Friday, March 13, 2015

Who are the Israelis electing and who are they not?

Empress Trudy

Any election in any country is mostly about domestic issues one way or another.

Or at the least they're a benchmark of the nationalist-like fervor people 'feel' about those domestic issues. This is why American presidents like to focus on foreign affairs their second term. They don't have to work with Congress and don't particularly care whether they're successful or not - excepting the obligatory 'I fixed the palestinians' thing for their own glorification and legacy. This I suspect is true in Israel's squirrely electoral political system as well - even though nationally they don't operate with local issues in mind. It's still domestic. It's still about taxes and income, housing, grocery shelves, the price of gas, paving the streets. It's still about sticking it to your domestic political foes. It's still about parochial interests and issues from farm costs to air pollution and trees to gay rights and everything in between.

This is why Obama and the NYT completely miss the mark. Having sucked down a barrel full of Messiah Man Kool Aid they genuinely believe that electing anyone but Netanyahu means that unicorns and sunshine will fly out of their ass and the people of Israel will all convert to Islam and welcome in all 7 million 'palestinian refugees' where they can all have a mass same sex wedding, worship the sun and smoke weed.

Not going to happen. Sorry but you were misinformed. There is no "Great Man Theory" except in their own heads. There is no far far far left Israeli Nelson Mandella Obama Christ the Second.  And even there was, even if somehow Israelis elected a lesbian illegal Mexican immigrant Hamas terrorist to lead them, all indications that Israelis, having shown the US EVERY SINGLE faction of every single political agenda from Communist to the far right over the last 60 years and the response from the US has been the same - - 'you guys aren't conciliatory enough!' would not be in any better position with the US anyhow. Because accepting that Israel doesn't exist to do the US's bidding simply never enters the political discussion in the US. Even the most accepting US administrations, from Truman to W has backed Israel, semi-reluctantly but only when they had to. Truman did it for anticommunist reasons. Ike didn't support Israel and threatened to attack in 1956. JFK wasn't interesting the mideast at all. Johnson stayed on the sidelines in 1967 albeit he allowed his UN ambassador to backstop Res242 with ambiguous wording. Nixon outwardly disliked Israel and only sent arms to them when Kissinger told him they might go nuclear. Ford was a non issue, Carter hates the Jews. Reagan secretly held court with the Iranians, Bush 1 is in bed with the Saudis and Clinton is more pro 'palestinian' than the Europeans. W rhetorically backed Israel but his actual accomplishments say the reverse. And now we have President Muslim Brotherhood Obama. And again, from 1948 to today Israelis have managed to elect leaders from near communists to near fascists and the response from the US has always been the same lukewarm relationship.

Allow me to show you my best Capt. Renault impression and tell you how shocked, shocked I am, at the goings on here.

But to my point; people vote on domestic and local issues. There's only a few at the fringes who don't. And they don't count for very much. So if they elect the somewhat ironically named "Zionist Party" they're generally electing someone on a domestic slate of promises (and the general tendency to be sick of ANY incumbent after 6 years). They're voting on the basket of services covered under the national health plan. They're voting on the byzantine nightmare of income and real estate taxes and the insane complexity of mortgage financing. They're voting on the allotment of public services that either benefit them or benefit they people they don't like. They're voting on how many children are stuffed into each classroom.

Obama as in most things, believes Israelis are voting for him, or least are thinking about him very much. He needs them to think of him and appreciate him or, as is his due, he must punish his subjects for their disloyalty should they fail to demonstrate sufficient obsequiousness. And that's where his blind spot is. Because Israelis may very well vote out Netanyahu and then turn around and ignore whatever it is Obama thinks he can demand of them as a reward for 'rescuing' them from the clutches of Likud. If only he understood they don't care about Obama almost as much as they don't like him it would be better for everyone.

11 comments:

  1. An obvious point, but one worth repeating. From some of the reading I've been doing on certain progressive blogs lately, you'd think the Israeli election is a referendum on their twisted opinions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yes I have seen that too on the ALLEGED progressive blogs that are more like smear blogs.

      I would love to see Avigdor Lieberman be the next PM to shove it up their whiny sniveling behindsas it wouldn't be Bibi and I KNOW they wouldn't like Lieberman!

      Delete
    2. They're really gonna be pissed at Teh Jooz when they figure out that nobody supports what they want.

      G-d forbid they should realize that the Palestinian-Arab leadership has no intention of accepting a state for themselves in peace next to the Jewish State of Israel.

      Even those who realize this would find a way to blame Teh Jooz, nonetheless, I'm sure.

      Delete
  2. From what I have been reading lately I can't make sense of any of it, it's as bad as the US electoral system.

    Thank G-d for the countries who follow, in the main, the Westminster system.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would think the US system is easiest to follow? No coalitions and only two parties. The electoral college is stupid, I'll grant, but once you find the number of electors per each state, and realize that only four or five states have a realistic chance of flipping parties during any given presidential election, you've pretty much got it.

    I think the new rule of thumb is probably if the Democrat wins Florida and Ohio, they've won the presidency. If the Republican takes one of those two, and wins Virginia and Colorado, they've probably won. North Carolina and New Mexico can throw the occasional curve ball, but for the most part that's probably it for 2016. No electoral votes will change until 2024, based upon the 2020 census results.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is the great state of Connecticut, with its 7 electoral votes, that will determine the next election!

      As goes the Nutmeg State, so goes the union!

      Delete
    2. You know, I looked it up, and it's true - nobody has EVER won the presidency without getting at least one vote in Connecticut!

      Delete
  4. I still remain a bit nonplussed at the amazing degree of hatred spit at Netanyahu.

    What is the worst thing that they have on this guy?

    Protective Edge?

    If so, they must believe that Arabs have every right to kill Jews and Jewish self-defense represents aggression.

    If anything, Protective Edge did not go far enough because it failed to eliminate Hamas from the Strip.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, they do believe Arabs have every right to kill Jews and Jewish self-defence represents aggression.
      Actually, in their eyes, there is no such thing as legitimate Jewish self-defence.


      Also:

      http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-deadly-Israeli-house/

      It speaks to the hysterical hatred you were talking about.

      Delete
    2. "What is the worst thing that they have on this guy?"

      He's Israel's leader. That's it. These same bigots will turn on Herzog in a second, too, as soon as they realize that he isn't going to immediately announce the dissolution of the State of Israel, and step down in favor of newly-appointed Binational Progressive Dictator-for-Life Khaled Mashal.

      Delete
    3. Of course, I should make clear that the above only applies to those who demonize him and Israel, and not to good faith people who simply oppose his politics and ideas.

      Delete