Perhaps I’m not in tune with mainstream Judaism in America, but I think that among the Jewish immigrant population the single issue voters are more prevalent than you realize. Among all of the Russian Jewish immigrant families that I know, which number at roughly thirty, only mine is likely to vote for the Democratic candidate next election. My parents frequently get bombarded with emails assailing Obama as an enemy of Israel, a closet communist, and a Muslim radical. That Obama is bad for Israel and needs to be removed from office as soon as possible seems to be the taken for granted.
I hope that Florida Jews are more of a Meet the Fockers variety, because if they bear any semblance to the Russian Jews that I know in the Midwest, Obama has no chance of securing their vote.
I think the Dems are still trying to deal with the Republicans’ charge that Obama is a secret Muslim that was born in Kenya (if by dealing with it you mean trying hard not to laugh).
ETA: And as an American I sincerely hope that Obama is not pro-Israel or anti-Israel, just working for the best solution for everyone involved.
The premise of the thread is disingenuous. These are the OP’s actual feelings, posted in another thread:
This attitude reminds me of the more rabid Irish-American “patriots” I have met - don’t live there, but have passions by proxy that far exceed actual citizens’ pain. Denying the opinion, in fact, of moderates; for example, Israelis whose opinions line up with those expressed in Haaretz. Indeed, the SDMB’s own highly-valued Israeli contributors are in actual physical peril from the situation, yet in my opinion are distinctly more dispassionate and reasoned than the OP.
I fail to see how either post is in any way contradictory. She’s Jewish, and, despite general apathy about the situation, she feels insulted by it. If other Jewish people feel the same, then it does make sense that the Democrats are going to have to address this, and to wonder how it will be done.
I also fail to see why you couldn’t address the comment you quoted in the thread in which it appeared. This thread is not contingent on her opinion of the situation. They are similar but separate topics of discussion.
Missed the edit:
That article is exactly what I’m talking about - it’s either the ‘We don’t support a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, therefore, we must be VERY pro-Israel’ or the ‘You don’t understand international politics enough to get this’ or (like this article, which is something a magazine could write but not DNC operatives) the ‘Obama knows better than Netanyahu, making him more patriotic than Netanyahu’ meme.
If the DNC wasn’t spending so much to court Jewish voters, I’d agree with the other posters who are saying it’s a non-issue and a non-problem. Last I checked, campaigns don’t put a lot of effort into courting votes that are already guaranteed. My OP was based on the premise that there already was a problem.
The alleged debate of this thread is presented as a dilemma for US electoral politics.
However the title of the thread initially poisons the well by calling the linked statement “the green line speech” (a phrase, incidentally, that returns this very thread as hit #1 on Google) and asks if something that is clearly a minor diplomatic wobble, in which an opinion was not even expressed by Obama, is “worse” than a phrase the OP has apparently coined based on (as far as I can tell) some talking point from far-right blogs.
The well is further poisoned by her thread title, which misrepresents the order of events: “Obama complains about Netanhayu” is the lead, despite that interpretation being not only debatable, as stated, but also secondary to the Sarkozy comment.
Thus we are asked to compare something debatable against something else debatable, but presented in a manner in which it is assumed that one thing is unambiguously bad and the other even worse. This is a dishonest piece of rhetoric.
The quote I posted from the Pit thread is germane to this discussion, because indicates her view is unequivocally that criticism of Israeli politicians is implicitly criticism of Israel: thus this GD “debate”, allegedly about US politics, indicates that the OP preconceives some great misdeeds have been perpetrated, where none necessarily have been.
I did, but I used language inappropriate for this forum.
Should I have said “67 borders”? You’re right, I could’ve said “67 borders, which are really 49 borders”.
The first hit on Google for “Obama 67 borders speech” is from NYT. I really didn’t think one versus the other was a left v. right thing. I also think many would read, "“You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you,” as a complaint. Is it not?
I feel your issue with the OP is more about Obama and your feelings on Israel and less about the actual question. Note my :smack: in the OP, which, imho, clearly indicated my displeasure of the gaffe because it :smack: isn’t making the case for Obama’s pro-Israel stance any easier for us Jewish Democrats.
Again, I think your argument that I’m addressing a problem that does not exist is baseless. The OP is not about the merits of the ‘problem’, but rather what the latest gaffe does for the ‘problem’.
Netanyahu is a liar. While Obama didn’t call him that, he did not disagree with the statement of “liar” and pretty much did agree with “I can’t stand him.” He is a boil on diplomacy and a detriment to Israel. I’ve given up on Israel because they keep electing turds like Netanyahu (who is the worst of them) who all make promises about settlements and peace and then take official actions the other way. (And please spare me the Palestinians do the same thing stuff, I know that.)
Tiny nitpick: They didn’t directly elect Netanyahu. Kadima wasn’t able to form a coalition government, which is why Livni isn’t the PM right now. Kadima actually won the majority of votes.
I stand corrected. That guy makes our Lieberman look harmless by comparison. I was thinking of Israeli PMs. Netanyahu makes Sharon look placid and peaceful by comparison.
Not in the least. The problem I have is that any real or imagined US government negativity evertowards Israel appears to be perceived by your good self as a “problem”. (Also that you appear to ally yourself with only the conservative side of Israeli politics and portray that as Israel as a whole.)
In a world where one head of government calls another an unfuckable lard-arse, I think Obama’s alleged “complaint” (dictionary definitions of words are very unbecoming as a debating tactic) is a spit in the ocean, and focusing on it is a distraction from the fact that Nethanyahu is a complete dick and actually needs his most powerful ally to publicly bitch-slap him into not doing things that are unbelievably counterproductive like, say, expanding the settlement program, which push the practicalities of a two-state solution even further over an already distant horizon.
Yes indeed - it seems far more reasonable to take the view that opposing Netanyahu, and his jingoist supporters, and all the havoc they’ve created, actually is a pro-Israel attitude.
