I'll Call It Nodwigs' Law

Whatever one thinks about Mr. Hagel, a possible nominee for Defense Secretary to replace Secretary Panetta, it is clear that Jews with a Zionist bent and the neocon-flavored editorial staff at the Weekly Standard don't care much for him. Why? Well, partly because of his realist take on the casus belli for the Iraq war (fought for oil, "of course...we're not there for figs"), or that Mr. Hagel took a dim view of neocon-inspired democratic imperialism in the Middle East, or even that lefty filmmaker Mr. Michael Moore is among the Hagel-boosters. But it's also because he doesn't swear sufficient fealty to the Jewish ethno-state. Apparently, it's part of the job description of American Congresscritters to advance the interest of a foreign power in the US Senate (bolded emphasis mine):

While former Nebraska Senator and likely Secretary of Defense nominee, Chuck Hagel, has drawn criticism in recent days over his foreign policy positions, and specifically his hostility to Israel, members of Nebraska's Jewish community spoke to The Algemeiner about their experiences with him during his time in office.

Asked about his positions on Israel, Javitch said that Hagel always placed the blame on Israel, demanding "more and more concessions, Israel was at fault when things went wrong, the Palestinians didn't need to adhere to any standard."

Another Jewish community activist, Nate Schwalb, who has been living in Nebraska for 54 years, described Hagel's relationship with the Jewish community as "unfriendly" with views on Israel that were "often contradictory to widely held views by other politicians about Israel. He
didn't seem to show much interest in Israel and in Jewish people. He thinks that there is an Israeli lobby that's too strong," continued Schwalb, "I think it is well established that he is not a friend of Israel."

When ".the late Ally Milder visited the senator in his Washington, D.C. senate office (she) was told by Hagel, 'that she was nothing but a fucking tool for AIPAC,'" [Nebraska political consultant Patrick McPherson] writes. From that point on, Milder never had anything to do with this guy who even then made clear his anti-Jewish sentiments," writes McPherson.

Another politically active Jewish Nebraskan who claims to have known Hagel for "almost 20 years, politically and non-politically," spoke to The Algemeiner on condition of anonymity. I was alarmed with his views about Israel," said the source. As Secretary of Defense, "He would treat Israel just like anyone else, no special treatment [...] of course it would be
damaging to Israel. We were trying to work with him for many years on these issues," the source added, expressing skepticism over the suggestion that as Secretary of Defense his position would be tempered, saying, "There will be no change in his stance, no negotiation, he is unmovable when it comes to Israel."

Left unsaid is the rationale for why a candidate for the American Secretary of Defense should have advocated for the security of foreign country as a legislator. Furthermore, the very act of lobbying on behalf of a foreign power is an attempt at corruption; corruption that Mr. Hagel apparently resisted quite well, to the enduring disappointment of American-based supporters of Israel.

That a possible Secretary Hagel is feared to treat Israel no differently than any other country with which we have numerous cooperation agreements--but no actual defense treaties and therefore is not an ally, per se*--is, when viewed objectively, a significant reason for patriotic Americans to support him. It's not so much to ask, that American officials should advocate for American interests only, and no other.  And no amount of sloppily conflating lack of support for the political state of Israel with actual anti-Semitism** will change this normative claim.

So, why "Nodwigs' Law"? In addition to being a simple anagram of Godwin's Law, this neologism refers to the tendency to apply the perjorative label "anti-Semite" to any person who refers to the state of Israel or Jewry in general that is less than glowingly positive...and the first person to utter this term in any discussion of anything other than bona-fide judenhassen is judged to have automatically lost the debate.

* When was the last time the IDF fought alongside the US military, again?

** A non-sensical word in application, as Semites include Hebrews, Syrians, Arabs, and some peoples on the Horn of Africa. Rhetorically sloppy, just as is lumping a-Zionism together with actual Jew-hate.