The Virginia race is still tight. Allen up ... but only slightly. Webb putting up a good showing and did a better job in the recent debate on Meet The Press. Both candidate's have been dogged by controversial comments and side issues ... but both seem to want to get back on track and focused on issues facing Virginians.
I'll start to tune into this race more closely in mid October.
I'll admit to being highly biased in favor of George Allen, but it seems as though many in the media are attempting to cheap-shot Sen. Allen in a way that almost never happens to a Democratic candidate. That the revelation of Allen's Jewish grandfather would be a campaign issue is ludicrous, as is the recent "report" about his alleged racist attitudes in college. It seems to me that if this race were to be about the issues, then Webb would lose because he finds it difficult to take firm positions on many things.
Posted by: Steve | September 25, 2006 at 23:52
If the race is about issues, Allen wins. Webb supporters ... and there are many in the media as you correctly point out ... know this. Their best opportunity is to take the focus off issues on nationaly security and on what Allen did or didn't say twenty-five years ago at a frat party.
Webb can publicly say that it is distasteful and inappropriate to dwell on things like Allen's ancestory or past comments Allen has made ... but the truth is, he would be trailing 15 points in the polls if it weren't for these things.
In my opinion, the Jewish thing might actually work in Allen's favor. We'll see.
Posted by: Mr. Dawntreader | September 26, 2006 at 06:36
I agree, the folks that are attempting to stick it to Allen risk making him a sympathetic figure.
What we are seeing is just old-fashioned "piling on". Unfortunately, in journalism and in politics, it is not penalized as it is in football.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 26, 2006 at 15:54
I'm going to go ahead and ... disagree. I'll agree that the "let's point out he's part Jew" thing was completely out of line, but the motivation for it also has to be disturbing: it was brought up because the people bringing it up know that people who are bigoted against Jews are likely to be Allen supporters. Think of it as a reverse Southern strategy, where instead of using thinly disguised apeals to racists to attract voters, they're using them to deter them.
But I'm just a dumb Democrat. Here's a Conservative Christian who thinks that there's more to it than just partisan politics.
Posted by: tgirsch | September 28, 2006 at 17:38
Of course in recent years it's been conservatives who have befriended the Jewish community, in the US and abroad. Or at least the Angry Left has decided that anti-semitism is acceptable. So I'm not sure I buy that the revelation of Allen's ancestral religion is necessarily going to reduce his support among conservative voters--although I do agree that most "racists" are probably conservative.
And Southern Appeal links to Captain's Quarter's, which does a good job of poking holes in several of the stories that have come out about Allen's alleged racial bias.
Posted by: Steve | September 29, 2006 at 08:59
"Or at least the Angry Left has decided that anti-semitism is acceptable."
I have seen no evidence of this; perhaps you could provide some. I don't think one can equate criticism of the state of Israel or of our nation's unblinking support of Israel with antisemitism.
Posted by: Rob Ryan | October 02, 2006 at 07:55
I think the ancestry was brought up to try to make it appear as if he were hiding it, as if he were embarassed about it. This would fit into the perception of racism that some apparently want to create.
"both seem to want to get back on track and focused on issues facing Virginians."
I hope Mr. Dawntreader is correct in this, because personally, I'm tired of hearing the personal attacks on both candidates.
Posted by: Nephos | October 02, 2006 at 11:48
I'll happily provide some.
Exhibit A: Cindy Sheehan. I believe there is enough out there that I don't need to go into detail, but suffice to say she regards the whole 9/11 war as a Jewish plot.
Exhibit B: the disgusting smearing of Senator Joseph Lieberman, a Jew, by left-wing fanatics on such wonderful blogs as the Huffington Post and DailyKos. See, e.g., "Good men, Daniel Webster and Faust would attest, sell their souls to the Devil. Is selling your soul to a god any worse? Leiberman cannot escape the religious bond he represents. Hell, his wife's name is Haggadah or Muffeletta or Diaspora or something you eat at Passover" (by "gerrylong," posted on the Huffington Post, July 8, 2006); AND "as everybody knows, jews ONLY care about the welfare of other jews; thanks ever so much for reminding everyone of this most salient fact, so that we might better ignore all that jewish propaganda [by Lieberman] about participating in the civil rights movement of the 60s and so on" (by "tomjones," posted on Daily Kos, Dec. 7, 2005).
Posted by: Steve | October 02, 2006 at 12:25
If comments from blogs meet the standard of evidence it becomes very easy to demonize either right or left based on the semi-anonymous rantings of fringe-dwellers. I'm afraid such characterizations do little to advance the discourse. I'm certainly not suggesting that that is what you are doing, Steve, but some folks might get the impression that antisemitism is becoming acceptable on the left. It is not. I would venture to say that antisemitism is no more acceptable to the left than Fred Phelps' brand of hatred is to the right; perhaps even less so.
Posted by: Rob Ryan | October 02, 2006 at 15:20
Rob, I realize that blog commentary may not be considered "mainstream," but that was my point in referring to the "Angry Left" as anti-Semitic. I did not intend to condemn those who lean left politically; instead, I merely offered my belief that the moonbat left (as, indeed, the moonbat right) will happily oppose a politician because of his connection to Judaism.
Posted by: Steve | October 02, 2006 at 16:59
"...the moonbat left (as, indeed, the moonbat right) will happily oppose a politician because of his connection to Judaism."
Or at least seek to use it against him. I agree. It is the extremists that bring the more general political alignments into disrepute. How much more consensus and compromise would be possible without them!
Posted by: Rob Ryan | October 04, 2006 at 11:40
hope you guys are are really basking in each other's shadows...and His: good for you! I expect Vegas will be convinced to turn over a new leaf before you leave, we're doing our best without you here. BTW, had a nice group and prayer at Bob's last night; missed you. PDM
Posted by: PDM | October 05, 2006 at 21:02