Posted on 02/14/2007 3:53:46 PM PST by The Blitherer
ABC’s Jennifer Rubin thinks she knows. According to her report, Mitt Romney announcing his candidacy yesterday at a museum named for Henry Ford has a lot to do with it:
Indeed, the incident may say something not only about Romney but about the GOP's problem with Jews. In his boatload of advisers, Romney apparently did not have anyone to say, "You know, a lot of Jews really hate Ford, and it might mess up your message.”
A few points here to counter Rubin’s hyperbole. At this moment, Romney has less a boatful of advisors than a handful. And, for what it’s worth, among that handful, my lantzmen are amply represented. Furthermore, most Jews don’t know about Henry Ford’s anti-Semitism and those that do couldn’t give a rat’s tuchas about it anyway.
What’s more, obviously Henry Ford’s fame doesn’t derive from his anti-Semitism. Romney’s announcement venue was as much of an issue (to all but the most hyper-sensitive Jews) as a photo-op in front of the Spirit of St. Louis would have been. Like Ford, Charles Lindbergh’s fame had nothing to do with his anti-Semitism. Now if Romney made an appearance at the next Leni Riefenstahl film festival, that would be noteworthy.
As an additional point of note, I’ve heard many Jews say they would never consider driving a German car as payback for the Holocaust. I have never heard a Jew say he wouldn’t drive a Ford, unless it related to the execrable quality of their vehicles. (In my younger days, I too used to say I would never drive a German car. When my financial situation changed, I amended that guideline to the only slightly less principled, “I’ll never drive a Volkswagen.”)
The ginned up controversy over Romney’s venue is hysterical, the kind of eye-roll inducing Jewish protest that makes me want to say to the complainers, “There are some very nasty people who want to exterminate 6 million of our co-religionists. Don’t we have bigger fish to fry?”
The complaints have come from the usual outraged suspects – I believe Alan Dershowitz is leading the charge this time. I love Dersh, but he’s always annoyed over some perceived slight. Dersh, Abe Foxman, Rabbi Heir – whenever these guys enter righteous outrage mode, it’s by nature a classic dog-bites-man story.
But let’s just say for the sake of ridiculous argument that the Republican Party is habitually not sensitive enough to the Jewish community’s concerns. The Democrats are better? Need I remind you that during the Democrats’ last presidential primary season, a so-called Reverend who had organized a virtual pogrom a few years earlier graced the stage at every debate. Since 2004, the Democratic extreme fringe has eagerly equated Zionism to systematic bigotry. The Grey Eminence of the Party, James Earl Carter himself, recently published a dreadful book that ludicrously asserted that Israel is an apartheid state. And, oh yeah, Wesley Clark just last week made a reference to how American foreign policy is dictated by “New York moneymen” with proboscises of unmentioned size.
In short, if you want to find the reason for the Republican failure to do better with the Jews, I guess you could choose to blame it on insufficient Republican sensitivity. But you’ll look pretty dumb if you do.
SO WHY DO JEWS VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS?
I think I’m in a unique position to answer that question since not only are some of my best friends Jewish, I too am Jewish. There are two main reasons: First, the social issues drive Jews into the Democrats’ sweaty embrace; second, it’s a tribal thing.
As far as the social issues are concerned, most Jews are liberal. Very liberal. They’re pro-choice, and they’re very concerned about the separation between church and state. These are serious matters for them. When Bush won re-election, I called to taunt one of my liberal friends, and she launched into a tirade that I think had something to do with back-alley abortions and legalizing date-rape. The American Jewish community in general is very uncomfortable with the virtually every position the Republicans hold on social issues.
And then there’s the church-and-state thing. Jews are concerned about being a powerless minority. The Holocaust haunts them; for a lot of Jews, it still lingers as a cautionary tale of how quickly and totally things can go south even in a society into which they’ve fully assimilated. That’s why nativity scenes and prayers at football games tend to elicit such a visceral reaction from some Jews. These things are reminders of the Jews’ minority status, and thus what they perceive as their vulnerability. (I’m not saying any of this is rational – I don’t think it is. I’m just being descriptive here.)
The other reason so many Jews vote reflexively and exclusively Democrat is because it’s a tribal thing. Their grandparents voted only for Democrats. So too their parents. Many of today’s Jews are going to do the same thing.
I’ve had conversations with Jews whose primary concern is Israel’s well-being. I point out to them that Israel has never had a better friend than George W. Bush. Objectively, that fact is unassailable. And yet Jews who are tribal Democrats refuse to even engage the issue. The notion that George Bush, an Evangelical Christian of all things, is a friend to Israel is so far outside their conceptual framework they can’t process it. They lack the bandwidth.
So what can Republicans do about this? Pretty much nothing. These things take decades to change. The attitude of the far left to Israel will drive some Jews to consider voting Republican, but nowhere near a majority. The South took a century after the Civil War to even consider supporting Republicans.
Like I said, these things take time.
I got it. Thanks! I get a little too thin skinned sometimes I think. Gotta get tough, hard times are a coming..
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.