« Where in the world is Flat Fatima™ ? | Home | Okay, so it's now August 22 . . . . »
August 21, 2006
Republican Jewish Coalition Comes Out Swinging Against "Islamo-Facisim"
Today's post brought a direct-mail piece from the Republic Jewish Coalition. It makes me glad I never donated money to the group.
An attached letter from the RJC pitches membership as a way to combat the new cossack hordes, starting with Democratic Representative John Dingell's June 30 statement: "I don't take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel," followed by this type of text (underlining, bold and italics all in the original):
Sadly, this left-wing apologist policy has come to your backyard in Connecticut with the selection of anti-war, extreme left candidate, Ned Lamont as the Democratic nominee for Senate. . . .The United States, like Israel is locked in a struggle against Islamo-Facisim, and with the continued leadership of President Bush and like Republicans we will prevail.
Who wrote this, an English-challenged summer intern fresh from Outer Slobovia?
My biggest gripe: can't Republicans spell "fascism" correctly? Where did "facisim" come from? Maybe this is some deadly new form of sharia law that judges people by facial characteristics. I'm sure Democrats would never, ever misspell "fascism," because fascism is the kind of word Democrats like to use a lot.
Practice makes perfect, RJC. I'm sorry to be such a spelling and logic fascist, but you'll never get my support with this kind of deliverable.
A sheet with the package sounds hard-hitting, but also confused me. It starts with the headline "Joe Lieberman was a voice of support for Israel. That voice has been silenced by the Democratic Party." Underneath comes a picture of a pained-looking Joe hugging somebody somewhere. Israel? Bridgeport? Somebody who just blew her Social Security check at the Mohegan Sun casino? The sheet doesn't say, leaving us with a generic Concerned Joe. Next comes a scary quote from "leading Democratic activist" Cindy Sheehan: "You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism."
The piece insinuates more than it speaks, and that's exasperating. Aside from donating money to the RJC, what's the agenda? Vote for Lieberman? Certainly the flier does not urge a vote for the hapless GOP nominee in Connecticut, Alan Schlesinger. The RJC spends more time flaying that wily left-wing fox Cindy Sheehan than talking up Joe Lieberman or anybody else. The text says,
The Democratic Party has thrown out one of Israel's best friends.Sadly, the Democratic Party of Roosevelt, Truman and "Scoop" Jackson is no more. Now it is the party of Howard Dean, Cindy Sheehan, Jimmy Carter, and Al Sharpton.
What was once the radical Left -- with its antipathy towrd Israel, its indifference to anti-Semitism, and its desire to appease terrorists instead of fighting them -- is now emerging as part of the mainstream in the Democratic Party.
Right now, Israel needs all the friends it can get. Sadly, the Democratic Party just took away one of Israel's best friends.
Maybe election laws muzzle the RJC and prevent it from actually endorsing candidates. But in this mailing the RJC spouts a lot of fighting words, then sits down in its corner and makes the reader figure out what to do, in addition to writing a check to the RJC.
If the RJC is going to go so wishy-washy, why not give my hard-earned bucks to the National Jewish Democratic Council?
Van | 08/21/06 at 11:12 PM | Categories: - GOTV '06 to '08
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.keshertalk.com/cgi-bin/mtb.cgi/5437
Comments
Oh, I don't know. Maybe because the NJDC has a lot of trouble recognizing that anti-semitism is a problem on the Left?
Besides, I thought the goal of ALL these organizations was to get you to write checks...to fund the next direct mail solicitation, right?
[VW comment: Yes, getting to the check is the goal, but I was hoping the RJC could at least offer a little more intellectual payoff for reading the materials. FYI, the RJC has delicious bagels at their events, some of which I have attended.]
Attila (Pillage Idiot) | August 22, 2006 10:47 AM
Also, I suspect that the RJC's stopping short of endorsing Lieberman is part of the overall tactic of the Republicans, who are for the most part refraining from endorsing Lieberman explicity. Didn't the President yesterday say "I'm staying out of Connecticut" and didn't Ken Mehlman say on the news shows Sunday morning that he is not endorsing Lieberman? So my guess is that it is not any legal prohibition but rather the carefully considered position of the party not to endorse Lieberman even though many (including the RJC) are walking pretty close to that line.
Tom Freeman | August 22, 2006 06:02 PM
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.keshertalk.com/nav-commenters.gif)
