It's the "appearance of advice and consent" that matters most

Harry Reid and Elena Kagan
(Image via Wikipedia)

Read related » Nebraska's Nelson Becomes First Democrat to Oppose Kagan for Supreme Court
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska said he will vote against confirming Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, becoming the first in his party to announce opposition. Also today, Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire said he will vote for President Barack Obama’s nominee, the fifth Republican to do so. Nelson said he had heard “concerns” from people in Nebraska about Kagan.”
— By Laura Litvan - Jul 30, 2010 (bloomberg.com)

Just in case you were absent when elementary procedures in the U.S. Senate were covered in your high school civics class, a super majority of 60 votes is required to allow the full Senate to consider any legislation prior to a so-called "up or down" final vote. Given that 59 of the 100 Senators are currently Democrats, and that 5 Republicans have announced their intention to support President Obama's Supreme-Court nominee, Elena Kagan, her confirmation as Associate Justice had already been assured.

Moreover, given the addition of the support from 5 Republicans, and assuming everyone in the Senate can handle simple addition and subtraction, the Democrats know that they have a surplus of 4 votes beyond the necessary 60 for confirmation. For the sake of political efficiency, such surplus must not be wasted. As Jack Kennedy related it after his narrow presidential victory in 1960, his dad, Joe Kennedy (an Irish Catholic who was, nevertheless, very "clever with money") had told him, “Don't buy a single vote more than necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide”.

It is abundantly clear to the Senate's Majority Leader what he should do with such bounty — hand out permissions to 4 Democrat Senators to vote against confirmation. So far, one of the recipients of Harry Reid's largess is Nebraska's Nelson, who, if memory serves, sold his support of Obamacare for his State's exemption from certain Medicaid obligations worth many megabucks (if not gigabucks). This gives the recipient cover from the ire of his constituents: Nelson was quoted as saying, "Her [Kagan's] lack of a judicial record makes it difficult for me to discount the concerns raised by Nebraskans, or to reach a level of comfort that these concerns are unfounded".

Mind you, this sort of thing is standard procedure regardless of which party has the majority. My purpose is merely to point out what many people have already figured out for themselves, but which, unfortunately, many have not.

Appearances count for much more than principled action among politicians. On occasion, principled action prevails, but such occasions are rare.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Nelson first Democrat to oppose Kagan (thehill.com)
• Five Republicans to support Kagan, Ben Nelson to oppose (dailykos.com)
• How in the name of common sense does any of this help anybody? (hl98.blogspot.com)

Post 1,371 It's the "appearance of advice and consent" that matters most

I love the smell of drainage in the morning … it smells like justice!

California Rep. Maxine Waters
(Image via Wikipedia)

Rep. Charles Rangel
(standing second from left)
(Image via Wikipedia)

Read related » California Rep. Waters may face fall ethics trial
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“WASHINGTON — A second House Democrat, Rep. Maxine Waters of California, could face an ethics trial this fall, further complicating the election outlook for the party as it battles to retain its majority. […] Waters, 71, has been under investigation for a possible conflict of interest involving a bank that was seeking federal aid. Her husband owned stock in the bank and had served on its board. […] Both Waters and Rangel are prominent members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the trials would be an embarrassment for the group. Dual ethics trials would also be a major political liability for Democrats, forcing them to defend their party’s ethical conduct while trying to hold on to their House majority. While Rangel is a former chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, Waters is a prominent member of the House Financial Services Committee. […] Waters, like Rangel, could settle her case by arranging a plea bargain with the ethics committee. So far she has decided instead to fight.” [emphasis added]
— By Larry Margasak - Associated Press | Published: 07/31/2010

I applaud Rep. Waters' decision to fight the allegations against her. Far too many people choose the cowardly "plea bargain", not trusting our system of justice to render a just verdict. The American people deserve to know the truth when their Congressional representatives are alleged to have engaged in unethical behavior.

I also applaud Speaker Nancy Pelosi's campaign to "drain the swamp" of dirty politics and unethical behavior in our Nation's Capital. This swamp she oversees needs a lot of draining, and the coming elections may be unequal to the task of completing such a huge undertaking.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Second senior Democrat to face ethics trial-source (reuters.com)
• Rep. Maxine Waters Chooses Ethics Trial (foxnews.com)
• Ethics panel to charge California Rep. Waters (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• The Corruption of the United States of America by Robert Moran (theospark.net)
• Journolist Highlights and Lefty Lowlifes (hl98.blogspot.com)

Post 1,370 I love the smell of drainage in the morning … it smells like justice!

Jew-hatred 101: … and, they are clever with money

… and, they are clever with money

← Image via Wikipedia

Read related » Tracking “Jewish Money”
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“It’s not often that bald-faced, unashamed anti-Semitism is advertised by supposedly mainstream politicos. But these are no ordinary times. […] Jewish money. Gosh, even Walt and Mearsheimer are smart enough to use the “Israel lobby” rather than “Jewish money” to incite the public. [Mike McMahon’s campaign spokesman Jennifer] Nelson immediately began back-peddling, confessing that “she did not know exactly how the finance team knew who was Jewish and who was not,” and bizarrely arguing that “I don’t think ethnicity matters.” […] America is not Europe and anti-Semitism is not yet fashionable or commonplace in “polite” company. (At least Nelson was canned rather than lionized and [Helen] Thomas was finally put out to pasture.) But what was unheard of a few years ago is now popping up with alarming frequency. Peddlers of virulent anti-Semitism now appear in mainstream publications and their arguments are entertained as legitimate. That should concern us all.”
— JENNIFER RUBIN - 07.30.2010 (commentarymagazine.com)

Why is "clever with money" a Jew-hating slur? Well it's not about the "clever" part, though I would prefer the less pejorative-sounding "expert". It's about the "money", stupid.

Over the course of the Diaspora, Jews were able to find refuge only in lands where their presence was barely tolerated. In Europe such tolerance was primarily based on the Christian dilemma posed by the universal need for money lending (the forerunner of modern banking, which is indispensable to all modern economies) despite the proscription of it (perceived to be equivalent to usury) as a Christian sin. Thus, money lending became one of the few occupations available to Jews in their host countries. And, as is their wont, they saw it as a lifeline to ultimate survival in a ubiquitously hostile environment. They became expert (read "clever") at it, by necessity.

Perhaps, dear reader, you are more familiar with the plaint, "They are willing to do the work that Americans won't do", usually in reference to both legal and illegal aliens. Though the circumstances underlying American unwillingness to do certain necessary tasks, especially at harvest time, has more to do with an aversion for menial labor rather than religious-based proscription (though I must admit that, personally, I refuse to do housecleaning because it is against my religion), this is rather like the derogatory association of Jews with money-lending, and, by extension, financial success.

Aztec ritual human sacrifice

← Image via Wikipedia

Arguably, one of Judaism's greatest cultural contributions was the invention of the weekend, AKA the Sabbath. By including it with the other nine Commandments, Moses institutionalized not only the concept of a day of respite from monotonous drudgery but also the more subtle, albeit much more far reaching concept of a (hopefully better) future.

But another Jewish innovation was the concept of scapegoating, which those who would assign a humanistic interpretation to (as opposed to what the righteous believers accept on faith alone) was intended to replace the more ancient barbaric pagan-concept of ritual human sacrifice. It is ironic (but possibly intentionally so) that Jew-haters have perverted the concept of scapegoating into the principal tool of persecution against the very people who invented the originally humane concept.

Related articles by Zemanta

• McMahon Campaign Hits Grimm For Taking "Jewish Money" (observer.com)
• Andrew C: Dem Rep Fires Aide After Distribution Of 'Jewish Money' List | TPMDC (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com)

Post 1,369 Jew-hatred 101: … and, they are clever with money

How in the name of common sense does any of this help anybody?

Chief of Stuff "it up your ass"

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

Read related » From Rev. Wright to the Sherrod Affair
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“3) From “Cowards” to “Wise Latina” — We Get it Already. Had Eric Holder not accused the nation of being cowards, had the president not appealed to voters in a recent video on the basis of race, had the president not intervened to stereotype the police in a minor matter at Harvard, had the Supreme Court justice not suggested racial background can make a better judge, had both the attorney general and the president not implied, before reading the bill, that 70% of Arizonans were intent on racially stereotyping, we would not quite be where we are — in which a bankrupt country in the middle of two wars is obsessed over the NAACP calling the tea party veritable racists and the dropping of charges against a fringe crack-pot group like the New Black Panther Party.

I say “quite,” because Mr. Obama’s campaign itself had always been characterized by one too many racial Macaca moments to suggest that the media image of a healer was quite right — from Rev. Wright, to typical white person, to the clingers of Pennsylvania, to Michelle’s various editorials on a downright mean country to never been before proud, etc. I realize to review this well-trodden ground is to earn a bullseye on the left-wing NY-DC list or its successor to come, but the truth is that the administration deliberately gambled that by playing identity politics they could galvanize the base vote (it worked when over 95% of African-Americans voted along racial lines) without offending centrist devotees. But they did not quite comprehend the ugly nature of the genie they had unleashed. And now we are reduced to suicidal calls from the left to appoint more administration officials solely on the basis of race, and to become even more overt in racial referencing.” [emphasis added]
— by Victor Davis Hanson, July 26, 2010 (pajamasmedia.com)

As is abundantly clear to anyone familiar with logical reasoning, the assertion that any number of American jobs have been "either created or saved" by the Administration's policy is unfalsifiable, and consequently not even wrong. Just try to imagine how much time, energy, and money could have been saved if our colossally misguided president did not insist on engaging in a perpetual election campaign comprising dissembling, blundering, and misdirection.

Rather than leading the nation, eager to reestablish its preeminence among the community of civilized nations, along a path of innovation and a spirit of common interests, this national-misfortune-in-chief perpetuates old problems and creates new ones on a daily basis. Who benefits? Only the enemies of the United States, both foreign and domestic.

Obama's supposed support of the so-called "downtrodden" among us is a reactionary reversion to the pre-civil-rights era of racial bias and the societal naiveté of entitlementalia. The latter is a national strategy where everyone loses, to a lesser or greater extent. Instead of a free-market capitalist economy that creates wealth, which everyone can compete for and almost everyone gains from, we get an ever decreasing pie of redistributed wealth, which stifles innovation, entrenches the relative status quo by blocking upward mobility, and where everyone becomes dissatisfied with their lot in life.

How in the name of common sense can anyone hope for such change?

Runaway Slave: The Documentary | coming 2011

Related articles by Zemanta

• Journolist Highlights and Lefty Lowlifes (hl98.blogspot.com)
• Race on the Brain -- By: Victor Davis Hanson (corner.nationalreview.com)
• Moron is the wrong word for Obama... socialist works. (theospark.net)
• The Audacity of Van-Jonesian Progressives (hl98.blogspot.com)

Post 1,368 How in the name of common sense does any of this help anybody?

Who knew?

Image via Theo

Read related » A Big Shocker
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“After listening to many of the things that have gone wrong, Heffer [of the UK’s Daily Telegraph] says, “This immediate proof of mismanagement adds to the cumulative feeling on so many other fronts that Mr Obama and his team simply don’t understand governance". He ends his column by saying what others have said before: "In that ecstatic dawn in November 2008, the Democrats would not have thought that things could turn out like this". […] Who knew?”
— PETER WEHNER - 07.28.2010 (commentarymagazine.com)

I know Pete Wehner's "Who knew?" is a rhetorical joke, but, though I am loath to say "I told you so", I am not above mentioning that some of us, in fact, did know. See, for example, here, here, here, here, …


Post 1,367 Who knew?

They stone people in Iran, don't they?

Oliver Stone 'in Context' (Image via NewsBusters)

Read related » Oliver Stone: 'Jewish-Dominated Media' Prevents Hitler from Being Portrayed 'in Context'
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“Director Oliver Stone belittled the Holocaust during a shocking interview with the Sunday Times today, claiming that America's focus on the Jewish massacre was a product of the "Jewish domination of the media." The director also defended Hitler and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and railed against the "powerful lobby" of Jews in America. [Obviously, if Jews "rule the world", ruling America would have to be a prerequisite — TBH] Stone said that his upcoming Showtime documentary series "Secret History of America," seeks to put Hitler and Communist dictator Joseph Stalin "in context". […] Stone said that, "Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people, 25 or 30 [million killed]." The Sunday Times interviewer then asked why there was such a focus on the Holocaust. "The Jewish domination of the media," responded Stone. "There's a major lobby in the United States. They are hard workers. They stay on top of every comment, the most powerful lobby in Washington. Israel has f***** up United States foreign policy for years." The director, who recently met with Iranian President Ahmadinejad, also slammed the U.S. policy toward Iran as "horrible".” [emphasis and comment added]
— By Alana Goodman, 07/25/2010 (newsbusters.org)

First of all, let me address the ignorant aspect of Stone's vile rant. It is true that the number of Russians killed by the Nazi invaders was without precedent, in absolute terms. According to Wikipedia the total deaths have been estimated as 23,954,000 (out of a pre-War population of 168,524,000), which represents 14% of the Russian population. Considering that 14% of the American population today (310 million) would be 43.4 million people, you can easily comprehend what a horrific catastrophe that was for the Russian people. Nevertheless, 6 million Jews exterminated by Hitler's Nazis, out of a total pre-War population of 9.5 million European Jews amounts to 63% of European Jews! To put that "in context", consider that 63% of the American population today would be 196 million Americans!

The stupidity of Stone's comparison that, "Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than [he did to] the Jewish people" is that the damage to either demographic can only be compared quantitatively via relative numbers (%), not using absolute numbers of people, because these demographics themselves are, as in most demographic comparisons, not equivalent in number.

As to Stone's Jew-hating remarks, he is just another in a long line of pseudo-intelligentsia who perpetuate the despicable Protocols of the Elders of Zion, "an antisemitic text purporting to describe a plan to achieve global domination by the Jewish people. Following its first public publication in 1903 in the Russian Empire, a series of articles printed in The Times in 1921 revealed that much of the material was directly plagiarized from earlier works of political satire unrelated to Jews."

Finally, where are Stone's Holyshitwood peers (yes you, Spielberg, et al.) when one of their own is spouting anti-American and Jew-hating remarks? Where's the outrage, eh?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Oliver Stone: Jewish-Controlled Media Has Been Unfair To Hitler (sayanythingblog.com)
• Oliver Stone: 'Jewish-Dominated Media' Prevents Hitler from Being Portrayed 'in Context' (newsbusters.org)
• Oliver Stone Apologizes for Anti-Semitic Comments (newsbusters.org)

Post 1,366 They stone people in Iran, don't they?

Journalist Journolist Highlights and Lefty Lowlifes

Carlson (Image via Wikipedia)

Read related » Journolisters Risked Their Integrity
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“What we had were journalists creating a "community" in which we see expressions of hatred that are both comically adolescent and almost psychopathic. We have them endorsing slander of innocent people simply because they hold a different point of view, comparing the Tea Party movement to Nazism, and participating in a post thread with the subject, "The line on Palin." And we have journalists endorsing a "tough legal framework" to control what a news organization says. What we have, in short, is intellectual corruption of a fairly high order. From what we have seen and from what those like Tucker Carlson and his colleagues (who have read the exchanges in detail) say, Journolist was — at least in good measure — a hotbed of hatred, political hackery, banality, and juvenile thuggery. […] Journolist provides a window into the mindset of the journalistic and academic left in this country.”
— PETER WEHNER - 07.26.2010 (commentarymagazine.com)

Journalist Journolist Highlights and Lefty Lowlifes

Journalist Journolist Highlight	Lefty Lowlife
"People we no longer have to listen to: would it be unwise to start a thread of people we are grateful we no longer have to listen to? If not, I’ll start off: Michael Rubin."	Laura Rozen (politico.com)
"Mark Penn and Bob Shrum. Anyone who uses the expression “Real America.” We should send there [sic] a** to Gitmo!"	Michael Cohen (New America Foundation)
"Michael Barone? Please?"	Jesse Taylor (pandagon.net)
"Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich (afraid it’s not true), Drill Here Drill Now, And David Addington, John Yoo, we’ll see you in court?"	Laura Rozen (politico.com)
"As a side note, does anyone know what prompted Michael Barone to go insane?"	Jeffrey Toobin (The New Yorker)
"Ledeen."	Matt Duss
"Let’s just throw Ledeen against a wall. Or, pace Dr. Alterman, throw him through a plate glass window. I’ll bet a little spot of violence would shut him right the f*** up, as with most bullies."	Spenser Ackerman (Washington Independent)
"Pete Wehner…these sort of things always end badly."	Joe Klein (Time)
"F****** Nascar retards…"	Eric Alterman (Author, What Liberal Media [sic])
Spitz wrote that if Rush Limbaugh went into cardiac arrest, she would "laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out" as Limbaugh writhed in torment.	Sarah Spitz (NPR-affiliate KCRW)
Ackerman urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright by changing the subject. "Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics", Ackerman wrote — "Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists."	Spenser Ackerman (Washington Independent)
Donmoyer adds this: "You know, at the risk of violating Godwin’s law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts? Esp. Now that it’s getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s."	Ryan Donmoyer (Bloomberg)
"I am genuinely scared" of Fox, wrote Davies, because it "shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tought legal framework."	Daniel Davies (Guardian)
"I agree", said Scherer. “[Roger] Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organizations. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”"	Michael Scherer (Time)

The whole stinking liberal-progressive cesspool has been quarantined here:

JournoList (TheDC EXCLUSIVE)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Tucker Carlson To JournoList Partisans: 'Stop Pretending to Be' Journalists (newsbusters.org)
• Tucker Carlson Angers Ezra Klein By Saying Journolist Had A 'High Concentration Of Bitchiness' (mediaite.com)
• Keith Olbermann -- too much even for the Journolisters (powerlineblog.com)
• Journ-O-Lists Run Interference (powerlineblog.com)
• Ezra Klein: 'This is My Final Finally-ish Final Word on JournoList!!' (theospark.net)
• Journolist: the Movie (healthcarebs.com)
• Hugh Hewitt: The JournoList Question (hughhewitt.com)

Post 1,365 Journalist Journolist Highlights and Lefty Lowlifes

An Officer and a Warrior

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

Read related » Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's retirement ceremony marked by laughter and regret
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“A month earlier, McChrystal resigned from his command in Afghanistan after a Rolling Stone magazine article quoted him and his aides making derogatory remarks about senior Obama administration officials. The sunset ceremony, held at Fort McNair on the Anacostia River, marked McChrystal's retirement from the military after 34 years. […] He closed by urging his fellow officers to believe that success in today's wars is possible. "Caution and cynicism are safe, but soldiers don't want to follow cautious cynics," he said, his voice catching briefly. "They follow leaders who believe enough to risk failure and disappointment for a worthy cause".”
— By Greg Jaffe, Washington Post Staff Writer, July 24, 2010

“Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!”
— Order issued by Admiral David Farragut during the Battle of Mobile Bay

Perhaps Gen. McChrystal was not the ideal theater commander, as the Second World War's gentlemanly General of the Army Eisenhower was (and his subordinate field commander, Gen. Patton was not). But there is no doubt that the military and political coordination skills necessary to lead multinational armies, which Eisenhower had in abundance, and neither Patton nor McChrystal did, were made up for by a warrior ethic that is the mark of a leader of men in battle.

Though Gen. McChrystal ended his brilliant military career in a manner he might regret, his contributions to his nation's military objectives are beyond reproach. And they are honored by his countrymen.

Related articles by Zemanta

• McChrystal's retirement ceremony marked by laughter and regret (washingtonpost.com)
• As a Blunt General Moves Out, Another Moves Up (atwar.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Gen. McChrystal retires in military ceremony (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Post 1,364 An Officer and a Warrior

§ I Am Music and I Pick the Songs: The Song from Moulin Rouge

{Song #74 « Song #75 » Song #76}

§ ≡ One of an ongoing series of posts in which I pick, in my not-so-humble opinion, the best songs of the second millennium. Feel free to offer constructive dissenting opinions; preferably set to music.

Percy Faith (Image via Wikipedia)

Song #75 is The Song from Moulin Rouge. The most popular version of the song was made by Percy Faith's Orchestra, with a vocal by Felicia Sanders. The recording by Faith and Sanders was made on January 22, 1953 and released by Columbia Records as catalog number 39944. It first reached the Billboard charts on March 28, 1953 and lasted 24 weeks on the chart, peaking at #1 {Whitburn, Joel (1973). Top Pop Records 1940-1955. Record Research}.





Percy Faith - The song from Moulin Rouge



Post 1,363 § I Am Music and I Pick the Songs: The Song from Moulin Rouge

The Audacity of Van-Jonesian Progressives

Image via Wikipedia

Read related » Van Jones: Stop worrying about the deficit
The government can just take more money from rich companies
[Reading this related source in its entirety is recommended.]
“LAS VEGAS, NV — While the federal government sinks deeper into debt than any time since World War II, former White House “green jobs” adviser Anthony Van Jones said it was time to stop worrying about budget deficits and pressure Washington to take more money from American businesses to fund larger social and infrastructure projects. "This is a rich country. We have plenty of money, and if you don’t believe me, ask Haliburton", Jones told a group of progressive bloggers and activists at the Netroots Nation convention Friday. "There’s plenty of money out there; don’t fall into the trap of this whole deficit argument. The only question is how to spend it", he added. American corporations currently face the second-highest corporate tax rate in the world, according to the Tax Foundation.” [emphasis added]
— By Chris Moody - The Daily Caller, 07/24/2010

“Entitlementalia is the audacity of dopes.”
— TheBigHenry's Truth Axiom

The hubris of a Van Jones is astonishing. He glides with the greatest of ease from a colossal theft, namely "the government can just take more money from rich companies [e.g., Haliburton, an international corporation]"; to "we have plenty of money", wherein the colossal theft is deemed a fait accompli; to "there's plenty of money out there" as if the money has, in fact, already been transferred to "us"; to "the only question is how to spend it", wherein the progressive proletariat is at liberty to spend this stolen wealth as it sees fit. Simply astonishing.

If this sort of arrogant whimsy continues to flourish unabated and unchallenged within the vast confluence of left-leaning progressives in government, labor, media, academia, intelligentsia, entitlementalia, the perpetually perplexed public, and naive youth, then this once-great capitalist [no slight intended!] society of ours is doomed, despite the great wealth that had been generated by private enterprise in our once-free markets that enabled the greatest advances in standards of living in all of human history.

That's my story. I'm sticking to it. You heard it here first. Peace out, bro.

Post 1,362 The Audacity of Van-Jonesian Progressives

Warm Calculation

(L-R) Johnson, Garrard, Cohen, Lappin, and Geras  (Image via Wikipedia)

Read related » Reasons which are also weapons
[Reading this related source in its entirety is recommended.]
“I think Henry is half right but only half right - which means that he is also half wrong. Israel's out-and-out enemies, those who want the country destroyed, who purvey lies and half-truths about it, and are never through with campaigning to deny its legitimacy as a country; the anti-Semites overt and covert, and those who make open or subtle apology for them - these people are not worth wasting one's breath on as respected debating partners. They have to be fought and shown up for what they are. But even a war must be conducted in the realm of ideas as well as by other means; and the reason it must be is that between friends and out-and-out enemies there are also people who are willing to listen to reason, to consider evidence and counter-evidence, argument and rebuttal. These are the tools, not only of philosophical discussion and polite conversation, but also of political contestation. One abandons them at one's peril. For one thing, if we cease to engage in argument about Israel, all those who are currently undecided, or confused, or who feel they don't yet know enough about it, will then hear nothing but the viewpoints of Israel's detractors. And, for another, if we do not give good reasons, some will conclude that we have none.” [emphasis added]
— Norman Geras, July 23, 2010 (normblog)

Norm has responded in the above-excerpted post, which I urge those interested in following this discussion to read in its entirety, to my previous post criticizing Norm's initial post in this thread. I am pleased to continue discussing what I consider an important contemporary issue, of interest to civilized people everywhere, most especially Jewish people and non-Jews who are not inclined to demonize Jews solely for their Jewish heritage.

Image via Wikipedia

Let me begin by saying that I appreciate Norm's crediting me with being at least half right. I hope to increase that proportion by clarifying some points about my previous post that I believe Norm has overlooked.

I did not mean to imply either that we should "cease to engage in argument" or that we should "not give good reasons" for our support of Israel. We most definitely must continue to do both. Moreover, I was careful to point out, though apparently not sufficiently clearly, that my purpose and motivation in this sixty-plus-year struggle for Israel's survival goes beyond reaching a better understanding of whose moral ground is higher. That issue was, for me at least, decided conclusively the day after Israel's declaration of statehood, when the combined armies of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq attacked Israel from all directions in an attempt to exterminate all the Jews then living within Israel's borders. Ever since, I have been primarily concerned with the survival of the only nation that is dedicated to the protection of the Jewish people, and only secondarily concerned with whose morality and ethics are held in greater esteem by those who have not yet made that incredibly difficult judgement.

Assuming that Norm's purpose includes supporting Israel's struggle to survive in the midst of its mortal enemies, my concerns about Norm's approach have to do with his specific focus on "clear and proportionate criticism, when it is due". I submit that, logically, neither "engaging in argument" nor "giving good reasons" necessarily require criticism of Israel "when it is due", though I understand what benefits can derive from doing so. But I insist that criticism of Israel can and does have both positive and negative consequences in the greater battle for survival of the most persecuted demographic in human history.

The obvious benefit of public criticism of Israel derives from whatever credibility one earns on "the street" of undecided public opinion about Israel's actions in the furtherance of its existential needs. The obvious downside, of course, is feeding the propaganda machine of the hordes of Jew-haters the world over. If one is in this fight to win the war, and not just to win the debate, one has to calculate whether or not the net benefit of one's words and actions will make a positive contribution toward one's personal goals.

Post 1,361 Warm Calculation

Sorry

Sarah Spitz

Publicity Director & Producer
Left, Right & Center; Politics of Culture

Read related » Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News
“If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would. But if that man was Rush Limbaugh, and you were Sarah Spitz, a producer for NPR affiliate KCRW for the show Left, Right & Center, that isn’t what you’d do at all. In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would, "Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out" as Limbaugh writhed in torment. In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. "I never knew I had this much hate in me", she wrote. "But he deserves it".”
— By Jonathan Strong - The Daily Caller | Published: 07/21/2010

Well, who knows whether or not he deserves it. Perhaps Ms. Spitz is privy to some really egregious felonious assault that the target of her venomous fantasy perpetrated against one of her children. Or, perhaps she is just a hateful bitch.

Read related » Public Radio Publicist Apologizes For Controversial Remarks About Limbaugh
KCRW is one of some 900 independently-operated public radio stations across the country that air NPR's news, talk and entertainment programming. Like network TV affiliates, they air national programming but act autonomously. At 2:10 p.m. ET, Spitz issued this statement:

“I made poorly considered remarks about Rush Limbaugh to what I believed was a private email discussion group from my personal email account. As a publicist, I realize more than anyone that is no excuse for irresponsible behavior. I apologize to anyone I may have offended and I regret these comments greatly; they do not reflect the values by which I conduct my life.”
— by DAVID GURA, July 21, 2010 (NPR)

Sounds like a typical non-apology to me. "I made poorly considered remarks ... to what I believed was a private email" is your basic "I am really sorry I got caught with my venom dribbling down my chin".

"I may have offended"? You mean there is doubt?

And, "they do not reflect the values by which I conduct my life" is a bald-faced lie. The values one truly lives by are revealed precisely when one believes one has the presumption of privacy.

Post 1,360 Sorry

It's NOT the racism, stupid!

County Supervisor Peggy West

Read related » Are You Smarter than a Peggy West? Milwaukee Embarrassed Yet Again
“On a video that has quickly gone viral, County Supervisor Peggy West told attendees at a county meeting that if Arizona shared a border with Mexico, she would have to re-think her position on boycotting Arizona's immigration law. The problem, however, is that Arizona does indeed share a border with Mexico, just like Texas, New Mexico and California [do]. The video of West's remarks circulated on YouTube where it received nationwide attention from political pundits like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and a hoarde of Arizona blogs and newspapers. Local personalities like Charlie Sykes and Mark Belling also spent considerable time poking fun at it. Belling said that in his 21 years of doing his program, this was the dumbest thing any Milwaukee liberal has ever said. He went on to say how sorry he was for County Executive Scott Walker for having to deal with people like her on the County Board.”
— Written by Aaron Rodriguez, 25 June 2010 (thehispanicconservative)

It's not the racism. It's also not about political affiliation, cultural demographic, socio-economic status, or ancestry.

It's the stupidity, stupid.

As, arguably, the only historical figure of the modern era who is unanimously acknowledged to have been not stupid, Albert Einstein once quipped, "Two things are infinite — the universe and human stupidity. And I am not sure about the universe."

Post 1,359 It's NOT the racism, stupid!

Israel's Albatross

Read related » I Bet Iran Doesn’t Think the J Streeters Are "Unhappy Jews"
“If you’re going to start a pro-Israel group, nothing beats a shout-out from the mullahs [i.e., a condemnation by I'madinnerjacket]. It does cement one’s bona fides as a genuinely pro-Israel group committed to its defense against an existential threat from Iran […] But there are a lot of American Jews not happy with Obama’s Israel policy. The idea that such people might become engaged in a debate about what it means to be "pro-Israel" and begin to focus on the voting records of candidates (not just their self-descriptions) seems to be making the mullahs very unhappy.” [emphasis and comment added]
— JENNIFER RUBIN - 07.21.2010 - Commentary

While Obama persists in revisiting that disreputable Chamberlain-esque foreign policy of His, Israel must factor-in the additional degree of difficulty His appeasement of the mullahs effects. Obama's seemingly fanatical pursuit of failed policy, never doubting His own "infallibility" ("This time, regardless of past failures, it will surely work, because I Am The Won!"), is the Israel-strangling albatross.

"Damn the polls! Follow that Chamberlain!"       h/t Theo

Post 1,358 Israel's Albatross

The post-racial iPOTUS? Not so much

Post Racial?           h/t Theo

Related Link » Race Card Fraud
“Among people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008, those who are likely to be most disappointed are those who thought that they were voting for a new post-racial era. There was absolutely nothing in Obama's past to lead to any such expectation, and much to suggest the exact opposite. But the man's rhetoric and demeanor during the election campaign enabled this and many other illusions to flourish. […] Racial issues are more of the same. You want a government where all citizens are treated alike, regardless of race or ethnicity? Obama will say that. Then he will advocate appointing judges with "empathy" for particular segments of the population, such as racial minorities. "Empathy" is just a pretty word for the ugly reality of bias. […] Obama's injecting himself into a local police matter in Massachusetts, despite admitting that he didn't know the facts, to say that a white policeman was in the wrong in arresting a black professor who was a friend of Obama, was more of the same. So is Obama's Justice Department overlooking blatant voter intimidation by thugs who happen to be black. There is not now, nor has there ever been, anything post-racial about Barack Obama, except for the people who voted for him in the mistaken belief that he shared their desire to be post-racial. When he leaves office, especially if it is after one term, he will leave this country more racially polarized than before.”
— Thomas Sowell, 7-20-2010 (Townhall)

Obama the Post-racial iPOTUS (PriPOTUS)? In a pig's eye (even if it's wearing lipstick). Of course it has been so asserted by his tingle-berry supporters, and implied by The Won's own rhetoric. But the proof is in the pudding, as it were. If it talks like a duck, but acts like a bigot, it's a bigot.

The only things authentic about Obama are his actions. And in case you have just returned from extended leave on planet Pluto, some of His actions are recapped by Thomas Sowell, in the above referenced post.

What I consider even more egregious than His actions, however, is His blatant disregard for how His actions are perceived by those Americans who do not worship the ground He hovers over. His arrogance in the knowledge that His enormous posse of Kool-Aid drinkers will make excuses for any and all of His transgressions is contemptible.

Never before in my six decades of life in America, prior to the election of Obama, have I felt such palpable racial tension as I have felt in the past 18 months, and continue to feel now.

---

UPDATES:

Read related » Gets My Irish Up
— POSTED BY MALCOLM, JULY 21, 2010 (waka waka waka)

Read related » Race, lies and videotape
“Everyone – the White House, the Agriculture Department, the anonymous editor, the website – has political dirt and racial guilt all over their hands. The little guy, Shirley Sherrod, was just "collateral damage" in a political war. The usual race-baiters, the Al Sharptons and David Dukes, must be smiling. But somehow Shirley Sherrod got the true story out because tapes exist of the full speech. Now the White House has apologized to Sherrod. And now the Agriculture Department has now offered Sherrod a new position. But what has been revealed, once again, is the pattern of race-baiting and racial lies that is used by left and right when they convince themselves they have larger, more righteous political goals to reach.”
— By Juan Williams | Published: 07/22/2010 (TheDC)

Post 1,357 The post-racial iPOTUS? Not so much

Country Bites Dog

Related Link » Snoop Dogg Tried to Rent Liechtenstein
“Just when you think a guy is so ubiquitous and shameless he never deserves your attention again, Snoop Dogg goes and tries to rent Liechtenstein — like, all of it — and pulls you right back in. Snoop was reportedly trying to shoot a music video in the tiny Western European country, but was rebuffed ...” [emphasis added]
— By: Amos Barshad, 6/30/10 (nymag)

"Da Game Is to Be Sold, Not to Be Told"

"Yo, we ain't no ho, dog!"

Post #1,356 Country Bites Dog

I love the smell of VAT in the morningIt smells like … justice

"VAT did you say? Bring it!"     h/t Theo

Related Link » Obama's next act
“I have a warning for Republicans: Don't underestimate Barack Obama. […] Obama's most far-reaching accomplishment is his structural alteration of the U.S. budget. The stimulus, the vast expansion of domestic spending, the creation of ruinous deficits as far as the eye can see are not easily reversed. These are not mere temporary countercyclical measures. They are structural deficits because, as everyone from Obama on down admits, the real money is in entitlements, most specifically Medicare and Medicaid. But Obamacare freezes these out as a source of debt reduction. Obamacare's $500 billion in Medicare cuts and $600 billion in tax increases are siphoned away for a new entitlement [Obamacare] -- and no longer available for deficit reduction. The result? There just isn't enough to cut elsewhere to prevent national insolvency. That will require massive tax increases -- most likely a European-style value-added tax [VAT]. Just as President Ronald Reagan cut taxes to starve the federal government and prevent massive growth in spending, Obama's wild spending -- and quarantining health-care costs from providing possible relief -- will necessitate huge tax increases.” [emphasis and bracketed comments added]
— By Charles Krauthammer, July 16, 2010 (WaPo)

Once again Charles Germanicus-Martel is ahead of the curve. I think he has finally found the missing pieces to The Puzzle, AKA iPOTUS. The Obama is not just a self-aggrandizing narcissist. That's not even close to defining The Enigma: He is the craftiest snake-oil salesman evah. He not only permanently overhauled the U.S. budget; he announced his intentions to do so way in advance. And the suckers went for it hook, line, and sinker.

VAT did you say? Well, I say, "Bring it!" A VAT has the potential to fund all of Congress’s pet projects, such as cap-and-trade, renewable energy, electric cars, high speed rail, and, of course, health care. And no one expects that the initial single-digit "introductory offer" percentage will hold for long. But I still say, "Bring it!", because a VAT is regressive. In terms of individual income and wealth, a regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the freeloaders than on the earners — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer's ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income.

So here, at long last, is where The Wily Obama has painted Himself into a corner. The VAT will reverse the number-one goal of His Socialist agenda: progressive wealth redistribution. And His freeloading idolaters will be stuck holding the bag. Moreover, that bag will not contain free lunch, but rather, a hefty bill for lunch that is costly.

Post #1,355 I love the smell of VAT in the morning
It smells like … justice

North/South Vietnam, Korea, Carolina, Dakota, ...

Related Link » Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee on North and South Vietnam

— Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Democrat from Texas

According to her official House Biography, "Congresswoman Jackson Lee earned a B.A. in Political Science from Yale University with honors, followed by a J.D. from the University of Virginia Law School."

In her defense, it should be noted that she provided a note from her mother excusing her absence during history and geography classes at Yale. Either that or her dog ate her homework, I forget which ...

It don't make no never mind. Y'all get the representation all y'all deserve.

---

UPDATE:

Read related » North and South Vietnams: "She was really tired"
[Reading this related article in its entirety is recommended.]
“Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee from Houston "mixed up" the Korean war with the Vietnam war and stated there are North and South Vietnams. Geography lesson: North and South Vietnam do not exist...just...Vietnam […] ”
— Posted by Katie Pavlich, July 16, 2010 (townhall.com)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Congresswoman: 'We Have Two Vietnams' (drudge.com)

Post 1,354 North/South Vietnam, Korea, Carolina, Dakota, ...

Not Too Shabby

Related Link » The Policy Litmus Test

TheBigHenry writes like
Ian Fleming

I Write Like by Mémoires, Mac journal software. Analyze your writing!

AKA  Bond ... James Bond

Post #1,353 Not Too Shabby

Cold Calculation and Hot Lead

Related Link » What does being pro-Israel mean?
“There's something I would add for my own part […] if you don't level criticism when criticism is due, then you're less well-placed to defend, persuasively and credibly, whatever it is you are defending when it needs to be defended.”
— Norman Geras, July 15, 2010 (normblog)

Related Link » Hillel the Elder
“If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And when I am for myself, what am 'I'? And if not now, when?”
— From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Related Link » Einstein's razor
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”
— From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Related Link » Bill Clinton Quotes
“It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.”
— Bill Clinton, during his 1998 grand jury testimony on the Monica Lewinsky affair

Though I venture an opinion (not without trepidation) in such illustrious company as referenced above, I do so with some confidence in the virtue of my position and in my own credentials as a Holocaust survivor (due to my parents' survival instincts and our great good fortune). In my opinion, Norm's prescription for a "persuasive and credible defense" depends very much on what, and in what circumstances, you are defending, as well as your available means for defense and your ultimate objective. I think that Norm is correct in stating the proper approach if one is engaged in a philosophical debate from the comfort of one's study.

But in the real world, in which Israel's existence is rendered nasty, brutish, and potentially short by terrorist regimes, the rules of engagement must be modified. Note, I do not assert that anything goes. No, even in life-or-death struggles, civilized people must retain at least a modicum of civilized behavior. But the rules of formal debate no longer apply, because they are woefully inadequate to the task. Israel and its supporters are not engaged in polite-society debate, one that abides by polite-society rules.

Israel and its supporters, especially those Jews who have not forgotten the utter futility of persuasive and credible debate with murderous Jew-hatred, understand that they are engaged in a war of survival against overwhelming numbers of despicable fanatics. Not even a Maimonides could make a dent in those numb skulls. The only means of defense that has a chance to succeed is cold calculation and hot lead.

I believe that the misapplication of polite debate to what is clearly a war of survival is not only irrelevant but, indeed, detrimental to the objective of Jewish survival. Arguments supporting Israel have been and will be ignored/ridiculed/denied. Arguments criticizing Israel will be eagerly pounced upon and fed into the Jew-hatred machinery that is well-ensconced in the world at large.

Post #1,352 Cold Calculation and Hot Lead

The Company You Keep

The Company You Keep

Related Link » Louis Farrakhan sends letter [demanding reparations from] Jews
“Last month, Louis Farrakhan, the “National Representative of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad and the Nation of Islam,” sent a three-page letter to the leaders of 16 major Jewish organizations demanding reparations for alleged crimes Jews have perpetrated against African Americans. […] 'This is an ugly and despicable document', Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America and one of the recipients of Farrakhan’s letter, told The Daily Caller. 'The most frightening aspect of the letter was the threat of ruin and destruction if we do not comply with his demands, which is why we, at the ZOA, have sent a letter to President Obama urging him to speak out against it … The President has spoken about healing divisions between Jews and the Black community, this is a great opportunity for him to do so".”
— By Caroline May - The Daily Caller | Published: 07/16/2010

Don't hold your breath, Mr. Klein. The Obama will have no qualms dissembling His "undying support" of the Jewish people's right to exist, as soon as he needs something (usually money and votes) from them; but not a moment sooner. He is too wily to to be up front about His contempt towards anyone who could possibly be a useful idiot for Him.

And, to borrow one of The Obama's favorite dissemblances, make no mistake about it, He has nothing but contempt for his Jewish useful idiots. For, truth be told, Jewish supporters of The Obama are contemptible.

---

UPDATE:

Related Link » 46% say Obama is pro-Palestinian
10% of Israelis think president is pro-Israel
“US President Barack Obama’s efforts to reach out to the people of Israel last week – when he hosted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for a positive meeting at the White House and gave his first interview as president to an Israeli television station – were not very successful, according to a Smith Research poll for The Jerusalem Post.”
— By GIL HOFFMAN, 07/16/2010 (JP)

Related Link » Israelis Aren’t Dumb
“If only American Jews could be as hard-headed and realistic. It’s not a smile or a handshake that makes for a pro-Israel president — it is what he does that matters. So far, nothing much has changed in Obama’s approach to the Middle East.”
— JENNIFER RUBIN - 07.16.2010 (Commentary)

If only American Jews could be as rational and realistic. The Obama is not your friend. His friends are the likes of Jeremiah Wright. And spare me the smokescreen of Rahm "It up your ass" Emanuel. The latter is a self-loathing Jew, who serves The Obama as an oberkapo, and who will likely end up under a bus when his usefulness expires.

Post #1,351 The Company You Keep