High season of politics has clearly begun, judging by the e-mails, computer generated phone calls, and fundraising letters I’ve recently received. It’s déjà vu all over again (as Yogi Berra, the patron saint of malapropism put it); yet, this time there seems to be something genuinely new: on the Democratic side, we’re going to see an African American man or a white woman nominated, either of which would be unprecedented. On the Republican side, we came close to seeing a member of the Mormon Church nominated. It would appear that a new era of tolerance has descended on these United States.
That is, until you open the letters and emails and discover that the politics of race and narrow mindedness is alive and well. There you will find the tactics of hate-speech, ad-hominem attacks, and rumor-mongering. Given my “demographic”, these communications target my “fears” and imply that specific candidate(s) are “anti-Israel” and that Israel would be endangered, and the entire Jewish people placed in jeopardy, should they be elected.
For example, consider what’s been written about Barack Obama. An array of inflammatory (and alleged) specifics are laid out: Obama attended a Wahabist, pro-terrorist Muslim school as a child, that he is secretly a Muslim today, and that he is anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. “Proof” is offered: Obama purportedly was sworn into his senate seat with his hand on the Koran.
I hope you’ve heard that the above isn’t true. Even so, receiving multiple copies of these emails from congregants and friends prompts me to reiterate a message I’ve shared before: for the manifold blessings email affords us, it also enables a most virulent form of “Lashon HaRa”, evil speech. Email is particularly effective for spreading unverified rumor. What’s more, it affords almost unlimited amplification of same. And once the “big lie” is repeated often enough, it’s indistinguishable from the truth. In such an environment, defending a candidate’s character can be an opportunity to do further damage. In the wake of the rounds of email, The National Jewish Paper of record, the Forward, denounced such scurrilous and libelous communication, but printed this: "Is Barack Obama a Muslim? Almost certainly not." “Almost?” The inclusion of that qualification transforms an otherwise responsible editorial into inexcusable innuendo. Is there any basis for leaving the door open, even just a crack?
In a similar vein, other candidates have offered a half-hearted condemnation of such libelous attacks, all the while leaving open the possibility that Obama just might be the enemies’ secret weapon. Beyond the virtual libel of such accusations, it’s just plain wrong in this day and age for anyone to imply that American Jews vote monolithically as a “one-issue” community. I, for one, care deeply about Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, but my unwavering love for Israel is but one of many concerns I have as an American Jew. Along with support of the State of Israel, my Jewish values compel concerns about poverty, education, housing, employment and health-care. I worry about how the war in Iraq continues to drain our country’s financial and spiritual reserves.
Luckily, all of the major Presidential candidates - Democrat and Republican - have been unequivocal in their support of the State of Israel. Thankfully, the idea that Jewish votes can be manipulated by fear is a thing of the past. We are fortunate to live at a time and in a place where our political choices can be founded not on fear, but on hope. We should expect our candidates to eschew the debilitating politics of fear and speak, instead, about the positive possibilities for the future.
2 comments:
dbc -
THIS is the reason (among others) that you continue to be MY RABBI. Thank you for your smarts. Thank you for your heart. Thank you for your spirit.
Much love,
PLS
I agree that lies spread about Barack Obama's heritage, background, actions and beliefs are to be roundly condemned. That said, I am not so quick to say that there are no fact-based reasons for being concerned about his commitment to Israel, let alone the seriousness of his understanding of the threat to both Israel and America represented by the Jihadis.
Despite his professions of support for Israel,what is one to make of his long-time membership in a church, the pastor of whom has been Obama's spritual advisor and has offered opinions on Israel such as the following:
"The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for almost 40 years now. It took a divestment campaign to wake the business community up concerning the South Africa issue. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community up and to wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism."
The pastor, Jeremiah Wright, has also honored Louis Farrakhan at his church.
So, I hear you ask, isn't this guilt by association? Well it certainly doesn'tmean that Obama is anti-Semitic, but why does he choose to affiliate with a church whose pastor honors them? Isn't it legitimate to question such judgment? A look at his church's website reveals that it is very race centers in outlook, decribing itself as "Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian." Hmmm, I can see the sign: "Congregation Sinai: Unashamedly White and Unapologetically Jewish...." That would go over well. So why did and does Obama choose this church? to me it seems to indicate that, in spite of a wish to separate himself from racial politics-as-usual, he seems powerless to resist the opposing need to identify, at least partly, with the morally bankrupt race-hustling identity politics of the failed post- Martin Luther King self-annointed leadership of the black community, as exemplified by Messr's Jackson and Sharpton. Shelby Steele, who writes as incisively on race as anyone in America today, has just published a book called seems to indicate that, in spite of a wish to separate himself from racial politics-as-usual, he seems powerless to resist the opposing need to identify, at least partly, with the morally bankrupt race-hustling identity politics of the failed post- Martin Luther King self-annointed leadership of the black community, as exemplified by Messr's Jackson and Sharpton. Shelby Steele, who writes as incisively on race as anyone in America today, has just published a book called A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can't Win (though I'm not convinced about that conclusion, given how well he's currently doing)in which he presents a compelling analysis of this thesis. Just listen to how Obama changes his accent (as Hillary Clintion has also been known to do) when he speaks to a black audience. This quality leads me to question, though I would like to think that Obama means what he says about Israel's security, whether he possesses the strength of conviction and character that is needed for him to act consistent with such sentiments.
Obama's close relationship with the leader of the Kenyan opposition who apparently has strong ties to Jihadists is another cause for questioning how attuned he is to the threat from the Islamists.
The greatest cause for concern re: Obama's readiness to stand behind Israel is his choice of foreign policy advisors which in addition to long-time anti-Israeli Zbigniew Brezinski,includes a man named Robert Malley, who almost makes Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer (whose views he has supported)look like rabid Zionists. Malley has consistently apologized for such shining lights as Yasser Arafat, Hamas, Syria, and Moqtada al-Sadr. That doesn't exactly engender much confidence from me in him.
I think Obama is a decent man, but his rhetoric is really vapid. He is charasmatic, young and an eloquent orator; but he exemplifies style over substance. He goes on and on about "change" but offers bromides rather than specifics. And it's ironic that, as much as he talks change, one would be hard-pressed to find a hair breadth's distance between his positions and those of Ted Kennedy's.
I think we'd be taking much more of a risk than I'd be comfortable with by electing this man to lead our country in a time of war against a truly vicious and evil enemy.
Post a Comment