To the @NYTimes, Israel haters have "principles" while the Israel lobby has "power."

The New York Times reported on the drama on the House floor yesterday this way:

Minutes before the vote closed, Ocasio-Cortez tearfully huddled with her allies before switching her vote to “present.” The tableau underscored how wrenching the vote was for even outspoken progressives, who have been caught between their principles and the still powerful pro-Israel voices in their party, such as influential lobbyists and rabbis. (A spokesman for Ocasio-Cortez declined to comment on her change of position.)

The phrase "such as influential lobbyists and rabbis" was later excised. It can still be seen as of this writing in the wire service version of the story here (archived).

According to the newspaper of record, the progressives wanting to strip Israelis of defense against Hamas rockets and who falsely single out Israel as the world's only "apartheid state" have "principles" - while those who are appalled at their immorality and their pandering to terrorists are in the service of an all-powerful Jewish lobby.

This same bias can be seen throughout the article, although not as explicitly:

The back and forth was the latest flare-up in a long-simmering feud between an energized new generation of progressive Democrats — many of them people of color — that has demanded an end to conditions-free aid to Israel and others in the party who argue that the United States must not waver in its backing for Israel’s right to defend itself. 

The reporter writes of an admirable new generation of Israel haters fighting a valiant battle against the stodgy, old white supporters of the Jewish lobby.

Also, the idea that aid to Israel is "conditions free" is simply a lie by those energetic progressives.

The article also gives equal coverage to the 8 Democrats who opposed the bill compared to the 215 that opposed it. 

Rashida Tlaib's anti-Israel screed is reported straight:

“I will not support an effort to enable war crimes and human rights abuses and violence,” Representative Rashida Tlaib, Democrat of Michigan, said on Thursday. “We cannot be talking only about Israelis’ need for safety at a time when Palestinians are living under a violent apartheid system and are dying from what Human Rights Watch has said are war crimes.”

Rep. Ted Deutsch's response, however, is that of an angry white man:

In an angry speech, Representative Ted Deutch, Democrat of Florida, said he would not allow “one of my colleagues to stand on the floor of the House of Representatives and label the Jewish democratic state of Israel an apartheid state.”

“To falsely characterize the state of Israel is consistent with those who advocate for the dismantling of the one Jewish state in the world,” he said. “When there is no place on the map for one Jewish state, that’s antisemitism, and I reject that.”

The bill is also characterized as being orchestrated by all-powerful Israel against the moral progressives:

His maneuver appeared to be intended to calm Israeli officials, who had watched with alarm as the fight unfolded on Capitol Hill and had closely followed previous efforts by young, liberal lawmakers to cut off U.S. military aid to Israel.

Yet some of Israel's most strident critics in Congress are older and white - Mark Pocan (57) and Betty McCollum (67), for two. And some of Israel's most enthusiastic liberal supporters are young and people of color, such as Alma Hernandez and Ritchie Torres. 

None of them ae quoted in this article because that would violate the narrative of old white men in thrall to the Jewish lobby against young, dynamic, principled progressives of color who want to change things for the better.

(h/t Judah Bernstein)

---

---