Sign in | Register now | Like us on FacebookLike Us | Follow us on TwitterFollow Us

Milwaukee's Daily Magazine for Friday, July 25, 2014

Fri
Hi: 79
Lo: 66
Sat
Hi: 84
Lo: 67
Sun
Hi: 80
Lo: 61
Advertise on OnMilwaukee.com

Readers Blog

Israel Is The Issue

"(Obama has been) throwing Israel under the bus!"  Former Gov. Mitt Romney. (1)

"The Obama administration has appeased the Arab street..." Gov. Rick Perry (1)

These candidates for the  2012 Republican presidential nomination have pounced on  one of President Obama's  major vulnerabilities:  his  tepid record of support for Israel.  Since Evangelical Christians are strong backers of the Jewish state,  both candidates  are  also  appealing to  this group, which can  play a significant role  in GOP primaries.

But are they right about Obama?  Although the President has consistently supported and approved  aid to Israel  (as promised by previous presidents) and  gave  it  the  Iron Dome missile-defense system  ($200 billion paid by the US), Obama has tilted American policy toward the Palestinian cause  three ways:

1. The Cairo Speech.  Obama declared American ties to Israel  "unbreakable,"  but also promised the creation of a Palestinian state on land won by Israel in 1967.   Since this promise was not contingent upon any concessions by the Arab side,  the Palestinians have  held out for their maximalist demands, assured as they were of American support.

2. The 1967 Borders. The President called for negotiations based upon the pre-Six Day War borders, with "swaps" of  some land.  But the Palestine Authority has executed Arabs for selling land to Jews, so it will never voluntarily  transfer any  land  (especially in or near Jerusalem, a city holy to Islam) to Israel---so there will be no "swaps." And Israel will not withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, which the present government deems indefensible. 

3. Jerusalem.  Eastern Jerusalem was annexed by Israel in 1968, and it includes the  Old City and Temple Mount, where Jews intend to rebuild  the Beth HaMikdash  (Temple)  in Messianic times.  There is virtually no chance than any Israeli government, now or in the foreseeable future, will cede any substantial part of this city to the Palestinians.  In  2008 Barack   Obama  assured  the American Israel Public Affairs Committee  (AIPAC) that Jerusalem would be  the "undivided capital of Israel",   but  subsequently   complained incessantly every time  Israel  has even proposed building housing in East Jerusalem.  This  has encouraged the Palestinians to stiffen their demands about "settlements" in Jerusalem and the West Bank. 

As a result, Jews are abandoning Obama, who  garnered  about 78% of their votes in 2008.  The Republican victory in Anthony Weiner's  former congressional district, perhaps the most Jewish in the nation, is a sign that  Jewish antipathy toward Obama is strong enough to sink other Democratic candidates.   Without a  big  Jewish vote, Obama cannot carry New York in 2012, and without New York's  electoral votes, Obama cannot be re-elected.  (No Democrat since Truman has won the presidency without New York.)

Even if  he  orders that the US veto a Security Council resolution recognizing the State of Palestine later this month, it may be too late  for Barack Obama to win back crucial Jewish support.  If  he  is the Democratic nominee, he  will  not only lose the presidency,  but  may  also drag down other Democratic nominees for the Senate and House with him.  So, if Obama  really cares about  health care, jobs and  taxes, he  should  decline to seek  the Democratic nomination for another term, so that a more popular  Democrat  (probably  Hillary Clinton) can be nominated and go on to win.   President Hayes  declined to run in 1880, and his party  kept the presidency. (2)

Gerald S Glazer

-----------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Associated Press, Sept. 21, 2011.

(2) The Republicans nominated James Garfield, who won.  Hayes was the last president to decline to seek renomination after only four years in the White House.

 

 

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this and other user-submitted content do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of OnMilwaukee.com, its staff, its advertisers and/or its partners. This user-submitted content has not been checked for factual accuracy, and any photos uploaded have not be verified to be copyright-free. It is the user's responsibility to post text and/or photos that belong to that user and do not violate any copyright or intellectual property laws. If you feel this content is abusive, offensive or otherwise inappropriate, click to report and we will review this blog entry.

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Talkbacks

solitarius | Sept. 21, 2011 at 3:25 p.m. (report)

While I surely agree that Obama has been one of the worst presidents in history regarding Israel, the Republican victory in Weiner's congressional district had NOTHING to do with Israel. Both candidates in that election were strong supporters of Israel and in fact the Democratic Orthodox Jew who lost was probably more pro-Israel than the non-Jewish Republican who won.

Therefore, indeed the Democrat lost this election because of Obama, but he did not lose becasue of policies toward Israel but because of policies toward everything else.

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Post your comment/review now 1 comment about this blog.
Post your comment/review now

Facebook comments

Disclaimer: Please note that Facebook comments are posted through Facebook and cannot be approved, edited or declined by OnMilwaukee.com. The opinions expressed in Facebook comments do not necessarily reflect those of OnMilwaukee.com or its staff.