Hello,
Hope you are well. I don't know if you know, but I am fairly involved in the Obama campaign. I am writing because a number of my friends and family seem surprised that someone like me – who comes from a politically conservative, religious Zionist background – will be voting for Barack Obama. Indeed, the revelation has been greeted with the kind of deep sighs and mournful head-shaking from people in my shul that is usually reserved for news of children who marry non-Jews or get a tattoo.
The more people I talk to about this subject the more obvious it is that the argument for an Obama presidency is not merely being ignored by the religious Jewish community, but actively blocked from discussion through the power of peer pressure and assumption.
Since I pride our community on its willingness to analyze ideas on their merit, I felt it was important for those of us on both sides who have thought seriously about the subject to share our opinions. So I wanted to write (completely as a private citizen – this has not been dictated or vetted by the campaign in any way) and encourage you, especially if you are someone who feels that it is "obvious" that all religious Jews should vote for McCain, to give this email some consideration and perhaps forward it to friends who think the same way in the hope that they will respond with their own views. (I apologize in advance for my use of outlines and bullet points – too many years in school and lawyering.)
Like many people with my background, in this election I will be voting on the following issues, roughly in order:
- The security of America (tie)
- The security of Israel (tie)
3. The economic future of myself and my family.
4. Everything else.
Regarding the first two issues: I am voting for Barack Obama not "despite" his views on Israel and the threat of Islamic terrorism, but because of them.
My basic outlook is that the security of Israel and America are intertwined, and that generally anything that makes America more secure and healthy is by definition better for Israel. And in general, I take my cues on security and diplomacy in the region from the Israelis. Israeli policy in dealing with the constant existential threat from its Muslim neighbors has always rested on three pillars:
1. Be open to negotiations anywhere, any time with your enemies. Israel has in the past held successful negotiations with Syria, Egypt. Jordan, Lebanon and Hamas/PLO/Hizballah, both direct and indirect, at times when hawks in the US urged them to have no contact. These negotiations have led to two permanent peace treaties and numerous temporary ones that have saved countless Jewish lives.
2. Cultivate and engage allies in your struggle. Israel's most obvious ally is the US, but it also goes to great lengths to cultivate the goodwill of the Europeans, Africans and even moderate Arabs in the fight against terrorism, to the point of unilaterally releasing prisoners and announcing cease-fires when the Israeli government feels it is safe to do so.
3. Always keep a credible military threat on the table, and use it only when absolutely necessary. Israel has the strongest military in the region by a substantial margin. A key priority is never getting bogged down in long missions which take the focus of the IDF away from its ability to project power and invite an attack by a foolish neighbor. Similarly, Israel engages in military action only when it is actually and undoubtedly threatened.
The comparison to the current situation in America is obvious. As the Bush regime has rightly noted, the US now faces an existential struggle with the same group of actors that threatens Israel. Specifically, Barack Obama and John McCain both recognize Iran and Russia as the greatest threats facing our countries, ones which must be countered with a united international front and a credible military option. The difference between them is that the Bush administration, with McCain as it's most vocal cheerleader, has chosen to refuse negotiations, alienate allies and rashly commit all our military power to a muddled quagmire with no discernable end. Barack Obama wants to actually find out what kind of threat our enemies represent before attacking, build a coalition of allies that support our goals of international security and restore our now non-existant military deterrance by ending the massively misguided and wasteful war in Iraq. Somehow, this proven Israeli model of international security is scorned by the Bush/McCain/GOP crowd as "weak" and "naïve" while continuing the failed policies of the last 8 years is promoted as strength.
That to me is ridiculous. The Bush/McCain policies have broken our military, bankrupted our future and made Iran (and Russia) exponentially stronger due to our destabilizing adventure in Iraq and absolute refusal to take any steps towards ending our demand for oil. Giving them another 4 or 8 years to continue would be, in my opinion, madness.
The only retorts I hear from my Jewish friends to these facts are vague feelings that Obama is just "not good for the Jews", usually through some combination of fears that he is a secret Muslim/Black Panther/PLO supporter, that he is a "flip-flopper" for being inarticulate in his statement supporting Israeli claims to Jerusalem, or that he doesn't have enough of a history of supporting Israel in government.
It is, of course, everyone's prerogative to make personal judgments about the candidates. I have listened closely to Obama since the beginning of his candidacy, as I have to McCain, Clinton, Edwards, Romney, Giuliani etc. and now Palin. What I have seen is someone of exceptional forthrightness, intelligence and integrity. I do not think he is Moshiach, but I have also not seen him pander to the right (like McCain) or the left (like Edwards). Instead, I have seen him talk about unpopular topics to antagonistic groups, like promoting gay rights before conservative black churches and faith-based initiatives to left-wing Democrats. Unlike McCain and others, I have seen him resist the impulse to engage in gutter Rovian politics in order to score cheap political points. I have seen him choose a VP that can lead the country rather than one chosen only to help him win an election. He has had every opportunity to lie and pander and backtrack on major issues but he has not. So when he strongly and consistently states his support for Israel, and backs up that oral support with a voting record that is identical to McCain or Hillary's on Israel issues, I believe him. Moreover, according to everyone who knows either man, McCain is universally described as "impulsive" and someone who makes quick calls on issues "from the gut", much like our current President. Obama, on the other hand, is consistently described as calm and thoughtful, someone who considers the ramifications of a variety of options before commiting to a course of action. Which personality do you want making the call on Israel and America's safety in a complex and dangerous world?
As to the economy – in this election I may be one of the few who will not be an economy issues voter. But I own my own business, and like most Americans I hope one day to be in the highest tax bracket. When I am there, I will no doubt want to pay as few taxes as possible. But regardless of how much I make, I know that my economic and even physical security depend upon the overall health of the nation's economy. Bush has added over $32 trillion to the debt the next generation has to pay and turned a budget surplus into an annual deficit of half a trillion dollars. The wage gap between average workers and CEO's has skyrocketed to levels not seen since before the Great Depression. Like Bush, John McCain has admitted he knows nothing about the economy, and like Bush he is self-evidently much more interested in exciting overseas adventures than the boring details of steering the nation's finances. We literally cannot afford to elect someone who has promised to continue the Bush economic policies without any deviation.
Finally, as regards "everything else": America, as we all know, has been the single most welcoming country for Jews in the history of the world. After two millenia of persecution and oppression across Europe and the Arab world, America was the first (and perhaps still only) place where Jews have enjoyed absolute equality of opportunity. We and other minorities have flourished here specifically because the founding fathers instituted three "chiddushim" that the world had never seen before: a country based upon the separation of church and state, a government with checks and balances between branches of power, and a professional bureaucracy that carried out the workings of government without regard to partisan politics. For the first time everyone was officially equal under the law, and citizens were not at the whim of an absolute dictator or king. This system has served us and America incredibly well for two hundred years, and been respected by politicians of all stripes…until now. For the first time in the modern era, we have a government that is pushing the slow, steady encroachment of a politically active Christianism into every sphere of public life. John McCain, who once rightly identified the aggressive leaders of the Christian right as "agents of intolerance", has now so fully accepted their direction that he felt compelled to nominate one of their own as his Vice Presidential candidate. The Bush/McCain philosophy displays an utter contempt for Constitutional limits to executive power, shows complete disregard for the traditions of open and accountable government and has replaced impartial professionals with incompetent cronies at every level of government, from FEMA to the Attorney General. This is not good for America, and certainly not good for the Jews or any other minority in this country.
So, if you have made it this far, thank you for your time. And thanks for putting in the thought and balance necessary to make this momentous decision.
I look forward to hearing any and all responses soon!
best,
ML
26 comments:
Wow – we really need to start learning again…
As intelligent as you are, you have let both political brands and their empty emotionally charged rhetoric get the best of you and cloud your otherwise sound judgment. The outcome of the election is irrelevant. Both parties are equally corrupt and controlled by special interest groups. Your time would be better served being active at a local level thru politics or volunteer/community work.
Hey ML!
Let me preface my response with a few statements. Firstly, I am currently undecided about my vote, and if anything am leaning VERY SLIGHTLY towards Obama. But I am a staunch and proud independent, and like to consider each candidate with an open mind. Frankly I am not a big fan of either one, and have problems with both. So my vote will likely come down to which one I dislike less. Of course, that won't likely make much difference, bringing me to my second preface statement.
Not that this matters to a discussion of who would make a better president, but I must state that I hate the electoral college system, which essentially makes my vote truly meaningless. I am not saying this in the vein of anyone who says, "Why vote? My vote doesn't count anyway." I take the privilege seriously, and of course will exercise my right to vote. I just hate the fact that in states like California (or Texas in the other direction), the votes are so overwhelmingly in one direction that an individual voter's vote counts EVEN LESS than in the election overall. So there is a chance that come election day I may be voting for someone random, as a mere protest vote, if I think that the candidate I dislike less is essentially assured California's electoral votes.
That being said, let me make three statements about your missive. Firstly, I think you do argument a disservice by parroting the same lie that the Democrats have been iterating this entire campaign. Namely, that a McCain presidency is the equivalent of four more years of Bush. I am not saying they don't agree on certain issues, but to constantly tie them together here is patently overstating the case. Like or dislike the man and his beliefs and policies, there are major differences between McCain and Bush. If you dislike him as a candidate on his own terms, of course that is fine. But to paint him as simply a continuation of and heir to the Bush legacy is an overly broad generalization.
Secondly, many of Obama's desires may be in line with what I might like to see happen. But saying you want "Change" and that diplomacy is going to be your first approach is nice in theory. But practically every candidate I can remember for the past 20 years, at least, has said they want to change Washington. I am frankly uncomfortable with Obama's lack of experience. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean he isn't worth taking a chance on, especially if you feel his heart is in the right place. Inexperience and potentially disability to achieve goals that are well-intentioned would likely be preferable to an ability to succeed at things that you don't want achieved (if that makes sense). But lack of experience is still cause for at least some hesitation in choosing this man as President.
Finally -- and I admit this is an emotional response, but one that I believe is grounded in more truth than idiotic claims about Obama's religion or heritage -- I still have problems with his former association with Wright's church. Now, I am not saying that I believe he shares all of Wright's views or anything. But at the same time, I can't accept that he is entirely seperable from those ideas either. I know that if I was attending a shul in which the rabbi regularly spouted racist statements, I would not continue to attend that shul. So while he can distance himself as much as he likes, the fact remains that he kept going. And that tells me that he at least has a place in his heart for some element of what Rev Wright said. I would feel the same way if McCain attended a white supremacist church for many years, even if he professed distance from its messages.
None of these three things are necessarily things that will make me vote against Obama and for McCain. But they are all issues that I believe should enter the decision-making process, and which I think are counter to your arguments somewhat. (And believe me, if you had written a letter of this nature about McCain I'm sure I could have plenty fo similar responses.)
That's just my $.02
Shana tovah!
Hi Joel,
Thanks for your quick and thoughtful reply. I don't have much time, but to address your three points:
1. I agree that McCain and Bush are different personalities. But as to policy, even McCain's potential VP picks couldn't explain any meaningful difference between the two. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/13/mark-sanford-draws-a-blan_n_112391.html
On both foreign (including Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia, Israel and Venezuela) and domestic policy (including taxes, spending, regulation, education, energy and most importantly judicial nominations) McCain has promised to continue Bush's exact policies. One hopes that there will be marginally less government torture and some slight consideration of the environment (unless its an area that oil companies want to drill) but to me that's not much of a difference.
2. I agree that everyone talks about change and that Obama doesn't have much Washington experience. I guess I'd prefer that he have more, but being a long-lived legislator doesn't seem to make anyone a better president, while character and judgment seem crucially important.
3. On this I totally disagree. There is a big difference between the black and jewish experiences in this country. A black guy saying that the government is racist (which we have never experienced here) is equivalent in my book to a jew talking about how all the goyim are anti-semites deep down, or calling everone who disagrees with us "nazis". You and I have both heard plenty of that, certainly for me at YU and at shul, and we let it slide because we know where it comes from. When it came time to publiucly agree or disagree, BO disagreed, which I hope we would have the courage to do if anyone asked us about some of the Rabbis' views on TV.
BTW, a quick question, since I was just discussing an ancillary matter with my roommate. The national debt currently stands at just under $10 trillion. How could bush have added $32 trillion to the debt? Are you looking at it with the interest it will have earned down the road? Was it a typo when you write that? Should it have read $3.2 trillion?
Just looking for the facts!
Sure: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/12/the-cost-of-bus.html
Okay, that explains it. You've made a mistake in your terminology. which is understandable, since it was unclear to me until I poked around. Tha National Debt is at about $9.6 trillion. The $32 trillion is what is known as our "fiscal exposure" which includes money that we WILL need to pay in the future. Saying that future generations will have to pay it is not entirely untrue. But you said he added that amount to "the debt" which is a confusing term at best.
No worries though. The fact of the horrific turnaround is true. Just the degree to which it was done was stated in vague fashion!
Matt,
I respectfully disagree with most of what you wrote :-) For lack of time and knowledge I cannot debate each point, but I do think we agree on the most important issue, Israel and its security.
Would further negotiations with Iran and its proxy army's, Hezbollah and Hamas, yield a better outcome for Israel? Look what happened in Gush Katif only a couple of years ago? Lebanon? Oslo in 93 led to the intifada, how much more should we have negotiated?
Of all the negatives you have about John McCain, does Barack Hussein Obama really have a better track record? He and Joe Biden will come into your top tier tax bracket house one day and take your money because it's the neighborly thing to do. He will negotiate with Iran without precondition?????????
Bottom line for me is that Obama is sympathetic to Israel's enemies. How much more sympathy does the Arab world need from us? Would that have prevented 9/11? If we are extra nice to Ahmenejad and really get to know what kind of threat he is, will he call off Hamas and Hezbollah and stop funding them? Do you know how many people were affected by post-trauma stress this week in Sderot alone? If we were only more understanding of our enemies???
I don't believe he and his wife like this country or are appreciative enough of it, despite what they say, and have proven time and time again to keep company with only the far (radical) left.
LS: Certainly your prerogative. But not sure where you get the part about him being "sympathetic" or "understanding" to Israel's enemies. The only thing I have heard him say is that Israel's security is sacrosanct and that our top priority has to be stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Agreeing to hold talks before starting a war doesn't imply sympathy for your enemy; it is just intelligent to know whether war is necessary. Only an idiot like Bush decides he knows all the facts before asking or talking to anyone.
This is also interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VFRt5W4FM
ML, I almost got into a fist fight in shul last weekend with a guy telling me that BO is a Muslim black panther. This election is really bringing out peoples' true stripes... You preach it, brother. On the Israel issue, I argue that Bush was one of the worst presidents for that country of all time. As a citizen who lived, worked and got married there during the height of the Intifada, I can tell you this - more Israeli civilians died on his watch than any other president, his disengagement from the peace process, which some interpret as being a 'friend' to Israel led directly to the power vacuum being filled by Hamas and Hizbullah, the latter of which caused a permanent shutdown to half the country for two entire weeks. As much as Jimmy Carter is very likely an anti-semite, the guy's POLICIES brought an end to war with Israel's most populous, most intractable foe. Bush may love Israel, but his POLICIES have only brought disaster on am yisrael. And of
course, what you said about Iran. It's only stronger and thanks to the Iraq debacle, the military option is off the table. Sure, he talks a good game about his love of Israel, but friends don't let friends drive drunk. And don't forget he's the first US president to call for a palestinian state and he hasn't moved the embassy to Jerusalem. What, you're telling me he's afraid of incurring the wrath of the Arab world by moving the embassy? A guy who invaded Iraq afraid of the Arab street? Please. One thing you also failed to mention is energy policy - oil men in the WH surely did little to break our addiction to ME oil, which is of course one of the foundations for our problems in the ME and elsewhere...
Man, have I got stories for you about the solipsistic, xenophobic and downright racist Jews in my modern orthodox leafy suburb. But now aint the time. For now, let's just say 'Ken Anu Yecholim!!'
you had me at hello, but this is a very thoughtful email.
Really excellent, ML. You should publish as much of it as a newspaper would take.
refuah shelaima.
ML,
Thanks for taking the time to write this. I think it is utterly scary how many Jews in the more observant communities plan so blindedly to vote for McCain. I'll pass this on to some friends in those communities. Maybe it will spark some discussion and make them open their eyes and minds to another point of view?
And in terms of doing something for the Obama campaign... what can I do? What have you been doing with the campaign? I know there is a need to take action, most importantly outside of NY.
hooray for you. and hooray for me for having you as a friend.
i will carry this around in my pocket until the election. well, i probably won't, but you get my drift. thank you.
Thank you very much for your piece: so helpful and inspiring to so many, I am sure.
Do I have your permission to send it to people I know? If so, can I mention your name in full and include your e-mail address?
L'shanah tovah tikatevu vitechatemu.
someone forwarded it along to me. great job. will send it out to plenty of folks i know could use it.
Heywhatever floats your boat
I found your email interesting but not entirely compelling. To my mind, there are a few issues that influence my shying away from Obama (although I am not one to believe the Jewish cause is lost if he were to win).
As a person, his personal influences are troubling. First and foremost a man who he has credited so much to in terms of who he is as a Christian - Rev Wright. How could Obama not only be associated with a man as violently anti-American, anti-white be "like a member of the family" How could Obama claim that he did not know the bad side of Rev. Wright who influenced his world view to the point of becoming like a member of the family? What does that say about his character judgment? Of course his connections with other shady and downright bad people also makes me quite uncomfortable. To put this issue into a more real context, with the Iranian threat looming large and Obama famously willing to meet with him without condition, I am reminded of the naiveté of the a world leader in 1938 referrig to an agreement reached with Hitler when British prime minister Neville Chamberlain decalared “peace for our time”. The ensuing World War would call into question Chamberlain’s character judgement and his ability to determine if a true enemy is willing to change course. The stakes in this day and age for Israel and the free world are too large to take a chance.
And, speaking of judgment, I imagine you think the lipstick line was nothing to make a stink over but I think it calls into question again his judgment in truly fundamental ways. As a statesman, who can trigger a war by poorly chosen words, how could Obama not think that "lipstick" would not generate an outrage? Why did he not immediately react to the crowd who went wild to offer a "clarification” to emphatically deny any allusion to Pailin? Again it calls into question his judgment.
Perhaps most importantly, his basis for his candidacy was his judgment in being against the war in Iraq. Of course in hind sight his opposition appears sagacious. However, I do question what led him to that conclusion - especially when the vast majority of congressman from all spectrum of the US agreed that war was a reasonable course of action against a defiant Sadaam. Considering all that facts that were available at the time, a reasoned and wise person would have mistakenly come to the conclusion to go to war. Is it possible that Obama was catering to his specific Illinois constituency (which has a large percentage of Muslims) who would be offended with war on an Arab country to better secure a future re-election to Congress?
As a leader, it truly troubles me how many times he voted present - it does not appear to demonstrate strong conviction and clear direction.
I am sure you know people in the course of their becoming more or less religious do something with their name. If I were to change my name to Baruch when I was in college and no longer answer to Barry, the modern orthodox world would interpret that as my desire to break from a less traditional past or un-rooted past to cleave to a tradition or history. Some might mock the decision and others might respect it, but the person who insists on the change, especially at such a late age, is trying to figure himself out. Obama is not Barry. He is Barak Hussein Obama. What do you make of his decision to go by his given name. Although I think it is silly for people to question which faith he belongs to (although a muslim considers him muslim just as much as we consider any person born to a Jewish mother a Jew), his choice to reconnect with his roots which have something to do with Islam should reflect something on who he is. Do you think that he might be more sympathetic to a Muslim cause or issue at the expense of a Jewish one? Despite all the right things he has undoubtedly said about Israel’s security being sacrosanct, I think it is possible.
With all that said, and there is more to say about things that give me reservations about Obama, I think America could benefit from a jolt of what he brings. I find him mesmerizing and inspiring (although less so of late). Although not exactly part of the ticket, something about his wife is also very unsettling although it is not as easy to pin down. I look forward to seeing your blogspot. I'll end with saying that I think Obama is a great orator and a powerfully positive force in America. I don't find leadership qualities in him, I have found him to demonstrate poor judgment and I certainly question if he is on equal footing with McCain in his support of Israel. (Although he has said that Israel has the right to defend itself - who doesn't? - I was disappointed by his "clarification" on what he meant that Jerusalem is the united capital of Israel - once again poor judgment in words and no backbone to stand behind what he said.
Some of the most petty things reveal worlds about a person because it is there that the least scrutiny.
I appreciate your input and insights on laying out the political landscape – in this presidential election. I for one, as a voter still undecided - appreciate your thoughts. However, in relating to your letter below and putting forth some of my own thoughts/concerns (which perhaps you might address or take into account) – I decided to see what you might say.
Your letter – Some minor points about our "enemies": regarding Russia – they are by no means one of the new threats to America or the world at large for that matter. Russia is still a very weak and dependent evolving economy and would not even be where it is today if it were not the economic/pricing tear that the commodity markets have got through during the last 5 years (oil, gas, gold, steel, aluminum, copper, diamonds, coal, etc) – all of which Russia is of the top in the world reserves. So it has not been do to US government policy, although it was Clinton that invited Yeltsin (Russia) into the G8 (granted before it deserved to be) but Clinton did this in an effort to integrate Russia and develop a common ground for diplomacy and joint-economic decision making. Russia is very much in need of western technologies, capital market knowledge, banking reforms, and good relations with Europe and also the US (as a counter balance to China – always a psychological and physical population threat on their eastern border). The only negotiation that the US has formally been involved with Russia (outside of UN debates on Iran, etc) has been regarding Russia joining the WTO and Bush even with his seemingly warm relations with Putin has still yet to include Russia in the WTO and it might still be 4-5 year off before Russia is in – so there have not been any "friendly" treatment from Bush towards Russia – and on the contrary the US (as much as I love my country of birth) has done some pretty stupid and unnecessary things in its relations with Russia during the Bush/Putin era – such as aggressively getting involved in the Ukraine elections (which Russia views as political and election manipulation from the US) when the majority of the population there supported a more friendly government to Russia (since Russia is the largest trade partner and economy for the Ukraine, boarder neighbor, etc) instead of a government/prime minister that wants to join NATO. With regard to Georgia – same thing there Russia see the US involving itself in Georgia politics, and the president there has done enough stupid things (like starting the conflict with Russia without consent from US) Georgia has been for some time under economic stress in their relations with Russia and in their effort to break out from their econ pressure they started up with Russia betting on the worlds reaction to come and deliver BILLIONS of USD to provide them aid and manipulate international media that they are oppressed in their plight with Russia – small country, small population (4 mill) – that also has more than 90% of its GDP trade dependent on Russia – they said they wanted to be part of NATO – an organization which does not have a clearly defined idealistic enemy (no more Warsaw Pact) which does not define a military purpose – so Russia interpret all these actions as nothing more than a psychological attempt at containment of "enemy" Russia when Russia has not been a threat to anyone since 1990 until today – so finally the US effort to place missiles in Poland so close to Russia sends the strongest message to Russia that they should feel threatened.
Russia in no real threat to the US – the real threat to the US is the US (in current policy and behavior). As much as I feel that Russia is not a real threat to the US – I feel that Obama has not been one to communicate clearly the situation with regard to Russia – on a similar note McCain using all of his rhetoric certainly does not send a better message – so regarding the this enemy – I feel neither candidate is incredibly insightful – so call it a tie.
Regarding Iran – here is where I am most concerned! If you read even today's Haaretz online – you can see quotes that Iran (after UN speech) is viewed as greatest threat to Israel and stability in the ME – and that even within the next 18 months Israel might need to make and take on "its most difficult decision since the start of the state" – the point is if within a 2 year window is it realistic for Obama to become comfortable as President on foreign policy MAJOR decisions to take a position (if it get to that point) of aggressive military action against Iran?
Where are the doubts – since we are friends I can take the liberty of using some quotes from our bible belt up bringing – I think it’s the Catholics that say "give a kid til his five, and I make a Catholic for life" – lets keep in mind Obama was educated in Muslim schools until he was 11!!! I am sure as a politician this even gives him more comfort and confidence psychologically that he know being black he can relate to the Muslim (Farrakan) crowd and the regular Christian crowd – after all he has "connections" to both parties – father being Musilm and his early schooling, while married with Family going to Church (Jeremiah Wright - not the most Jewish or American loving Church for that matter) and I think he has been a member of that church for over 10 years until recently denouncing his connection to Wright. Then there are the classic quotes from Obama's wife "this is the first time I have ever felt pround to be an American" – what the hell is that all about – I would call that her Church indoctrination – and just wait and see what comes out of her mouth if Obama loses. This morning at the gym while on the treadmill between watching CNBC I switch to Fox News (I know conservative Republican rhetoric and Democrat bashing network) – they reported about a new pastor scandal – that Obama has been a large supporter and channeled major charity funds to this guy – I forgot his name but it was not pretty – he is some white Catholic priest in Chicago who preaches to blacks like a black minister – no problem with that but he says same things as Wright and even worse loves Farrakan. I have even cut and pasted below an interview where Obama has a "Freudian slip" – saying "his Muslim" religion – where the interviewer corrects him and says you mean you Christian religion. You know how the old saying goes – there are NO FREUDIAN SLIPS – it just might be in the back of his mind how he relates to himself. Anyway, these issues truly brother me to no end, and I do not know how to come to terms with it – vote for Obama and hope for the best?
Regarding McCain – I do not think there are incredible things I think I can say about him with total certainly that he will be the greatest president even – he is certainly a patriot as a Senator and war hero, and has not had church indoctrination which is anti-Semitic or anti-American – he has served as a bipartisan Senator often bucking (and pissing off) the conservatives in his party – he is the elder statesman with worlds of experience. I feel that he is not the charismatic leader the US needs today but a statesman he is. Final comment on Palin – her Christian beliefs I think are a lot less concerning than Obama religious background – it is just an argument that I think Obama loses. Your hints (or out right claim) of her Christian Right influences/background (as well as Mccain's) "creeping up and into" all forms of life in America, alluding to their religious leaning bringing about the undermining of the basic orinciple of separation of Church and State, I think is way over stated! But at the end of the day, I am left undecided.
danny - Don't have to time to respond right now, but as to Palin's christianism:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/palin-in-wasill.html
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/the-anointing-o.html
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/palin-muthee--1.html
Micha & Danny -
1. I don't know enough about the mechanics of the Illinois senate to have an opinion regarding the "present" votes. I can only judge from the US senate, in which he has a pretty good record in terms of voting before he started running for President. Last year he missed 11 votes, while McCain missed 58. This year he missed 295 while McCain has the worst record, missing 412 votes. http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/senate/vote-missers/
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/
While it would be great if he voted on every bill, that record doesn't seem like one of someone who is trying to somehow evade responsibility.
2. I find this "influence" think amazing coming from frum Jews. I know you know of dozens of rabbis you have had, not least at the Gush and KBY, who hold extremely different viewpoints from you on many topics, often ones that would horrify normal people if they were recorded and played on TV. Hundreds, if not thousands of people counted Mattis Weinberg, Baruch Lanner and other reprobates as their personal religious leaders. Are we all going to be held responsible for every one of their statements if we didn't drop out of school or leave shul in protest? The question is whether Barack himself holds Wright's ridiculous views, and he came out on national TV to condemn them. It seems like you think it's possible that he is in fact some kind of Black Panther/radical etc., which to me is crazy, since every fiber of his being when you watch him contradicts that idea.
3. In terms of judgment in general - I think you are misremembering the runup to the war. There was a large number of people, myself included, who simply couldn't imagine that the US was now in the business of invading and destroying other countries not because they were actually threatening us (because they may one day have the capability to be a threat to us (At best, our claim was that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons, which many dozens of countries including Iran, Syria, Libya, Egypt et al possess and that he was "trying to gain the knowledge" to one day make a nuke, again like all those countries mentioned). The fact that Congress authorized the use of force did not mean they were sanctioning a war as a first resort based on completely cherrypicked and/or falsified intelligence. Obama made his statement against the war for those reasons - that the "evidence" certainly didn't seem overwhelming or the threat immediate, and that war is by nature unpredictable and so should be taken only as a last resort.
4.Overall, the evidence you guys have given for his poor judgment seem extremely thin and convoluted. Comparing him with McCain seems like a cakewalk to me: I believe the fact that McCain chose a VP who is so monumentally unfit for any national position that even the most conservative pundits are now pushing for her withdrawal (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more) shows a truly frightening lack of judgment. This was the first semi-presidential decision he had to make and he did it with basically no investigation or consideration. He has also immediately and unthinkingly responded to national crises like the financial meltdown (fire the head of the SEC!), the Russia-Georgia problem (war with Russia!) and Iran (never talk to bad guys!) with quick "gut" calls that show no judgment whatsoever. He is a guy who not only voted for a bad war, but has said he would do so again even though the casus belli were demonstrably false. He was the central figure in an ethics scandal in Congress. He has even run such a shambolic campaign, with central messages that change literally week to week, that he has had to fire his entire staff twice within a year. Barack has made the right calls at the right time, chosen a VP who may not agree with him about everything but is at least functional, and has run a campaign that works like a calm and thoughtful machine. And with all due respect, the lipstick "controversy" and the nickname points are so silly as not to warrant discussion (am I reconnecting with my Christian heritage if I go by Matthew instead of Matt?)
5. Again, my knowledge of Islamic identity law is slim, but Muslim scholars certainly seem to disagree as to whether they consider him a Muslim or not: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-eteraz/obama-islam-smear-changes_b_101337.html Regardless, he has never once identified himself in any way as a Muslim. It is scary that I have to point educated fellas like y'all to this page, but here are background documents addressing this stuff: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/jahome/ I would specifically recommend watching the short YouTube on that page with Dennis Ross; I was just at a meeting where he gave that speech and hardcore McCain people left convinced that Barack was the best choice for Israel.
Thanks again for weighing in.
Two articles on McCain 's recent displays of judgment on two major issues - VP choice and the banking crisis:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161204
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/opinion/28rich.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
Post a Comment