) did not sign

What has always bothered me, as a Jew, is that some people, who would never say that they can not criticize our own government when they thing it is wrong, feel that because we do not suffer the consequences of actions in Israel, we should never criticize the actions of Israel's government. J Street commended Obama, Clinton and Biden on their stand.

I hate that the language here sounds innocent, when it isn't. How do you settle "differences" amicably if they have no intention of stopping settlements - and the West Bank's Palestinian area already looks like Swiss cheese - or like Swiss cheese with checkpoints wherever it switches from Palestinian to Jewish.

[beachmom]

2. It's just a big mess, and frankly, I do not find the 76 Senators being representative

of their constituents. It's downright weird that such a huge supermajority went for this to sign a strange letter that does nothing but cater to the AIPAC lobby group. Frankly, I wonder if less would have been for the letter in the Israeli Knesset. There does seem to be an inability in the U.S. to truly talk about the Middle East beyond "the script" AIPAC writes.

[karynnj]

3. I'm sure a lower % of the Knesset would have signed it

In fact, I would bet that Livni, who got the most votes but was not asked by the President to form a government, because it looked more likely that Netanyhu could by pulling in the ultrareligious parties and the far right party, would not have signed it - given the intent.

Per a speaker we heard, Israelis are concerned with what their government is doing and are concerned it could hurt the relationship. (The speaker was the editor of a local Jewish newspaper - and the topic was essentially AIPAC trying to define what is "pro-Israel".)

AIPAC is powerful and they are very angry that JStreet is speaking with a different voice, as they feel that their strength is from speaking with just one voice. The speaker noted that AIPAC had no problem with dissenting from what the Israeli government wanted when Rabin was in power. (Sound familiar - "You can't criticize the wartime CIC" circa 2004 vs being free to say that Obama was not born in this country or is a socialist ?)

As to Feingold, his votes since Obama was elected have occasionally been weird. I looked at votes in the first 6 months of 2009 a while back. On foreign policy I suspect that Feingold voted for the AIPAC ones because he is up for re-election. They all failed incidentaly due to Kerry's leadership:

Inhofe amendment against the UN - Feingold for
Three counterproductive Kyl amendments against Iran/Egypt/Gaza/Hamas that Kerry and Lugar successfully defeated - here Feingold backed AIPAC and Kerry didn't.
To strike the provision funding IMF - Kerry and Lugar leading the fight against this, Feingold for

[wisteria]

4. Interesting that Kerry and Luger did not sign the letter. This tells me they have a different

understanding of the Israel matter.

[Inuca]

5. Interesting and very disappointing

and the disappointment is obviously about the signatories (right word? I mean those who signed). As another jew, I find the blind "Israel is never wrong" very distressing.

[MBS]

6. Boxer is up for re-election in possibly tough race. n/t

[karynnj]

7. I think that is right

The fact is that the innocent sounding wording will and can be spun against people who don't sign. In a close race - and Boxer's may well be - it could be the difference. Feingold might potentially be in a tough race too - if Thompson opts to run.

[beachmom]

8. This was not a trap for Boxer. She wrote it. nt

[karynnj]

9. I missed that - so, she actually created the "trap" for others, Yuck

[Mass]

10. It was a trap for her (and Feingold). Being n 3 and 4 on the SFRC and both in the Senatel

eadership, if they were approached to write this letter, given they are in a difficult situation if polls are to be believed, they may have felt they had no real choice.

The real issue here is the fact that so many senators felt they had to sign this letter. This is one of these situations where saying something different than the accepted norm is seen as dangerous. I am happy Kerry did not sign, but am not sure he would not if he had been for reelection.