Specter Marks the Death of Jewish Republicanism? Not Quite...
Jonathan Tobin, Executive Editor of Commentary magazine, penned a piece in The Jerusalem Post, "The Death of Jewish Republicanism?" Tobin uses a hyperbolic title to sell an attack on the Republican Party's latest defector, but in exploring the role of Jews in the Republican Party, what's most shocking is that Tobin seems to concede that Jews don't have a home in his tent. I, of course, disagree with some of Tobin's points, but the op-ed is still an interesting read.
Tobin's promotion of Israel as a partisan wedge issue is misguided and wrong. Ironically, this op-ed was published during AIPAC's Policy Conference. Those of us who attended the Policy Conference know that this kind of partisan rhetoric is both not true and hurtful to the U.S.-Israel relationship. Here's Tobin's attack: "The ascendancy of social conservatives in the Republican Party has ensured that [the overwhelming support for the Democratic Party by the American Jewish community]...will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future, even if this puts the Jews in the position of rejecting their closest allies on the question of security for the State of Israel."
However, more interesting than Tobin's repackaging of tired partisan rhetoric is his seemingly genuine concern that the Senate's last Jewish Republican's decision to run as a Democrat is not seen as the "death of Jewish Republicanism." Tobin puts forward the argument that "Specter's departure from the Republican Party has far more to do with his personal political dilemma than it does with the future of the GOP." The piece continues with predictable smears against Specter as egotistical and opportunistic, but Tobin does not argue that Specter was wrong to leave the Republican Party. Rather, he argues that Specter took too long to switch. Tobin writes, "The demise of liberal Republicanism happened decades ago, not this past winter. Nelson Rockefeller-style GOP liberals disappeared a generation earlier."
Clearly, Tobin intended for his op-ed to be used as a GOP defense against Specter's switch, but his argument concedes that the future of Jewish Republicanism is bleak "for the foreseeable future."
Jews remain incorrigibly liberal and more loyal to the Democrats than every sector of the population except for African-Americans. The ascendancy of social conservatives in the Republican Party has ensured that this will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.Tobin also seems to agree with NJDC's assessment that "the Republican tent is far smaller than it used to be." I imagine that when Tobin wrote an op-ed under the title, "The Death of Jewish Republicanism?," he was responding to the idea that Specter's switch was an indicator for the health of Jewish GOPs. Although, after reading his article it sounds like Tobin is making the argument that "the death of Jewish Republicanism" already happened. (That sounds a bit harsh. After all, the Jewish vote for Senator John McCain was 21%, and there is still one Jewish member of congress. That's not nothing.)
The GOP has a long way to go before they will be seen as welcoming to the Jewish community. Conservatives, like Tobin, are right to take note of the paltry amount of support they get from American Jews, and I can see why Republicans would be upset. However, in their attempt to justify the very concept of Jewish Republicanism, I ask that they not denigrate themselves to partisan attacks in the name of Israel. Bi-partisan support for the U.S.-Israel relationship is the cornerstone of the pro-Israel community. Maybe, Republican leaders should turn inward and take a good look at the future of their party. The fact that there is so little room in the Republican Party for Jews is an indication of both how far out of the mainstream their ideology is and how small the GOP tent has become.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Once more, an hopefully the first amendment still lives--
If everybody's going to be counting Jews--a thing that in and of itself should reinforce on us the importance of separation of church and state--then let's stop counting the low level, virtually powerless ones in Congress (like most congresscritters these days) and start counting the ones who really make policy in America. They work in Treasury, the Fed and on Wall Street, most notably at Goldman Sachs. At first blush this remark might call forth the usual spewing of "anti-semite" accusations. Let's not go there. If it's fair to count any people of any race, religion or belief in one department or arm of government or--you name it--it is more than fair to add them up in any other department or industry. That's how it works.
We used to count the number of Masons in government. Then it was Southern plantation owners, North vs South, Catholics, and even right wing born agains, as recently as the last 8 years. Until we get to the point where people live and act as People, and not representatives of any sub group, where they are able to vote their conscience and the interests of their constituency, rather than act as front men for other interests, I guess we will need to endure this counting. And if we do, then let's be fair and count them all.
Marked as favorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:29 PM on 05/09/2009
frankly, i am surprised that more Jews don't rail against the progressives. there are clear anti-Semite underpinnings in the left. I know... love the "people hate the State" but thats nonsense.
Your problem is that the high average education in the Jewish community is an inherintly progressive force. You see there is a link between education, information and progress.
When I was a kid in NY (40 years ago), most jews were Democrats, pro-union, pro civil-rights and a lot of us had parents or grandparents who flirted with socialism in their own youth.
When the focal point of the civil rights struggle turned from desegregating the south to bussing in the North, many Jewish Liberals became a bit more conservative. Business ownership and affluence had its effect as well and then in recent years many Jews seemed to think that only the GOP was looking out for Israel. When I visited my mother in Florida during the primaries, I was shocked not just by the passion of voters for Hillary but the ugly rhetoric aimed at Obama.
Richer and older jews were more conservative (except for the ones where I now live in LA, particularly those in the entertainment business) but younger jews continued to be liberal.
Lieberman seemed to be a pretty typical jew of his generation. Hawkish on defense. Fiscally moderate. With so many conservative jews out there, people like Dennis Prager, I'm kind of surprised to hear that there are now no more Republican Jews in the Senate and only one in the House.
Perhaps it shows that not all Jews are single-issue obsessed and that even on that one issue, Israel, we aren't falling for the anti-Obama propoganda.
I guess it proves the one consistant stereotype about my people that we rarely deny. Jews are smart.
Yes we are!
With a few notable exceptions (see: the final link in the article above, Bill Kristol).
Keep Religion separate from the State. Israel should be treated like any other country. It shouldn't be criminal to criticize its' policies nor should a group of people and their loyalties come before the rule of international law and basic HUMAN decency.
Why are we so hung up on all these labels??
Are there enough Catholic Republicans, Muslim Democrats, Baptist Democrats, Lutheran Republicans?
These separations only serve to polarize instead of dealing with Human needs, feeding the hungry, providing clean water, etc....
i know it can get confusing, but Jewish-American here is used as an ethnic marker, not a religion.
"Jews remain incorrigibly liberal and more loyal to the Democrats than every sector of the population except for African-Americans. The ascendancy of social conservatives in the Republican Party has ensured that this will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future. "
So, basically he's saying that the people of these 'persuasions' are NORMAL, and that it's the REPUBLICAN PARTY'S PLATFORM thats wrong.
Yeah, that's about it.
"White Boys Only Need Apply (but tokens welcome to wipe our asses) "
LIEberman is still a republican.
Obviously he isn't considered a "good Jew" then.
If Israel is so good, why don't more American Jews move there? I know I'll get smeared as an anti-Semite, but why should my country be the backup for Israel? Why should we have to stand up for a country that is unrepentant and determined to piss off all of its neighbors? Greed for land blinds Israel to the fact that they need to make concessions in order to achieve real peace. America's curse is that we have politicians from either political party that place Israel above America in their priorities.
Can't wait to read your next brilliant post "if Africa is so good, why don't more African-Americans move there?" Gosh, I don't know why you'd get "smeared" as a bigot...
No-really. I've asked that question before.
The whole purpose of the nation of Israel was to finally provide a "homeland" (I despise that word).
I do NOT understand how people can be here in the US-making money, raising kids, etc and spend their whole lives WHINING about Israel & supporting Zionists, who will be the death of Israel as a nation supported by the rest of the world.
Zionism will bring Israel down.
So sad - she's so young with so much potential - but she 'depends on the kindness of strangers'
http://www
Africa is a continent, not a country. If Nigerian-Americans were clamoring for the US to prop up that country, I would ask why they don't want to live there themselves. YOU demostrate bigotry by assuming that all African-Americans are one and the same, when there are multiple countries that make up Africa. I wouldn't be so callous as to expect someone who's African-America to be able to settle anywhere in Africa. Egyptian immigrants to America could technically be called "African-American", but I somehow doubt they'd want to advocate for aid to Zimbabwe, would they?
You overestimate the influence of Israel on American policy. The U.S. would not be supporting Israel if it wasn't in the U.S.'s (however ill-concieved) best interest.
And please, do check your underlying beleifes for any potential streotyping of a whole group of people -- many American Jews feel that the U.S's decision to support Israel's current policies is actually quite harmful to Israel.
There's no national strategic interest for America, only conservative evangelical politicians. Can't have that awesome Rapture til the Jews die or convert, after all.
.."many American Jews feel that the U.S's decision to support Israel's current policies is actually quite harmful to Israel."
Hopefully, you're right.
Truthfully, the face of these people is AIPAC.
Tied with Hagee and the Right Wing Fundamental Dominionists - *quack! *quack!
The idea that the Republicans are Israel's closest ally is pure crap.
With friends like the Republicans, who needs enemies?
If by close allies, Tobin means that the Republicans were most reliable in coming to Israel's "defense," then it was the Republicans who most effectively sold the existentially deadly myth to the Israelis, as the Israelis did to themselves, that there was, and is, a military solution to their problems, and any chance that they could realize a Greater Israel.
It is this phony friendship that has allowed the Israelis to avoid finding peace with their neighbors for over four decades, poisoning generations on both sides with hatred.
As far as Jews leaving the Republican party: As the article points out, McCain got 21% of the Jewish vote. As self-identified Republicans now poll at 21%, Jews are in fact proportionately represented among Republicans. Or put another way, they voted (As they should.) like Americans.
That doesn't sound like Jewish Americans are any more "incorrigibly liberal" than the rest of the US. And I hope and pray that my country, the United Stated of America, may never have its "incorrigible" liberalism "corrected
The Republican "tent" is smaller for all Americans. How many non-Jewish Republicans found no room in that tent in 2008?
"Jewish Republicanism" = oxymoron.
Really. That would be something along the lines of "Feminist Fundamenta
We have reached the point where I wonder if there's even such a thing as "Non-Evangelical Republicans"
After all, we aren't Real Americans.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
