Courage in taking on the Sacred Cows

Contributed by euandus2 at Morror site

In my view, when a sacred cow lobbies for another country, something is wrong. I think real leadership risks reelection to take it on. I recommend the following post on the blog: http://euandus3.wordpress.com/

Link

Filed under: American Politics — euandus @ 1:45 pm
Tags: Abraham Lincoln, AIPAC, Andrew Jackson, Barak Obama, jewish lobby, Theodore Roosevelt

Why is it that public officials are so utterly scared of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)? Is it the money represented? Or the votes? That a pro-Israel lobby should have such power in the U.S. (i.e., another country) is perhaps too little questioned.
Barak Obama and his secretary of state were opposed to the further expansion of settlements in Israel. However, when the Israeli prime minister said he would not stop the construction on settlements already slated to be done, the American “leaders” backed down. What were they so afraid of? I believe that the US gives Israel $18 billion a year. Whatever the figure, we have never put our money where our mouth is. I suspect the reason is that our representatives are more concerned with getting reelected than in making real change. I’m convinced that if the US Government withheld the “aid,” we would find peace negotiations begin in earnest, and a deal quickly reached. If I’m right, this would also cut down on the anti-American sentiment around the world (esp. in the Middle East) that is related to the plight of the Palestinians.
I would much rather see Barak Obama take on the banks too big to fail and the AIPAC and be out in four years, than “four more years” of comfortable incramentalism. I suspect that if he did take on the sacred cows that have been causing problems, he would find more support among the actual voters in 2012, though there would be a risk as powerful interests would be looking for retribution. Still, four years can be much better than eight. Whether Andrew Jackson taking on the national bank, Abe Lincoln staying the course in the war in spite of the polls in the North, or Teddy Roosevelt in taking on the trusts, a real leader is sorely needed to solve systemic problems that have been rendered intractable by the powers that be on account of their vested interests that they not be solved. Instead, real change all too often becomes accommodation and incrementalism.