The American Spectator

Red Phillips| 2.22.10 @ 7:52PM

I am a national security voter, with a special concern for Israel. If I thought for a minute that "Tom Campbell had a "national security problem" or an "Israel problem," I would not care if he were the most brilliant mind in American politics, the most consistent free marketer in the entire state of California: I'd never support him."

At least Frum is honest. Well put me down as a Constitution voter, with a special concern for America.

S.L. Toddard| 2.23.10 @ 9:17AM

"Well put me down as a Constitution voter, with a special concern for America."

A distinct minority here at AmSpec.

axbucxdu| 2.22.10 @ 10:06PM

Curious. I know that there must be other more important issues to Californians in this particular campaign, but I'm beginning to think of Mr. Klein's preoccupation with Campbell's views of Israel as some sort of system identification exercise.

You know, stimulate the blog by reporting on a pol's "unconventional" voting record vis-a-vis Israel and then report back to superiors in Tel Aviv, or should I say Jerusalem, on the nature of the traffic so generated.

Well, Mr. Klein, so be it: please tell them from me that the American people are lately recognizing the dichotomy in our political parties as a false one. Furthermore, the days that Zionist Israelis can continue to manipulate these circumstances to their advantage are numbered.

ds80| 2.23.10 @ 8:38AM

Curious. Your anti-semitism is showing.

axbucxdu| 2.24.10 @ 7:02PM

Do tell. How so?

Hawks Purge One of Their Own| 2.23.10 @ 9:27AM

Philip Klein normally has a rather flexible definition of what passes for being “anti-Israel.” As I recall, when J Street held their first conference, he declared that they were an “anti-Israel” organization. So when he asserted earlier this month that California Republican Senate candidate Tom Campbell had an “anti-Israel voting record” I was pretty skeptical. As it turns out, Klein and the others who have embarked on this get-Campbell campaign are amazingly wrong about Campbell and his record:

http://www.frumforum.com/defen.....ael-record

This isn’t some disagreement over emphasis or interpretation of ambiguous statements or actions. The critics have been simply wrong. While it is rather amusing to see foreign policy hawks attempting to tear down one of their own out of sheer ignorance and overreaction, the entire episode over the last week and a half does tell us some more important things about the state of the GOP and conservative movement and about the California Senate race itself.

To take the second point first, we can see that Campbell’s opponents are flailing about in desperation and will employ any claim to attack him, no matter how much misrepresentation it might involve. Since he entered the race, Campbell has enjoyed a comfortable lead in the polls over Fiorina and DeVore, and of the three he has the best polling numbers against Boxer. DeVore was the one to get the ball rolling in attacking Campbell on this point, but he remains a distant third and is mainly running a protest candidacy with little chance of prevailing over the other two. Except for the mostly negative and mocking attention she was able to garner with her weird “demon sheep” ad, Fiorina has not been able to gain much traction, and so she has started trying to exploit Campbell’s tenuous, limited connection with the Al-Arian case. Like her tenure at HP, Fiorina’s campaign has not been going well. What we learn from this is that Campbell’s opponents seem unusually unscrupulous and/or sloppy, and it also tells us that hard-line hawkish policy views are must-haves even within the California GOP primary electorate.

The campaign to cast Campbell as “anti-Israel” started in the camps of his primary competitors, but it was then picked up by some conservative blogs and took on something of a life of its own. Obviously, the unfounded attack was aimed at destroying Campbell’s candidacy within the GOP. This would have had the effect of eliminating or crippling the candidate with the best, albeit still remote, chance of defeating Boxer. Some of the people carrying out the campaign attacking Campbell claimed that they wanted to prevent the GOP from nominating someone with such a grave liability, when the liability, so called, never existed.

What they managed to do instead was to demonstrate their own knee-jerk fanaticism on this question of what is required to be “pro-Israel,” and it shows how ready some movement conservatives are to turn against even those Republican candidates who are reliable hawks when there is the slightest hint of deviation from their own hard line. As it turned out, the “hints” in Campbell’s case were misleading and meaningless. Campbell is safe from continued attacks because he is actually a dangerous and aggressive hawk himself, exemplified by his support for Israeli military action against Iran, but if someone as genuinely hawkish as Campbell can be targeted even temporarily with a smear campaign for being “anti-Israel” there is not going to be much chance for candidates who hold skeptical, realist or non-interventionist views within the Republican electorate. As for Campbell, he will be sure not to risk taking any positions that might be misinterpreted in the future. Of course, the reinforcement of the party line is the point of the exercise, so unfortunately it scarcely matters that some of the enforcers have shredded their credibility in the process.

P.S. Carly Fiorina said this in her recent statement:

"What is clear is that Tom Campbell and I couldn’t disagree more when it comes to policy regarding our nation’s relationship with Israel."

So does that mean that Fiorina is now the one who should be considered “anti-Israel”? This just drives home how contemptible and stupid this ritual denunciation really is.

Red Phillips| 2.23.10 @ 5:31PM

"Klein and the others who have embarked on this get-Campbell campaign are amazingly wrong about Campbell and his record"

No Hawk, you are wrong about that. Because the standard is utter and unambiguous fidelity to Israel, so ANYTHING that might be interpreted otherwise is discrediting if not disqualifying.

Nobama| 2.24.10 @ 3:52AM

Campbell is a RINO skunk.

Dave| 2.23.10 @ 10:02AM

Israel Shmisrael. Isn't Campbell a DemonSheep?.

Yosemeti Sam| 2.23.10 @ 11:24AM

Re column - "Is our Children Learning?"

To American Spectator:

Appears I strike Liberal/Leftist nerves.

Do you or do you not validate email addresses
with posts?

You let an asshole - pardon the shorthand -
speak as if he were me.

Get your AS act together!

Do you have hacker firewalls - at all?

If not - moving on!

AS Webmaster - what's up with this compromise?

Lynne Verley| 5.28.11 @ 2:20PM

Hello Guys, if you want to spicy your recipe a little bit. Try using this Jamaican Jerk Seasoning paste. DKSpice will add irresistible flavor and tropical island heat to your meat with jerk spices in all your recipes.