Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
DNC Chairman

They say a picture is worth a 1000 words. What about a movie? A YouTube movie– on the actions of the Democratic National Convention?  And what does that have to do with Israel and the end-times? 

At the 2012 Democratic National Convention (DNC), the initial party platform published on Monday, September 4, 2012, omitted specific language that had been a part of the 2008 Democratic platform (and, according to a Wall Street Journal report, part of the Democratic platform since 1992). The specific language dealt with the identification of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The omitted “Jerusalem language” was then added by amendment on the floor of the DNC, by voice vote, but not with unanimity. The specific wording of Amendment #2 (page 63, line 26 of the national platform) is as follows:

Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiation. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.

Here is an account of what happened on the floor of the DNC as reported by the Huffington Post:

Villaraigosa [Convention chairman, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa], in what quickly became an awkward moment, asked for the voice vote three times in all. After the second time, he paused for several seconds and looked behind him for guidance from a convention staffer — possibly a parliamentarian — before turning back and asking for a third vote… even though the no’s were again as loud if not louder than the aye’s. On the third vote, Villaraigosa said he had determined that two-thirds of those present had voted in favor. Boos filled the arena in response.

The Republicans immediately posted a YouTube video of the entire affair (here). Initially, I relied on news accounts on the video. It was only when I watched it that I saw its import on Israel and Bible prophecy. I encourage you to watch the YouTube video yourself and see if you think the 2/3 vote was won by the aye’s or the no’s. If there ever was an example of the abuse of the democratic process, this vote takes the prize! Villaraigosa, the DNC chairman, clearly was at a loss as to what to do. The amendments proposed to the 2012 platform were noticeably without the required 2/3 majority. Rather than allow a judicious process to take place (he had earlier asked for the suspension of parliamentary rules),Villaraigosa simply declared the aye’s the winner. His declaration was in spite of the fact that everyone knew the aye’s did not have the required 2/3 vote! Villaraigosa simply ruled the amendments had passed. How so? Because they had to pass! Someone in the “back” had already decided that!  I wonder who? (Sort of reminds me of a saying I heard long time ago: “Good lawyers know the law; great lawyers know the judge.” Sounds like someone knew the judge!) The YouTube video of the DNC vote then panned the audience as it focused on a husband and wife couple seated among the delegates (no doubt it was a Republican at the controls!). The woman had a large placard hanging from her neck with the words, “Arab American Democrat.” The delegate seated next to her appeared to be Arab (her husband?). As the chair declared the victor, the man threw his fist into the air as he vehemently voiced his opposition to Villaraigosa’s decision! Can’t say that I blame him. I thought this was the “land of the free” — where justice prevails! (There is another saying I learned a long time back: it goes, “We live by the golden rule: he who has the gold, rules.”  Hmhh… I wonder who has the “gold” in America these days?).

But what does the omission of the Jerusalem language have to do with Bible prophecy? Think about it. This is a significant departure for the leadership of the Democratic party. The 2008 Democratic national platform included the Jerusalem language. The omission from the current platform could only have occurred with much forethought on the part of democratic leadership; and, since it was omitted initially, the only explanation that is plausible is that the democratic leadership (and the President?) has changed their level of support for Israel since the last election. I might add that the White House has repeatedly refused to acknowledge Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This is in spite of the statements by the Chairman of the Platform Drafting Committee, former Ohio governor, Ted Strickland, who introduced the amendments to the national platform at the DNC. Strickland’s introductory comment stated that the reason the national platform needed to be changed was because President Obama “recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and our party’s platform should as well.”  Wow. Was the Platform Writing Committee not aware of the President’s Jerusalem/Israel position prior to finalizing the initial 2012 national platform? The initial document was made public on the Monday that the DNC began; and, it omitted the Jerusalem language.  Did the President make his position public after Monday’s posting of the DNC platform so that now the platform needed to be amended to agree with the President’s position? Something is not adding up here….

In addition, not only did the original 2012 Democratic platform omit the Jerusalem language, it also changed its language on Hezbollah and HAMAS, two Islamists organizations previously linked to terrorist activities. The Wall Street Journal reports on this change as follows:

The second difference relates to Hamas and Hezbollah. The Democrats’ 2008 platform noted “the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah” and said “The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas” until the group changes its policies and beliefs. This year Democrats don’t mention either terrorist group, and their platform’s section on terrorism is dedicated to lauding President Obama for the killing of Osama bin Laden.

It seems to me there has been a definite shift in support among the democrats for Israel. What if we looked at the DNC event from Israel’s perspective? Suppose you lived in Israel, and watched the DNC video and heard the sound of the no’s on the floor of the DNC (when asked to vote on the addition of the Jerusalem language to the platform)? Would you not wonder if the no’s were really a response to whether or not the United States will actually support Israel against it’s Muslim Brotherhood Arab neighbors or it’s Persian nemisis, Iran? With the change in the DNC national platform does that not lend itself to the conclusion that a second term for Barack Obama will see a continuation of the erosion of support for Israel from the White House as well as the political leadership of the Democratic party?  As I stated, something is not adding up here….

I direct you to a post made by this author on May 18, 2012 and titled, “America – Abandoning Israel for Iran?” In that post, the following comment is made:

The problem for the American public (and the world) is that there is no real way that we can know what is happening behind the closed doors of diplomacy, whether or not the politicians and diplomats are Israeli, American, or Iranian.  If America does weaken its policy against Iran thereby allowing it to enrich uranium sufficient for nuclear weapons, we will only know it after the fact. One morning, we will awake to the news of smoke billowing into the skies of the Middle East as Israel has either taken matters into its own hands and attacked Iran, or Iran has done so.

The actions of the Platform Writing Committee to finalize the Democratic National Platform without the Jerusalem language is one more step indicating that the President and his leadership is wavering in their support of Israel.  Our incumbent leadership is weakening its policy towards Israel; Iran will be the ultimate benefactor.

The addition of the Jerusalem language to the platform after its public release can only mean that the democratic leadership miscalculated the popular support for Israel. It likely means, in fact, that the leadership realized they might lose the support of many Christians who would otherwise support Obama (whether Democrat or Republican). Why else would the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, Ted Strickland, make specific mention that he was an ordained Methodist minister in his introduction to his motion to amend the platform? And, why else include Amendment #1 which returned the “God language” to the national platform (also omitted from the original platform made public on Monday of DNC week) unless the reason for the amendments was the fear of losing the support of Christians which the democrats had grossly miscalculated?

From a Biblical perspective what does it mean when the leadership of America waivers in its support of Israel?

  1. It lends support to the view that if Israel intends to attack Iranian nuclear facilities it will do so prior to the November election. After the November election, if Obama wins, American support for Israel will likely waiver far more than it has already. The recent public actions on the floor of the DNC reveal that the real reasons for the amendments were purely political in nature; in fact, based on the voice vote (to this viewer), the majority of the Democrats have little interest in supporting Israel. After the election, Obama will be able to act more freely (as Obama was overheard in an open mic slip-up in conversation with Russian President Dimitry Medvedev.)
  2. It lends support to the interpretation of Bible prophecy (of this writer; see this post: Will America Stand with or against the Antichrist in the End-Times?) that America will either be unwilling to support Israel against an Iranian attack or that America is so interested in diplomacy as an effective solution to Iranian nuclear options that it will be caught on the sidelines waging diplomacy while Israel is all but destroyed by Iran, and overrun for 42 months.
  3. Lastly, it sets the nations of the world on a trend line (with America either standing with those nations or standing on the sidelines in diplomacy) that ultimately ends in the fulfillment of the end-time conquest of Israel by “all the nations of the world” (Zachariah 14:2-5 NASB). This conquest, in the view of this writer, is a pre-tribulation conquest that acts as the first step to lead the world into the Tribulation, the ultimate outcome of which is the second coming of Jesus Christ accompanied by His raptured saints (Zacharia 14:5 NASB).

America is tilting further and further away from Israel. So long as we continue in this trend, we can be assured that we are stepping, one step at at time, into the end-times, and the Islamic Paradigm is the correct paradigm to interpret Bible prophecy for the time of Tribulation.