Eric Alterman pens a paean to the leftist, and appeasement focused J Street - a group that admitted it served as Obama's blocking back to promote his approach to Middle East policy.
 
Why would the "paper of record" honor Alterman by giving him the nod to broadcast his views? Maybe because Alterman earned the paper's respect by writing a column for the left-wing The Nation that outed Jews in the media who supported Israel and , by not so subtle implication, displayed dual loyalty in doing so.

Here is Alterman New York Times column. More significantly here is the column he wrote for The Nation a few short years ago that castigated a range of Jewish groups for purportedly being "hawkish" and then listed a long list of Jews in the media who regularly "sound off on Israel" and whom he characterized as being mostly "Bush apologists."

I thought the New York Times was the epitome of political correctness that would never accept any negative focus based on someone's heritage. That is true except when it comes to the Jews ( as expanded upon in two columns of mine from 3 years ago. 

As if to compound the problem, the Times published a column that downplays the risk of a nuclear Iran by relying on expertise delivered by the likes of Trita Parsi ( the de facto lobbyist for the mullahs in America), Juan Cole - an academic widely discredited for his obsessive anti-Israel writings over many years, and Flynt Leverett whom the Times trots out regularly to parrot the Iranian line and who is the director of the Iran Project at the left-wing New America Foundation.

The Times relies on these type of people to propound the paper's own views.

Why do Jews read the New York Times? Why does anyone?