Bernie's Moment

Bernie Sanders has been running for president essentially nonstop for almost five years now. For much of that time the question that has been the subtext of his candidacy has been can he win-first the Democratic Party nomination and then the general election. With the Iowa caucus, the first contest of the 2020 nominating season, less than a month away, it may be time to rephrase that question-at least the first half of that question-and ask if Bernie can lose the Democratic Party’s nomination. That is an overstatement, but a confluence of recent events and developments in the race have bolstered Sanders’ chances.

Ilhan Omar’s Tweets and Republican Hypocrisy

While recent events are a reminder that racism and anti-Semitism are problems that do not know partisan boundaries, the faux earnest concern about anti-Semitism from Republican leaders who have quietly sat through the festival of intolerance that is the Trump administration are not just hypocritical, but offensive. Those who see the anti-Semitism in Omar’s Tweets, but not in actions, associates and messages of the Trump administration, care about settling political scores, not about ridding America of this ancient, but sadly persistent, hatred.

A Turning Point for American Jewry

The murder of eleven people at the Tree of Life Synagogue was horrific. The were killed by a vicious anti-Semite who had proclaimed that “all Jews must die.” These killings are a terrible blew to the Squirrel Hill community in Pittsburgh, all Jewish Americans, and indeed our entire country. It also feels like a turning point for American Jews and for the slowly unfolding civil conflict in the US. The killings came only days after bombs were sent to several high profile critics of President Trump by a deranged supporter of the President. More importantly, it comes following weeks of Republican candidates, pundits and propaganda organizations warning the American people that a shady Jewish billionaire is funding caravans of brown people to invade our country. It also occurred during the presidency of a man who, despite his hawkish support for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu campaigned on ancient anti-Semitic themes, has surrounded himself with anti-Semitic advisors and has never spoken out against the anti-Semites who are among his supporters.

Charlottesville and Emboldened White Supremacists

These are sad days for the United States. A petulant, willfully ignorant, bigoted man-child has encouraged the most bigoted, ugliest, vulgar and intolerant among us to wave their racist flag high, knowing they have support from the White House. It is significant that the violence in Charlottesville originated as citizens gathered to defend a statue celebrating a traitorous regime that sought to destroy the union more than 150 years ago. If the US surveys this current crisis, it is likely that is how historians will view the Trump administration as well.

Bernie Sanders' Vanishing Act

The presidential race has moved on and Sanders is no longer leading a political revolution, but is trying to remain relevant, and maintain some leverage, in a fast-moving election where fear of the Republican nominee has, as expected, helped solidify the Democratic base around Ms. Clinton and largely put to rest concerns about Sanders supporters refusing to support the former first lady.

Israel, Gaza, Hamas and Media Strategies

Both sides in this conflict find it difficult to separate the best media strategy from the narrative to which they have long been wed. For Israel that means trying to convince the rest of the world that they are different from other countries and care about civilian deaths, while for Palestinians it means holding on to the notion that they are ignored by the world and marginalized by a the global media that is unduly influenced by Israel. These two narratives may no longer be the most useful for each group, but they are still strong and often make it harder for both sides to see how the conflict, the world and indeed themselves are changing.

Gun Regulation, Profanity and Thuggery in Rhode Island

It is rare that the comments of a state legislator make national news, even more so when those comments are only three short words. Last week, however, State Senator Joshua Miller made national news when he told Dan Bidondi of Infowars to "Go f#ck yourself!" Bidondi, an avid supporter of unrestricted gun ownership had been present at a press conference where Miller and other state legislators appeared. Miller's comments came after Bidondi had been harassing and berating participants at the event.

Miller later apologized for using profanity. However, as more information about this confrontation and about Bidondi comes to light, Miller should probably be lauded for his restraint. Bidondi is associated with the website Infowars, a right-wing site that is given to conspiracy theories questioning, among other things, veracity of the Sandy Hook shooting and the Boston Marathon bombings. Bidondi has sought to represent these views through among other things intimidation and shouting down opponents. Nonetheless, Bidondi has a right to express his views and elected officials, even ones trying to defend constituents from harassment should, on balance, avoid using profanity.

Since these events, and his apology, Miller has faced an unrelenting campaign of thuggery, threats and bigotry. Miller is a small businessman who owns several restaurants in and around Providence. Since he made those comments, Miller's restaurants' web presence have been compromised through floods of negative reviews on sites like Yelp and Trip Advisor and the Facebook pages of his restaurants. Other websites belong to Miller and his campaign have been hacked as well. These are apparently the tactics of the gun supporters who interpret Miller's support of a bill to do things like ban assault weapons and make it illegal to bring guns onto school grounds as undermining the US constitution.

Critics of Miller have also attacked the senator for being too far left. It is not clear that Miller, who chairs the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, would disagree with the substance of this. Miller is a strong supporter of gun regulation, expanding access to healthcare, marriage equality, the environment and labor. Attacks on Miller for his progressive politics are no surprise given how his position on gun regulations and comments to Bidondi undoubtedly infuriated many on the right.

Pointing out that Miller, a strong supporter of gun regulation, has a generally progressive agenda, is an appropriate political strategy in this context. It is unimaginable that this is the first time Miller has been criticized for being a progressive, and it almost certainly will not be the last. Attacking Miller because he is Jewish, however, is not appropriate at this, or any, time. Bigotry of that kind never plays a constructive role in the political discussion, yet Miller's Judaism has drawncomments of a very bigoted and vile nature since the Bidondi incident.

The anti-Semitism Miller has confronted in recent days is disturbing and draws on some of the oldest and vitriolic prejudices against the Jewish people. It is saddening, but not altogether surprising, that his kind of hatred still exists and is so easily aimed at Miller by some on the far right. More upsetting than the noise from these bigots has been the silence from the more moderate and allegedly reasonable factions of the conservative and pro-gun movements. While these people have every reason to condemn Miller for his profanity, his views on gun regulation and his politics generally, they also have a greater obligation to speak out against the bigotry that some have used against Miller. While it is clear that it is not the mainstream of the Republican Party or the gun movement that made Miller's religion an issue, the need to take a position against this kind of thing remains strong. In their silence, too many on gun supporters tacitly condone attacking Miller for being Jewish, rather than his politics. While this may not be the intent, it is, unfortunately, the effect.

Miller's words have led to different interpretations. Opponents of gun regulation have accused Miller of being an arrogant and elitist politician who cares little for the constitution and specifically the second amendment. Miller's supporters, on the other hand, have asserted that the Senator was standing up to a bully who was using aggressive and confrontational methods to try to stifle debate on gun regulation. Although it is possible to disagree about which of these interpretations is right based on the initial incident, the fallout from Miller's comment makes it clear that the forces of intolerance and intimidation are clearly on the side of Bidondi, as Miller's opponents have resorted to hacking websites, dishonest and negative reviews of decent small businesses, and bigotry to make their point. I don't get to Rhode Island much, but the next time I do, I know whose restaurants I'll be patronizing.