Who Do They Love?
By Mona Charen
Friday, June 06, 2008
Do American Jews really love Israel, or just Democrats? Last week, 7,000 members of the storied AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) rose to their feet to honor Barack Obama a total of 13 times. The first standing O, lasting more than a minute, greeted the senator as he took the stage -- before he had even begun to count all the ways he plans to become a "true friend of Israel." They gushed. They cooed. They were carried away.
Someone needs a cold shower. It is difficult to think of any recent major figure on the American scene who should invite disquiet among supporters of Israel more than Barack Obama. (And certainly among Israel's many Christian supporters, he doubtless does.) Yet 61 percent of American Jews, according to a recent Gallup poll, prefer Obama to McCain. True, this is a drop from the 78 percent who voted for John Kerry in 2004, but it still qualifies as slightly deranged, under the circumstances.
Displaying the skill for framing (and distorting) matters for which he should be renowned by now, Obama began by suggesting to the mostly Jewish crowd that they had been hoodwinked by political dirty tricks -- by anonymous e-mails alleging that Obama was a Muslim Manchurian candidate. "Let me know if you see this guy named Barack Obama, because he sounds pretty scary," he reassured them.
But the members of AIPAC are very sophisticated types, not the sort to be deceived by such e-mails, and not so simplistic as to assume that Obama was a secret Muslim. They have quite substantial reasons to worry about Obama's views. Worry begins with Obama's membership in the Trinity United Church of Christ. As everyone now knows, Rev. Wright issued vitriolic denunciations of Israel from the pulpit ("unjust" and "racist"), praised Louis Farrakhan, and provided space in the church bulletin to Hamas. The "true friend of Israel" did not protest.
For a true friend, Obama also chose peculiar associates. He was quite friendly with Rashid Khalidi, a former director of the official press agency for the Palestine Liberation Organization (and now a professor at Columbia). Khalidi, who has called Israel an "apartheid" state and who defends the right of Palestinians to use violence against Israel, founded a group called the Arab American Action Network. When Obama served as a director of the Woods Fund in 2001 and 2002, the foundation donated $75,000 to the AAAN, for projects like an "oral history" project on the "Nakbah," which translates as "catastrophe," and is the name Palestinians use for the birth of Israel. Khalidi held a fundraiser for Obama when the latter ran for Congress in 2000, and according to a recent LA Times story, Obama has fond memories of time spent with Khalidi and his wife. Those conversations, he said, served as "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. ... It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world." (z: sing Kumbaya?)
Speaking to AIPAC, Obama reframed his position on Iran. Whereas he had been one of only 22 senators to say he would vote against a 2007 resolution declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guards to be a terrorist force, he allowed in his speech that the guards "have rightly been labeled a terrorist organization." But of course, it would be much trickier for Obama to back away from his better known declaration that he would meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions. Obama's protestations of friendship for Israel notwithstanding, it just might make Israel's supporters a tad uncomfortable to reflect that Obama believes that the reason Iran is a threat (and he once called it a "tiny" threat) is because we have failed to be nice enough to them. "And the fact that we have not talked to them means that they have been developing nuclear weapons, funding Hamas, funding Hezbollah." (z: it's our fault again!)
At the AIPAC conference, Obama was a veritable Curtis LeMay, promising huge amounts of military hardware for Israel. Will the AIPAC members really not see through to the heart of the problem? Without a strong United States, Israel cannot hope to survive. And Obama's record as the most left-wing American senator strongly suggests that he believes in weakness. Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
thanks for the tip, Holly
35 comments:
Mona nails it. I've never understood the Jews loyality of Democrats. Well, it's like the Black vote, I guess. If that high of a percentage of a minority votes one way only, then it's just some kind of blind loyality. And, usually not deserved either.
Too true, Karen!
But then, many Jews have wedded themselves to the dhimmicrats, probably due to union involvement and the dhimmi's understanding of the "No Jews Allowed" country clubs(wonder who the majority members politics were?)
Yes, there was prejudice in the past, and even now, but to blindly follow the dhimmis into disaster for Israel, you wonder what they are thinking. Or worse, ARE they thinking?
The one thing I disagree with, the US will turn it's back on Israel(like she hasn't treated her very well since when?)but G*D will take her up. And woe to those who attack the apple of G*D's Eye!
tmw
Whether Obama is naive, or a true believer and disingenuous, he is dangerous to our national security.
We can't afford to take the time to figure out why he takes leftist positions, it only matters that he does.
This makes him dangerous for Israel's national security too.
For a Presidential candidate to equate the size of a country, as relevant to the threat they may pose, is truly ignorant.
I believe he referred to Iran as one of the "tiny" countries, and therefore can't pose a real threat.
How much land does a country need to have a launching pad if that government has nuclear weapons, and the oil revenues to pay for them?
If Israel's power isn't questioned how can Iran's be dismissed? Israel is really a tiny country. Such a statement by Obama is ludicrous and downright stupid.
If Jewish Americans are so wedded to their Party, it's as I said the other day. They have allowed their political party to become akin to a religion.
Their desire to be seen as tolerant even in the face of destruction is beyond my comprehension.
It's that same old bugaboo folks, political correctness!
There's one other possibility. Voters may tell a pollster one thing and vote just the opposite.
For some, image really is everything, regardless of which segment of the population they are.
Pris
D Kos has posted some really vile anti-Israel rants. So has HuffPo MyDD. If progressives are the future of the Democratic party, the soft socialism of toady's lib will soon meld to national socialism. The Jews will take notice eventually, they've seen this before.
There are political scientists who posit that Jews are traditional liberalists. They make the same claim about Catholics. But I think it is simplistic to argue that American-Jews or Catholics are all liberal; both religious groups are diverse and individuals are the product of their social experience. But even if it were true that Catholics and Jews lean to the liberal side of politics, such would only underscore the importance for political conservatives to broaden their base, rather than narrowing it by railing against people who are sadly misinformed. There are occasions when government should stand beside its citizens, in both law and policy – especially among the elderly, the infirm, or the incapacitated. At the same time, it is charitable organizations such as might be affiliated with church groups who should do the most to care for people with local communities, not inept national bureaucracies.
Obama is as liberal as he can be . . . and he understands how to appeal to people’s sympathies. I see a relationship between some groups of people here in America and those in Europe, where rather than becoming involved in charitable causes, they much prefer to stand back and let government do it. Such does not reflect American tradition or its historic culture. The only way to persuade these people is to demonstrate that the cost (beyond mere dollars) of allowing the government to control every aspect of our lives is the kind of socialism that permeates Europe today – and if that is what they most prefer, Europe is where they should live.
In my view, the GOP is lately inept at defeating progressive attitudes. In fact, I see the GOP moving farther to the left each election cycle. What is needed to start with is a new contract with America . . . and a robust program (within communities) to show moderates and left leaning liberals there is a much better way than to bare our throats to a government run by the likes of Obama and Clinton. Of course, I could be wrong – but the time to broaden the conservative base is between elections, not on the even of the general.
The single biggest reason not to support B. Hussein over Israel is his stated opinion that America should meet with the Iranian terrorists.
Ahmad has stated over and over and over that he wants to wipe out Israel and is proceeding full steam ahead with his nuke plans.
The UN is useless, Europe is useless. That 61% probably needs to see a mushroom cloud over Israel and an Obama still talking before they'll learn their lesson Z.
Another thing i found out a long time ago, sophistication and education are not sure signs of wisdom anymore. I've often heard more sense coming from garbage men and truck drivers than some learned elites up there in the ivory towers.
As TMW has already pointed out Israel is protected from on high and will not be destroyed. Those who would oppose Israel are not wise to do so. It is a shame that so many people have put their faith in Obama to help them. There are so many questions regarding this man that the 6 months before the election are not near long enough to ask them all.
mustang, conservatives will keep veering to the left because the immigrants are here for handouts, not for the life of self-reliance and independence they sought here 200 or even 75 years ago. FDR changed everything, in my humble opinion. And, because our teachers (I don't say PROFESSORS anymore because I'm hearing amazing liberalism in middle school now, too) are indoctrinating our kids into Marxism...immorality, etc. It FEELS good, so DO it! FEELS better to think someone OWES you if you've never felt the joy of working for your keep.
MK...you're so right about Barack, except he's already making noises about how he didn't really mean he'd speak to rogue regimes ... oh, yes. And the people LOVE IT! It's no FLIP FLOPPING with Obama..just WISDOM, CLARITY, CHANGE, HOPE!! grrrrr !!!
As for education vs common sense? I'm with you! You should hear our talk show host here in the States, Dennis Prager (I'm quite sure you can listen to old shows on the internet?)...he's almost totally OFF higher education these days!!! Says he's not sure the indoctrination received there is worth the education!!
Pops..in the scheme of things, Israel is protected. I feel God wants us as good stewards..the whole Old Testament is full of battles where God was acting THROUGH the warriors; I think you and TMW would agree we need to fight, be warriors for Israel? And, God will take HER up, but I'm not really sure what'll happen HERE if we drop Israel in the mud. WHich we will do with Barack, no doubt!!
Z-Nevada is experiencing more earthquake swarms, the midwest(our breadbasket) has been flooded several times, wonder what crops we will get? Diseases that we had nearly eradicated are resurging(TB, bovine form, in southern California), morgellons(which no one really knows much about), leprosy(Mexican doctors are sending their poor patients who can't pay for the medicine to the US for FREE CARE), superbugs from antibiotic overuse.
Drought in California, tornados in places you don't historically see them...like DC!
It's starting to look like Matthew 24, and why? Because we have a president and secretary of state who have never really read their Bibles, belong to churches that are into the replacement heresy, so they are forcing Israel into an untenable corner, and G*D is knocking at their doors.
We are in for a very, rough ride. And if obama gets the nod...next year will be even worse!
Good morning, G*D bless and Maranatha!
tmw
I really take issue with the numbers they keep getting on these "polls". I never for a minute believed the 78% for Kerry number.
I know, I live in the south and we Jews in the south are FAR more conservative, but I don't know ONE, NOT ONE of my fellow Hebes who are going to pull the handle for Barack. A few said they would vote for Hillary, but the word is definitely out on Barack!
Karen there are historical reasons why Jews voted democrat, and believe me that's CHANGING. Mona breezed past the 78% to 61% shift, and she shouldn't have. I personally think both numbers are HIGH, but the shift is real. I'll take the time tonight to explain the Jewish "affinity" for the Dems these last 120 years and hopefully it'll make sense. Not only that, but the polling method for getting Jewish opinion is AWFUL. I'll touch on that too. It's changing for sure.
Morgan
LOL. Radicals have done to AIPAC what they INDIRECTLY do to EVERY institution. They take it over, and re-direct the money to support Leftist cause. If anyone stands up, they face retribution under Rule 12 of Alinsky's Rules for Radicals...
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
It worked with Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. It worked with the leaders of AIPAC, the Ford Foundation, etc., etc., etc.
This is why DNC leaders like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were ALL Saul Alinsky disciples. Hillary did her thesis on Alinsky methods and worked for him. Obama did his post-lawyer seasoning with the Alinsky organization.
btw - Ever wonder what those trolls were doing visiting your site... just read the rules. Look what they did to Evan Sayet.
The hecatomcheires...
American friends of Israel would do better to create one hundred small independent groups than one big one. The big one may have more "leverage", but it makes itself a "target" for lawyers who would use that leverage in support of their own ends.
That explain something. Thanks, FJ.
It also explains what they've been doing in the court of public opinion to Israel all these years.
MORGAN! Please do come back and help us better understand the Jews and voting Dem so often. As you could see, I colored that part of the article which showed the percentage of Jews voting liberal is going down....Charen should have extrapolated on that but she flew right by. At least she mentioned it!
FJ...The more I think about it, the more I know you're right. Yes, the trolls do exactly the same thing, don't they. I think the idea to have many smaller groups is a good one, too.
OBAMA WORKED WITH ALINSKY types, TOO? I knew Hillary bows to the god of Saul, but I had no idea...
FJ, I don't know WHY this says so much to me, but have you heard Michelle OBama say "Barack and I went to Harvard and ME AND BARACK..." 'ME AND BARACK'? How do you do papers for HARVARD and still say 'ME AND BARACK'? GeeeeZ!!
Israel, and by proxy AIPAC, was a huge target for Leftist radicals.
Neutralizing AIPAC... cutting Israel off from it's support network.
I'm sure that the organization is rhetorically pro-Israel, but makes excuses to support efforts which don't really serve Israel's interests. Like Obama.
I wonder how often they trash Olmert... and other Israeli leaders who "don't measure up" (targetted for elimination by the radicals).
Yes, Obama is married at the hip to Alinsky. Here's a good WaPo article on the subject.
Sounds like Hillary isn't the only one who slips into a different accent when speaking to crowds...
"Dis be my mo' populah voice..."
WHAT AN ARTICLE, FJ. Everyone should at LEAST read this:
"Alinsky was a bluff iconoclast who concluded that electoral politics offered few solutions to the have-nots marooned in working-class slums. His approach to social justice relied on generating conflict to mobilize the dispossessed. Power flowed up, he said, and neighborhood leaders who could generate outside pressure on the system were more likely to produce effective change than the lofty lever-pullers operating on the inside.
Both Obama and Clinton admired Alinsky's appeal for small-d democracy but came to believe that social progress is best achieved by working within the political system, and on a national scale."
Sounds like Sharpton and jackson are on his page, too.
Wow, Hillary and Obama are seeing their (and his) dreams come true...as everyone knows, total equality will NEVER EVER work, but THEY are going to try again! FOR POWER? For sheer altruism? (Ya, right!! NOT) Power, yes...and the circle keeps turning...
Until America remembers not EVERYONE CAN BE RICH, we're in enormous trouble. Until Pelosi wakes up and remembers America is NOT a country where those who work hard are forced to live less well than their toil should provide and instead support illegals and others who don't want to work, America is doomed.
The problem is, the Left takes this attitude and says Conservatives DON"T CARE and we're shamed into silence ...again.
A la Alinsky. freeze the target
fj....has Obama sunken to that accent? Where would he suggest he GOT it? Hawaii? INdonesia? CHICAGO? WHA?????!!!
I think Alinsky stole the idea of freezing the target from the Greeks. Medusa's were very popular symbols for painting on their bucklers, especially at the front of a phalanx. ;-)
Okay, I guess from the vase painting, her uglier sisters also made the cut.
fj...after carefully perusing your links and properly absorbing and thinking, could you now tell me what freezing has to do with medusa? Is it 'the look' in her eyes?
I like the buckler!
If I had to guess, I'd say it's spotting your own snake in there amongst the others. You wouldn't want to strike your own... so best always place it on the "opposite" side of the buckler.
How's that for a correct non answer (I don't know?) ;-)
It's kinda like having too many thoughts (snakes) at once (panic) versus a clear idea (one thought/snake) in mind as a plan...
In other words, excessive thought can be an impediment to taking decisive action.
Shakespeare, "Hamlet"
How all occasions do inform against me,
And spur my dull revenge! What is a man,
If his chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep and feed? a beast, no more.
Sure, he that made us with such large discourse,
Looking before and after, gave us not
That capability and god-like reason
To fust in us unused. Now, whether it be
Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple
Of thinking too precisely on the event,
A thought which, quarter'd, hath but one part wisdom
And ever three parts coward, I do not know
Why yet I live to say 'This thing's to do;'
Sith I have cause and will and strength and means
To do't. Examples gross as earth exhort me:
Witness this army of such mass and charge
Led by a delicate and tender prince,
Whose spirit with divine ambition puff'd
Makes mouths at the invisible event,
Exposing what is mortal and unsure
To all that fortune, death and danger dare,
Even for an egg-shell. Rightly to be great
Is not to stir without great argument,
But greatly to find quarrel in a straw
When honour's at the stake. How stand I then,
That have a father kill'd, a mother stain'd,
Excitements of my reason and my blood,
And let all sleep? while, to my shame, I see
The imminent death of twenty thousand men,
That, for a fantasy and trick of fame,
Go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot
Whereon the numbers cannot try the cause,
Which is not tomb enough and continent
To hide the slain? O, from this time forth,
My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!
...and yeah, I do quote that soliloquy a LOT!
...'specially when libtards begin recommending yet ANOTHER negotiating round.
According to Greek mythology MEDUSA's gaze had the power to turn men to stone.
Ah, fear of castration.
Stay away from my snake!
I wonder if it could also turn women to stone...
Hey, but you already broke yours off!
Penis envy? THAT's Medusa's gaze?
Clue us is, anon.
"sith", fj...what the heck did I BREAK OFF?!!
if you're talking about MY snake, I ASSURE you I never had one!! (Trust me on that!)
And I'm starting to think Alinsky had no reference to the Greeks. I mean, really....!!?
That would explain the Wiki-link about feminism.
I wonder how I could have missed that Freud piece.
A little boy and a little girl are taking a bath together. The girl asks, "What's that," and points between his legs. "I dunno," replies the boy. "Can I touch it, enquires the girl? "Hell no, you already broke yours off," replies the boy.
I know, bad joke. And you're probably right. It sure sounded good at the time I said it, though... as a "target" was originally a reference to a shield/ buckler (when practicing swordplay).
...but hey, I plead insanity. I hadn't read the Freud essay on Medusa. My only point of reference was the statue of Athena in the Parthenon.
Post a Comment