The senator and the Jewish elephant

1.

Clearly, this is something commentators are going to have fun with. Saturday it was Ruth Marcus, today it was Charles Krauthammer (I'll be following future commentary on Allen's Jewish roots in my Mid-term Diary).

Why do the critics find Senator George Allen so appealing to mock? I think it's his persona - the Southern, boot-wearing, not afraid of swearing, pork-eating, tobacco-chewing - which makes the story of his recently exposed Jewish roots the nice, funny story that it is. Madeleine Albright's exposure was somewhat unexpected, but it didn't present us with the same contrasting allure. John Kerry? Better, but still not as surprising. After Allen, the only one who can really take us to the next level will be Arnold Schwarzenegger. Can you imagine this happening? Is everything possible now?

2.

In her column about Allen, Marcus opens with a thought about "the ability claimed by some gay people to detect other gays." But there's a whole lot more if one comes to take on the gay issue to draw comparisons - that is, whether one should force people out of the closet. Gays argued bitterly about this topic for years, and most agreed that you can do it in the case of an elected official that's hostile to gays, that speaks or legislate against them, but the general opinion was that you shouldn't force people out of the closet if there's no public interest in it. Now, apply this test to Allen and Judaism and you have an interesting case: He was in no way anti-Jewish, so why would anyone want to expose him as such? On the other hand, you might argue that his response to this revelation justifies the exposure. Allen went out of his way to prove that it meant nothing to him ("My mother made great pork chops"), so maybe sticking it to him was not such a bad idea after all.

3.

I went on thinking about Etty Allen's interview in the last couple of days - especially this one sentence: "I didn't want my children to have to go through that fear all the time." Keep in mind: Allen converted in America, not in North Africa - meaning she was afraid the fate of Jews here will not be different from the one she experienced first hand in the old country. Did she ever change her mind?

4.

Allen's Jewishness presents the Jews among us with an interesting test. We know Allen, we know his character and history and public image. We also know that according to halakha - Jewish law - he is as Jewish as we all are (Jewish identity follows the mother). But honestly, how many of us Jews will think about him now as one of the tribe, knowing that he doesn't want to be one? Not an easy thing to do in the modern world, is it?

5.

Let's get rid of the common hypocrisy as we discuss Allen. When people ask "will this influence his political chances" what they really mean is "will this hurt him with the Southern Christian voters?" When people say that "religion shouldn't be a factor in this race" - what they mean is "it shouldn't, but it is. How can it not be?"

6.

David Friedman, director of the ADL's Washington office, told the Virginian Pilot that "Both sides should desist in making this a political issue." As wise as it might be, this is the most impractical advice I ever heard. We are in a middle of campaign, and the issue came up. How exactly can you avoid making it political - by not mentioning it? By mentioning it casually? By saying it doesn't matter? That it matters? Try all the options and you'll immediately see that they are all political in nature.

7.

As we prepare for the second Israel Factor survey I took another look at Allen's numbers in the first round. Interestingly enough, on the question that deals with emotional attachment Allen ranked rather low, with 5.5 out of 10. Does anyone think this will not change now for the candidate (assuming the panel knew what it was talking about)? And if it does change - will he now be considered a "better" candidate for Israel? Just remember: it didn't really work for Kerry (also 5.5 on emotional attachment).

8.

There's one Late Night joke about Senator Joe Lieberman I really liked - and yesterday I tried it as an Allen joke (it works just fine, but only is he loses in November): It was a disappointing race for Allen, but on the plus side his campaign was long and depressing enough to qualify as a Jewish holiday.

9.

Two Jewish legislators, Minnesota's Senator Norm Coleman and Virginia's Rep. Eric Cantor accused the campaign of Allen's Democratic challenger, Jim Webb, of pushing the story of Allen's Jewishness for political reasons. "In some perverse way Jim Webb believes that this will cost Senator Allen votes. Jim Webb is dead wrong," Cantor wrote. I hope he's right but also somewhat suspicious: if Cantor was sure, why would he feel the need to attack Webb - just let him be "dead wrong."

10.

"We happen to think that there's nothing wrong with his heritage," a spokesperson for Webb said. Yes? And can you also say that some of your best friends are Jewish?

11.

But seriously, this is a complicated situation for Webb. He is being attacked for playing an anti-Semitic card, and he can't reply, as any attack (or apology) coming from his camp might prove Allen's point. Obviously, it would have been better for him had it not been the second time he is being accused for playing the anti-Semitic issue (last time was during the primaries against the Jewish Harris Miller). But what can he do now?

12.

So I'd say so far it's a tie. Allen is using the unusable to portrait his rival as a bigot - but in Webb's camp there might still be hope that in truth Virginians will hesitate to vote for a "Jewish" candidate. One thing is clear by now: you can't place an elephant in a middle of the room and than declare it to be nonexistent.