 |
|
February 8, 2012
Warren Richey: Why momentous Prop. 8 ruling might not satisfy gay-rights groups
Menachem Wecker: Though Controversial, LL.M.'s Can Lead to Specialized Legal Jobs
The Kosher Gourmet byDana Velden: Going to the bother of making soup? You know it better be good. This CREAM OF TOMATO SOUP certainly is! And it's a cinch to make, too (Includes techinques and serving secrets)
February 7, 2012
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.: Caught off-guard? President's Super Bowl interview with Matt Lauer gives those who need a reason not to vote for him, a darn good one
Suzanne Bohan: Leaping lizards! Tiny reptiles advancing robot design
February 6, 2012
Jonathan Tobin: Iran Threatens Israel With Destruction, But the New York Times Doesn't Hear It
Jeffrey Fleishman: In newly democratic Egypt, tens of democracy activists jailed, to stand trial; their groups are 'threatening the stability of the homeland'
Julie Deardorff : Researchers say antioxidants may not be that effective and could do more harm than good
Mark Clayton: How did Anonymous hackers eavesdrop on FBI and Scotland Yard?
February 3, 2012
Edmund Sanders : Israeli official says Iran is creating missile that could reach East Coast of US
Victoria Kim: Immigrant-smuggling ring used black drivers to avoid racial profiling
February 2, 2012
Jim Carney: Wrong number call may have saved her life
Reza Kahlili : Ex-CIA spy in Iran's Revolutionary Guard: What Obama doesn't grasp about striking deals with Tehran
Tina Susman: For woodchuck rescuer, every day is Groundhog Day
February 1, 2012
Brian Bennett: US officials see increasing threat of domestic attack from Iran
Emily Brandon: How to Take Advantage of New 401(k) Fee Disclosures
January 31, 2012
January 30, 2012
Paul Richter and Ramin Mostaghim: Misreading Teheran's limits -- deadly and economically devastating as they may be -- is a risk administration, Europe seem willing to take
Suzanne Bohan: Warning: Nap-deprived tots missing more than sleep, study finds
Meg Handley: Banks Revamping Rewards Programs to Woo Customers
January 27, 2012
Caroline B. Glick: Obama: Of course I intend to prevent a nuclear holocaust . . . in a few months
Yochonon Donn: In liberal New York City, fervently-Orthodox Jews may soon be getting a district to call their own
Jeannine Stein: An inflated ego and thinking you're 'all that' doesn't just make others sick of you, it can make you ill
Katy Hopkins: New budget rules may affect how much money you get for college
January 26, 2012
Ed Koch: To the New York Times, calling for the murder of Jews by those capable of having their incitement taken seriously isn't news
Jeannine Stein: Mental illness struck one in five U.S. adults in 2010: Report
January 25, 2012
Richard Simon: House passes two bills endorsing the use of religious symbols at military memorials
Fred Weir: Putin: Multiethnic Russia cannot survive as a US-style 'melting pot'; must find its own way
Susan Johnston: 5 Sneaky Coupon Strategies Consumers Should Watch Out For
January 24, 2012
Carol Clark: The price of your soul: How your brain decides whether to 'sell out'
Caroline B. Glick: America lost most in 'Arab Spring'. Sadly, many voters still don't grasp the extent
Warren Richey: Drug criminal scores win in GPS ruling from conservative-leaning high court
Erika Bolstad: Black conservatives gather to talk about gaining strength
January 23, 2012
Melissa Dribben: Jewish voters to play a key role in Florida's Republican primary
Jordan Rau: In quest to grow, Catholic hospital system will announce this morning its break from church
Ali Safi: U.S. envoy gives Taliban terms for peace talks
January 19, 2012
January 18, 2012
January 17, 2012
Frank J. Gaffney Jr.: No-kidding red lines: U.S. response to an Iranian nuke may be bluster, but Israel's won't be
David G. Savage: They sued their principals after slandering them online --- now the cases are headed to the Supreme Court
David Francis: Where to Invest in 2012: With stocks expected to rebound, opportunity abounds for investors
January 13, 2012
Ben Lynfield: Israeli lawmakers move to annex Jewish Judea, one museum at a time
Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz: Thriving through touch: Gentle massage helps older people with low mobility improve in mind and body
January 12, 2012
Warren Richey: Landmark Supreme Court ruling a 'resounding win' for religious groups
Warren Richey: Supreme Court says no to new rule on eyewitness testimony
John Fauber : Statins found to raise diabetes risk in postmenopausal women
Katy Hopkins : Consider This Before You Pay for an Online Degree
The Kosher Gourmet by Joseph Erdos: This mushroom and barley soup has an intense -- almost nutty -- flavor that mixes robust with Middle East. It has creaminess without cream
January 11, 2012
Shari Roan: Millions of atrial fibrillation sufferers at risk for devastating, but preventable, stroke
Tom Hussain: Pakistan -- recipient of more than $21 billion in civilian and military aid -- speeds pursuit of Iranian pipeline, defying US
David G. Savage: High court signals it won't be loosening TV's 'indecency' rules
Stephen Ceasar: Oklahoma's Islamic law amendment can't go into effect, court rules
January 10, 2012
Reza Kahlili: From an ex-CIA spy: US must exploit new split in Iran's Revolutionary Guard
Karen Kaplan: Study: Nicotine replacement products ineffective when used in real-life situations
January 9, 2012
Michael Doyle: Put through legal hell over dream home, couple fought back hard --- all the way to Supreme Court
|
| |
Jewish World Review
Nov. 7, 2006
/ 16 Mar-Cheshvan, 5767
Before you pull that election lever …
By
Jeff Ballabon
Yes, there are differences between the Dems and GOPers when it comes to the Holy Land. Significant ones
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
In recent weeks, even as the Democrats' fortunes skyrocket everywhere else, the National Jewish Democratic Council is in crisis management mode responding to a series of Republican Jewish Coalition advertisements which clearly have drawn blood. The RJC ads publicize recent polls and public comments highlighting the substantial philosophical gap between Republicans and Democrats on the issue of Israel. The ads are factual, not hysterical, and therefore devastating.
Last week, AIPAC finally weighed in, not on behalf of Israel, but on behalf of Democrats, issuing a statement to support the NJDC's improbable claim that there is no discernable difference between the two parties when it comes to this one, apparently uncontroversial, well-settled issue: Middle East policy.
Since it is obvious to even the least politically-minded that what to do about the Middle East is a matter of serious contention and that there must be some difference between the parties, why would AIPAC make such a patently absurd public statement?
For that matter, why on this one issue don't the Democrats themselves try to argue that they are better than Republicans, rather than just "as good as?"
The reality is that nobody in Washington seriously doubts which party is better for Israel. Confronted with the obvious superiority of Republican inclinations on Israel, however, AIPAC's fundraising base would evaporate, so AIPAC constructed the argument of bipartisanship "for Israel's sake." On issues like school choice, gay marriage and abortion (which polling shows are far more significant to them than Israel) however, AIPAC's base has no hesitation in fighting for Democratic control of Congress. AIPAC's bipartisanship fetish is thus an expedient to sustain its own base in the face of Democratic hostility to Israel, often at the cost of Israel’s interests.
Here's an example from the recent Hezbollah war of AIPAC putting Democrats before Israel. Embedded in a Jewish Telegraphic Agency article challenging the credibility of Walt and Mearsheimer, authors of the controversial “The Israel Lobby” report, is the following:
Mearsheimer also said the American Israel Public Affairs Committee was the "driving force" behind efforts in Congress to remove language from pro-Israel war resolutions that called on all sides to preserve civilian life.
In fact, JTA has established that the initiative was purely Republican and had nothing to do with AIPAC. Some pro-Israel lobbyists told JTA they found the partisan dustup on the issue distasteful.
The context: During the conflict, Israel was confronted by customarily corrupt treatment by the media, the UN and others of Israel's defensive response as morally indistinguishable from Hezbollah's attacks. Democrats, leader Nancy Pelosi among them, insisted on language that made it appear as though Congress also equated Israel's actions and intentions with Hezbollah's. Republicans balked, refusing to treat Israel like terrorists.
In this dispute, one would expect any "pro-Israel" lobby to align with the Republican position. Not AIPAC. Too "distasteful."
The appalling truth is that for years Republicans on the Hill, Christian Zionists and hawkish groups like the Zionist Organization of America actually have being restrained in their support for Israel by AIPAC's tepid Democrat-friendly agenda. Israel has endured a major terror war recently ratified in the landslide election of Hamas as representing the unified will of Palestinian Arabs. During the same period, war-on-terror hawks have been in control of the House, the Senate and the White House and champing at the bit to quash the Palestinian terror culture and infrastructure. In this context, AIPAC’s agenda of foreign aid and toothless resolutions criticizing hugely unpopular regimes like Iran and Syria are demonstrably less a robust pro-Israel platform than what they really represent: a minimalist agenda crafted to allow even Democrats to achieve certified "100% pro-Israel" voting records so that millions of dollars keeps flowing through AIPAC, directly and indirectly.
If this sounds cynical, then consider: all interest groups would like to achieve bipartisan support of their issue. So isn't it striking that literally the only one issue in Washington on which the major lobby insists that party control doesn't matter is Israel? Does anybody doubt that unions prefer Democratic congresses or that pro-lifers want Republicans? Bipartisanship is valuable up to the point where you have to sacrifice your issue in order to achieve bipartisanship. AIPAC's anomalous neutrality and its lavish support of legislators with radically different agendas not only promotes the treacherous pretense that Democrats are as good for Israel's survival as Republicans, it also guts the phrase "pro-Israel" of any real meaning in terms of US policy.
There are other consequences. Republicans and Democrats differ based on a competing set of fundamental principles. By asserting that on this one issue the parties are indistinguishable, AIPAC disingenuously promotes the impression that Israel policy is based solely on the Jewish Lobby's fundraising, rather than on any core ideas or ideals. That may help AIPAC, but the grotesque result is a conviction now shared by Israel's enemies and friends that all Israel policy is unprincipled; that all lawmakers are for sale; and, of course, that Jews have too much money and power.
Before the last election, Israeli polls showed Israelis overwhelmingly preferring Bush to Kerry. Israeli papers reported that the Israeli government had a conspicuous preference for Bush. As the JTA reported in May 2004, however,
AIPAC has touted this election as a "win-win" proposition, noting Bush's strong support for Israel and Kerry's 100 percent pro-Israel voting record in the Senate.
Bush and Kerry "win-win?" Republicans and Democrats indistinguishable? It would be funny if Jews weren't being killed.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
PoliticalMavens.com contributor Jeff Ballabon, CEO of Ballabon Group LLC, was a Republican US Senate staffer. He has been listed as one of the "50 Most Influential Jews in America." Let him know what you think by clicking here.
© 2006, Jeff Ballabon
|
