Obama to Israel: DROP DEAD

Obama's speech at the State Department about Middle East policy exposed the fact that he is either naive or evil.

His statement that Israel was expected to go back to the 1967 borders, that the US would support Israel's right to exist, and a viable Palestinian state would be established is nothing more than a sugar coated cyanide pill for Israel.

First of all, the 1967 borders are not defensible, so forcing Israel to go back to those borders creates a situation that, de facto, denies Israel the right to exist. Requiring that Palestinians get a land connection between Gaza and the West Bank would cut right through Israel and deny Israel land that is contiguous which is an obvious threat to Israeli security.

More importantly, Gaza was part of Egypt and the West Bank was part of Jordan. There never was an independent Palestinian state. The Palestinians are actually citizens of Egypt or Jordan and should be repatriated to Egypt or Jordan if they have an issue living under Israeli rule.

Telling Israel to give up East Jerusalem which has been annexed and is now part of the capital of Israel, is patently offensive and disrespectful to Israel and anyone who is not a Moslem. Under Moslem control, sites holy to all religions were allowed access only to Moslems. It was rarely granted to others only if special arrangements and permission were provided. Israel allows access to people of all faiths who behave in a peaceful manner.

It is also disgusting that Obama is pushing Israel into concessions before Hamas has stopped saying its goal is the destruction of Israel. There is no basis for a permanent peace agreement with someone who lives for your destruction.

Lest anyone think that this is a decision about whether to put America or Israel first, it must be remembered that Palestinians cheered about American deaths on 9/11 and Hamas has forcefully condemned America's assassination of Bin Laden. The Palestinians are not America's allies; they are America's implacable enemies. Israel is America's ally in the region. An American tilt toward the Palestinians and against Israel works against American interests by pandering to and strengthening our enemies and hurting the safety and morale of our friends.

If Obama has his demands met, it would quickly result in the slaughter of the Jews of Israel at the hands of Arabs on a scale comparable to the Holocaust. For Jews on the political left, is ObamaCare and bigger government really worth that?

Any Jew who can continue to support Obama cannot be taken seriously as a supporter of Israel or a defender of Jews. Anyone who denies that cannot be taken seriously as a person with the capacity to think seriously about how the world works.

Obama Outdoes Carter When It Comes to Abandoning Moderate Moslems

Carter helped kick the Shah of Iran's legs out from under him when Islamic militants challenged him and ultimately took over Iran.

Obama stood by helplessly when this was done in Tunisia and is kicking Mubarek's legs from under him in Egypt.

Of course, Obama also stood by helplessly when the people of Iran wanted to overthrow their oppressive regime and were getting gunned down in the streets. Of course, for Mubarek to do the same in Egypt to preserve a relatively pro-American government is unthinkable for the Obama Administration.

Due to either sheer incompetence or perhaps a desire to see American power and influence in the world reduced, the Obama Adminisistration is allowing Islamic Extremists to foment and capture revolutions that they will use to establish governments that are virulently anti-American, anti-Western, and, consequently, anti-Israel.  Allowing dominoes such as Tunisia and Egypt to fall will put Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and other Arab nations at risk.

I believe that a lack of resolve on the part of the United States and Israel to wipe out Islamic militiants in Lebanon and Gaza emboldened Islamic militants supported by Iran to seek additional targets.

The United States under Obama has essentially surrendered the Middle East to Islamic militants. Iraq is secure for now with US troops there, but, if they leave, neighboring Iran will try to start a revolution there. The war in Afganistan is now out of control and cannot be won without wiping out bases in Pakistan which Obama is only willing to do in a half hearted way. Tunisia has fallen and Egypt is falling. Jordan is under serious threat. The government of Saudi Arabia is now fearful of being overthrown by Moslems even more militantly Islamic than they are.

We need to remember that encouraging democracy for people who have a visceral hatred of us is not necessarily a good thing. What we really should be promoting is freedom, property rights, and a legal and moral infrastructure to support them. Freedom is more important than Democracy. After all, you can elect a despotic government into power, but it then becomes a problem to get rid of it (as with the Communists wherever they took power or Islamic militants like in Iran). If the population really hates us, then why would we want them to have a government actively opposing us just so we can say they are democratic? In a generation, with continued US influence and military protection, Iraq might become a functioning free democracy, but to expect Tunisia or Egypt to instantly transform to free democracies through revolutions is unrealistic just as was the case with Iran.

The Obama Administration has to be more realistic about the Middle East and more aggressive against our enemies. Otherwise, Israel's existence will be undermined and the US will face greater economic and military threats that will soon hit closer to home.

Israeli Think Tank for Economic Freedom

Here is a link to a web site for an Israeli think tank that promotes free market economics. The The Israel Center for Social & Economic Progress has been around since 1984, but I just heard about through an email sent to me by Tom Buggeln, a conservative political activist.

Something also very useful on their web site is their list of links to other free market web sites - most based in the United States.

This think tank has been providing the intellectual foundations for economic reform in Israel to move its economy away from the socialism of the Labor Party toward a freer economy under Likud.

Analysis of Obama's Attitudes toward Islam

Here is an interesting analysis of President Obama's sympathy for Islam compared to previous presidents. It does not sufficiently consider that this is, in many ways, a continuation of President Bush's policy, but is interesting and useful anyway.

Election Endorsements

Some endorsements by the Phoenix Jewish News should be enough to make any responsible citizen gag.

First of all, any Jew who cares about Israel should not vote for a Democrat for US Congress. Regardless of what any Democrat candidate says, he will be under great pressure to support a Democrat president who has shown himself to be hostile to Israel and more friendly to the Arabs. All of the Republican Congressional candidates are at least as supportive of Israel as the Democrats and will not be burdened by being expected to support a president unfriendly to Israel.

On domestic issues, the country needs Republicans in Congress to help roll back the socialist agenda of the Democrats. Losses of freedom that go along with socialism are not good for honest people. Jews, who tend to be high achievers, are among those most hurt by socialism and government control. In fact, the poverty that socialism causes hurts even the poor people it is supposed to benefit because there is no way to finance welfare programs when people are not given the freedom and incentives to produce goods and services as efficiently as possible.

In statewide races, Republicans like Tom Horne for Attorney General, Doug Ducey for Treasurer, and John Huppenthal for Superintendent of Public Instruction are excellent candidates who will do a far better job than their Democrat opponents.

Tom Horne has more legal experience than his Democrat opponent and is willing to enforce state laws and represent the state of Arizona in good faith. His opponent has indicated she will pick and choose which laws to enforce.

Doug Ducey's opponent has said that he will invest state money in Arizona instead of on Wall Street. Investing in "Wall Street," with access to world financial markets, is how the state can get the best possible return on its investments. Investing in Arizona will translate into funding dubious projects for people with dubious political connections and will result in poor returns or even losses for Arizona's treasury. Doug Ducey will be a responsible investor on behalf of taxpayers.

John Huppenthal has been an advocate for school choice and school reform. Does anyone think that less choices for parents and students will improve education? Does anyone think that schools don't need to be reformed? Huppenthal's Democrat opponent is part of the education establishment who is more interested in keeping the bureaucracy funded and growing than in educating students. Huppenthal is rightly more concerned about educating students than making sure state education dollars go to particular education providers (like public schools).

Republicans stand for responsible government, lower taxes, accountability to citizens and taxpayers, and, usually, attempts to keep government spending under control (at least more than Democrats - there is clearly room for improvement by Republicans, but  they are almost never as bad as Democrats on government spending).These policies and practices are better for everyone and will lead to a more prosperous, freer, and happier society. Allowing the private sector to create good  jobs is always better for people than creating more welfare programs.

Obama Reportedly will Support UN Investigation of Blockade Incident

The Weekly Standard reports that the Obama administration will be supporting a UN resolution to investigate the incident when Gaza blockade runners fought against the Israeli Navy.

This is outrageous! Why is there no UN investigation of violence by Hamas? Why is Turkey not being investigated for helping to set up this confrontation? Did Israel demand an international investigation of the Abu Graib prison scandal or any other scandals connected with the war in Iraq, or did Israel feel it could accept the findings of an investigation by a fellow free country, the United States, as legitimate without international oversight being needed?

This resolution is an attack on both the integrity and legitimacy of Israel. Those who support this resolution are attacking Israel. They may say they are supporting a "fair" process, but that is just a cover for their attack on the legitimacy of Israel and a statement that Israel cannot be expected to act fairly.

Parody Musical Video about Blockade Runners

This video uses dark humor to make a strong point about the Hamas supporters trying to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza.