There are two stories in the press this weekend that show the real nature of the liberal mainstream media slant. One is in the Wall Street Journal and the other is in the New York Times. Both stories pertain to the growing rift between many American Jews and the Democrat party as a result of the actions of president Obama towards both Israel and Iran.
The New York Times has a front page story today describing how Republican ties to Israel are being solidified. According to the Times, this is the result of large campaign contributions from a few wealthy Jewish donors. The Wall Street Journal reports that Jewish Democrat members of Congress have told the Obama administration that they are finding it very difficult to stop the unease that their constituents experience as a result of the Obama tilt toward Iran and away from Israel.
So which is it? Is "Jewish money" buying the Republicans as the liberal Times would have it, or are Obama's policies causing upset among Jews as the Journal reports it? That is not a tough question. The Times is taking another page from the liberal "Blame Campaign Contributors" book to somehow avoid dealing with the fact that Obama is coming down very hard and nasty on Israel and its government. Did Obama send American government money to try to unseat Israel's prime minister in the last election? (Of course) Have Republicans been strong supporters of Israel over the last decade (Of course) Did Obama call Netanyahu a racist and a liar? (Of course) But for the Times, if there is a stronger link between Jews and Republicans it must all be because of campaign contributions. The Times plays on the anti-Semitic caricature of Jewish money controlling politicians. It's another of those liberal lies that get put out for public consumption by the media.
The reality is that Obama may have managed to break the bond that kept Jews as the second most loyal constituency for Democrats (after blacks). A shift of 20% among Jews in 2016 towards the Republicans could swing Florida and maybe a few other states in a close election. And no, it won't be because of campaign contributions.
The New York Times has a front page story today describing how Republican ties to Israel are being solidified. According to the Times, this is the result of large campaign contributions from a few wealthy Jewish donors. The Wall Street Journal reports that Jewish Democrat members of Congress have told the Obama administration that they are finding it very difficult to stop the unease that their constituents experience as a result of the Obama tilt toward Iran and away from Israel.
So which is it? Is "Jewish money" buying the Republicans as the liberal Times would have it, or are Obama's policies causing upset among Jews as the Journal reports it? That is not a tough question. The Times is taking another page from the liberal "Blame Campaign Contributors" book to somehow avoid dealing with the fact that Obama is coming down very hard and nasty on Israel and its government. Did Obama send American government money to try to unseat Israel's prime minister in the last election? (Of course) Have Republicans been strong supporters of Israel over the last decade (Of course) Did Obama call Netanyahu a racist and a liar? (Of course) But for the Times, if there is a stronger link between Jews and Republicans it must all be because of campaign contributions. The Times plays on the anti-Semitic caricature of Jewish money controlling politicians. It's another of those liberal lies that get put out for public consumption by the media.
The reality is that Obama may have managed to break the bond that kept Jews as the second most loyal constituency for Democrats (after blacks). A shift of 20% among Jews in 2016 towards the Republicans could swing Florida and maybe a few other states in a close election. And no, it won't be because of campaign contributions.
No comments:
Post a Comment