Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Jew for Jesus preached in Palin's church two weeks ago

Monday morning's JPost includes an analysis from Herb Keinon in which he claims that Sarah Palin's nomination to be Vice President will have little effect on the US Presidential votes of Israel's supporters one way or the other.
Some of the same qualities that make Palin so attractive to the Evangelicals and the blue collar workers - her anti-abortion stand, her National Rifle Association credentials, her members in the Fellowship of Christian Athletes - will make many Jews nervous. The question is whether it will make many of those who vote primarily on the Israel issue, a minority of Jewish votes but a significant population in a key state like Florida, nervous enough to take a fresh look at Obama.

Palin's detractors have already floated the little tidbit that she wore a Pat Buchanan button when he made a presidential campaign stop to Wasilla, Alaska, in 1999, where she was mayor, a tidbit that won't make Jews happy, but may seem less toxic than Obama's longtime affiliation and friendship with his own former pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

While US Jews struggle to figure out who exactly Palin is, some may look to Israel for cues, but they will look in vain, because Jerusalem won't oblige; officials are smart enough to realize that it would be extremely counterproductive for Israel to even hint at a favorite in this close and riveting presidential race.

Besides, Jerusalem couldn't give any cues on Palin, because it has little clue itself about the candidate. If Palin was relatively unknown in the US before being plucked from obscurity and placed on the Republican ticket, in Israel she is completely unknown, her name failing to register not only with regular folks who have other things to worry about, but also even Foreign Ministry officials who pay attention to these matters.

But Palin's obscurity, her lack of any record on Israel, or even statements on Israel issues, has not changed the overall sentiment in Jerusalem toward the race, and a lack of public endorsement of a ticket doesn't mean a lack of preference. Privately, the prevalent feeling in Jerusalem's corridors of power is that in the Obama-McCain race, "more of the same," the epithet Obama is throwing at McCain, is not that bad.

When it comes to the Middle East, Jerusalem - or at least the current government - is not only unafraid of more of the same, but would actually embrace it from the next White House. The government likes what has come from the Bush administration over the last number of years and is in no hurry to see any change there.

Almost nothing of Palin is known in Jerusalem beyond what has been written in the press over the last few days. But at least in the initial blush following the stunning announcement, that unfamiliarity has not changed Jerusalem's overall comfort level with the man who has deemed that Palin is indeed of vice-presidential caliber.
Keinon is not exaggerating when he talks about how unknown Palin is in Israel. On Sunday, Israel Radio interviewed Danny Ayalon, until recently our ambassador to the US. Ayalon said he has never been to Alaska, never met Palin and barely heard of her until she was selected. Maybe Danny should read my blog.

But Daled Amos presents visual evidence that Palin is pro-Israel (Hat Tip: Soccer Dad). The evidence consists of a TV broadcast from her office in Anchorage in which an Israeli flag is seen next to her window and another is seen on her lapel. Significantly, the video was shot in February 2008 - long before her name had been mentioned as a possible candidate for the national ticket.

Free Republic points to Palin's church's web site. The church web site has several sermons online.

Continue reading "Jew for Jesus preached in Palin's church two weeks ago"

9 comments:

Suricou Raven said...

How could they support anyone?

Obama is so peaceful, he wouldn't get the US involved in Israel's conflicts for anything less than helping them fend off an invasion.

McCain is the opposite - a bit of a warmonger, who would send in the troops at the slightest excuse. Perfect for turning a minor border skirmish into World War Three.

A lot of Jews don't trust the religious right, because they are concerned about Revelation being a self-furfilling prophercy - there are fundamentalist Christians who believe the apocolypse can't start until the whole middle east attacks Israel, and so would have no reason to avoid that situation or might even try to hasten it. Those jews are probably waiting for something to slip out regarding Palin's thoughts on biblical prophercy.

Anonymous said...

The question is whether it will make many of those who vote primarily on the Israel issue, a minority of Jewish votes but a significant population in a key state like Florida, nervous enough to take a fresh look at Obama.

My elder in-laws have reflected the views of the South Fla. retired demographic for decades - hanging chads and all. When I spoke with them last week, they were openly considering the McCain ticket and have stated they will stay home rather than vote for Obama.

SamenoKami said...

I would think that most evangelical bible-believing church members would be pro-Israel. Jews have nothing to fear from the overwhelming majority of Christian churches, after all Jesus is a Jew. We've had the "Jews for Jesus" folks at our church. Nice, interesting people. No one was talking bad about Israel and no one was trying to get the end of the world going.

""There are fundamentalist Christians who believe the apocolypse can't start until the whole middle east attacks Israel.""

That is a generally close to correct statement. However, I know a lot of pastors and a lot of church members and have never heard anyone chomping at the bit to get started w/Armageddon.
Do I believe Armageddon will happen? Yes. But I ain't gonna rush it. Most US Christians are too comfortable to want to rock the boat and destroy their lifestyle anyway.

Sorry Pastorius, I remember the last time there was a Bible discussion on IBA.

Pastorius said...

Sameno Kami,

What happened the last time? Was it about abortion?

That one gets some of the more liberal contributors here pretty pissed off.

I think we're all pretty much in agreement on Israel.

As a Christian who cares about Israel, I can understand the concerns of Jews for the apocalyptic nature of some of the discussion about Israel among some brands of Christians.

However, I'm with Sameno. I have never met a Christian who is rooting for war so that the Apocalypse will happen.

Additionally, I think all Christians (especially Jews for Jesus and Bridges for Peace, and other Christian groups oriented towards Israel) know the verse Genesis 12:3.

I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you ...

I know of no Christian who thinks it is blessing Israel to split the baby Solomon sytle. I know no Christian who believes it is blessing Israel to give away Israeli land in a "peace process" or to split Jerusalem, etc.

Honestly, my Jewish friends, have you ever met such a Christian? Have you ever seen one interviewed, or found any evidence of such an entity existing?

Because I haven't.

Epaminondas said...

Forget the bible...THIS is why Israel exists and must exist

Palin like anyone else is going to present a set of things some people don't agree with.

If your most important item is being pro choice, McCain is not your guy. If your main item is worldwide jihad, he is.

If you are, like I am, worried about jihad, and pro choice, then as long as McCain UPHOLDS THE LAW (choice) that's all I ask.

If anything, IMHO, as a SCIENCE BASED law, abortions should not be allowed (save for the life of the mother, or rape or incest) past the age of the youngest surviving fetus.

As our skills improve, that age will get younger and younger.

No one can argue that a human life has been spared when a fetus's life has been struggled or and grows to adulthood.

If that gestational age is 21 weeks or 28 weeks, or 12 weeks, then that's the way we go.

Pastorius said...

Epa,
That's an interesting argument from science. I had never thought of it that way.

According to Jewish law (I think it's in Deuteronomy), if a man punches a pregenant woman and causes her to lose her child, he is only liable to pay her a certain amount of money.

That is a kind of Biblical argument against the absolutist anti-abortion position.

I've heard arguments against it. But, I don't remember what they were, which means I wasn't too impressed. I usually remember things that impress me.

Anyway, I'm a bit squishy on the issue of abortion. I tend to think it is a human life right at conception because that makes sense to me. But, I also understand the arguments against it.

One thing that I have always noticed in women is that they call it a foetus unless it was a pregnancy they planned for. And then, they call it a baby.

Wishing? Or truth?

Epaminondas said...

To me, the whole frigging thing is ridic. It's raining condoms and pills, why is ANYONE having an unwanted pregnancy?

Are we THAT dumb?

SamenoKami said...

It wasn't abortion, but I don't remember the subject. A couple of regulars chastized you for acting like a Christian blog as opposed to being anti-jihadist and said they would go elsewhere. Maybe a month ago?

Pastorius said...

I remember that.

Of course, Christianity has been a pretty big influence on Western Civilization, but some of our readers are Objectivists, and some Objectivists seek to deny the import of the Judeo-Christian ideology. Apparently, they believe our success has come about because of natural law.

Thing is, I don't get angry at them for trying to turn IBA into an Objectivist blog. I don't know why they get made at Babba, AOW, and I for expressing our opinions, but, you know, whatever ...