Neck of the woods

“But the standard rationale for treating Jerusalem’s status as uncertain is that the partition plan designated it as an internationally ruled “corpus separatum.” Neither America nor anyone else is consistent on this point, either. In a last blast of imperialism, the corpus separatum was mapped to avoid Jewish or Muslim rule over Christian sites. ………….. I suspect that if Mitt Romney is elected, he will be absolutely irresponsible about cutting taxes on the rich and ballooning the deficit—but I don’t think he is reckless enough to move the American embassy to Jerusalem before a peace agreement. Doing so would remove the last shred of American credibility in the Arab world. It might very well ignite a new intifada, which—trust me—would not be healthy for those of us who live in Jerusalem. How many Americans will vote based on what the Democratic platform says about the Jerusalem? You can count them on your thumbs. This may be the most ideologically stark American election since 1932, if not since 1860. Most American Jews will vote for Obama. If they are worried about Israel, they will notice that Obama has upped funding for Israeli missile defense, vetoed U.N. resolutions criticizing Israel, and kept Benjamin Netanyahu from launching a disastrous attack on Iran. The minority of Jews who support Romney don’t care if the Democrats put the entire Israeli national anthem in their platform, in Hebrew. Most evangelicals will vote Romney, and are similarly unconcerned about whether “Jerusalem”—or “God”—is in the Democratic platform ……………..”

This whole quadrennial noise (it is just noise) in U.S. politics about Israel and Jerusalem is aimed at two American constituencies this fall. The first one, the Jewish voters, will continue to vote heavily Democratic, partly because they can smell demagoguery in disguise and their whole “modern” history screams against it (at least when it is non-Jewish demagoguery). Maybe a few elderly migrant voters in Florida can be terrified and swayed, which is one possibly useful target. The second receptive constituency is the Evangelicals and Bible-belters who will not vote for Obama in any case, even if his name were Jesus Holy Christ (with or without the ‘Obama’).
Come to think of it, the same Evangelical Bible-belters would probably vote against Jesus Christ himself, once they see how he is dressed, how he speaks and, more important, what he preaches.

Cheers
mhg
[email protected]