Obama and Israel – Really???
For the past two weeks, voters have been treated to the rare opportunity to observe a microcosm of the ideologies that drive both the Republican and Democratic Parties today – ideologies that affect the lives of all Americans.
Predictably, the first of the two national conventions was “conservative” (no pun intended). Speakers cited the reasons for supporting Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and they were not shy about enumerating the policy failures of the past four years. The emphasis however, was not on the past, but on the future and on what a Romney presidency would mean to the country and to our economic recovery. Noticeably absent from the narrative was an “Obama bash fest.” With the exception of an imaginative skit by actor Clint Eastwood, references to the president were largely measured and respectful, albeit critical of his policies.
By comparison, last week was an entertaining, but disturbing circus. Much like the Obama presidency itself, the Democratic National Convention was a spectacle of questionable decisions, illusions and insults to the intellect of American voters. Here, over the next few days, are just a few of what I sincerely hope most readers will see as additional “Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama.” The future of our country depends on it.
Midway through the Convention, it was discovered that Obama had omitted “GOD” from the Party Platform. It was also discovered that he had omitted any reference to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. These were not just absent from the Platform. They were removed from the Party’s previous presidential Platform. It was a conscious decision. This was first exposed in an interview by FoxNews Anchor Bret Baier with Senator Dick Durban (D-IL). When asked to explain the basis for these omissions, Durbin became visibly agitated and defensive, suggesting that Fox and Baier were attempting to paint the Democrats as “Godless.” But, despite Durbin’s reaction, we soon saw Convention Chair Antonio Villaraigosa calling for a voice vote from delegates, in order to return God and Jerusalem to the Platform. Most Americans, I think, would suspect that such a voice vote would be a mere formality.
The first call for “Yea” or “Nay” produced an indiscernable difference in shouting volume between the two camps. A noticeably confused Villaraigosa called for a second vote – same result. Villaraigosa, as if searching for advice, stopped and looked to staff members – one of whom told him
“You’ve got to rule, and then you’ve got to let them do what they’re gonna do.”
He again repeated the process. Results? Still the same.
Then, with amazing finality, Chairman Villaraigosa looked straight into the camera, announcing that:
“In the opinion of the chair, two-thirds have voted in the affirmative.”
The truth is that the difference between “Yea” and “Nay” votes was barely discernable, if at all. The suggestion that either side won by a 2/3 majority is sheer fantasy. As we later discovered, Chairman Villaraigosa’s “Opinion” had already been posted to his teleprompter. He could have no other opinion. The “Party” had spoken – he was just the face. We have to wonder if this is the process that Obama has followed in his alleged efforts to reach compromise and bipartisan solutions in Washington. No wonder Republican Governors want voter I.D.!!!
The bigger, far more troubling part of this saga however, is that rank and file members of the Democratic Party, in large numbers, voted against returning “God” and Jerusalem to the Party Platform.
At the close of the convention when Cardinal Dolan gave the Benediction, the “Amens” were plentiful and loud – as loud as the “Yea’s” and “Nays” of the earlier votes. We can only surmise from this, that the controversial issue for rank and file Democrats was not “God,” but the idea of Jerusalem being the capital of Israel. This of course, begs the question of 1) whether or not the Democratic Party has, under Obama, become hostile to Israel; and 2) Who, in the Democratic Party was “testing the waters,” by removing “God” from the Platform. While all of his minions were racing around to certify that the omissions were made without Obama’s knowledge and that he was proactive and adamant in having them re-inserted in the Platform, the fact remains that it was Obama’s Platform. Were its writers using accepted boilerplate language, both items would have been included, because they had been there in 2008. It is far more likely that these omissions represented a conscious decision executed with Obama’s personal approval – or even more likely – at his direction.
In the opinion of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), DNC Chairperson, none of this amounted to more than a “Technical Correction.”
TO BE CONTINUED…
 LA Times, (September 6, 2012), La Times web-site, Awkward moments for Villaraigosa during God, Israel vote at DNC, retrieved Sept. 7, 2012 from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/09/mayor-antonio-villaraigosa-dnc-vote.html