There are a lot of political developments in the United States of America, especially now, when it’s just six months until the Election Day. This is evident from the various periodicals addressing different political ideologies, such as Mother Jones and Commentary. They come up with all sorts of articles exemplifying different political ideologies. These articles play an important role in politics, especially at this time of a vital and potentially pivotal election in the history of America. For instance, the article in Mother Jones, National Review, says that Cain looks a more typical black as compared to the President Barrack Obama. The Commentary, a conspicuous article that illustrates political ideology, explains whether it is true that the Jews are divided on Iran. These articles together with others present different political ideologies that exist in various parts of the world.
In the article Jews Divided on Iran? Not Really by Jonathan Tobin, the author says that the Iranian nuclear weapon threat could be one important factor that has united the pro-Israel community over a long period of time. According to Tobin (2012), the power of this consent is fading away that the real division is over whether it is prudent for West (America) or Israel to attack Iran for delaying a diplomatic force solution before the actual force can be involved. According to Tobin (2012), it is debatable whether Iran does not want to install that kind of a weapon and that it could be contained. On the other hand, the American President Barrack Obama reiterated his determination to stop the nuclear weapon being built by Iran. In his speech to AIPAC Conference, President Obama illustrated that such voices were triggering a global debate, not just inside the Jewish community. He denied an allegation that he was pursuing a repression tactic.
In this article, Tobin emphasized that it was apparent that the conservatives were questioning the authenticity of President Obama’s promises on this issue. They claim that his actions do not match what he says he will do. They accuse him of false promises he had given long time ago, especially during presidential campaign. However, many questions are also being posed as to what the U.S. President has already done and what he will do with regards to this matter.
In this article, the author expresses the opinion that Israel is hindered from achieving her dream of success by opposition to her measures of self-denial and defense to collaborate with Iran. Very little attention, if any, is given by the Congress to Israel’s efforts to get AIPAC’s control over the issue. President Obama is also seen to have abandoned the case. The President’s speech has showed that he has been pursuing a detached group’s agenda of pressure on Israel for the interest of peacemaking process.
Tobin (2012) says that, according to the experts, the harder line that President Obama has articulated also happens to be good domestic politics. Some fears of Jewish voters about Obama’s support for Israel have been, to a degree, relieved by his speech. Hence, Obama’s stand on this issue illustrates that he is aware that there are very few votes, Jewish or non-Jewish, he could win by sounding soft on Iran, despite the fact that the left has been hoping to buttress what it believes is Obama’s true wish to stay out of a conflict with Iran.
David Hanson in the article, National Review: Cain is more “Authentically Black”, tries to alienate Herman Cain from the allegations that the Republicans have played the immature racial and gender-based politics. The entire article comes in the defense of the Republican Party. Hanson (2012) dismisses the rumor that the Republicans are involved in sex scandals, while their counterparts Democrats have allegedly suffered from such ill fame. For instance, some Democrats like Bill Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, and John Edwards, who were impeached and left in shame, while others resigned on allegations over supposedly diverting campaign money to pursue their vested interests.
The author goes further to mention that the Republicans have gone much further in keeping their track records clean, compared to the Democrats who have been implicated with several dirty scandals and misdemeanors. He cites several examples of the Republican leaders, such as George Bush, John McCain, Dan Quayle, and Clarence Thomas, who are role models, if anyone wants to avoid any actual outcomes of their mischiefs. He says that both detractors and supporters concur that Cain ought to already know that the supposed transgressions by the Republican Party people are usually more serious compared to their analogical misdeeds by their Democratic rivals.
Hanson, in his article, emphasizes the role of sexual harassment as a casual tool that is used by the ill-motivated women who are incapable of excelling in any other way. He also goes back to the old days, where nearly no subject of conversation was forbidden, and still even a slight sexual hint could become a fatal misdeed. It is another case of the oversensitive women who cannot take jokes (Hanson, 2012). The author therefore describes accusations against Cain in comparing them to the second stage of cancer.
The parallels between Obama and Cain are not too much volatile as they flatter conservatives that desperately need a symbolic figure or racial absolution, having latched on Cain as a race excuse for the fact that Lincoln’s party has not broken 20% of black vote after Nixon (Hanson, 2012).
The two magazines are related since both of them talk about American politics. However, Hanson emphasizes on the political parties in the United States, while Tobin addresses Iran’s nuclear weapons. President Barrack Obama is the main character in both articles. However, the article in Mother Jones provides a comparison between the previously contending candidates, Obama and Cain. This article is anti-Obama, while it exalts Cain who was the Republican candidate. While many people believed that Obama is Black, the author portrays Cain as a more real Black compared to Obama. This has generated a hot debate that does not only exist in the United States, but in the whole world.
Moreover, the article by Hanson counteracts the belief that the Republicans are more evil, compared to the Democrats. This has been the case for a period of time, with Republicans being accused of many different offences including sexual harassment. This notion is dismissed by the article saying that the Democrats are even more evil than people think the Republicans are. Likewise, Tobin, in the Commentary, talks about the same story but in a different manner. It discusses how President Obama relates with other countries and the tactics that he is using to gain more popularity than the Republicans.
While it is believed that US has declared war on Iran’s nuclear weaponry (and even President Obama has delivered speech in regard to this issue), nothing has been done so far (Tobin, 2012). This article has shed more light on the various tactics used by Obama and Congress to evade or not talk about this issue, despite the speech at AIPAC. The other issue that brings itself clearly out of these magazines is that blackmailing, false promises, and false accusations are the main components of American politics with both the Republicans and Democrats using them to earn popularity against each other and, maybe, gain more votes. In summary, these two magazines have similar political ideologies, as illustrated by their content.
In my opinion, politics is giving rise to new tactics and methods of campaigns and voting. With the development of technology, politics have gone online, with politicians now being capable of addressing or accessing many people within a short time. Thus, politicians have employed new tactics to cope with these changes. For instance, false accusations and promises are being highly used to gain people’s confidence. They are using different tricks to win people’s faith. We have seen numerous politicians giving promises, which they have never fulfilled. This is in line with Tobin’s opinion on what President Obama is saying with regards to Iran’s nuclear programs. He is not walking, his talking; and just perpetuating rumors in order to gain political advantage miles ahead of the coming election by winning Jewish and Non-Jewish votes.
My opinion, in some way, is related to Mother Jones which tries to show how the Republicans are accused wrongly by the Democrats. Racism, as a major factor behind political arenas, is highly addressed in this magazine saying that being black does not simply mean that you are closely related to African Americans. This is clearly shown in the case of Herman Cain and Barrack Obama. Despite the fact that Obama is a son of an elite Kenyan and a white graduate student, it does not grant him a direct qualification of being related to blacks more than any other whites. This view is therefore closely related to my view in comparison with the viewpoint of Mother Jones.
In conclusion, I agree with Tobin in the Commentary to a greater percentage, as compared to Hanson’s article. This is because Hanson only highlights achievements of the Republicans with a lot of emphasis on the Democrats’ shortcomings. He does not present both achievements and failures of the both parties, and frivolously draws a conclusion biased towards the Democrats. On the other hand, Tobin addresses a crucial matter at hand – Iran’s nuclear programs. The current US President has not taken a clear action against the issue, though he keeps giving many promises about it.