Cantor Didn’t Really Pledge to Back Bibi
Congressman struck with case of foot-in-mouth
Remember last week when it was widely and clearly reported that soon-to-be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Republican of Virginia, had told Prime Minister Netanyahu that the GOP majority would side with him against the Obama administration? And how this was kind of extraordinary in a bad way—not because politicians should march in lockstep with members of the other party, but because there is principled opposition, and then there is telling a foreign leader you will side with him over the leader of your own country?
Well, we can all breathe a sigh of relief: Cantor never actually said that. A spokesperson explained that the highest-ranking Jewish congressperson told the Israeli prime minister that “the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the administration” just, y’know, in a general way, not specifically on Mideast issues—“not in relation to U.S.-Israel relations.” You see, Netanyahu is known for his special curiosity as to domestic U.S. tax policy. (It is interesting that Cantor’s office felt the need to clarify, implying that it agrees that there would be something wrong with Cantor having said that.)
The remaining problem is that Cantor seems to say things concerning Mideast policy that he doesn’t actually mean. Late last month, recall, he pledged to separate Israeli aid from the rest of foreign aid, a universally disliked idea that, fortunately, he didn’t actually want to enact. Maybe the thing to do is discount absolutely everything Cantor says about the Mideast and just wait to hear what his spokespeople say?
Obama Remark Misinterpreted, Cantor Spokesperson Says [JTA]
Candid Cantor [Capital J]
Earlier: Cantor’s Foreign Aid ‘Trial Balloon’ Is Popped’
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at firstname.lastname@example.org. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.