Posted on 08/27/2004 5:19:46 AM PDT by SJackson
Why should Jews want the re-election of George W. Bush? Let's start with the removal of Saddam Hussein, his resolve in fighting Islamic terrorists, his unequivocal support for Israel's government and people, his willingness to confront the appeasers of terror in the United Nations, and his steadfast commitment to the principle of prevention.
The case for George W. Bush is the case for a clear and consistent US foreign policy. In three and a half years, President Bush has done more for Israel than any other president in the last 50. And, unlike his opponent, he has never wavered, vacillated, or equivocated in his support.
For all practical purposes, national security and defense are among the few issues that truly fall under presidential power.
Budgets, taxes, spending programs are crafted and approved by Congress. Nor do presidents determine social policy - including such contentious issues as abortion and prayer in school. Congress makes the laws, and it is up to the Supreme Court to interpret them. A president cannot even determine the makeup of the Supreme Court. Just ask Robert Bork and all the judicial nominees rejected by the Senate over the last few decades.
In fact, about the only almost unchecked power a president does have today is in foreign policy. When it comes to national security and international relations, what a president says and what a president does is taken seriously.
So when Senator John Kerry says we have to be more "sensitive" in our efforts against those who fly planes into skyscrapers on American soil, or those who send children to blow themselves up in crowded Israeli restaurants and buses, exactly what message is he sending? Kerry's philosophy, also held by the man he first mooted as a "special Middle East adviser," Jimmy Carter, is based on "consensus-building." But how do you build consensus with people who support the destruction of our land and our people? "War is not the answer" is an easy bumper sticker to display, but it is hardly an effective foreign policy for a peaceful world in the 21st century.
When President Bush declared war on global terrorism, America's agenda became Israel's agenda, and vice versa. The words he used at this year's AIPAC conference were direct, blunt, and unwavering: "Freedom-loving people did not seek this conflict. It has come to us by the choices of violent men, hateful men... Israel longs for peace. America longs for peace. Yet there can be no peace without defending our security. There is only one path to peace and safety. America will use every resource we have to fight and defeat these enemies of freedom."
In a survey my firm conducted for the Hudson Institute, beating terrorism is the single greatest priority in America today. The president adopted Israel's approach for fighting terror - bringing the fight directly to the doorsteps of every terrorist network, no matter where their disciples may hide. And just as Israel's non-sensitive approach has reduced a flood of deaths by terror to a trickle, there has not been a successful terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11.
Now compare that language and approach with Senator Kerry's speech at the Arab American Institute National Leadership Conference last October. "I know how disheartened Palestinians are by the Israeli government's decision to build a barrier off the Green Line, cutting deeply into Palestinian areas," said Kerry. "We do not need another barrier to peace."
To be fair, Kerry did eventually recognize that the fence was a "legitimate act of self-defense." But hundreds of Israelis had been murdered before Kerry decided to parrot Palestinian propaganda. Is that what the Jewish community wants in their president - someone who flips one way and another as Israeli blood is being spilled? This type of political tiptoeing has even loyal Democrats nervous. They fear that an absence of conviction will reveal an absence of strength and leadership.
Another significant difference between the two candidates is their world view. Senator Kerry has argued that US policy needs to be more attentive to and respectful of the Europe Union and the United Nations, the same bodies who turn a blind eye to global anti-Semitism and terrorism.
It should not be surprising what happens when Kerry's world view is applied to the Middle East. In his 1997 book The New War, Senator Kerry wrote, "Terrorist organizations with specific political agendas may be encouraged and emboldened by Yasser Arafat's transformation from outlaw to statesman." What a warm, gracious tribute to a despot who bankrupted his own people, broke every commitment made at Oslo, supplied illegal arms and funding to terrorist organizations, and has allowed subordinates to rain down incessant violence on innocent Israelis.
You will not hear President Bush echo such sweet language about Yasser Arafat. Sure, his words are often simple and his world vision relatively black and white - but that's a value Jews should appreciate. In the war against terror, moral clarity is an asset, not a liability. The Bush approach is founded on a very simple principle: The best way to pursue peace is to maintain strength.
Not since the Yom Kippur War has an American president mattered more to the safety and survival of the Jewish state.
President Bush's support for Israel, and the greater war on terror, is not a stand-alone issue. It defines his entire agenda, domestic and foreign. Terrorism has already adversely affected jobs, taxes, and other important domestic concerns. Staying the course in these troubled times will indeed test who we are as a nation and as a people. The fact is, we cannot have economic or personal security without national and homeland security.
George W. Bush gets it. With unequivocal opposition to Palestinian terrorism, his public declaration that some areas of Jerusalem and the West Bank must remain under Israeli control, the public rejection of the Palestinian "right of return" claims, and the elimination of one of the great sources of evil in the Middle East, this president has earned the support of the Jewish community.
The writer, a vice-president at Luntz Research Companies and an adjunct professor of communications at Pepperdine University, was the Southern California director of the Republican Jewish Coalition.
BUMP
Too bad that many in the Jewish community " don't get it. " Just read figures about Jewish people supporting Bush and it was surprisingly low.
He'll never get the support of American Jewry. American Jews are too busy committing demographic suicide and parrotting their grandparents' outmoded politics to care.
Give it time. Many, not just left-leaning Jews, are waking up.
bump to read later.
-Jewry, thats a word you don't hear to often
One of my customers brought up a political discussion with me one day, he is Jewish and a Republican. I asked him why Jews vote for Dems in such large numbers even though it's obvious they are more supportive of Israel. He said (one mans opinion) that a large number of Jews believe in giving to the poor and helping the unfortunate in society and view conservatives as greedy.
My response was " So what can't they give to help out?" and he said his friends think the gov't should be involved to basically make people give to help the poor.
My take is this, not only Jews but many people hate the Christian right. They view Republicans as a bunch of "God Hates Fags" and people who hang outside abortion clinics calling girls murderers as they go in types.Its not true, but thats the way many see it.
I like the word. Very retro--sort of like "Christendom."
However, I think that Kerry could be Arafat in donkey's clothing--and still get the US Jewish vote.
To paraphrase Meir--"Israel will only be safe when American Jews love Israel more than they disdain Baptists."
If Kerry is in office, I predict a lot of pro-Israel Christians will be turned off of the possibility of helping Israel--I, for one, feel quite discouraged. If US Jews vote against Israel, join with the Muslims and Dem antisemites, what can US Christians do?
I hope that you're right in November, but I'll remain skeptical until then. Someone here at FR tried to explain the traditional Jewish loyalty for the Demoncrat party to me, but I still don't understand it.
I don't understand anyones loyalty to the Dem(on)s.
Remember, being a democrat is their own religion. Being Jewish has very little to do with it.
Surprisingly low? Not really...to be honest what shocks me is their disdain for Bush in the face of what he has done for Israel. He truly has been their best friend more than any president over the last 50 yrs and the media and hollywood would rather have you think different.
Odd though considering it is those same factions that blame everything on the Jews and if we didn't support them so blindly we wouldn't be in half the messes we are in now.
Waking up.
I wish it were true - my NYC Jewish acquaintences (who apparently don't realize I'm a repub) have been sending me the most rabid, hateful emails about George Bush. Some of them are encouraging "civil" disobedience while admitting they are leaving town next week. It makes me heartsick.
I think a lot of us will be pleasantly suprised at the outcome the Enemy Within's behavior at the RNC will produce, come Election Day.
Sadly, they do know you are a Republican. They don't care. They are quite willing to lose your friendship and support over their liberal ideas that they and only they know what is right for you, and the American people.
Been there. Send back some pro administration information, (see the Republican Jewish Coalition site). You will see them drift away.
The Middle East and Persian Gulf
we must ensure that Israel remains safe and secure.
It is important for the United States to support and honor Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East. We will ensure that Israel maintains a qualitative edge in defensive technology over any potential adversaries. We will not pick sides in Israeli elections. The United States has a moral and legal obligation to maintain its Embassy and Ambassador in Jerusalem. Immediately upon taking office, the next Republican president will begin the process of moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Israel’s capital, Jerusalem.
The United States seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East. America can use its prestige to encourage discussions and negotiations. But peace must be negotiated between the parties themselves. We will not impose our view or an artificial timetable. At the heart of the peace process is the commitment to resolve all issues through negotiation. A unilateral declaration of independence by the Palestinians would be a violation of that commitment. A new Republican administration would oppose any such declaration. It will also do everything possible to promote the conclusion of a genuine peace in the Middle East. While we have hopes for the peace process, our commitment to the security of Israel is an overriding moral and strategic concern.
Republicans endorse continued assistance and support for countries that have made peace with Israel — led by Egypt and Jordan. We appreciate the significant contributions by Jordan to our common struggle against terrorism, and will take steps to bolster relations with Amman including negotiating a U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement.
The next Republican administration will use its diplomatic influence to put an end to a pattern of discrimination that persists at the United Nations in denying committee assignments to Israel. It will do the likewise at the International Red Cross which refuses to accredit the symbol of Magen David Adom, Israel’s equivalent of the Red Cross. Moreover, Republicans oppose the ideological campaign against participation by the Vatican in U.N. conferences and other activities.
………………….
The Democratic Platform for America: Presented to the 2004 Democratic National Convention
The Middle East. The Democratic Party is fundamentally committed to the security of our ally Israel and the creation of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace between Israel and her neighbors. Our special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative edge for its national security and its right to self-defense. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.
Under a Democratic Administration, the United States will demonstrate the kind of resolve to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that President Clinton showed. We will work to transform the Palestinian Authority by promoting new and responsible leadership, committed to fighting terror and promoting democracy. We support the creation of a democratic Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel. The creation of a Palestinian state should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel. Furthermore, all understand that it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. And we understand that all final status negotiations must be mutually agreed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.