The ECI’s Bibi-Obama Robocalls Are Kind of Sad
And everything that’s wrong with the American discourse on Israel
While a large part of the country was preparing for a devastating hurricane, people in swing states like Virginia, Ohio, and Wisconsin were receiving slightly creepy and laughably misleading robocalls pit out by the Emergency Committee for Israel.
As of yesterday, there had been two robocalls, which sought to portray President Obama as the candidate who either (1) believes Jerusalem is a settlement or (2) is ideologically committed to allowing Iran to get a nuclear weapon. The first deception came when with the robocall’s ID, which led callers to think they were being personally phoned by ECI Founder Bill Kristol–the veritable dream scenario for maybe 14% of American Jews. But when callers actually answered there were treated to recordings of a fake “debate” that never actually took place between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu, using spliced quotes and half-uttered sentences.
The first “debate” was about the status of Jerusalem. Ron Kampeas did the good work of including the links to the sources of the actually statements by both Obama and Netanyahu, which were quotes from speeches given three years apart from each other. Absent of their context, it almost (in a janky xerox-of-a-xerox kind of way) sounds as if the two men are talking about the same issue, but as the links show, they are not.
DEBATE ‘MODERATOR': Welcome to the first debate between Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mr. President, we’ll start with you.
“MODERATOR”: Mr. President, thank you. Mr. Prime Minister, your response.
“MODERATOR”: Mr President, your rebuttal.
ECI: Friends, Americans and Israel cannot afford four more years of Barack Obama. This call was paid for by the Emergency Committee for Israel because your vote will make the difference in this election.
Here is the recording of the second call:
Both Kampeas and Dave Weigel debunk the content of the calls, rightly contending that these distortions would probably not fool anyone with a working knowledge of the actual issues. But that wasn’t the point. The desired effect is to create hysteria among voters who may not exactly know what’s going on and mislead them into thinking that President Obama’s positions are not what nearly four years of his policy have reflected. The result is kind of sad.
It’s this season for cheap and dirty politics, yes, but this is actually a metaphor for what’s wrong with the conversation happening about Israel in American politics right now. It is a triumph that the issues surrounding Israel’s strength and security enjoy such widespread support among American leaders. But with efforts like these robocalls in mind, the farther away that Americans are from understanding what’s really driving the discourse on crucial issues like Jerusalem (by the way, here’s George W. Bush calling for 1967 borders) and Iran’s nuclear program (here’s a sample of Obama’s record on Iran), the greater the difficulty there will be in forging the necessary bipartisan support required to honestly confront these issues in the future, no matter who wins on Tuesday.
There are certainly things that voters could fault President Obama on with regard to the Middle East. But rather than make substantive points, the ECI seems to prefer to act as if Americans are stupid. It doesn’t seem like an exaggeration to say that provoking this hysteria hurts Israel in the long run.
Plus Iran offers the U.S. aid in the aftermath of Sandy?
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at email@example.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.