About Me

Name:J-GOP
Email: moreinfo@j-gop.org Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

A Video That Every Jewish-American Must See

FITNA is a short (less than 17 min) film showcasing the threat Radical Islam poses to the world.  Banned from the net recently because of Muslim threats of violence, it is "must viewing" despite some graphic segments.  This is the way it's been in Europe, and Muslims are now making a concerted effort this year to insinuate themselves into US politics. The movie ends with a call for Europe to defeat Islamic ideology, just as it defeated the threats of Nazism and Communism in the past.
 
After his own site - FitnaTheMovie.com  - was closed down by Network Solutions, producer Geert Wilders published Fitna on the video website Liveleak on Thursday evening, March 27, 2008. By March 29, Liveleak had removed Fitna from the site due to threats from Muslims. The movie was replaced by an announcement from Liveleak explaining their decision:

"Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, Liveleak.com has been left with no other choice but to remove Fitna from our servers. "This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else. We would like to thank the thousands of people, from all backgrounds and religions, who gave us their support. They realised LiveLeak.com is a vehicle for many opinions and not just for the support of one."

"Perhaps there is still hope that this situation may produce a discussion that could benefit and educate all of us as to how we can accept one anothers culture.

"We stood for what we believe in, the ability to be heard, but in the end the price was too high."

This is a video that every American, and most certainly every Jew should see. Pass it along to your friends. Here's a link to the video:
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

RJC calls on General McPeak to Resign

The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) today called on Sen. Barack Obama to remove Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak as his military advisor and national campaign co-chairman.

"By choosing to have a military advisor and national campaign co-chairman like General McPeak, serious questions and doubts are once again being raised about Senator Obama's positions and judgment on Middle East issues," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks.

In a 2003 interview with the Oregonian, Gen. McPeak resorted to old stereotypes and unfortunate language by blaming the lack of progress with the Israeli-Palestinian peace process on the undue political influence of American Jewry.  The problem, said McPeak is "New York City. Miami. We have a large vote -- vote, here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it."

"Rather than putting the blame where it belongs -- on the Palestinian leadership and their continued reliance on terror, General McPeak finds it more convenient to blame American Jewry and their perceived influence," said Brooks.  "This is the same dangerous and disturbing canard being promoted by the likes of Jimmy Carter and authors Mearsheimer and Walt in their book, The Israel Lobby."

In addition, Gen. McPeak has a long history of criticizing Israel for not returning to the 1967 borders or returning the Golan Heights to Syria, as he wrote in Foreign Affairs in April 1976.  

"Senator Obama continues to surround himself with advisors holding troubling and disturbing anti-Israel bias.  General McPeak's views are alarming.  We call on Senator Obama to immediately remove General McPeak from his campaign leadership role and as a key advisor," said Brooks.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

US ambassador: Jews will just have to leave Jerusalem

US Ambassador to Israel Richard Jones suggested during a tour of overcrowded Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem on Monday that many Jews will just have to move out of the capital rather than expand into parts of the city claimed by the Palestinians.

Jones told said in an interview with The Jerusalem Post that Washington is growing increasingly displeased with Jewish housing projects on the eastern side of Jerusalem, which are certain to hinder efforts to conclude a peace deal along the lines of US President George W. Bush's vision for the region.

The American envoy said he is well aware of the lack of Jewish housing in Jerusalem, but in a remark betraying a lack of understanding regarding Jewish historical and spiritual connection to the city Jones concluded that "sometimes people do have to move to a different location. They cannot always stay close to their families."

He insisted that more important than the Jews' restoration to their biblical capital and heartland is Israel's implementation of commitments made as part of the US-driven Road Map peace process, even if unreciprocated by the Palestinians.

Jones ended the interview by all but justifying the Palestinian Authority's ongoing failure to meet its primary obligations to curb anti-Israel violence and incitement by stating that "it is not easy for either side to move ahead when they see the provocative behavior of the other side."

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Dishonest and Corrupt Liberal Media

In the face of the drubbing that Barack Obama took after his association with the now exposed Black Separatist, Anti-White, Anti-American Reverand Jeremiah Wright, in an act of vengence the liberal media now has the long knives out for John McCain.
 
After all, if the New York Times attempt to smear the candidate didn't work, any verbal misstep, no matter how slight, will now incur the full rath of this most-biased and slanted media onto the candidacy of John McCain.
 
His recent comment during his visit to Israel, when he misspoke and said that "Iran was supporting Al-Qaeda in Iraq", was quickly corrected by his freind Senator Joseph Lieberman. McCain then said, "I mean insurgents in Iraq".
 
Ah Hah! Let the gottcha games begin. The liberal media jumped all over the mistake, asserting that this was evidence that John McCain:
 
A. didn't know anything about foreign policy
B. was evident that he was too old to serve as President
C. was on this trip purely as an election gimmick
 
It's evident to most of us that still practice coherent, rational thought that today's mainstream news reporters, writers, and producers form as Bill O'Reilly points out: "A corrupt and dishonest media". Their attempts at digging up the dirt to find anyway to discredit john McCain, deflect the negative press on the Obama/Wright controversy, and provide any help in putting a Democrat in the White House demonstrates how blatant the bias is in today's liberal mainstream media.
 
No wonder that the New York Times is financially cratering, the Los Angeles Times was sold, and that Newday is reportedly considering selling to NewsCorp (parent of The Wall Street Journal and Fox News).
 
Like the Jim Jones Kool-Aid drinkers at Ghana, liberals will cling to their biased ideology without regard to its impact on their bottom line until the bitter end.

Someone please tell Pinch Sulzberger to turn off the lights on his way out.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Meeting of the (ahem) Minds

According to an article by Dana Milbank of The Washington Post, entitled, "The Audacity of Chutzpah", a group of Jewish leaders meet at the Washington Hilton the week for the United Jewish Communities, to participate in a debate surrounding issues on Israel and where each presidential candiate stands on the issue.
 
Representing John McCain was former secretary of state Lawrence Eagleburger. Representing Hillary Clinton was former White House official Ann Lewis. And finally, representing Barack Obama: was a high-level (TBA)."

TBA? Obama's Jewish problem must be getting worse.

This TBA was finally identified as Princeton professor Dan Kurtzer, a former ambassador to Israel. When it was his turn to address the debate, he went quickly on defense, and said:

"There's a question in the community that's unfortunately been stimulated and stirred about and played with in e-mails and innuendos and newspaper articles," he said, "that suggests that there's something wrong with Senator Obama's views about Jews, about Israel." He then suggested that Jews could relate to Obama's persecution. "There are nagging doubts, there are e-mails, there are innuendos: These are the kinds of things which we as a community have suffered over the years at the hands of anti-Semites."
 
As Milbank points out, it took a bit of chutzpah to play the anti-Semite for Obama -- but these are tense times for the senator from Audacity.
 
Obama is in trouble because his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was caught on tape preaching such gospel as "God damn America" and accusing Israel of "state terrorism against the Palestinians."
 
Kurtzer, granted his turn to speak, attempted to argue that "on issues relating to Israel, frankly, there aren't any differences among the three candidates." Eagleburger looked at him incredulously; the audience laughed.

Kurtzer attempted to defuse the Wright controversy. "For many of you who belong to synagogues and Jewish community centers, as I have all my life, we would not want to be judged by the words of rabbis who sometimes say ridiculous things," he reasoned.

The others used their time to raise doubts about Obama's fealty to Israel. "Senator Obama has said that he commits in his first year as president to meeting with President Ahmadinejad of Iran," Lewis said. McCain, Eagleburger added, "will not talk with the Syrians, will not talk with the Iranians, will not talk with Hamas and Hezbollah. . . . He isn't going to push the Israelis."

Next question to Kurtzer: Obama's assertion that he needn't have a "Likud view" -- that of Israel's right-wing party -- to be pro-Israel. Kurtzer explained that Obama wanted to see a "plurality of views." There was silence in the room.

To that, Lewis retorted: "The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel. It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties." The audience members applauded.

Eagleburger piled on. "There's a distinction between those you do talk to," he said, "and those who declare themselves as intent on the destruction of the state of Israel. And if that's their policy, I think we ought not talk to them." More applause.
 
After this meeting, Kurtzer may think twice before being Obama's TBA again at a debate on U.S.- Israeli relations.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain Looking Presidential in Israel

US Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Wednesday showed vigorous support for Israel, where he made a highly symbolic visit to a town hit by near-daily rocket fire from Gaza.
  
"No nation in the world can be attacked incessantly and have its population killed and intimidated without responding," McCain said in the southern town of Sderot, where he visited a house hit by a rocket fired by Islamists in the Gaza Strip, just a few kilometres (miles) away.
  
The Arizona senator was in Israel on a fact-finding mission which has also taken him to Iraq and Jordan and has been widely seen as a bid to polish his credentials as a statesman.
  
"Seeing it first-hand, the situation here is one that is very compelling,"  McCain told reporters in Sderot after touring the town with Defence Minister Ehud Barak.
  
"Nine hundred rocket attacks in the last three months; this puts an enormous strain on everyone here, especially the children."
 
Palestinian militants have fired thousands of rockets and mortars shells at southern Israel in the past years, killing 12 people and injuring scores more.
  
On February 27, Israel launched a five-day blitz on Gaza in response to attacks from the Palestinian enclave, where Hamas routed the forces of moderate Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas in June.
  
McCain said the situation underlined the urgency of moving forward the peace process that was revived at a US-hosted conference in November but has made little progress since.
  
Earlier in the day, the senator and his colleagues Joe Lieberman (Democrat) and Lindsey Graham (Republican) were taken on a helicopter tour by Barak, who briefed them on security issues.
  
McCain warned in an interview with the Jerusalem Post that Hamas and the Lebanese Hezbollah militia threatened not only the Jewish state but also US and Western interests.
  
"If Hamas-Hezbollah succeed here, they are going to succeed everywhere. They are dedicated to the extinction of everything that the US, Israel and the West believe and stand for," the Republican candidate added.
  
He also called Iran "a threat for the region", expressing certainty Tehran was "pursuing nuclear weapons".
  
McCain held talks with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Wednesday, before travelling to Sderot.
  
Asked why he did not meet with US-backed president Abbas, the senator pointed out the two had "a good conversation" over the telephone on Monday. "I've had meetings with him in the past and I will have meetings with him in the future. I think he is sincere, I think the Palestinian people desire peace and I believe they deserve peace," McCain said of the Palestinian leader.
  
McCain has insisted the trip was not political, though he clearly stood to gain from being seen on the world stage at a time when Democratic presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton continued to brawl at home.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

No Liberal Bias, eh!

Yesterday, my newspaper carrier accidently delivered a copy of the New York Slimes, ah, I mean Times to my doorstep, instead of my usual edition of The Wall Street Journal.
 
With the controversy surrounding Barack Obama's paster, Reverand Jeremiah Wright being aired on Fox News and Talk Radio on a 24 x 7 basis, I was curious to see how the Times spun the story in their ususal uber-Liberal way. I expected at least to see a postage sized article on page A10,000.
 
Nope. Not even a single sentence. It was as if the story didn't happen or even exist. No wonder Bill O'Reilly indicated on The O'Reilly Factor that approximately 36% of people polled didn't know about the story.
 
This story is going to be a test case for the old media versus the new media, and who will ultimately win. Can a collective liberal print and broadcast media effectively squash a hot news story solely becuase they will it? Or instead will new media sources such as Talk Radio, Cable News, and bloggers successfully bring down the likely candidate for the Democratic Party.
 
Stay tuned boys and girls for our next episode, of "Obama's Fall From Grace".
 
(And the liberals said that he couldn't be stopped!)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why the "Wrighted" Obama Boat Will Ultimately Sink

One must admit that watching the liberal media's limited coverage of the many anti-American, anti-War, and Anti-White rantings of Reverand Jeremiah Wright, Barrack Obama's pastor of 20 years, is an interesting exercise in blatant media bias. If this story had been about John McCain attending a white separate church in Idaho, the story would have been carried on the front page of the New York Times (and correspondingly every mainstream news program) from now until the November general election.
 
As Charles Krauthammer put it, this story will be a growing "cancer" on the Obama campaign, growing each day until it consumes the candidate. I'm sure Hillary is privately and gleefully gloating in wanton anticipation of that day.
 
The reason for Obama's ultimate demise has less to do with his assocation with Reverand Wright than is does about his judgement. For any logical person that has a sincere love and appreciation for this country, such inflammatory language spoken during a sermon would cause such a person to get up, walk out, and never come back. To stay not only a member, but a close friend and active participant in this church must be viewed as one of poor judgement and full-fledged complicity.
 
Now it seems that Obama wants us to believe that: 1) this is the first time in 20 years he heard such language from his pastor, and 2) that his schedule was such that he never made it to a single Sunday service where this kind of vitriol was heard over the course of his 20 year membership.
 
Some of us may have been born at night, but not last night.
 
Instead, what will happen will be similar to the fate of Dan Rather when he ran the story about George Bush's Air National Guard Service. After that episode conservative bloggers were incented to prove Rather dead wrong. We all know what happened as a result of those efforts. Rather is now an obscure figure on an equally obsure cable network owned by a fellow-lefty, Mark Cuban.
 
Now, a number of conservative bloggers are probably screening every DVD that this church sells, to see if they can spot a single frame of Obama standing and clapping to one of the Reverand's rants. It's just a question of time before that happens, and when it does, Obama's campaign will be over, (to put it in Spitzer-like terminology)....in a New York Minute!
 
I guess Hillary won't have to strong-arm those Democrat Super Deligates with her investigative dirt after all!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

New York Chutspa

The announcement of the sexual foibles of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer provides a great example of chutspa in action. He was the classic bully who relished in his ability to go after big business, Republicans, scoundrels, cheats, and his political opponents with a high and mighty moral attitude. He believed he was above everyone else, and the rules didn't apply to him.

The fact that he went after prostitution rings with such enthusiasm and was caught with a prostitute provides a real-life example of the fulillment of the saying: "The mill of the gods grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly fine". His years of lacerating people lives has finally come back to bite him in the behind. This is a rare glimpse of justice in action that we don't get a chance to see very often.
 
The interesting part of this episode is watching the liberal media call this entire episode "a tragedy". Funny but when it comes to a Democrat embroiled in a sexual scandal, the event is usually described as "a personal affair", "a lapse of judgement", "a family matter", or "a tragedy" and that "they should be given another chance to redeem themselves". On the other hand when a Republican is embroiled in a scandal the adjectives that are used are much harsher and not so forgiving. In these instances "the bum" should "be fired immediately", or harsh adjectives like "scoundrel", "pervert", "adulterer", or "a depraved, villainous or base miscreant" are frequently used. These terms were used when Republicans such as David Vitter, Larry Craig, Newt Gingrich, or Bill Livingston found themselves in similar compromising situations.
 
Unfortunately, when Spitzer finally resigns (if he does) the story will most likely disappear from view fairly quickly. After all, liberals want to wash the tarnish of a Democratic scandal off the front page as fast as they can. Unlike Republicans, who are typically the brunt of jokes and front page newsworthiness for six months after the fact, Eliot Spitzer will be a distant memory within the month.
 
That's too bad. For once, Republicans would like to see a prominent Democrat that's in trouble twist in the wind for just a little bit longer.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Jewish Repubicans Should Thank William F. Buckley

Jewish Republicans can thank William F. Buckley for making the Republican Party a "Big Tent". Let us all remember this great American for his contribution to making the party a better place for Jewish and other minority voters. Excerpts of this blog post come from the article in Jewish World Review, called "Bill Buckley and the Jews" by Jonathan Tobin:
 
Though much has changed in the 53 years since the debut of The National Review, most Jews are still, at the very least, reliable supporters of the Democrats, if not hard-core liberals. Most likely most have not noted the passing of its founder, William F. Buckley without emotion.

But aside from the focus on Buckley and his influence in the convserative movement, and his affiliation with Reagan-style Republicanism, there is one other aspect of his amazing career that deserves mention. It is the fact that as much as any other person, Bill Buckley cleared the way not only for a conservative movement where Jews would be welcomed, but that it was his leadership that set the stage for an American politics in which anti-Semitism was confined to the fever swamps of the far right and far left.

Buckley specifically chose to rid its ranks of people who espoused the sort of anti-Semitism that once was inescapable on the American right. As National Review took flight in the late 1950s, anti-Semitic writers found themselves on the outside looking in. So, too, did apologists for the extremist John Birch Society. Buckley made his journal, and by extension, the movement for which it served as an unofficial bible, off-limits to the anti-Semitism that was commonplace in the world in which he grew up.

Though he didn't always agree with all of its policies, Buckley was also a consistent supporter of Israel. A staunch anti-Communist, he was also deeply supportive of the movement to free Soviet Jewry at a time when many in this country (including some Jews) were loath to speak out because it might be interpreted as opposition to a policy of detente with Moscow.

Long after he chased the Birchers and its supporters out of NR, Buckley found himself forced to confront the issue again. When longtime colleagues Pat Buchanan and Joseph Sobran used their bully pulpits on the right to bash Israel and stigmatize Jews for their support for the state, it was again Buckley who took on the haters.Buckley repudiated Sobran's writing, which he labeled anti-Semitic, and pushed him off the magazine's masthead.

As the issue continued to percolate in the aftermath of the Persian Gulf war in December 1991, he devoted an entire issue of the magazine to an essay titled "In Search of Anti-Semitism" (which was also the title of the book he later published on the same subject), in which he took on Buchanan, who was preparing an insurgent run for the White House against the first President Bush.

His conclusion was damning: "I find it impossible to defend Pat Buchanan against the charge that what he did and said during the period under examination amounted to anti-Semitism, whatever it was that drove him to say and do it," Buckley wrote. Though Buchanan would continue to snipe away on television, it was largely Buckley's doing that he and others like him would do so from outside a perch in one of our two major parties rather than inside it.

By remaking the conservative movement in his own image, in which the emphasis was on anti-communism and a libertarian skepticism of government power, he ensured that it, and the Republican Party, which it came to dominate, would be a place where Jew-haters were unwelcome. In terms of practical politics, Buckley's rout of the anti-Semites made it possible for the sort of bipartisan consensus in favor of support for Israel that we now take for granted. He replaced the Buchanan-like world of American conservatism that existed before National Review with something that was not only more successful, but purged of Jew-hatred.

His was a political faith that most Jews never embraced, but as we survey a political spectrum in which our enemies are confined to the margins, we should all remember the unique achievements of this American original. May his memory be for a blessing for all who love liberty.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Yeshiva Terrorist Opens New Chapter for Israel

If current reports are accurate, the terrorist that attacked the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva may have been a Palestinian citizen living in Israeli-controlled East Jerusalem. If proved true, this incident opens up an entirely new chapter for Israeli citizens and the country's war with Palestinian terrorists.
 
According to the Israeli blog, Yoni the Blogger:

"Residents of Jabel Mukaber neighborhood say the shooter who killed eight students at Jerusalem seminary Thursday was arrested by Israel four months ago, released two months later; neighbors claim he worked as driver at seminary. In the neighborhood in east Jerusalem, Palestinian residents hold Israeli ID cards that give them freedom of movement in Israel."

In additon, Yoni points out that this was a symbolic attack to Israelis making it akin to a non-Muslim going to Mecca and opening fire on Muslim worshipers at its most holy of sites:

"If you don't understand the ramifications of this targeted attack, let me give you some background Mercaz Harav Yeshiva is considered the leading national-religious yeshiva in Israel, with hundreds of elite students. Among its thousands of graduates are leading public figures including senior rabbis and IDF officers. It was founded in 1924 by mandatory Palestine's first chief rabbi, Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Hacohen Kook. Its longtime head, Rabbi Avraham Shapira, died in September 2007."
 
The incident, which was the worst terrorist incident since a February 2004 bus bombing, could signal an expansion of the region's perpetual cycle of violence and retaliation. In addition, if it is proved that this terrorist had a blue Israeli ID tag, then this incident opens up a entirely new chapter for Israel, placing every Palestinian citizen living in Israel at additional scruitiny for the potential of terrorism.
 
The question now for Israelis is what action will Prime Minister Olmert take in the face of this incident to prevent it from happening again? If he does nothing, Israelis may not sit idly by. According to Yoni:
 
"If Olmert does not get his act together and respond like a real Prime Minister to the daily rocket attacks and today's murderes at Mercaz Harav Yeshiva, bad things will happen."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Beware the Sweet Siren Song of Obama

We are witnessing a political phenomenon with Barack Obama of rare magnitude. His speeches have inspired millions and yet most of his followers have no idea of what he stands for except platitudes of "Change" or that he says he will be a “Uniter”.

The power of speech from a charismatic person truly can be a powerful thing. Certainly Billy Graham had charisma and both his manner of speech and particularly the content changed millions. On the extreme other hand, the charisma of Adolph Hitler inspired millions and the results were catastrophic. Barack Obama certainly is no Hitler or a Billy Graham, but for many Americans out there feeling just like a surfer who might be ecstatic and euphoric while riding a tidal wave, the real story is what happens when it hits shore.

Here are just some of the statements and votes that define Barack Obama:

He voted against banning partial birth abortion.

He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions.

He supports affirmative action in Colleges and Government.

In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.

He says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum wage affair.

He admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in college.

He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.

He opposed the Patriot Act.

The first bill he signed that was passed was for campaign finance reform.

He voted No on prohibiting law suits against gun manufacturers.

He supports universal health-care.

He voted yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.

He supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

He supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.

he voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.

He voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.

he wants to make the minimum wage a "living wage".

He voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.

He opposed to any efforts to Privatize Social Security and instead supports increasing the amount of tax paid.

He voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax.

He voted No on repealing the "Death" Tax.

He wants to raise the Capital Gains Tax.

Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded.

He is ranked as the most liberal Senator in the Senate today and that takes some doing.

If you are like most Americans that recognize after examining what he stands for is not truly in line with his record, it would be prudent to get off the wave or better yet, never get on, before it comes on shore and undermines the very foundations of this great Country. At this point, whomever your first choice was for the Republican nominee, your vote for John McCain should be for keeping a conservative Supreme Court. If Barack Obama wins, Republicans will lose the Supreme Court for the next 30 years.
 
If that happens, one can only envision the kind of Supreme Court and correspondingly secular-progressive (read Socialist) country that Barack Obama has in mind for us all.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mahmoud Abbas No Different From Yassir Arafat

It seems as if the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas continues to follow the playbook of his mentor of forty years, Yassir Arafat--talk peace in English and 'armed resistance' (synonymous with terror) in Arabic. Only this time, he threw in some bragging about how the PLO trained Hizballah in its leadership of all the other 'resistance' groups. This confirms what IRIS has been saying for years--that the Global Jihad is an allied force:

According to
JBlog Central, PA President Mahmoud Abbas on Thursday said that he does not rule out returning to the path of armed "resistance" against Israel and took pride in the fact that he had been the first to fire on Israel and that his organization had trained Hizbullah.

In an interview with the Jordanian daily al-Dustur, Abbas said that he was opposed to an armed struggle against Israel - for the time being.

"At this present juncture, I am opposed to armed struggle because we cannot succeed in it, but maybe in the future things will be different," he said.

The PA president also expressed pride both in himself and in his organization, Fatah, for trailblazing the path of resistance.

"I had the honor of firing the first shot in 1965 and of being the one who taught resistance to many in the region and around the world; what it's like; when it is effective and when it isn't effective; its uses, and what serious, authentic and influential resistance is," Abbas said.

"It is common knowledge when and how resistance is detrimental and when it is well timed," he added. "We (Fatah) had the honor of leading the resistance and we taught resistance to everyone, including Hizbullah, who trained in our military camps."
 
Every Jew should listen, hear, and take to heart this latest of Abu Mazen's truth-telling!  The sooner the IDF moves against the PA to shut down this terror apparatus in the heartland, arresting Abu Mazen in the process, the sooner all Jews will begin to know some real peace.  A hard struggle is in the offing, and so it must begin with every advantage Israel can muster.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Pro-Palestinian Positions a Warning to Jewish Voters

Jewish voters need to take note of two separate stories that are circulating the Internet that demonstrate Senator Barack Obama would be a Pro-Palestinian President should he ascend to the office. Senator Obama's views on Israel and the Middle East should certainly raise serious doubts and questions in Jewish voter's minds about the true leanings of Senator Obama on these important issues.
First, there was presidential candidate Ralph Nader's appearance on the NBC news program "Meet the Press". During his interview, Nader said that Sen. Obama had reversed his positions on Israel. Nader said Sen. Obama's "better instincts and his knowledge have been censored by himself" and that Sen. Obama was "pro-Palestinian when he was in Illinois before he ran for the state Senate" and "during the state Senate."

Sen. Obama has caught criticism for pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel statements and sentiments before. In March 2007, Sen. Obama was criticized for saying that "Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinians." Obama has also been criticized for stocking his campaign with several controversial advisors including Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Malley, Samantha Power and Susan Rice all who have taken anti-Israeli stances in the past.
 
Then there's an article that appeared in today's edition of The Jewish Press indicating Obama served as a paid director on the board of a nonprofit organization that granted funding to a controversial Arab group that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe." The article goes on to indicate that Obama has also reportedly spoken at fundraisers for Palestinians living in what the United Nations terms refugee camps.
 
In 2001, the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit that describes itself as a group helping the disadvantaged, provided a $40,000 grant to the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN. The Fund provided a second grant to AAAN for $35,000 in 2002. Obama was a director of the Woods Fund board from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund’s website. According to tax filings, Obama received compensation of $6,000 per year for his service in 1999 and 2000. The $40,000 grant from the Woods Fund to AAAN constituted about a fifth of the group’sreported grants for 2001, also according to tax filings. The $35,000 Woods Fund grant in 2002 made up about one-fifth of AAAN’s reported grants for that year as well.

Concerning Obama’s role in funding AAAN, the co-founder of the Arab group, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, who is a harsh critic of Israel and reportedly worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization, claimed he "never heard of the Woods Fund until it popped up on a bunch of blogs a few months ago." He terminated the interview with The Jewish Press when pressed further about his links with Obama.
 
So despite all the verbal distancing that Obama has made recently about his affiliation with the anti-semitic Rev. Farrakan, "facts are damned things" as the old saying goes. These facts should give prospective Democratic Jewish voters a great deal of pause come November.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Message to Obama: Don't Count on that Jewish Vote Just Yet

According to an article from Adam Smith in the St. Petersburg Times, Democrats are fretting over the apparent divisions within their party, and the rift is clearly apparent with Liberal Jews. 

"In the 66-some-odd years I've been doing this, this is the saddest election I've ever worked in,' said Ginger Grossman, a prominent Democratic organizer in Miami-Dade County, who says she hears countless Jewish liberals tell her they won't vote for Obama if he wins the nomination.  'It's outrageous, and it's breaking my heart. I know it's because he's black, or I feel it is,' said Grossman, a Clinton supporter who said she would also vote enthusiastically for Obama. 'The worst of it is when they start calling him a Muslim and say, "Why aren't they using his name, Hussein?" I pray God it can be overcome. It's devastating, but I'm hoping I can change it.'"
So does this mean that liberal Jews might turn away from the Democrat party come November if Obama is the nominee? Many political pundits think this might happen for two reasons:
 
The first, has to do with Reverand Farrakhan's support for Obama where he spoke before 20,000 followers at McCormick Place in Chicago and said: "He (Obama) is the hope of the entire world that America will change.  A black man with a white mother could turn out to be one who can lift America from her fall."

The second has to do with the clear record of support that Senator McCain has had for the State of Israel over the many years he has been in the Senate. Could it be that many Jews feel that with a middle name of "Hussein" and a Muslim father, that Obama's support for the Jewish state could be as somewhat questionable should he ascend to the Presidency? Only time and his comments on the political trail will tell.
 
But one thing is clear. The seeds of doubt remain in the minds of many Jewish voters. Despite what pollsters may say at this early stage, the truth will become clearly apparent when Jews get behind that voting curtain and pull the lever either to the left or to the right.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive