« The True Inconvenient Truth | Main | Cindy Sheehan Revealed »
May 26, 2006
Democrats, Republicans, and Israel
Instead of just providing a link, I'm reprinting Daniel Pipe's entire article because it's that important. It seems that too many Jews are still habitual Democrats, still pulling that old lever because, well, that's the lever they always pulled, the lever their parents pulled. They don't realize, or don't want to face up to the reality that the Democratic Party no longer supports Israel, that the Democratic party has become a viper's nest of AntiSemites.
I'm afraid it's time to face some truly unpleasant facts and to make some extremely difficult political decisions, but the survival of the Jewish state is at stake, as is the survival of the Jewish people.
The Republican Party is by no means perfect, but I do not look for utopian solutions. I live in the real world. And in this world the Republican Party is the party that supports Israel and the Jewish national homeland. The Republicans are the ones who are willing to fight the Jihadists. The Democrats, on the other hand, seem willing to fight, well, global warming, not to mention the NSA and CIA's attempts to eavesdrop on Jihadist phone calls. It is clear that the Democrats cannot be trusted with National Security.
A final note: Many Seraphic friends are registered Democrats. We do not wish to insult anyone and we are by no means naive, we do not live under the illusion that you will all run out and register as Republicans. But in a world where Orwellian language has become the norm, we strive for clarity.
--RJA
Democrats, Republicans, and Israel
by Daniel Pipes
Middle Eastern issues will likely play a role of unprecedented
importance in the American mid-term elections less than a half-year
away. Three topics head the agenda: the course of the Iraq war, the
proper response to Iran's nuclear ambitions, and the soaring price of
fuel.
Despite their prominence, these are momentary issues, where voters will
make decisions based on transient circumstances and without clearly
defined differences between two major parties; what is the Democratic
position on Iraq, anyway, or the Republican one on Iran? A fourth
Middle Eastern issue, the Arab-Israeli conflict, though less high
profile this year, has deeper electoral significance. It is a perennial
topic that helps define the two parties.
The U.S.-Israel bond is the most special "special relationship" in the
world today as well as the family relationship of international
politics. In many areas – foreign policy, strategic cooperation,
economic ties, intellectual connections, religious bonds, and
intervention in one another's domestic politics – the two countries
have unusual if not unique relations. This reaches down even to local
politics; as a 1994 New Yorker article put it, at times, "it seems that
the Middle East – or, at any rate, Israel – is a division" of New York.
In addition, a significant number of Americans (Jews, Evangelicals,
Arabs, Muslims, anti-Semites, leftists) vote according to Israel
policies.
Since Israel came into existence in 1948, Democrats and Republicans have
changed places in their attitudes toward Israel. In the first era,
1948-70, Democrats sympathized more with the Jewish state and
Republicans distinctly less so. Whereas Democrats emphasized spiritual
bonds, Republicans tended to see Israel as a weak state and as a
liability in the Cold War.
The second era began in about 1970 and lasted for 20 years. In the
aftermath of Israel's extraordinary victory in the Six Day War,
President Richard Nixon, a Republican, came to see Israel as a military
powerhouse and useful ally. This new regard rendered Republicans as
positive toward Israel as the Democrats. Noting this reality, I
concluded in a 1985 research piece "Liberals and conservatives support
Israel versus the Arabs in similar proportions."
As the Cold War ended in 1990, the third era began. Democrats cooled to
Israel and Republicans further warmed to it. The left made the
Palestinian Arab cause a centerpiece of its worldview (think of the
Durban conference in 2001), while the right deepened its religious and
political alignment with Israel.
This trend has become increasingly evident. In 2000, survey research
commissioned by the left-wing, anti-Israel activist James Zogby found
"a significant partisan split" on the Arab-Israeli conflict, with
Republicans significantly more pro-Israel than Democrats. For example,
asked the question, "With regard to the Middle East, how do you feel
the next president should relate to the region?" 22% of Republicans and
only 7% of Democrats said he should be pro-Israel.
Recent research by the Gallup Poll finds that 72% of Republicans and 47%
of Democrats sympathize more with the Israelis than Palestinian Arabs. A
detailed look at this same data finds more dramatic results, with
conservative Republicans over five times more sympathetic to Israel
than liberal Democrats.
The Democratic coolness toward Israel fits into a larger pattern of
conspiracy theories about neo-conservatives and anti-Jewish outbursts
by such party luminaries as Jimmy Carter, Jesse Jackson, Cynthia
McKinney, and James Moran. One observer, Sher Zieve, concludes that
among Democrats, "anti-Semitism is and has been on the rise" for some
time.
The current trend appears to be growing, with an attendant sorting out
of Jews and Arabs/Muslims in American politics. This leads me to expect
that Muslims, Arabs, and others hostile to Israel will increasingly vote
Democratic, even as Jews and those friendly to the Jewish state
increasingly vote Republican. In this light, it bears noting that
American Muslims see themselves in direct competition with Jews; the
Brookings Institute's Muqtedar Khan predicts that Muslims in the United
States soon "will not only be able to out-vote, but also out-bid the
Jewish and most other ethnic lobbies."
These developments have potentially profound implications for
U.S.-Israel relations. The cross-party continuity of policy of the past
will end, to be replaced by a major shift whenever the White House
changes hands from one party to the other. As the political consensus
breaks, Israel will be the loser.
From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at:
www.danielpipes.org/article/3625
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at May 26, 2006 08:17 AM
Comments
Seraphic Secret is private property, that's right, it's an extension of our home, and as such, Karen and I have instituted two Seraphic Rules and we ask commentors to act respectfully.
1. No profanity.2. No Israel bashing. We debate, we discuss, we are respectful. You know what Israel bashing is. The world is full of it. Seraphic Secret is one of the few places in the world that will not tolerate this form of anti-Semitism. That's it. Break either of these rules and you will be banned.
"Many Seraphic friends are registered Democrats. We do not wish to insult anyone".
Robert, very diplomatic of you...have you thought of going into politics? You just might get me to vote Republican :)
Posted by: Cruisin-mom at May 26, 2006 10:28 AM
Randi:
I strongly believe that I can influence more people through Seraphic Secret than through local politics. Besides, I'm a hermit; imagine me on the campaign trail, that would mean me leaving my office. Not something I'm anxious to do.
Posted by: Robert Avrech at May 26, 2006 10:47 AM
I am a registered Democrat, but in truth I am more of an independent. I cross party lines as needed. I vote the issues.
One of the big problems is that people don't like to spend time trying to understand the issues and just simply vote based upon personality and gut feelings.
Not a very smart way to handle things, if you ask me.
Posted by: Jack at May 26, 2006 11:07 AM
Jack:
Interesting tactic. In presidential elections how deeply do you consider Israel when you vote?
Full disclosure: the last time I voted Democrat was Carter. I have regretted that vote ever since. I believe he did incalcuable damage to this country and to Israel. I have voted Republican ever since and felt very good about it. I was appalled at the last Democratic convention when Michael Moore was given a standing ovation and a seat right next to Jimmy Carter. Even for the Democratic party this was absolute madness.
Robert Kennedy once said that liberals are politically suicidal. He knew what he was talking about.
Posted by: Robert Avrech at May 26, 2006 12:38 PM
In June 1963 John Kennedy went to the Berlin Wall and declared "I am a Berliner." Today if Ted Kennedy were to go to the separation wall, he'd probably say something morally unclear like "I'm a Palestinian and an Israeli." More likely John Kerry would go.
Posted by: Jeremiah at May 26, 2006 01:27 PM
Jeremiah:
Of course, Kerry has gone on record as being against the Security Wall--but that was when he was speaking to an Arab audience. When he was speaking to a Jewish audience he was all for the wall. Ditto for the always-sloshed Kennedy.
Posted by: Robert Avrech at May 26, 2006 01:34 PM
Robert,
I always pay attention to Israel. The hard part is trying to make a real determination as to how someone will vote once they are elected.
Sometimes the surprises are plesant and sometimes they are less pleasant.
Posted by: Jack at May 26, 2006 01:45 PM
Jack:
My view, and it's borne out by hard numbers, is that in this day and age Republicans in national and local politics, will vote with Israel more often than Democrats. And that is one of the reasons I vote Republican.
Of course there are no guarantees. But as I wrote, I live in the real world, not in some utopian ideal.
Bush vs. Gore: there was absolutely no question. As there was no question between President Reagan and his various Democratic opponents.
And for the forseeable future, my vote goes with the Republicans, for the Democrats have become a party whose core philosphy is one of appeasement.
Posted by: Robert Avrech at May 26, 2006 01:54 PM