First, in all the races the Dems abandon, the GOP opponent will no longer need the cash raised for the election and will be able to give that money to the candidates in tough fights. Thus, the competitive races will still be competitive.

Second, in a wave year, which this has every indication of being, many of the races that look competitive now will wind up tilting even more to the GOP by Election Day.

This looks like throwing a lot of good money after bad.

It is true that one may be a Jew by virtue of ancestry alone. Not embacing the religious tradition, by itself, does not void this affiliation. National groups can be defined in multiple ways, such as citizenship (as in the United States), religious affiliation (as with Jews), or a common secular culture (as also with Jews and other national groups). The common element here is one’s sense of common destiny and common origin (mistaken or not).

Islam (as with other religious affiliation,) is different. One may be a Muslim, and claim any number of national affiliations unrelated to those commomly asscoiated with Islam. For example, there are ethnic Slavs that are Muslim. Moreover, there is no secular Islamic nationality, as such. Being Muslim is a matter of religious self identification. This differs from considering oneself to be a Jew, since there is such a secular national group, defined by common origins as defined by history and religion, and a sense of common destiny (wheter or not religion is in play).

As for Obama, it’s my feeling that if he really does not embrace Islam, then he is not a Muslim. His father’s affiliation is not material. The Islamic scolars can say what they want. Muslim influenced, or not, his administraion will be remembered in the same way as Jimmy Carter’s.