web analytics
August 29, 2014 / 3 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘George Bush’

Shutdown Post

Tuesday, October 15th, 2013

Have you noticed that I have had almost nothing to say about the government shutdown? This is because I don’t care. I am aware that this makes me an Insensitive Git, in that some programs that benefit the poor and the disenfranchised have been suspended (together with some things that make the richies happy) but I can’t help it: I just don’t care.

And its not that big government doesn’t bother me. You oldsters in the audience will remember how I used to rail against big government George W. Bush and his usurpation of power. The difference, I think, is the big government Obama envisions is one that helps people stay healthy and live longer, while George Bush, mainly, seemed interested Keeping Us Safe by criminalizing ordinary activities and rolling back longstanding protections from government abuse. (To date, Obama, has not undone any of that. I can’t find the post, right now, but I did beat him up for this and I do officially hate him for letting us down in this regard.) I have the same questions any sane person has about ObamaCare, but I in the aggregate I think socialized medicine is good for America.

So why am I lukewarm about the shutdown? Because I also think arguing and fighting is good for America. The House has the power of the purse for a reason. They are supposed to dig in and refuse to pay for things they don’t like. What the House has done is legal, and constitutional, and legitimately an example of checks and balance. However, at the same time its an example of insane brinkmanship that would not have been possible had the recalcitrant. Members of the House run the risk of facing any real electoral consequences back home.

See, thanks to gerrymandering, no one in the House of Representatives ever has to answer to anyone who might disagree with him. Nowadays, most  everyone in the House represents a district that was created specifically to keep him (or her) in office. As a result, these morons can go to Washington and say and do anything they like –no matter how crazy — without suffering any electoral consequences.

Its great that the Representatives are keeping Obama on his toes, but a tragedy that no one back home is issuing the Representatives similar challenges. Their recalcitrance keeps Obama honest, but who keep them honest?

Lapid Unintentionally Helps Right with Bid for ‘Interim PA Pact’

Monday, May 20th, 2013

Yair Lapid, Israel’s Finance Minister and head of Israel’s second largest political party, has unraveled U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s efforts to reincarnate the “peace process” before Kerry even packed his bags for another trip to Israel at the end of the week.

He told the Yediot Acharonot newspaper Sunday what everyone except Kerry and the European Union’s Catherine Ashton know – it is unrealistic even to think about a final stage peace agreement for the establishment of the Palestinian Authority as an independent country.

It is questionable if even Kerry’s boss, President Barack Obama, actually thinks an agreement is in the cards.

Maybe, just maybe, Obama has learned what Ronald Regan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush never seemed to grasp – the Palestinian Authority will make peace with Israel only when it is sure that the Jewish state’s future is doomed.

That is why PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas refuses to budge on the Arab world’s dream to import several million Arabs to Israel, based on their claim that Israel is their home because their parents, grandparents, great-great parents and their dogs lived here.

The Oslo Accords, Clinton’s time bomb that fulfilled his promise to create a new Middle East, although not exactly the way he envisioned, provided for interim borders for a Palestinian Authority state, with final borders to be negotiated.

Bush’s Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in one of her many less enlightened moments, agreed that maybe it was best to simply skip over that little clause and go for broke.

And the “peace process’ since then indeed went broke.

Correctly perceiving that there was no need to concede anything except uncertainty, Abbas re-defined the word “negotiations” to mean “you give and I take,” with the only undecided issue being the date that Israel will supposedly sign its own death certificate.

The term “interim agreement” is no where in his lexicon. It is buried deep, deep under the “peace process,” and here comes Lapid, the last hope for the center-left to keep those pesky national religious Jews from getting too uppity, to the rescue of the right wing nationalists.

He also displayed remarkable honesty and lack of tact at the same by stating that Abbas “is still not psychologically ready for an agreement with Israel, either partial or full.”

That is the kind of statement that sounds like it is right out of the mouth of Avigdor Lieberman, who was foreign minister before he was indicted six months ago for breach of public trust.

It did not take long for Abbas, through an aide,  to react to Lapid’s statements, which reflect either amazing naïveté for a former journalist or just plain stupidity.

“We have heard this idea before and rejected it simply because we know the intention of Israel is to continue building on Jerusalem and other parts of the West Bank,” stated Nimr Hamad, one of Abbas’ sages in Ramallah. Just in case Lapid does not understand, Hamad added that final borders are “the most important thing for us.”

With the United Nations General Assembly already having adopted a resolution recognizing the borders of a Palestinian Authority state exactly as Abbas wants them, talk of an interim agreement can only convince Abbas that Lapid is a nationalist is in disguise.

Lapid is part of an overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews who are not willing to hand over such areas as the Old City on Jerusalem to Abbas.

Abbas could save himself from virtually isolation by the Obama administration if he accepts the idea of interim borders, but to do so would be political suicide, if not a sign of a real-life death wish.

He has dug himself into a hole by promising and promising and promising the PA “street” that he will get everything he wants, lock, stock and barrel.

The joker in the cards is Lapid’s statement Sunday that President Obama could set a three-year time limit for defining final borders while carrying out Bush’s written promise to Israel that such as areas as Gush Etzion and Maaleh Adumim would remain part of Israel.

He also wants to put aside the issues of Jerusalem and the Arab demand for importing millions of foreign Arabs into Israel. Abbas has rejected that idea time and time again.

Yale Elects First-Ever Israeli Student Union President

Thursday, April 18th, 2013

Yale University students have Jerusalem-born native Daniel Avraham as the first Israeli president of the Student Union.

Avraham, a 24-year-old sophomore, learned at the Gymnasia Herzliya high school and is a former IDF intelligence officer. He is studying in the university’s ethics and economics program.

Former Yale Student Union presidents include former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her successor John Kerry, and former U.S. presidents George, both father and son, and Bill Clinton.

Are We Better Off With Iraq in Turmoil?

Thursday, December 29th, 2011

With the U.S. troops gone, the power struggle in Iraq is reaching new levels. Various sources are reporting that the Shi’ite-led government in Iraq has issued an arrest warrant for the Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashemi.

If you need a reminder, the Shia are aligned with Iran.

For the record, the Iraq war was the right war at the right time. I know,  these days it’s fashionable to think of it as a waste, so let’s briefly review why it was imperative that Saddam Hussein was removed from power in the aftermath of 9/11.

9/11 was the final attack in a series of escalating attacks on U.S. interests around the world by al-Qaeda. It put an end to the illusion that the U.S. homeland was safe from major destructive attacks. It had the potential of creating a worldwide economic and security crisis. Great leadership in New York City by mayor Rudy Giuliani prevented the city from falling apart at the seams (compare that to what happened last year with when a blizzard hit New York City with Bloomberg at the helm). And, swift reaction by President Bush in Afghanistan was the first step in showing the world that people who intend to do the U.S. harm and who harbor them had no safe haven.

A lot of people, mostly Democrat politicians and members of the liberal media, wanted to turn the reaction into a simple police investigation to track down Osama bin Laden. That would have been a risky enterprise, fraught with the danger of making the U.S. look impotent. The longer it took for the U.S. to capture bin Laden, the stronger would be his reputation. If I close my eyes, I can almost hear people say Osama is a great leader. Look, the U.S. with all its might cannot capture him. He would have attained the status of legend. Instead, he had to run and hide. His eventual capture revealed how much he had been marginalized in the intervening years.

After the victory in Afghanistan, it was important to send a credible message to various tyrannical regimes in the world that they were personally in danger if they gave safe haven to, organized or sponsored any organizations that intended the U.S. harm. Surely, there was no shortage of people who’d been oppressing and torturing their people while thumbing their noses at the U.S. for decades. There was, however, one dictator, who had credibly built a reputation for having weapons of mass destruction andwho had been flaunting U.N. resolution after U.N. resolution that he had to allow inspectors free access to suspected sites.

Once the vulnerability of the U.S. homeland was exposed, it would have been suicidal to allow Saddam to keep his status as a tyrant who had access to corrupt financial networks and diplomatic channels which could have been used to organize further attacks. Regime change in Iraq, which had been the stated goal of U.S. policy during the Clinton Administration, had to be realized. Eliminating Saddam would have sent (and did send) a clear signal to all other tyrannical regimes that they were going to be personally targeted if they threatened the U.S.

Such tyrants do not waste a second thinking about the well-being of anyone but themselves. Years of suffering of Iraqi people could not convince Saddam Hussein to comply with U.N. sanctions. In fact, the sanctions themselves had provided further avenues for his personal enrichment. Changing the regime in Iraq was essential to removing a major threat against the U.S. and stability in the Middle East.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was successful in achieving this goal.

Major errors, stemming sometimes from good intentions, were made in handling the aftermath. Anyone familiar with the Middle East would have appreciated the value of the immediate establishment of martial law across the country and strict enforcement of curfews. Instead, a period of confusion reigned for a while following the fall of Baghdad.

Things got worse when the U.S. media and Democrat politicians started undermining the administration. By declaring the war lost, they signaled to Iran and Syria and anyone else who cared to listen that the U.S. could not handle a tough struggle and that they would back away from a fight. To his credit, President Bush refused to cut and run, and went ahead with the surge. Tellingly, the current president was one of the people who stood firmly against the surge. Liberal organizations published ads and stories intended to undermine the administration’s war effort.

Finally, at a time the U.S. needed to signal continued resolve, a chicken was elected president.

People will point out that Osama bin Laden was killed under President Obama, proving that he is strong. But the real and present danger of the day is not posed by Osama bin Laden. It is posed by Iran, whose rulers, just like Saddam Hussein did, seek to possess weapons of mass destruction to project power well beyond the actual strength of their regime. They needed to see a United States of America with resolve, the kind of resolve that kept Western Europe safe from the Soviet Union since 1946—make no mistake, the spirit of the USSR is still alive and well even if the name is not.

Electionshpiel Special

Wednesday, October 22nd, 2008

Question: For whom will you be voting in next month’s presidential election?


 

 


Election?! You mean in just a few weeks I’ll longer get to be the decider? So that’s why Laura is so busy packing up boxes! I’m not sure whom I will vote for. I liked Rudy Giuliani’s spirit during 9/11 and I admire Mike Huckabee’s conservative nature, but one thing’s for sure: John Kerry is certainly not going to get my vote.

 – George Bush, president


 

 


As someone who was born an African-American male, I am so proud of Barack Obama, and I do think we are ready to see a black man as president. But I can also relate to Sarah Palin as a white woman, and I feel it’s about time we had a female vice president. Color me confused.

 – Michael Jackson, entertainer


 

 


I still think I would make a great president and perhaps when I challenge President Obama for the Democratic nomination in 2012, the American public will get it right and vote for me. Don’t tell anyone, but I never fully cleaned out my office from when Bill and I were in the White House. I knew I’d eventually be back.

 – Hillary Clinton, U.S. senator (D-NY)


 

 

 


Frankly, I don’t see why George Bush can’t run for another term. Who says there has to be a limit? If the man feels like he can put in another 4 years, he should go for it. Heck, why even have elections? I’m looking into that question as well.

 – Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York

 

 

This week’s column is intended for satiric purposes only.

Annapolis And Annihilation: Avoiding A Requiem For Israel

Wednesday, January 9th, 2008

The more things change, the more they remain the same. For anyone who can still think clearly, the Annapolis “Peace Conference” in November was merely the latest hallucinatory rendition of a very troubled sleep. It’s not that this carefully scripted assembly actually confirmed a catastrophic outcome for Israel. Rather, it underscored America’s perilous and persistent preoccupation with a determinably wrongheaded foreign policy.

For Israel, the “Road Map to Peace in the Middle East” remains an unambiguously lethal cartography. Should it still be taken seriously, it could transport Israel from bad dream to nightmare.

Nightmare. According to the etymologists, the root of the word is niht mare or niht maere, the demon of the night. Dr. Johnson’s dictionary says this corresponds to Nordic mythology – which saw nightmares as the product of demons. This would make it a play on, or translation of, the Greek ephialtes or the Latin incubus. In all interpretations of nightmare, the idea of demonic origin is central.

Israel’s demons are of a different form. Their mien is not directly frightful (one reason that they are so dangerous), but hidden and ordinary. If they are sinister, it is not because they are hideous but because they are commonplace. Their evil is not always readily identifiable, but the demons that stalk the Jewish State are unmistakably palpable and ultimately final.

Israel’s demons are those of a Jewish people who have become accustomed to strive and exist without any serious meanings. These demons prey easily upon a Jewish state without any real direction, an ingathered nation that has largely forgotten its essential and everlasting Jewish purpose in the world. Reducing itself to a “thing” at Annapolis, a tiny, banal and negotiable object in a vast sea of enemies, Israel effectively announced that it was now willing to become a corpse. This unfathomably cadaverous assessment would surely be disputed by the Prime Minister and by the U.S. Secretary of State, but the incontestable facts would certainly suggest otherwise.

Irony of ironies. In matters of war and peace, Israel may take vital lessons in pathos from ancient Troy as well as from ancient Jerusalem. The Prime Minister should recall the solicitous visit of Trojan King Priam to the battle tent of Achilles. Even though Mr. Olmert stopped short of clasping George Bush’s knees and kissing the U.S. President’s hands, the Palestinians and their allies knew that Israel had already lost. If the 23rd Arab state is born sometime in the next year, virtually the entire world will hail its explosive appearance as a triumph of human rights and “national self-determination.”

Irony of ironies. Israeli novelist Aharon Megged once noted, “We have witnessed a phenomenon which probably has no parallel in history; an emotional and moral identification by the majority of Israel’s intelligentsia with people openly committed to our annihilation.” Whatever the psychiatric origins of such an unprecedented identification, it is a disgusting behavior, a behavior so completely vile and inexcusable that it easily blocks out several thousand years of Jewish wisdom and whole oceans of sacred poetry. Left uncorrected, this grotesque identification could even destroy Israel even before the wreckage generated by state and sub-state enemy attacks.

But not every important lesson for Israel is laced with irony. Some are straightforward and readily apparent. To survive in its always-imperiled neighborhood, Israel cannot continue to treat international relations and diplomacy apart from the essential Jewish fabric of its national existence. From one administration to the next, from Rabin to Olmert, Israel’s leaders have remained ordinary and without vision because Israel’s people themselves have largely abandoned what is true and meaningful.

The German philosopher Nietzsche understood that “When the throne sits on mud, mud sits on the throne.” Israel cannot endure as “mud.” Not a thousand Annapolis promises from Washington can ever compensate for a single act of Israeli auto-destruction. There will be no Arab quid pro quos for hundreds of Israeli concessions, none at all, and absolutely no rewards for millions of deliberately drifting Jewish souls.

Recently, The New Jewish Congress was launched in Israel. Professor Hillel Weiss of Bar Ilan University chaired the plenary session. Dr. Gadi Eshel, an indefatigable and heroic fighter for Israel, read aloud from the Congress Charter: “The Eternal People in an Eternal Covenant in the Land of Israel.” Said Dr. Eshel, “Every community that we plant throughout the land strengthens the roots of the Eternal Nation’s Eternal Covenant here – while at the same time preventing it from being bound by ‘Auschwitz borders.’ Let us not fool ourselves. ‘Auschwitz borders’ invite Auschwitz – not only for the Jews in Israel, but for Jews everywhere, and for all of humanity.”

In The New Jewish Congress and such related movements as Moshe Feiglin’s Manhigut Yehudit (The Jewish Leadership Movement) lies Israel’s best hope. To champion the indissoluble integrity of the Land of Israel and the Nation of Israel is what Israel must pursue now, immediately, and at all costs. As regular readers of The Jewish Press will easily understand, it is time to finally heed Dr. Eshel’s recollection of Joshua and Caleb, when Moses sent them out to reconnoiter: “Let us ascend and inherit the Land, for we can overcome it.” The only probable alternative to such a purposeful final acknowledgment would be another final solution.

Copyright ©, The Jewish Press, January 11, 2008. All rights reserved.

LOUIS RENÉ BERES was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971). He is the author of many books and articles dealing with Israeli defense matters. Professor Beres is Strategic and Military Affairs columnist for The Jewish Press. He was Chair of Project Daniel.

President Savage? Radio Talker Mulls Oval Office Run

Wednesday, March 21st, 2007

      Tanks keeping illegal immigrants from U.S. borders? Nukes dropped on terrorist sanctuaries? Iraqi insurgent strongholds barb-wired and then decimated?

 

      That’s just a glimpse into the future should ultra-opinionated radio host Michael Savage have his way and become the next leader of the free world.

 

      The top-rated talker announced last month that he may leave the airwaves and join the political zoo by running for the nation’s top office. Since then, more than five million people have affirmed that they want him to seek the presidency according to an online opinion poll conducted by Savage Productions (www.savage-productions.com/ webpoll_savage_president.html).

 

      In an interview with The Jewish Press, the radio personality spelled out his official presidential policies on some of today’s burning issues:

 

      Regarding U.S. border control, Savage favors stationing the National Guard along America’s periphery “with orders to shoot to kill.”

 

      “I’d also put tanks on the border if necessary,” he said. “I’d reinforce the border after making sure we still have a border following so many years of it’s having been melted down under George Bush.”

 

      Savage’s formula for winning the war on terror is simple: “My platform would be nuke ‘em and rebuke ‘em. Hit them hard. Hit them fast and get out of the Middle East. Teach them we are the most powerful nation on earth and when our interests and their interests conflict, we are going to win.”

 

      The talker maintains America can “absolutely” be victorious in Iraq.

 

      He said as president he would “send maximum force into the Sunni triangle and after giving them 72 hours to evacuate their women and children, turn on the Sadar City area and not go door to door, but decimate the entire area after barb-wiring the place and letting the women and children out.”

 

      Following his prescribed military campaign, Savage said Iraq would be divided into four quadrants as determined by the League of Nations after World War I.

 

      He then turned to Iran, calling it a “great nation of great people,” but deeming Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad “an anomaly, the Hitler of our time.”

 

      Savage advocated an international coalition unified against Ahmadinejad to ensure Iranians “have a chance to live in freedom and peace.”

 

      Savage said his presidential candidacy can do no harm, since the GOP in its current state is “incapable of winning.” He knocked all the current Republican candidates as “good Republicans and bad conservatives. None of them evidence much of a conservative orientation.”

 

      While Savage is mulling a run, vice-presidential candidates shouldn’t be lining up just yet.

 

      “I’m just exploring,” he said in a previous online interview. “I could not continue to do my radio show. I’ve been told that once you’ve declared yourself a candidate and you’re openly running, you have to give up your career in the media for obviously good reasons.”

 

      Savage is the nation’s third-most popular talk-show host, reaching approximately 8 million fans listening on more than 370 stations weekly. His show is consistently ranked one of the nation’s most influential, and is rated number one in multiple major city markets, including his home base in San Francisco.

 

      The Talk Radio Network host often sparks national news. Savage was credited with bringing the Dubai Ports World deal to national attention. The deal would have turned over U.S. port operations to the Middle Eastern company. A public outrage ensued, forcing Dubai Ports World to scuttle its plan.

 

      Savage has written a series of best sellers, the latest of which, The Political Zoo, is a satirical criticism of both Republicans and Democrats.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/president-savage-radio-talker-mulls-oval-office-run/2007/03/21/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: