Legal Commentary

Foxman vs. Limbaugh

By David Bernstein

Rush Limbaugh made comments on his radio show (scroll down?if you find this post of great interest, you should probably read the whole three-paragraph monologue, which makes the relevant context abundantly clear) suggesting that Pres. Obama may be subtly appealing to anti-Semitism through his attack on ?bankers? and ?Wall Street,? and that Jewish voters, in return, may be abandoning Obama.

Abe Foxman and the ADL then issued a press release:

Limbaugh told his listeners: ?To some people, banker is a code word for Jewish; and guess who Obama is assaulting?  He?s assaulting bankers.  He?s assaulting money people.  And a lot of those people on Wall Street are Jewish. So I wonder if there?s ? if there?s starting to be some buyer?s remorse there.?

Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, issued the following statement:

Rush Limbaugh reached a new low with his borderline anti-Semitic comments about Jews as bankers, their supposed influence on Wall Street, and how they vote.

Limbaugh?s references to Jews and money in a discussion of Massachusetts politics were offensive and inappropriate.  While the age-old stereotype about Jews and money has a long and sordid history, it also remains one of the main pillars of anti-Semitism and is widely accepted by many Americans.  His notion that Jews vote based on their religion, rather than on their interests as Americans, plays into the hands of anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists.

When he comes to understand why his words were so offensive and unacceptable, Limbaugh should apologize.

Now compare the bolded ?quotation? from Limbaugh?s show with what he actually said:

Look, folks, there are a lot of people who when you say ?banker,? people think ?Jewish.?  People who have prejudice is the best way to put it. They have a little prejudice about them. So for some people, ?banker? is code word for ?Jewish,? and guess who Obama?s assaulting?  He?s assaulting bankers.  He?s assaulting money people, and a lot of those people on Wall Street are Jewish.  So I wonder if there?s starting to be some buyer?s remorse there.

Note that that the ADL press release intentionally cut off the italicized material above in which Limbaugh made it clear that prejudiced people associated ?bankers? with Jews.

I find Limbaugh?s comments, even with the full context, to be foolish: I don?t think there is any evidence?and Limbaugh provides none?that Jews even perceive Obama to be appealing to anti-Semitism, nor that Jews in particular are, as Limbaugh suggests, abandoning Obama at a rate greater than other voters.  Charitably, Limbaugh?s remarks were a lame attempt to find a topical reason to plug Norman Podhoretz?s book, Why are Jews Liberals?

But the fact that Limbaugh made a foolish comment unsupported by any evidence hardly makes his comment ?borderline anti-Semitic.?  How, exactly, is attacking the other side for allegedly appealing to people?s anti-Jewish prejudices anti-Semitic?

I?d like to give the ADL and Foxman the benefit of the doubt here, but the fact that their press release cuts off the relevant two lines about prejudice argues strongly against it. [I also don?t see anything in Limbaugh?s remarks that would support Foxman?s claim that his is propounding the ?notion that Jews vote based on their religion, rather than on their interests as Americans,? beyond the obvious (and I assume uncontroversial) point that Jews are less likely to vote for someone that they perceive as exploiting prejudices against them.]

Fact is, while leftist types go on and on about the ?right-wing? ADL, the core donor base of the ADL is Jewish liberals, and Foxman and company need to go after a conservative or two every once in a while, sometimes with the flimsiest of reasons, to keep their donors happy.

Unfortunately, and perhaps not surprisingly, the same left-wing bloggers (e.g.; and note the irony that this blogger accuses Limbaugh of being an anti-Semite, yet his blogging seems to attract a fair number of blatantly anti-Semitic commenters) who like to call Foxman out when they think he?s being too harsh on critics of Israel are perfectly willing to back him up on this one.  How many of them actually bothered to take the approximately 45 seconds I needed to look up the full transcript of Limbaugh?s remarks (none seem to quote the ?prejudiced? lines), I don?t know, but the line between reckless slander and intentional slander isn?t that fine.

Podhoretz, meanwhile, responds here.

Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on January 22, 2010 (boomark / email).