Posted on 06/28/2002 7:35:16 PM PDT by LarryLied
National Jewish Democratic Council press release:
Washington, DC: According to the Associated Press and CNN.com’s Internet site, Representative Benjamin Gilman – a former chairman of the House International Relations Committee, and one of only two Jewish Republicans in the House of Representatives – is considering a switch to the Democratic Party.USA Today, 5625/02:Under the leading New York redistricting plan currently under consideration by the GOP leadership in Albany, Rep. Gilman may be thrown into the same congressional district as Republican Rep. Sue Kelly. To pass, such a plan would ultimately require the support of the Republican State Senate and Republican Governor George Pataki.
And according to the New York Times Internet site, “Republican lawmakers have long made clear that their first choice for departure is Mr. Gilman, because of his age and his relatively liberal politics.”
In a swipe at President Bush, CNN.com reports that Rep. Gilman noted, “Hopefully the White House will take some interest in our problem.”
“While of course we would very happily welcome Representative Gilman into the Democratic family with open arms, it is simply a shanda – a disgrace – that Republican leaders in New York and Washington would not be more supportive of one of only two Jewish House Republicans,” said Ira N. Forman, Executive Director of the National Jewish Democratic Council.
“Where are the supportive voices of President Bush, RNC Chairman Racicot, and National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Davis? For that matter, where are the supportive voices of New York’s Governor Pataki and New York Republican Senate President Bruno?
“Rep. Gilman is one of the all-too-few Republican moderates, being pro-choice and supportive of the separation of church and state.
But aside from that, he is a vaunted leader, having served in the House for 30 years and having chaired the House International Relations Committee – where he worked in a bipartisan spirit on behalf of Israel. And then, to add insult to injury, he is one of only two Jewish House Republicans.
Is it that the Republicans do not value the diversity of having two Jews among their ranks of 222 Republicans in the House?
Or is it that they do not need his political moderation, or his decades of experience?
Why is it that out of only a handful of incumbent House Republicans across the country who have been abandoned in the redistricting process by the Republican leadership, it appears that one is the pro-Israel former Chairman of the House International Relations Committee and the senior Jewish Republican in Congress?”
New York redistricting plan gets tentative OK
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department has tentatively cleared the New York legislature's redistricting plan, which would eliminate two of the state's 31 seats and could throw several longtime House members into election fights with each other .
The plan threatens the career of veteran GOP Rep. Benjamin Gilman, the 79-year-old former chairman of the House International Relations Committee. . .(snip)
Gilman has said he might switch parties so that he would have a better chance in the upcoming election.
Most Republican insiders do not think he will actually jump ship. State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, a Republican, has said Gilman chuckled about such a move with him.
FULL USA TODAY ARTICLE
It wasn't until a few years later, btw, that I realized he was echoing Pauline Kael's famous phrase about Nixon right along the same lines.
For him, this was reality.
This Gilman story is small potatoes, the guy never voted with the GOP when it counted anyway, and he is only one of 435 representatives.
The GOP is going to make up for his loss in spades.
You have GOT to be troubled by the fact that the Clinton-Gore team, the most corrupt and criminal administration in perhaps the history of the Republic, so mesmerized the Jewish voter.
Don't you see how hopelessly daunting that is?
Look at the link that Torie supplied in Reply No. 24, and tell me how the heck you arrive at that premise.
You just dont get it, do you? Jewish Dems provide about half the soft money coming from individuals to the Democrat Party. If you peel off about half of the "significant" Jewish donors (there are about half a million in this country), then youve delivered quite a blow to the chops to Democrap fundraising. Thus all the angst over this rift among Party leaders.
Thats the real reason the Pubs would not write off the "Jewish" vote, or treat it as insignificantly as you do.
He did in 1980. But for the usual reason: Israel. The Carter admistration had signed on to a U.N. resolution unfavorable to Israel.
Reagan only received 30% of the Jewish vote in 1984 after he allowed the sale of AWACS to Saudi Arabia. Never mind that the deal was important in helping bust the Soviets (AWACS for more oil=low world prices=USSR military complex starved for $$$). Reagan was working to free hundreds of thousands of Jews from oppression in the USSR. But that wasn't enough. He made one decision on Israel which was not popular with Jews and they withdrew support.
Eisenhower received 40% of the Jewish vote in 1956. But then along came Suez. Support for the GOP dropped to under 20% in 1960.
I wish a change were occurring. But I don't see it. I see history repeating itself. One wrong word or move on Israel and the "new" Jewish support Bush has now will turn into fundraising efforts to defeat him in 2004.
The latest in thing among American Jews is to vote for the GOP, it's a fad like eating Chinese.
They are not stupid, they know who their friends are.
I would think that the 1980 results alone prove that the Jewish vote is very much in play considering the circumstances.
They knew Carter was the PLO's friend.
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.