Close your eyes, breathe in deeply, now exhale slowly… That was easy, wasn’t it? Not for everyone…
Group solidarity is one trait that has earned Jews both plaudits and criticism. But according to a spokesman for a national Jewish organization, it’s long past time to stop the group-think.
M.J. Rosenberg, the director of the Israel Policy Forum’s Washington Policy Center wrote on the eve of the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington to register his disgust at the rituals of pandering politicians who seek to win Jewish votes. While he affirms that we should care deeply about Israel, he is down on those who seek Jewish votes by carrying on about their views on the issue.
“To suggest that an American Jew living in New York or Des Moines votes based on considerations entirely different from his non-Jewish neighbors is insulting,” wrote Rosenberg.
What Rosenberg is mad about is not so much the concern for Israel that he says he shares, but the fact that many American political leaders feel constrained to register their support for Israel’s stands against pressure to make concessions. They also speak out about the shortcomings and general mendacity of would-be Palestinian peace partners more than he seems to like.
As the representative of a group that is not shy about its desire to see the United State use its leverage over Israel to push the Jewish state to make still more concessions, the idea of Americans lining up to say that they want no part of such a process is antithetical to his purpose.
Rosenberg’s stand seems also rooted in the partisan debates that have been waged during recent elections as Republicans have vainly sought to make inroads on the Jewish vote. Israel has been their wedge issue. Democrats claimed the entire idea of debating support for Israel during elections was “divisive” because their own record made it a consensus issue. Rosenberg seems to be taking this a step further and delegitimizing the very notion of evaluating candidates on the basis of this issue at all.
That would, of course, be a terrible mistake. The essence of democracy is accountability. Candidates who want the votes of those who care about Israel – whether it is their priority or just one of many concerns – must understand that if they do or say the wrong thing, there are going to be consequences.
All this was put into sharp relief recently when a freshman Democratic Congressman from the suburbs of Philadelphia, Joe Sestak, found himself embroiled in a controversy over his decision to appear at a fundraiser for a well-known anti-Israel group.
Sestak, a retired U.S. Navy admiral, had agreed to speak at a Philadelphia event for the Council on American Islamic Relations on April 7. CAIR is a longtime antagonist not merely of Israel, but of the war against Islamist terror itself. A group founded largely by supporters of the Hamas terrorist organization, CAIR has worked hard to worm its way into the mainstream of American politics.
According to Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the United States, a recently published book by leading expert Steven Emerson and his Investigative Project on Terrorism, the purpose of groups like CAIR is to “subvert the interests and safety of American and Western interests behind a veil of false moderation.”
These organizations “operate in the United States,” Emerson writes in his textbook-style volume, expressly “for the purpose of supporting radical Islamist causes throughout the world.”
CAIR is a legal public-advocacy group with deep connections to groups like the Holy Land Foundation, a Hamas-fundraising front that was shut down by the U.S. government. The group steadfastly refuses to disavow or condemn the murderers fostered by Hamas and Hizbullah.
Far from being the legitimate voice of local Muslims, as Sestak mistakenly believes, CAIR’s entire purpose is, Emerson reports, “to drown out the truly moderate and diverse voices within the American Muslim community.”
In other words, this is not a group to which a congressman should be lending the prestige of his office. Instead, it is one he should be vigorously opposing.
This is not a partisan issue. Democrats such as House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) have also made it clear that they will have nothing to do with the group. Yet when called to account for this error, Sestak refused to back down, and naively claimed he would use his time with CAIR members to impress upon them his support for Israel. His subsequent attempt to revise the schedule so as to make it appear that his part in the program had nothing to do with raising funds for this despicable group was similarly lame.
The truth is that the congressman is something of a political novice, whose upset victory in last year’s election had more to do with his opponent’s implosion in the wake of a corruption scandal than with either the Democratic tide that swept the nation or Sestak’s own impressive résumé. We must hope his refusal to be seen as backing down to pressure – even in the face of what even he now must realize is a blunder – will eventually be overcome by common sense, or a stern lecture from more senior and wiser Democratic leaders.
But one obstacle to that sensible outcome would be the reluctance of some of his local supporters to hold him accountable. If, because they support him on withdrawal from Iraq or on domestic issues, Jewish and non-Jewish friends of Israel decide to give him a pass for this egregious mistake, it will be sending the wrong message not only to Congress, but to CAIR and its backers. That would be a setback not merely for those of us who love Israel, but for anyone who still takes the battle against Islamist terror seriously.
If the Sestak fiasco teaches us anything, it is – contrary to the advice of some in the “peace” camp – that the last thing we need to do is to start backing off on making sure our leaders understand that we are watching what they are doing.
Compared to Sestak’s folly, a little well-prepared pandering looks less like an “insult” and more like wise public policy.
About the Author: Jonathan S. Tobin is senior online editor of Commentary magazine and chief political blogger at www.commentarymagazine.com. He can be reached via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.
Comments are closed.
Islamists spoke of “Love and Justice in a World of Suffering,” skipping the horrors caused by Islam
How and when is it appropriate for pulpit rabbis to comment publicly on the Iran issue?
David was many things: Brother, son, grandson, nephew, uncle, cousin, talmid, comrade, AND a WARRIOR
Aside from my own 485-page tome on the subject, Red Army, I think Jamie Glazov did an excellent job at framing things in United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror.
“Isn’t it enough that the whole world hates us? WHy do we have to hate each other?”
Who said Kerry won no concessions from Iran? He secured pistachios and Beluga caviar for America!
In 2015, Israel’s fertility rate (3+ births per woman) is higher than all Arab countries except 3
The New Israel Fund, as usual, condemns the State of Israel rather than condemning a horrible act.
I sought a Muslim group that claims to preach a peaceful and accepting posture of Islam, Ahmadiyya
While Orthodox men are encouraged to achieve and celebrated for it, Orthodox women too often are not
Jonathan remember, as long as you’re denied your right to come home to Israel you’re still in prison
Reports of a dead baby, a devastated family, and indications of a gloating attacker.
“The fear of being exposed publicly is the only thing that will stop people,” observed Seewald.
“Yesha” and Binyamin Regional Council leaders said the attack “is not the path of Jews in Judea and Samaria.”
Hillary should THANK Trump; By dominating the news he’s overshadowed the implosion of her campaign
The abuse following publication proved a cautionary tale: no one followed in Peters’s footsteps
Anti-Semitism has returned to the mainstream of European society and Israel has become its focus.
One of the key talking points by apologists for Hamas in the current conflict is that it isn’t fair that Israelis under fire have bomb shelters while Palestinians in Gaza don’t have any. Among other factors, the lack of shelters accounts in part for the differences in casualty figures between the two peoples. But somehow […]
How will all this end? Hamas seems to think it will be Netanyahu who will blink first.
Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/stepping-over-the-line/2007/03/21/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online: