Albeit with less vehemence than the World Jewish Congress and the ADL, the Orthodox Union joins the growing list of Jewish organizations publicly taking on Obama’s assault on Israel. Nathan Diament writes that the notion of an imposed peace with a divided Jerusalem — a “bitter pill,” as Zbigniew Brzezinski describes it – is fundamentally faulty:
Jerusalem cannot be equated with any other Israeli-Palestinian border arrangement in pursuit of a peace accord. The city is at the core of Jewish theology, history and identity.
From the religious perspective, Jerusalem is the heart of the Jewish identity. Observant Jews pray each day for Jerusalem’s welfare, facing toward it. We read Biblical accounts of our forefathers that take place there. We conclude our holiest days — as we did at the Passover Seder last month — with a prayer that, next year, we will celebrate in Jerusalem.
And he reminds us of the pre-1967 Jerusalem:
Synagogues were destroyed. This is what happened to the Hurva Synagogue, which was finally rededicated this month — amid Palestinian denunciations and incitement to violence. Christian sites were degraded, too. But after the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel unified the city and opened the holy sites to people of all faiths.
From 1948 to 1967, when Jordan held the Old City and East Jerusalem, Jews were barred entry, denied worship at the Western Wall at the foot of the Temple Mount and denied access to the ancient cemeteries on the Mount of Olives and Mount Zion.
Whether or not one agrees with Diament’s take, his argument makes it clear that there is no obvious peace deal where the terms are “known to all,” as Brzezinsk put it. Obama’s assault on Jerusalem and the threat of an imposed peace deal are, in fact, an “anathema to Jews everywhere.” (He certainly has some polling data on his side.)
It does seem we are entering a new phase in the Jewish community’s relationship with the administration. The series of public rebukes is noteworthy. And so is the timing of the AIPAC-sponsored letters, taking issue with Obama’s Iran and Israel policies. It is no coincidence it came directly on the heels of the nuclear summit. The message: you’re not fooling anyone. Now the question is whether that opposition manifests itself in a decline in support for Obama, and whether he really cares what Jews think. There’s substantial doubt about both.
Obama says, “I’ve got truth on my side! I fear no man when I’ve got truth on my side!”
Reality says, “The Obama campaign could not provide figures to back up his claiam that inflating tires and getting tuneups would save just as much oil as could be produced by offshore drilling. ” (AP)
I think we are witnessing the complete meltdown. Obama only has speech and language to run on. He used it to move past Rev. Wright, to enchant thousands of Germans, and captivate the media. However, when he turns his talent to real issues and facts, Obama comes up very short. Here is another example of soaring, empty rhetoric that has no support. I hope McCain runs an ad showing the lack of connection between Obama’s claim of greatness as the conduit of truth, and the actual truth.
Jonas the only way anyone could come to a “complete meltdown” conclusion is if they were only getting information from the far right. That’s like Bush only listening to advice he wants to hear. Try to take in both sides and filter out what makes sense and what is propaganda from both sides.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skElJ8LF-Sc
^this is what I was talking about before. it’s important to remember that at one point the mcain campaign was almost finished and he did very poorly in many of the early primaries. that wasn’t because no one had ever heard of him. it’s because on a bad day he is BAD
Hank,
I came to my analysis by reading this blog, and the mainstream press, including a daily reading of realclearpolitics. The far left and right blogs are a lot of nonsense. Maybe total meltdown is not the right choice of words, but check out the last interview that J. Rubin posted on Obama. He can’t answer questions, he is visibly upset by a challenge. He can’t stop talking about the Britney/Hilton ads. Last week, Obama pulled the race card. In the post-racial campaign, he pulled the race card. And, of all people, Bill Clinton runs in and says, yeah, he did that to me, too.
I look at him and read his quotes, and feel that his true character is coming through. To me, that is a total meltdown of his New Politics, his Change, his hope, and his hype.
Without that, I can’t see why he would win, or even put up a challenge. It is apparent to me, that this could be a McGovern repeat election.
one correction, Obama was talking about the ads in the townhall meeting.
I suppose people have different ideas what is extreme left and right.. commentary falls pretty far on the right for me.
I just don’t see the race card like you do. I’ve seen the video of those speeches and it just doesn’t come across that way to me. I’m Irish catholic ancestry also.
His campaign is a hype machine though ill agree on that. But I don’t see that as necessarily a bad thing. He could use that ability to our advantage in world politics if elected.
What tax breaks for the oil industry? I am in the oil business and I don’t know what they are.