It would be nice if the mainstream media could make up their minds. First, Trump was going to get us into nuclear war with North Korea, calling Kim Jong Un "Little Rocket Man," and all. Then, it was how dare Trump sit down with Kim and give him credibility on the world stage. True, he did seem to be excessively effusive about Kim. But the media does not get Trump's approach. It's the old carrot and stick.
Former undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman had an Op-Ed in the 6/14/18 USA Today. Secretary Sherman was the lead negotiator on the Iran nuclear deal, and was previously involved with the prior North Korean nuclear deal. She described the Singapore summit as not "much more than bluster and balloons." Really, what did she expect from an initial sit down? Kim did declare a "firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." But, words are cheap, especially so from dictators. So, we won't know until we know.
Secretary Sherman: the "official statement (signed by Trump and Kim) was far weaker than at least three previous documents signed by North Korea in years past. Unlike the agreements negotiated in 1992, 1994 and 2005, Tuesday's joint statement includes no verification requirements or framework to guide upcoming negotiations." What? Is that for real? Just how tough were the three prior agreements if Kim now has an estimated 60 nuclear weapons and a robust ballistic missile program?
Secretary Sherman continued that Trump does not understand that "any potential agreement would be durable only if South Korea, Japan, China and Russia are on board." Well, unlike Obama's deal with Iran, Trump says he wants any deal approved by the US Senate. Just what the Constitution demands. Why didn't Obama, the Constitutional law professor, know that?
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says the sanctions will remain in place until there are results. Pompeo also expressed the Administration's expectations that results will be seen within 2 1/2 years - by the end of Trump's (first) term. And just how impressed should we be with the Iran deal Ms. Sherman negotiated. No inspections on military bases. Continued development of Iran's ballistic missile program. And, of course, no requirement that Iran cease its terror supporting activities throughout the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. But wait, I thought one of the criticisms of Trump was that he didn't insist on movement of the humanitarian issues in North Korea. Isn't stopping terrorist attacks a humanitarian issue? I guess not when the deal was Obama's.
I think that Caroline Glick had, perhaps, the best take on the Singapore summit. As with any such summit, there is no guarantee that the other side will agree to any deal. Glick: "Democratically elected leaders have a greater tendency than dictators to become convinced that their political survival is dependent on their ability to deliver the deal." And: "If a leader believes his future depends on getting a deal, the likelihood that he will accept a terrible deal skyrockets." Gee, that sounds an awful like Obama, who was willing to pass up on the missiles, support for terrorism, inspection on military bases, and a $150 billion present in order to get the deal that he believed would be his major foreign policy achievement.
But Trump is not Obama. Iran came to the table because Obama kept offering more and more to the Iranians. Sure, Trump is holding off on joint military exercises with South Korea; but those exercises can just as easily be reinstated. North Korea came to the table out of fear of Trump. That's a good thing. Because Kim undoubtedly understands that if he messes with Trump, he has no guarantee that he will remain in power. The Ayatollahs never feared that from Obama. A little fear goes a long way.
Sunday, June 17, 2018
Saturday, June 16, 2018
Israel - at the U.N., in the L.A. Times, and in the Latest Poll of American Jews
I'll start with the most disappointing. The AJC (American Jewish Committee) recently released the results of a new poll comparing the attitudes of American Jews with Israeli Jews. While 77% of Israeli Jews either strongly approve or somewhat approve of President Trump's handling of US-Israeli relations, that number dwindles to 34% for American Jews. And while a significant 85% of Israeli Jews approve of the moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem, only 46% of American Jews approve. I'll let the numbers speak for themselves.
The June 10, 2018 Sunday edition of the Los Angeles Times had a front page story with this headline: "Lifelong Injury." The article discusses the thousands (per the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza) of Palestinians injured by Israeli bullets at the Gaza border with Israel. Never mind that Hamas has been sending tens of thousands of their people to mass at the Israeli border trying to breach the security barrier and/or throwing various weapons at Israeli troops. The article continues inside for 2 1/2 pages with plenty of pictures.
Here's a fun quote from the Times article: "...Israel accuses the militants of diverting funds for public services to military activities, an allegation Hamas denies." That's it, then? They just accept Hamas' denial? All of Hamas' rockets and missiles do not cost anything. All of the sophisticated tunnels built by Hamas, with tons of concrete and electrical wiring and ventilation cost nothing. Right.
The Times: "The (weekly border) protests, called to demand the lifting of the blockade and a right to return to ancestral homes in what is now Israel, were an exciting distraction from the grinding poverty." Maybe it would be better to not risk life and limb and do whatever may be possible to help your situation. Maybe show up at Hamas headquarters and protest their unwillingness to create a civil society to benefit their people. And let me ask the Times, assuming I lost my senses and decided I wanted to return to my ancestral home in Russia, would the Times care? I trust they do know about the Russian pogroms of the Jews.
This past Wednesday, the UN General Assembly passed yet another anti-Israel resolution. The resolution condemned Israel for what they said was "excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate" force against the Gazans during their mass efforts to breach the border with Israel. The resolution also called for "an international protection mechanism" for the Palestinians. My conclusions? The world only supports the Jews when they are being killed. If a General Assembly resolution had the same enforcement capabilities as a Security Council resolution, the world would be only too happy to send in troops to eliminate Israel.
The measure was propounded by Turkey and Algeria, and passed with 120 votes in favor, 8 opposed and 45 abstentions. Voting no were the US, Australia, Israel of course and some small Pacific Island nations. As the US has no veto power in the General Assembly, our Ambassador, Nikki Haley was unable to prevent passage of the measure. However, she did propose an amendment to the measure, specifically condemning Hamas for the firing of their rockets into Israel, the digging of the tunnels into Israel and the frequent border attacks.
That amendment actually passed by a vote of 62 in favor, 58 against and 42 abstentions. However, because of General Assembly rules, an amendment would have to pass with a 2/3 vote. The takeaway? I would have to give credit to President Trump and Ambassador Nikki Haley (along with Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon) for helping to slowly but surely change the anti-Israel sentiment at the UN.
The June 10, 2018 Sunday edition of the Los Angeles Times had a front page story with this headline: "Lifelong Injury." The article discusses the thousands (per the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza) of Palestinians injured by Israeli bullets at the Gaza border with Israel. Never mind that Hamas has been sending tens of thousands of their people to mass at the Israeli border trying to breach the security barrier and/or throwing various weapons at Israeli troops. The article continues inside for 2 1/2 pages with plenty of pictures.
Here's a fun quote from the Times article: "...Israel accuses the militants of diverting funds for public services to military activities, an allegation Hamas denies." That's it, then? They just accept Hamas' denial? All of Hamas' rockets and missiles do not cost anything. All of the sophisticated tunnels built by Hamas, with tons of concrete and electrical wiring and ventilation cost nothing. Right.
The Times: "The (weekly border) protests, called to demand the lifting of the blockade and a right to return to ancestral homes in what is now Israel, were an exciting distraction from the grinding poverty." Maybe it would be better to not risk life and limb and do whatever may be possible to help your situation. Maybe show up at Hamas headquarters and protest their unwillingness to create a civil society to benefit their people. And let me ask the Times, assuming I lost my senses and decided I wanted to return to my ancestral home in Russia, would the Times care? I trust they do know about the Russian pogroms of the Jews.
This past Wednesday, the UN General Assembly passed yet another anti-Israel resolution. The resolution condemned Israel for what they said was "excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate" force against the Gazans during their mass efforts to breach the border with Israel. The resolution also called for "an international protection mechanism" for the Palestinians. My conclusions? The world only supports the Jews when they are being killed. If a General Assembly resolution had the same enforcement capabilities as a Security Council resolution, the world would be only too happy to send in troops to eliminate Israel.
The measure was propounded by Turkey and Algeria, and passed with 120 votes in favor, 8 opposed and 45 abstentions. Voting no were the US, Australia, Israel of course and some small Pacific Island nations. As the US has no veto power in the General Assembly, our Ambassador, Nikki Haley was unable to prevent passage of the measure. However, she did propose an amendment to the measure, specifically condemning Hamas for the firing of their rockets into Israel, the digging of the tunnels into Israel and the frequent border attacks.
That amendment actually passed by a vote of 62 in favor, 58 against and 42 abstentions. However, because of General Assembly rules, an amendment would have to pass with a 2/3 vote. The takeaway? I would have to give credit to President Trump and Ambassador Nikki Haley (along with Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon) for helping to slowly but surely change the anti-Israel sentiment at the UN.
The Left's Non-Stop Hate
(Editor's note. This post contains language not used by this writer in the blog. However, as all the expletives come from the mouths of Leftists, I thought it was important to show the extent of their hatred.)
Last Sunday night the Tony Awards were telecast, and Robert De Niro was on stage introducing Bruce Springsteen. It was towards the end of the show, which I understand was relatively free of politics until that moment. De Niro walked up to the microphone and, and with arms raised and clenched fists, said: "First, I want to say fuck Trump. It's no longer down with Trump, it's fuck Trump." Nearly the entire audience stood and applauded. I can only imagine if during the Obama presidency, someone at one of these award shows got up and said the same thing about Obama. Would they have been beaten? I am sure they would have been roundly booed and forced off the stage. And that would have been the proper reaction to such a comment about a sitting President. But not for the lemmings in this audience.
Not to be outdone, the Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough, came out with this: "I know children are being ripped from their mother's arms even while they're being breast fed. I know children are being marched away to showers, marched away to showers. Being told they are - just like the Nazis - said that they were taking people to the showers and then they never came back." Disgusting. Not only does he diminish the horrors of the Holocaust with such a comment, but he alleges that American immigration policy is tantamount to genocide. Just sick.
Kathy Griffin (recall her holding up the fake, decapitated head of Trump) is not happy with her fellow comedian Kevin Hart. You see, as Hart is black, she just cannot understand why he won't discuss/mock Trump in his stand-up act. "I personally think it's a pussy move because he's a black man." So, Hart gets no respect because, even if he should agree with Griffin about Trump, he chooses not to use it in his act. How dare he!
During the last presidential election we were told how so many Trump supporters fit into a basket of deplorables. We have now learned from the just released DOJ's Inspector General's report what some in the FBI thought of Trump supporters. Said one agent: "Trump supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS (pieces of shit) that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing." Actually, some Obama supporters thought they would get lots of free stuff from him. And, under Trump, unemployment is significantly down - so, yes, people are getting jobs.
And this from another agent: "I would have brunch with Trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from Ohio that are retarded." I guess the elitists do not worry about being politically incorrect, at least as regards Trump supporters.
A final thought. Obviously, conservatives view the world differently from the way the Left does. But there is a further underlying difference. While conservatives disagree with the Left on virtually everything, we can understand the origin of their beliefs. Leftists, however, do not understand the origins of our beliefs. They do not understand how we could have voted for Trump and will do so again. After all, they cried when Trump won. Everything happening now is just so sad. And Trump's election will mean the end of America and even Western civilization. As the New York Times put it in one of their recent editorials: "Assuming that American democracy endures..." (under Trump). If I tried to explain to a Leftist that many conservatives felt the same way about the Obama Presidency, they would look at me in utter disbelief. As they cannot understand conservatives, the obvious conclusion - to them - is that we must be evil. Hence, the bitter hatred.
Last Sunday night the Tony Awards were telecast, and Robert De Niro was on stage introducing Bruce Springsteen. It was towards the end of the show, which I understand was relatively free of politics until that moment. De Niro walked up to the microphone and, and with arms raised and clenched fists, said: "First, I want to say fuck Trump. It's no longer down with Trump, it's fuck Trump." Nearly the entire audience stood and applauded. I can only imagine if during the Obama presidency, someone at one of these award shows got up and said the same thing about Obama. Would they have been beaten? I am sure they would have been roundly booed and forced off the stage. And that would have been the proper reaction to such a comment about a sitting President. But not for the lemmings in this audience.
Not to be outdone, the Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough, came out with this: "I know children are being ripped from their mother's arms even while they're being breast fed. I know children are being marched away to showers, marched away to showers. Being told they are - just like the Nazis - said that they were taking people to the showers and then they never came back." Disgusting. Not only does he diminish the horrors of the Holocaust with such a comment, but he alleges that American immigration policy is tantamount to genocide. Just sick.
Kathy Griffin (recall her holding up the fake, decapitated head of Trump) is not happy with her fellow comedian Kevin Hart. You see, as Hart is black, she just cannot understand why he won't discuss/mock Trump in his stand-up act. "I personally think it's a pussy move because he's a black man." So, Hart gets no respect because, even if he should agree with Griffin about Trump, he chooses not to use it in his act. How dare he!
During the last presidential election we were told how so many Trump supporters fit into a basket of deplorables. We have now learned from the just released DOJ's Inspector General's report what some in the FBI thought of Trump supporters. Said one agent: "Trump supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS (pieces of shit) that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing." Actually, some Obama supporters thought they would get lots of free stuff from him. And, under Trump, unemployment is significantly down - so, yes, people are getting jobs.
And this from another agent: "I would have brunch with Trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from Ohio that are retarded." I guess the elitists do not worry about being politically incorrect, at least as regards Trump supporters.
A final thought. Obviously, conservatives view the world differently from the way the Left does. But there is a further underlying difference. While conservatives disagree with the Left on virtually everything, we can understand the origin of their beliefs. Leftists, however, do not understand the origins of our beliefs. They do not understand how we could have voted for Trump and will do so again. After all, they cried when Trump won. Everything happening now is just so sad. And Trump's election will mean the end of America and even Western civilization. As the New York Times put it in one of their recent editorials: "Assuming that American democracy endures..." (under Trump). If I tried to explain to a Leftist that many conservatives felt the same way about the Obama Presidency, they would look at me in utter disbelief. As they cannot understand conservatives, the obvious conclusion - to them - is that we must be evil. Hence, the bitter hatred.
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
A Potpourri of News
I had to laugh. Seven Democratic Senators, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, put out a statement outlining mandatory provisions for any deal President Trump may make with North Korea. 1. The dismantlement and removal of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons from the country. 2. Complete and verifiable denuclearization of No. Korea, with the removal of all items related to nuclear production. 3. The end of their ballistic missile program. 4. Inspections anywhere and anytime. 5. The deal must be permanent. (Info from the 6/4/18 online edition of National Review.) Why was I laughing? Where were these Senators when then President Obama was making his deal with Iran? Hypocrites! (Yes, Schumer opposed it - until Trump wanted to back out. Then Schumer supported it.)
Out of Hanover, New Jersey, is a story about the High School cheer team. It seems that one girl complained to her Mom that she did not make the cut. The students are judged on their ability to jump, do choreography and the like. Well, that girl's Mom would have none of it, and complained to the District. The superintendent, like all good wimpy bureaucrats, caved in. He decided that ALL 11th and 12th grade cheerleaders would be on the school's elite squad, regardless of their skills. One former head cheerleader, clearly annoyed by that decision, explained that her sister did not make the squad after trying out. Their Mom told that daughter "You better get to work." There's a great Mom. No excuses. No blaming the person who made the decision or the unfairness of not every girl qualifying. No - get to work! Try harder! Which Mom is raising the stronger child? Which child will be better able to deal with life's challenges? (From CBS New York online.)
Trump uninvited the Super Bowl champs Philadelphia Eagles after a number of players said they would not go. That was a mistake. However many did show, along with their many fans, would have been able to celebrate at the White House. So what if you can't get everybody on board. Yes, once upon a time not that long ago, no one would have passed on an opportunity to be at the White House and meet the President. But those days are over.
And shame on Fox News. They initially put up pictures of Eagle players kneeling, suggesting that the kneeling occurred during the playing of the anthem. They had to apologize, because it turned out the players were kneeling in prayer prior to the game. No Eagle player kneeled during the playing of the anthem all year, although some stood with a raised, clenched fist. Still, Fox is a large enough company to not make these mistakes. A couple players complained that Fox was just in the tank for Trump. Oh come on - almost the entire mainstream media was in the tank for Obama for eight years. Did they complain about that?
This adherence to "identity politics" has got to stop. The idea that we judge people based on what "group" they belong to, instead of as individuals based on their words and deeds, is wrong and even evil. Do you want to be judged based on how the conventional wisdom (i.e. current political correctness) perceives whatever group you may belong to? If you are on a college campus and a Jew, then you are out of favor. In his recent book, "Suicide of the West" (Crown Forum/Random House, 2018), Jonah Goldberg tells us he took a look at the 2015 Yale University course catalog. Here's what he found: "Yale offered at least twenty-six courses on African-American studies, sixty-four courses on 'Ethnicity, Race and Migration,' and forty-one courses under the heading 'Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies."
In the 5/28/18 USA Today, Alia Dastagir had a piece on implicit bias. "While I struggled with a deep sense of class shame and the message that I was 'less than,' (apparently she grew up somewhat poor) I still always knew that I was white and that made me 'better than' poor people of color." What? My family was lower middle class. We never had extra money for much of anything. But, being white, I never was told by my parents, nor did I feel, that I was better than poor people of color. It's the difference between the classical liberal democrats, my parents, and today's Leftists. We were taught to treat everyone the same; another bygone belief filled with wisdom, compared to the shallowness of Leftist thinking.
Recently, Kuwait put forth a proposed resolution at the UN Security Council. The resolution expressed "grave concern" about violence in the Palestinian territories. It called on the Secretary General to issue a report within 60 days to ensure "the safety, protection and well=being of the Palestinian civilian population under Israeli occupation." It also called for an "international protection mechanism." Would that be sending troops in to fight against Israeli forces, even though there was zero mention or concern about Hamas terrorist attacks against Israelis? But, no fear; out of 15 members of the UNSC, 10 members voted in favor, 4 abstained, and the USA thankfully vetoed. One vote against, thanks to President Trump. As the US has a veto, the measure did not pass. But voting in favor were those two outstanding European countries - France and Sweden. Of course, it could be strictly coincidental that they both have large Muslim populations. Abstaining were three European countries - the UK, the Netherlands, and Poland. Sad.
And last, but certainly not least, is the Supreme Court decision regarding the Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a gay wedding. SCOTUS ruled 7-2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did not fairly consider Mr. Phillips religious beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. Mr. Phillips said that he offered cakes "off the shelf," but those were rejected. One of the commission members said that the use of religious beliefs in a manner that hurts others "is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use." The Court was quite concerned over the commission's overt hostility to religion. Religion is one of those things protected by the First Amendment. While there is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, and certainly not about gay marriage, SCOTUS only a few years back interpreted the Constitution to include this right to gay marriage.
These cases involving competing rights, especially Constitutional rights, do not make for good law. However, the Court found a way to make a narrow decision based on the specific facts of the case. No one should think that that any business would be allowed to refuse to sell to gay couples for their wedding if the product in question is prepackaged. The USA Today had a different take in their 6/5/18 editorial. "Phillips has an absolute right to his religious beliefs against gay marriage, but when the practice of those beliefs infringes on the rights of others to equal treatment, it goes too far." So, believe what you want, but don't actually practice your beliefs? That is an unsatisfactory result.
A number of liberal and Reform Jewish groups expressed their displeasure with the decision. I would ask them to ponder this. Imagine a Jewish baker whose family was murdered in the Holocaust. In walks a neo-Nazi couple asking the baker to make their wedding cake with swastikas covering the top and sides of the cake. I hesitate to think what these liberal Jews might require of that baker.
Out of Hanover, New Jersey, is a story about the High School cheer team. It seems that one girl complained to her Mom that she did not make the cut. The students are judged on their ability to jump, do choreography and the like. Well, that girl's Mom would have none of it, and complained to the District. The superintendent, like all good wimpy bureaucrats, caved in. He decided that ALL 11th and 12th grade cheerleaders would be on the school's elite squad, regardless of their skills. One former head cheerleader, clearly annoyed by that decision, explained that her sister did not make the squad after trying out. Their Mom told that daughter "You better get to work." There's a great Mom. No excuses. No blaming the person who made the decision or the unfairness of not every girl qualifying. No - get to work! Try harder! Which Mom is raising the stronger child? Which child will be better able to deal with life's challenges? (From CBS New York online.)
Trump uninvited the Super Bowl champs Philadelphia Eagles after a number of players said they would not go. That was a mistake. However many did show, along with their many fans, would have been able to celebrate at the White House. So what if you can't get everybody on board. Yes, once upon a time not that long ago, no one would have passed on an opportunity to be at the White House and meet the President. But those days are over.
And shame on Fox News. They initially put up pictures of Eagle players kneeling, suggesting that the kneeling occurred during the playing of the anthem. They had to apologize, because it turned out the players were kneeling in prayer prior to the game. No Eagle player kneeled during the playing of the anthem all year, although some stood with a raised, clenched fist. Still, Fox is a large enough company to not make these mistakes. A couple players complained that Fox was just in the tank for Trump. Oh come on - almost the entire mainstream media was in the tank for Obama for eight years. Did they complain about that?
This adherence to "identity politics" has got to stop. The idea that we judge people based on what "group" they belong to, instead of as individuals based on their words and deeds, is wrong and even evil. Do you want to be judged based on how the conventional wisdom (i.e. current political correctness) perceives whatever group you may belong to? If you are on a college campus and a Jew, then you are out of favor. In his recent book, "Suicide of the West" (Crown Forum/Random House, 2018), Jonah Goldberg tells us he took a look at the 2015 Yale University course catalog. Here's what he found: "Yale offered at least twenty-six courses on African-American studies, sixty-four courses on 'Ethnicity, Race and Migration,' and forty-one courses under the heading 'Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies."
In the 5/28/18 USA Today, Alia Dastagir had a piece on implicit bias. "While I struggled with a deep sense of class shame and the message that I was 'less than,' (apparently she grew up somewhat poor) I still always knew that I was white and that made me 'better than' poor people of color." What? My family was lower middle class. We never had extra money for much of anything. But, being white, I never was told by my parents, nor did I feel, that I was better than poor people of color. It's the difference between the classical liberal democrats, my parents, and today's Leftists. We were taught to treat everyone the same; another bygone belief filled with wisdom, compared to the shallowness of Leftist thinking.
Recently, Kuwait put forth a proposed resolution at the UN Security Council. The resolution expressed "grave concern" about violence in the Palestinian territories. It called on the Secretary General to issue a report within 60 days to ensure "the safety, protection and well=being of the Palestinian civilian population under Israeli occupation." It also called for an "international protection mechanism." Would that be sending troops in to fight against Israeli forces, even though there was zero mention or concern about Hamas terrorist attacks against Israelis? But, no fear; out of 15 members of the UNSC, 10 members voted in favor, 4 abstained, and the USA thankfully vetoed. One vote against, thanks to President Trump. As the US has a veto, the measure did not pass. But voting in favor were those two outstanding European countries - France and Sweden. Of course, it could be strictly coincidental that they both have large Muslim populations. Abstaining were three European countries - the UK, the Netherlands, and Poland. Sad.
And last, but certainly not least, is the Supreme Court decision regarding the Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a gay wedding. SCOTUS ruled 7-2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did not fairly consider Mr. Phillips religious beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. Mr. Phillips said that he offered cakes "off the shelf," but those were rejected. One of the commission members said that the use of religious beliefs in a manner that hurts others "is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use." The Court was quite concerned over the commission's overt hostility to religion. Religion is one of those things protected by the First Amendment. While there is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, and certainly not about gay marriage, SCOTUS only a few years back interpreted the Constitution to include this right to gay marriage.
These cases involving competing rights, especially Constitutional rights, do not make for good law. However, the Court found a way to make a narrow decision based on the specific facts of the case. No one should think that that any business would be allowed to refuse to sell to gay couples for their wedding if the product in question is prepackaged. The USA Today had a different take in their 6/5/18 editorial. "Phillips has an absolute right to his religious beliefs against gay marriage, but when the practice of those beliefs infringes on the rights of others to equal treatment, it goes too far." So, believe what you want, but don't actually practice your beliefs? That is an unsatisfactory result.
A number of liberal and Reform Jewish groups expressed their displeasure with the decision. I would ask them to ponder this. Imagine a Jewish baker whose family was murdered in the Holocaust. In walks a neo-Nazi couple asking the baker to make their wedding cake with swastikas covering the top and sides of the cake. I hesitate to think what these liberal Jews might require of that baker.
Thursday, May 24, 2018
"The N.F.L. Kneels to Trump" - so Says the New York Times
The NFL just announced their new policy with regards to players kneeling during the national anthem. "All team and league personnel on the field shall stand and show respect for the flag and the anthem." In their 5/24/18 lead editorial, the Times asserts that "the league capitulated to a president who relishes demonizing black athletes." Wow - straight to the race card. I almost cannot remember when editorials in the MSM actually relied on facts and logic to bolster their editorial arguments - rather than relying on demagoguery and demonization and vilification.
The Times thought it would be amusing to see players stand with "holding black-gloved fists in the air," or "holding signs protesting police brutality." Hmmm. I never did understand the connection between protesting perceived "police brutality" and not standing for the anthem. It seems to me that the kneelers are saying they will not stand for the flag until the country is perfect in their eyes - which will never happen.
So, let's take a look at some of the assumptions made by the Times and the kneelers. According to the Sporting News (10/15/17), the TV audience for the NFL through the first five weeks of the 2017 season was 15.156 million, down 7.42% from 2016's first five weeks of 16.371 million, and down 18% from 2015's first five weeks of 18.438 million viewers. Recall that Colin Kaepernick started the kneeling during the preseason games of 2016.
A reasonable person might ask if the owners looked at the numbers and decided that, from a business perspective, something needed to be done to reverse the downward spiral. A reasonable person might also conclude that there could be multiple factors affecting audience viewership. Ah, but not the New York Times. For the New York Times, somehow, the entire story was about President Trump being a racist. What a bunch of... No, I won't go there. The last blog post was harsh enough, although some of those descriptive terms could easily apply to the editorial writers of the Times. Is there anything happening in the world which the Times sees as negative that they cannot attribute to Trump? I don't think so.
And what about this police brutality? Are blacks always unfairly singled out by the police? I have no doubt that it happens sometimes. But what to make of the crime statistics? NBC reported that from 1980 through 2008, blacks committed 52% of the homicides, even though they make up about 13% of the population.
According to one source (The Mercury News), the number of people killed by police remained almost the same from 2016 to 2017. The paper also reported a sharp decline in the number of unarmed blacks killed by police from 2015's 36 to 17 in 2016 and 19 in 2017. Of course, those numbers are the proverbially "drop in the bucket" compared to the nationwide killing of blacks by other blacks. In 2015 that number was 2380, according to the FBI's Uniformed Crime Statistics.
Conclusions? Always blame Trump. Cops are evil. Never allow facts or the truth to interfere with the agenda.
The Times thought it would be amusing to see players stand with "holding black-gloved fists in the air," or "holding signs protesting police brutality." Hmmm. I never did understand the connection between protesting perceived "police brutality" and not standing for the anthem. It seems to me that the kneelers are saying they will not stand for the flag until the country is perfect in their eyes - which will never happen.
So, let's take a look at some of the assumptions made by the Times and the kneelers. According to the Sporting News (10/15/17), the TV audience for the NFL through the first five weeks of the 2017 season was 15.156 million, down 7.42% from 2016's first five weeks of 16.371 million, and down 18% from 2015's first five weeks of 18.438 million viewers. Recall that Colin Kaepernick started the kneeling during the preseason games of 2016.
A reasonable person might ask if the owners looked at the numbers and decided that, from a business perspective, something needed to be done to reverse the downward spiral. A reasonable person might also conclude that there could be multiple factors affecting audience viewership. Ah, but not the New York Times. For the New York Times, somehow, the entire story was about President Trump being a racist. What a bunch of... No, I won't go there. The last blog post was harsh enough, although some of those descriptive terms could easily apply to the editorial writers of the Times. Is there anything happening in the world which the Times sees as negative that they cannot attribute to Trump? I don't think so.
And what about this police brutality? Are blacks always unfairly singled out by the police? I have no doubt that it happens sometimes. But what to make of the crime statistics? NBC reported that from 1980 through 2008, blacks committed 52% of the homicides, even though they make up about 13% of the population.
According to one source (The Mercury News), the number of people killed by police remained almost the same from 2016 to 2017. The paper also reported a sharp decline in the number of unarmed blacks killed by police from 2015's 36 to 17 in 2016 and 19 in 2017. Of course, those numbers are the proverbially "drop in the bucket" compared to the nationwide killing of blacks by other blacks. In 2015 that number was 2380, according to the FBI's Uniformed Crime Statistics.
Conclusions? Always blame Trump. Cops are evil. Never allow facts or the truth to interfere with the agenda.
The Democrat's and Mainstream Media's Inability to Tell the Truth
Recently, President Trump had a meeting with a group of California public officials who oppose the State's sanctuary law. The Sheriff of Fresno County told Trump: "There could be an MS-13 gang member I know about, if they don't reach a certain threshold, I cannot tell ICE about them." Trump, clearly speaking about MS-13 replied as follows: "We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in - and we're stopping a lot of them - but we're taking people out of the country. You wouldn't believe how bad these people are. These aren't people, these are animals, and we're taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that's never happened before."
(Note: In an earlier post I commented on how we went from Obama's and Holder's war on cops, to Trump's and Sessions' war on criminal gangs, including MS-13. And by the way, MS-13's motto is "mata, viola, controla" - kill, rape, control.)
I get that the Left, which includes most of the MSM, has a visceral hatred of Donald Trump. The following comments are not only a reflection of that hatred, but yet another example of how their issues always supersede the truth. As Dennis Prager has said, and as this blog has noted, truth is simply not an issue for the Left. Let's take a look at some Tweets and comments.
The New York Times: "Trump lashed out at undocumented immigrants during a White House meeting, calling those trying to breach the country's borders "animals." Lie!
CBS: Claims Trump used "harsh rhetoric to describe 'some undocumented immigrants' during a California sanctuary state round table. Lie!
ABC: "President Trump refers to some who cross the border illegally as 'animals,' not people. Lie by omission! "Some" who cross the border illegally? He was specifically replying to the Sheriff's comments about MS-13.
Andrea Mitchell of NBC: Claimed Trump called "people trying to get into the country 'animals' not people." Not all people - lie by omission!
John Harwood of CNBC: "However repugnant their actions, MS-13 gang members are human beings IMHO (in my humble opinion)." Now, perhaps certain religious tenets accept that we are all God's children and therefore...what,everyone should be treated the same? I don't know. But I have friend who is a retired cop who would love to have some of these people on the Left see the handiwork of MS-13, and then ask what they might call them.
The NY Daily News: "Trump hurls hate at immigrants: 'these aren't people - these are animals.'" Lie!
And the leading Democrats comments? Nancy Pelosi: "When the President of the United States says about undocumented immigrants, 'these aren't people, these are animals,' you have to wonder, does he not believe in the spark of divinity, the dignity and worth of every person?" I would be extremely reluctant to ask the House Minority Leader (and future Speaker if the Dems take back the House in November) what she would say about history's mass murderers - Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others? Would she be talking about their "spark of divinity?" Horrifying!
Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader: "When all of our great-great=grandparents came to America they weren't 'animals,' (which is irrelevant) and these people aren't either." Do you get the picture yet? The Democrats are so enamored of open borders that they really do not care at all about who might be coming into our country. Gang members? Terrorists? They have no concern for the safety and well-being of American citizens. So, one might ask, why do my friends on the Left keep voting these people into office? They've already told me that Israel is not the main issue - see the last post. Maybe unrestrained immigration is not an issue either.
I'll end with California's long-time Senator, Diane Feinstein: "Immigrant's are not 'animals.'" (Trump never said they were.) The president's statement was deeply offensive and racist. (Ah, the race card.) Immigrants are our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country." (Yes they do, and what a nice deflection by the Senator.)
Some questions for my friends on the Left. Do you also side with criminal gangs? Do you even wonder why these leaders of the Democratic Party sided with the worst gang members over our President? When do you say "enough!"
(Note: In an earlier post I commented on how we went from Obama's and Holder's war on cops, to Trump's and Sessions' war on criminal gangs, including MS-13. And by the way, MS-13's motto is "mata, viola, controla" - kill, rape, control.)
I get that the Left, which includes most of the MSM, has a visceral hatred of Donald Trump. The following comments are not only a reflection of that hatred, but yet another example of how their issues always supersede the truth. As Dennis Prager has said, and as this blog has noted, truth is simply not an issue for the Left. Let's take a look at some Tweets and comments.
The New York Times: "Trump lashed out at undocumented immigrants during a White House meeting, calling those trying to breach the country's borders "animals." Lie!
CBS: Claims Trump used "harsh rhetoric to describe 'some undocumented immigrants' during a California sanctuary state round table. Lie!
ABC: "President Trump refers to some who cross the border illegally as 'animals,' not people. Lie by omission! "Some" who cross the border illegally? He was specifically replying to the Sheriff's comments about MS-13.
Andrea Mitchell of NBC: Claimed Trump called "people trying to get into the country 'animals' not people." Not all people - lie by omission!
John Harwood of CNBC: "However repugnant their actions, MS-13 gang members are human beings IMHO (in my humble opinion)." Now, perhaps certain religious tenets accept that we are all God's children and therefore...what,everyone should be treated the same? I don't know. But I have friend who is a retired cop who would love to have some of these people on the Left see the handiwork of MS-13, and then ask what they might call them.
The NY Daily News: "Trump hurls hate at immigrants: 'these aren't people - these are animals.'" Lie!
And the leading Democrats comments? Nancy Pelosi: "When the President of the United States says about undocumented immigrants, 'these aren't people, these are animals,' you have to wonder, does he not believe in the spark of divinity, the dignity and worth of every person?" I would be extremely reluctant to ask the House Minority Leader (and future Speaker if the Dems take back the House in November) what she would say about history's mass murderers - Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others? Would she be talking about their "spark of divinity?" Horrifying!
Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader: "When all of our great-great=grandparents came to America they weren't 'animals,' (which is irrelevant) and these people aren't either." Do you get the picture yet? The Democrats are so enamored of open borders that they really do not care at all about who might be coming into our country. Gang members? Terrorists? They have no concern for the safety and well-being of American citizens. So, one might ask, why do my friends on the Left keep voting these people into office? They've already told me that Israel is not the main issue - see the last post. Maybe unrestrained immigration is not an issue either.
I'll end with California's long-time Senator, Diane Feinstein: "Immigrant's are not 'animals.'" (Trump never said they were.) The president's statement was deeply offensive and racist. (Ah, the race card.) Immigrants are our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country." (Yes they do, and what a nice deflection by the Senator.)
Some questions for my friends on the Left. Do you also side with criminal gangs? Do you even wonder why these leaders of the Democratic Party sided with the worst gang members over our President? When do you say "enough!"
Thursday, May 17, 2018
The Sickening, Disgusting and Repulsive Mainstream Media*
(*Editor's Note. Readers of this blog will immediately notice the unusually harsh language in the title of this post. It is not my typical style. However, given what I have read in the mainstream media (hereafter MSM) this week, the language is actually not harsh enough.)
This past Monday, the United States of America opened its new embassy in Jerusalem, Israel. Hamas, the terrorist group that runs Gaza, did not want Israel to be able to celebrate the occasion. Hamas directed people (yes, directed, by giving people the day off from work and providing the buses) by the tens of thousands to the Israeli border. If you believe these were "peaceful" demonstrators, you need to look at the pictures. Furthermore, had any of the people succeeded in breaching the border, their intent was to kill Israelis. With that in mind, the Israeli Defense Forces (hereafter IDF) had snipers trying to target only those who were imminent threats, most of whom were members of Hamas. Hamas has since admitted that 50 of the 62 people killed by the Israelis while defending their borders were, in fact, members of Hamas.
As a reminder, the Hamas Charter calls for the destruction of Israel. As a reminder, Israel vacated Gaza in 2005. As a reward, Israelis have suffered from over 10,000 rockets, mortars and missiles being fired from Gaza into nearby Israeli cities. Hamas uses the millions (billions?) of dollars in aid to build tunnels into Israel in order to be able to kill or kidnap Jews. They use the money to build or buy all their rockets and missiles. If there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, it is because Hamas does not give a damn about their people. They only care about destroying Israel. And they have no problem in sacrificing their own people in order to win the propaganda war. Make no mistake, the tens of thousands massed at Israel's border, and the suicidal actions by Gazans done at the behest of Hamas, was for propaganda purposes. Hamas knew full well that they could rely upon the Western MSM to tell their fabricated story. Let's take a look.
The May 15, 2015 headline in the New York Times, the leading MSM paper in the country, read as follows: "Israelis Kill Scores In Gaza." One could argue that it was factually correct. However, if the Times wanted to tell the truth with their headline it might have read as follows: "Tens of thousands of Gazans try to penetrate Israeli border," with the sub-headline reading "Hamas sends men, women and children to their death as Israel tries to defend its borders and avoid mass killing."
Did you catch the NY Daily News cover? It shows a picture of Ivanka Trump with her hand raised while pointing at the seal of the US on the embassy wall - only the seal was blocked by a picture of a wounded or dead Gazan being carried away. The headline on this front page was "Daddy's Little Ghoul." Underneath we are told: "55 slaughtered in Gaza, but Ivanka all smiles at Jerusalem embassy unveil." Slaughtered? If Israel had any interest in slaughtering people, they have ample firepower to do so, and undoubtedly could have killed half of the 40,000 Gazans massed at their border. But they didn't use machine guns. They didn't "slaughter" anyone. Snipers targeted individuals carrying weapons, and those trying to destroy the security fence. There were a lot of people smiling at the opening of the new embassy, so why did they single out Ivanka? Because her last name is Trump.
At the White House press briefing, Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah made it very clear what the White House position was: "The responsibility for these tragic deaths rests squarely with Hamas." (What a refreshing change from Obama.) But the press would have none of it. Q: "The death toll is over 50 in Gaza. Is the US calling on Israel to use restraint in dealing with these protests?" While Shah kept repeating that the responsibility lies with Hamas, I would have answered this way: "Listen, you idiot. These were not "protests." It was a Hamas sponsored effort to have tens of thousands of people flood into Israel and kill Jews. Restraint? You don't think Israel was exercising restraint when you had a violent clash and only .0015% of those people had fatal injuries? Did you graduate high school?"
Here's another gem. Q: "So there's no burden on Israel to do something to, sort of, rein it in?" My reply: "Sure, Israel could send fools like you into Gaza to ask the Hamas leaders 'pretty please don't try to destroy the security fence; please be a good neighbor.' Next." And here's my favorite question from the geniuses who make up the White House press pool: "So there's no responsibility beyond that on the Israeli authorities? Kill at will?" My reply: "I can't believe that I have to deal with such moral idiots as you. Let me repeat, in what universe does a .0015 percent fatality rate suggest to you that the IDF was 'killing at will?' Did you finish kindergarten?"
The lead editorial in the May 15, 2018 edition of the NY Times ran with this title: "Mr. Trump's Failure in Jerusalem." You see, the Times was upset that "President Trump delivered the embassy as a gift without concession or condition to the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu, and as a blow to the Palestinians." A gift? Here's a question for the Israel-hating NY Times - can you name one other country in the world, just one, that is not allowed to declare its own capital city? Not only does the NY Times, along with much of the MSM, not view Israel as a friend and an ally, they actually side with the terrorist run Palestinians. Their editorial still thinks that Israel must "deal with refugees who fled or were driven away after Israeli statehood in 1948." None of the young violent demonstrators ever lived in the homes the Times says they were driven out of, and it's likely that none of their parents ever did either. But you know what? I challenge the editorial writers at the Times to take the lead and go back to whatever country you or your ancestors came from. And Hispanics will need to return to their homelands, because only the Native Americans get to stay.
It turns out that 4 senators, 10 congressmen and one governor - all Republicans - attended the embassy opening in Jerusalem. No Democrats. That seems rather odd as the "Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995," setting aside funds for moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, passed in the Senate by a vote of 93-5, and in the House by a vote of 374-37. So, the overwhelming majority of Democrats voted in favor. But times change. Citing a recent poll (previously referenced in this blog) from January, 2018, Ben Shapiro noted in his column in the current Jewish Journal of LA that while 79% of rank and file Republicans support Israel over the Palestinians, only 27% of Democrats do. Shapiro opined that the Democrats hatred of Trump (he is no fan either) was not the reason for their no-show. Rather, "Democrats didn't want to attend because they were afraid of their own base." Shapiro goes on to state that it doesn't matter that Israel is a democracy, it doesn't matter that Israel is the only LGBT friendly country in the region, and it doesn't matter that Israel is the only country in the area allowing full religious expression. What does matter is that as between Israel and the Palestinians, the Palestinians are perceived as "victims."
Shapiro: "Until Democrats throw aside victimhood ideology in favor of the morality that used to govern their party, (the split with Republicans over Israel) will continue to widen." I do not see that happening any time soon. "Victim mentality" permeates every aspect of the Democratic Party. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. Democracy versus terrorism has nothing to do with it. It is said that when the then Soviet premier asked LBJ why the US supported Israel, a country of only 3 million people at the time, over the 80 million Arabs at the time, LBJ replied: "Because it is right."
A final thought. When liberal/left-wing Jews tell me that they support Israel but vote Democrat because "there are other issues besides Israel," they are wrong. Certainly there are other issues. But the hatred directed at Israel, and the support given to the terrorist Palestinians, tells us a lot about the moral compass of today's Democrats. It tells us that the party is simply not able to discern right from wrong. Trump may have his personal moral failings, as most of us do, but his policy is morally sound. Reflecting that policy, our UN Ambassador, Nikki Haley, prevented the UN Security Council from opening an investigation into Israel's actions. Haley: "No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has. In fact, the records of several countries here today suggest they would be much less restrained." Isn't that the truth!
Haley: "The violence comes from those who reject the existence of the State of Israel in any location." Moral clarity. If your party has lost that, there are no other issues.
This past Monday, the United States of America opened its new embassy in Jerusalem, Israel. Hamas, the terrorist group that runs Gaza, did not want Israel to be able to celebrate the occasion. Hamas directed people (yes, directed, by giving people the day off from work and providing the buses) by the tens of thousands to the Israeli border. If you believe these were "peaceful" demonstrators, you need to look at the pictures. Furthermore, had any of the people succeeded in breaching the border, their intent was to kill Israelis. With that in mind, the Israeli Defense Forces (hereafter IDF) had snipers trying to target only those who were imminent threats, most of whom were members of Hamas. Hamas has since admitted that 50 of the 62 people killed by the Israelis while defending their borders were, in fact, members of Hamas.
As a reminder, the Hamas Charter calls for the destruction of Israel. As a reminder, Israel vacated Gaza in 2005. As a reward, Israelis have suffered from over 10,000 rockets, mortars and missiles being fired from Gaza into nearby Israeli cities. Hamas uses the millions (billions?) of dollars in aid to build tunnels into Israel in order to be able to kill or kidnap Jews. They use the money to build or buy all their rockets and missiles. If there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, it is because Hamas does not give a damn about their people. They only care about destroying Israel. And they have no problem in sacrificing their own people in order to win the propaganda war. Make no mistake, the tens of thousands massed at Israel's border, and the suicidal actions by Gazans done at the behest of Hamas, was for propaganda purposes. Hamas knew full well that they could rely upon the Western MSM to tell their fabricated story. Let's take a look.
The May 15, 2015 headline in the New York Times, the leading MSM paper in the country, read as follows: "Israelis Kill Scores In Gaza." One could argue that it was factually correct. However, if the Times wanted to tell the truth with their headline it might have read as follows: "Tens of thousands of Gazans try to penetrate Israeli border," with the sub-headline reading "Hamas sends men, women and children to their death as Israel tries to defend its borders and avoid mass killing."
Did you catch the NY Daily News cover? It shows a picture of Ivanka Trump with her hand raised while pointing at the seal of the US on the embassy wall - only the seal was blocked by a picture of a wounded or dead Gazan being carried away. The headline on this front page was "Daddy's Little Ghoul." Underneath we are told: "55 slaughtered in Gaza, but Ivanka all smiles at Jerusalem embassy unveil." Slaughtered? If Israel had any interest in slaughtering people, they have ample firepower to do so, and undoubtedly could have killed half of the 40,000 Gazans massed at their border. But they didn't use machine guns. They didn't "slaughter" anyone. Snipers targeted individuals carrying weapons, and those trying to destroy the security fence. There were a lot of people smiling at the opening of the new embassy, so why did they single out Ivanka? Because her last name is Trump.
At the White House press briefing, Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah made it very clear what the White House position was: "The responsibility for these tragic deaths rests squarely with Hamas." (What a refreshing change from Obama.) But the press would have none of it. Q: "The death toll is over 50 in Gaza. Is the US calling on Israel to use restraint in dealing with these protests?" While Shah kept repeating that the responsibility lies with Hamas, I would have answered this way: "Listen, you idiot. These were not "protests." It was a Hamas sponsored effort to have tens of thousands of people flood into Israel and kill Jews. Restraint? You don't think Israel was exercising restraint when you had a violent clash and only .0015% of those people had fatal injuries? Did you graduate high school?"
Here's another gem. Q: "So there's no burden on Israel to do something to, sort of, rein it in?" My reply: "Sure, Israel could send fools like you into Gaza to ask the Hamas leaders 'pretty please don't try to destroy the security fence; please be a good neighbor.' Next." And here's my favorite question from the geniuses who make up the White House press pool: "So there's no responsibility beyond that on the Israeli authorities? Kill at will?" My reply: "I can't believe that I have to deal with such moral idiots as you. Let me repeat, in what universe does a .0015 percent fatality rate suggest to you that the IDF was 'killing at will?' Did you finish kindergarten?"
The lead editorial in the May 15, 2018 edition of the NY Times ran with this title: "Mr. Trump's Failure in Jerusalem." You see, the Times was upset that "President Trump delivered the embassy as a gift without concession or condition to the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu, and as a blow to the Palestinians." A gift? Here's a question for the Israel-hating NY Times - can you name one other country in the world, just one, that is not allowed to declare its own capital city? Not only does the NY Times, along with much of the MSM, not view Israel as a friend and an ally, they actually side with the terrorist run Palestinians. Their editorial still thinks that Israel must "deal with refugees who fled or were driven away after Israeli statehood in 1948." None of the young violent demonstrators ever lived in the homes the Times says they were driven out of, and it's likely that none of their parents ever did either. But you know what? I challenge the editorial writers at the Times to take the lead and go back to whatever country you or your ancestors came from. And Hispanics will need to return to their homelands, because only the Native Americans get to stay.
It turns out that 4 senators, 10 congressmen and one governor - all Republicans - attended the embassy opening in Jerusalem. No Democrats. That seems rather odd as the "Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995," setting aside funds for moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, passed in the Senate by a vote of 93-5, and in the House by a vote of 374-37. So, the overwhelming majority of Democrats voted in favor. But times change. Citing a recent poll (previously referenced in this blog) from January, 2018, Ben Shapiro noted in his column in the current Jewish Journal of LA that while 79% of rank and file Republicans support Israel over the Palestinians, only 27% of Democrats do. Shapiro opined that the Democrats hatred of Trump (he is no fan either) was not the reason for their no-show. Rather, "Democrats didn't want to attend because they were afraid of their own base." Shapiro goes on to state that it doesn't matter that Israel is a democracy, it doesn't matter that Israel is the only LGBT friendly country in the region, and it doesn't matter that Israel is the only country in the area allowing full religious expression. What does matter is that as between Israel and the Palestinians, the Palestinians are perceived as "victims."
Shapiro: "Until Democrats throw aside victimhood ideology in favor of the morality that used to govern their party, (the split with Republicans over Israel) will continue to widen." I do not see that happening any time soon. "Victim mentality" permeates every aspect of the Democratic Party. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. Democracy versus terrorism has nothing to do with it. It is said that when the then Soviet premier asked LBJ why the US supported Israel, a country of only 3 million people at the time, over the 80 million Arabs at the time, LBJ replied: "Because it is right."
A final thought. When liberal/left-wing Jews tell me that they support Israel but vote Democrat because "there are other issues besides Israel," they are wrong. Certainly there are other issues. But the hatred directed at Israel, and the support given to the terrorist Palestinians, tells us a lot about the moral compass of today's Democrats. It tells us that the party is simply not able to discern right from wrong. Trump may have his personal moral failings, as most of us do, but his policy is morally sound. Reflecting that policy, our UN Ambassador, Nikki Haley, prevented the UN Security Council from opening an investigation into Israel's actions. Haley: "No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has. In fact, the records of several countries here today suggest they would be much less restrained." Isn't that the truth!
Haley: "The violence comes from those who reject the existence of the State of Israel in any location." Moral clarity. If your party has lost that, there are no other issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)