Beyond Sadness!

How easy it is to be sad! How easy and yet how debilitating. I attended the funeral today of Ezra Schwartz, the American boy who was murdered in Israel last Thursday, with my two sons. My boys both attend Maimonides School with him and knew Ezra. As I stood there and listened to the family's beautiful and heart-rending eulogies I was overtaken not so much with sadness but a combination of rage and fear. My boys will graduate from Maimonides next year and go to Israel as Ezra did and I already fear for their safety. As I experience this fear, the rage follows on its heels. 

I understand that the immediate family and close friends need to plumb the depths of their personal devastation. I would never deprive them of that important catharsis but I really think the rest of us need to have a more positive and proactive response.

I am furious that a boy like Ezra can be raised to be such a beautiful human being only to be extinguished by another boy who was raised in a society that feeds its children on a steady diet of Jew-hatred and blood-lust. I am incensed that deaths like Ezra’s are often “rationalized” as an “understandable” result of Arab anger at Israeli policy. My fury is lifted almost beyond my ability to express it to know that even with the evidence of thousands of terror deaths -it is not just since the last intifada, not since 9/11, not since the 1948 war of independence but since the beheading of 900 Jews in Quireiza more than a thousand years ago- that the pathetic likes of Obama can still live in denial of what is causing (and what can remedy) this horror. 

And then, there is the white house statement, issued as only after spokesman Kirby was asked about it during a news conference and after an unseemly delay,  Kirby said, ”We were deeply saddened…,”. Oh yes, there is the sadness again! They referred to Ezra’s murder as one among other "...tragic incidents…" implying that there are what they would call “tragedies” on both sides. 

The name Obama was never associated with this travesty of political correctness, signifying his separating himself from it. The statement never mentions in what name it was committed. It also calls it “tragic”, no less. This is NOT a tragedy. To call it tragic relegates it to an act of fate or God- something about which we can all share saddness.  No, It is an atrocity! 

Until we can name the monstrous ideology that inspired Ezra’s killer and until we can stop ONLY being sad, these atrocities will occur continue again and again. The problem  is that Israel’s restraint and fear of “world opinion” combined with the bootless refusal to recognize the Islamic nature of the terror and the morally bankrupt lack of leadership provided by President Obama have allowed the Palestinians to dream that it their desire to “push the Jews into the Sea” might someday be rewarded with success. They have been encouraged thereby to continue to train their children to hate and murder.

Its right to be sad, but understand that if you are only sad, you will be sadder still in times to come.

Taken together with his cowardice in the face of Putin and his pandering to Islamic radicalism world wide, his treatment of Israel and his handing Nuclear Club membership to Iran, Obama has, as no other human being in history, loosed disorder and violence from the bonds that once constrained them. His memory will be accursed down the ages.

Wanted: A Modern Jabotinsky

This past Saturday, The Wall Street Journal had a shocker of an article by Saeb Erekat on the Editorial Pages. I read it, feeling more and more outraged at every word. So, why, after a few days of reflection, am I glad they printed it? Because, even in its hideous distortion of the truth,  it reveals for us a glimpse into the deeply flawed and dangerously self-delusional misapprehension that fuels the Middle Eastern Conflict. The title of this article alone is enough to warn the reader of the inversion of reality that follows. 

"Where is Israel's de Klerk?"  it asked.

The title itself is a combination of fraud, libel and the venerable rhetorical trick known as “the loaded question fallacy”. It implies by its very asking that:

1. the people of Israel are not, themselves interested in peace
2. That Israel is an apartheid state and 
3. There has never been an Israeli leader who could or would make peace.

All three implications are nonsense and lies. Israel has historically been an entire population of "de Klerks", only wanting to live in peace. Far from an apartheid state Arabs in Israel have more rights and are treated better than the ordinary Arab citizen in any Arab country in the world. What’s more, every Israeli leader, even the reviled “ultra hard liners" Begin and Sharon have proven that they were willing to give concessions and actual land up for the promise of peace “talks”. Not to say that they have ever been close to getting peace in return, mind you, just “talks” the mere charade of peace-making from the likes of Arafat and Abbas. Those two terrorist supporters have never relinquished their publicly declared goal of destruction of the Jewish state even while "talking". 

Where is Israel's de Klerk? is not the right question, there have been too many already. To have a successful “de Klerk” there would have to be a Mandela on the other side. 

No need, then, to read the rest of that article. Erekat marches out the familiar, tired parade of the painted up, whored-out canards, scabrous libels and blind pigs of inverted logic- the entire aim of which is to camouflage his group’s desire (to annihilate Israel) beneath the aggrieved fiction of Israeli “occupation” and. He brazenly bludgeons Israel for the results of every civilized instinct and compassionate gesture she has ever offered.

Is there anyone (Aside, of course, from the “see no evil” trio of Obama, Kerry, Clinton and their sycophants) who cannot connect the dots from this deception with its labyrinth of hidden agendas to the desire of all of the Islamic States (ISIS, Iran et al) to annihilate all of us in the west?  

President Obama, for all the violence and hatred he has fostered in his attempts to “transform” reality, has done us a similar service to the one rendered by The Wall Street Journal and Saeb Erakat. His spectacular failures have proven to anyone who is paying attention that his political theories have blinded him to present realities and that the future he imagines is not possible. The price of not understanding reality is failure, violence and hatred. 

Many Jews both inside Israel and around the world have allowed themselves the same kind of luxurious self-delusion. They want to live in a world where good intentions are all that are needed and all conflicts can be resolved by negotiation and “give and take”. You can want that all you want but reality is not so easily fooled as you are. The Two State Solution would only work if both sides were equally compelled to see it as the only alternative. In 1948 Jews, not for the first time in history, had no where to go. The holocaust was still smoldering in eastern Europe and Jews who tried to return from the camps and hiding places to their pre-war homes were often killed or driven off. Immigration to the US and other western countries was much harder then than now. Arab lands were actively expelling centuries old Jewish communities. Israel had to exist.

The polite, diplomatic and self-deprecating approach has not worked with the Islamic World. They were not interested in allowing Israel to exist then and they have never been convinced that Israel is permanent and unavoidable. So you have one side pretending that all we have to do is talk sincerely enough and the peace will come and the other side believing that they only have to resist long enough and Israel will either be thrown into the sea or fall of her own weight. The Islamic world is coming at Israel with knives, guns, tanks, rockets and soon, thanks to Kerry and Obama, nuclear weapons and still the fantasy of “talks” is alive and, even now, the Two State Solution is seen as the best alternative for Israeli-American policy. There cannot be two states because they would not exist in the same reality.

Israel does not need anymore “de Klerks”! She needs to bring back the intellectual honesty of a Jabotinsky. Vladimir Jabotinsky understood that the Arabs would always reject Israel's right to exist. It is time to stop pretending that everyone can be happy and to face the reality that there will never be peace until the Arabs and their Iranian godfather are defeated decisively. Here is Jabotinsky writing, not just before the re creation of the Jewish state, before The Holocaust:

"The Arabs loved their country as much as the Jews did. Instinctively, they understood Zionist aspirations very well, and their decision to resist them was only natural ..... There was not misunderstanding between Jew and Arab, but a natural conflict. .... No Agreement was possible with the Palestinian Arab; they would accept Zionism only when they found themselves up against an 'iron wall,' when they realize they had no alternative but to accept Jewish settlement.”

Vladimir Jabotinsky

The entire world is responsible for the current mess. The Islamic world is most to blame. The rejection of the 1948 partition and the attempt to “Throw the Jews into the sea” with their military attack has been followed by two major wars and incessant murder, bombardment and prevarication. 

The UN and the security council powers are next in line for allowing the Arabs who obeyed the Mufti and the Arab despots call to leave their homes so the Arab armies could annihilate the Jews unencumbered to attain the status of permanent “refugees” and become an industry of their own. Never before in history has “refugee” status passed down for four generations. It is a corruption of the concept and redefinition of the word. 

Israel, too, must take blame, but only because she never supplied the Arabs with the “iron wall”  needed to bring them to that realization. All the talks and all the concessions of her would-be de Klerks have done nothing but allow the Arabs and the Islamic world to think that there is an alternative to having Jews as neighbors. That belief has to be disproven conclusively or the pretensions, killing, and suffering will continue until Israel is sacrificed on the alter of her own good intentions. By starting every conversation with a plea for peace and only making war incompletely and when it was unavoidable, Israel has gotten the opposite of peace. Only when she wholeheartedly embraces the need for the definitive conflict, will she be in a position to avert it. I only pray that we find our new Jabotinsky soon.

Something is Finally Ready for Hillary!

Obama's (Pathetic) Black Knight Strategy

"Only a Setback" or "Only a Flesh Wound"?
As city after city falls to ISIS in Iraq, the Obama administration's strategy looks more and more like the Black Knight's in this classic Python scene. As the Obama approach gets "dis-armed"and "de-feeted" and prepares to be beheaded, administration spokespeople continue to minimize the losses that everyone else including the craven congressional Democrats recognize as dire blows as "setbacks".



It would be funny if it were not for the mockery it makes of the spilled blood. bereft parents, orphaned children, widowers, widows and insulted bravery of the American soldiers who secured all those cities during the American victories in Iraq.

I suppose when the black flag goes up over Baghdad they'll just say, "Alright, we'll call it a draw, then."

Here He is, America, This is What a Grown-up Looks Like

And now comes Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of a nation whose people have only in the last 70 years staggered back from the brink of genocide. In those seventy years that people have not had any significant period of peace or safety for which they have not had to suffer, fight and sacrifice. They live under the constant threat of terror. Rockets drop from the sky randomly tearing apart innocent children who one moment are running in terror for a shelter and the next are peppered with shrapnel of steel ballbearings screws and nails. Suicide bombers murder entire busses full of people on their way to or from work and school leaving city streets filled with dismembered body parts and storm drains coursing with blood. Islamic fanatics who style themselves as warriors of Allah sneak through secret tunnels under the border between Gaza and Israel to murder families in their homes. With this as background, Netanyahu, a veteran of an Israeli special forces unit, twice wounded in combat against the unrelenting genocidal Islamic vendetta, comes to talk to the American people through our Congress.

It is little wonder that Obama and his followers experience an hysterical fear at such a man coming to congress to speak on behalf of his people. 

The Dems managed to make quite a spectacle of themselves. If it weren’t horrifying to realize that these people cast votes that bear on our lives and fututres everyday it would be pure comedy. Nancy Pelosi who squirmed through the speech and fled the room right after it. Threw herself into a dudgeon, Boo Hooing about Bibi insulting her and her president’s intelligence. Her claim boils down to “we already knew all that stuff!”. The yapping dog, John Yarmuth who had absented himself from the room but must have been listening at the keyhole. So quick was he to make his idiotic knee-jerk references to Dick Cheney and his putative playbook (Democrat party’s version of calling someone a “doody-head”) I assume he didn’t have much chance to collect his thoughts (did I say thoughts? - ok, rants) because his response was right out of the spoiled,manipulative child playbook- no facts no coherent argument just “He’s a fear-mongering doody-head!”. The only thing that would have completed the farce would have been if when Nancy bristled up the aisle and stomped out, the doorknob hit the yappy dog in the eye.

Oh, and then there is our President himself. I’ve raised six children and I recognized his response immediately. He, sulked elsewhere during the speech but lost little time in responding that Netanyahu said “nothing new.” How many times have I stopped one of my kids from doing something horrible in the nick of time… “Don’t pick that up! It’s (choose one or more…)red hot, poisonous, covered in excrement, or so sharp it will cut you on contact! Only to have that kid turn back to me and say, “I knew that!”. Yes, Mr. President, nothing new. But Mr Netanyahu is the one who visits children in the hospital when they have shards of metal embedded so close to their heart that they cannot safely be removed. He is the one who reviews the torn remains of  busses that one instant held Israeli workers and school children and were, in a flash explosion transformed into fountains of blood and body parts in the streets of his country. But then, maybe you should entertain the thought that the seriousness of his tone, his knowledge of the consequences of your ignorance and his concern for the future not just of his country but of ours as well is something novel and new to you. Or, if you don’t like that one, how about: if you are feeling humiliated, maybe its because you deserve to be.

Here is the nub of it: the liberal progressives, community organizers and others of the ilk do alright when they are the only ones in the room. They even manage just fine when they are able to manipulate the situation with political correctness and emotional blackmail. When a grown-up like Bibi walks in, however, they are in a terrible bind. They are constantly being humiliated when their ideas are tested against facts and reality. They are caught in the headlights- think of a sixteen-year-old who is trying to convince his parents that he is mature enough to be trusted with the family car and gets caught doing something- oh, say, like staying out past curfew and lying about not having been at that party where “other people” had pot. When a real grown-up man like Prime Minister Netanyahu (or Dick Cheney, for that matter)  walks into the room, they do not really have many alternatives to save their face(s) from the humiliation of being caught at their silly charades while there are real, deadly games afoot.

Chris Matthews’ reaction was very revealing. He accidentally got very close to hitting the nail on the head. He said, “…what country in the world would let a foreign leader come in and attempt to wrest from the president control of the U.S. foreign policy?” The real question is, “…what country in the world is, at this critical moment, so poorly led that a visitor from a much smaller and less powerful country could look as though we were the one in charge? - Or at least should be.

Thank God there is a real grown-up exploring his run for the Presidency now- Run Ben Run!

The Pitiless Crowbar of Events

Some years ago I heard John Madden (the former coach turned broadcaster) on the radio. He was talking about Bill Belichick. As I recall it was during one of those dominant runs when The Patriots were reeling off long strings of victories. After a good but slightly ragged win Coach Belichik had found plenty on his team to criticize- and he took corrective action in the form of punishing workouts for the team.

The reaction, mostly from outside the professional football world, ranged from outrage and derision to amusement, and even condescension. But Madden, himself a former very successful coach, defended it. He explained it this way: 

“Whatever you let go when you’re winning, you will have to live with when you are losing.”

(Note: Yes, I used this example for a different reason in a post a number of years ago. I bring it back now because it is even more important that we insist on it now.)

This is the reason that practicing “the fundamentals” and learning from the mistakes that you make even when you are dominant is the key to sustaining a winning record in any sport and it is also the analogue of staying true to the founding fundamentals of a culture even when there is no immediate threat. 

It has become a habit for us in the West to assume that we will be winning forever. We have, after all, dominated the civilized world for several centuries. We are tempted to sooth ourselves with the lazy, guilty fictions of power. We are tempted to think things like: “Everyone in the world wants the same thing, they would be just like us if they could…” or  “If some other people hate us, we must have done something wrong to them…” or “If all other cultures just had the opportunity, they would choose to live with our liberal ethos and our material richness…” or, even, “We are the richest, most powerful nation on earth, surely we can afford to…”

These are perfect examples of the kinds of things that, if you let (them) go when you’re winning, you will have to live with when you are losing. Just look at Greece, Italy and Spain, countries that spend lavishly on un-productive social programs that incentivized many people to become unproductive themselves and now that they are up against hard times, they cannot seem to find their way to solvency. Or recall the victorious allies of World War I who failed to foster and support good government in Germany and then appeased Hitler (believing him to be, “reasonable”, “humane” and “pragmatic" despite his own words to the contrary) until more than 60 millions of people perished and civilization itself hung in the balance.

Nobody in the west can see this as clearly as someone from the outside. 

Alexander Solzhenitsyn saw it. In his 1978 commencement speech at Harvard he delivered a very clear and ominous notice to the western world about this blindness. He said:

“But the blindness of superiority continues in spite of all and upholds the belief that the vast regions everywhere on our planet should develop and mature to the level of present day Western systems, which in theory are the best and in practice the most attractive. There is this belief that all those other worlds are only being temporarily prevented (by wicked governments or by heavy crises or by their own barbarity and incomprehension) from taking the way of Western pluralistic democracy and from adopting the Western way of life. Countries are judged on the merit of their progress in this direction.”

Solzhenitsyn, our friendly outsider, says that we do not comprehend the danger we face because we think that there will be a point of convergence where all other cultures (he calls them worlds) will overcome their backwardness and corruption and begin to think and act like us… 

He said, “…It is a soothing theory which overlooks the fact that these worlds are not at all developing into similarity. Neither one can be transformed into the other without the use of violence.”

Having our way so habitually has even made us a little shame-faced about it. We try very hard not to rub it in- not to appear to be “running up the score” on the opposition. In fact, we invented multiculturalism so that we could pretend that there really is no competition- that we are all just the same as everyone else and that there is no reason why any other culture should feel anymore threatened by us than we do of them. 

And that is why it seems so important to our president that we not speak of Islamic Terrorism. He is pretending that there are no valid reasons for the behavior of that “other world” that is compelled by its world view to convert or kill us. He insists that the fact that many peaceful “good” (read westernized or at least accommodationist muslims) exist means that those Jihadis, totalitarians, caliphate-ists and Muslim supremacists are an aberration, as though they might be coopted with good jobs, economic incentives, fancy duds from Banana Republic and day passes to Disney World.

John Kerry tries to soothe us by telling us that even if it seems “counter-intuitive”, we are safer now than we have ever been.

Has our perspective has become so warped that we are not afraid of the bestial cruelty of beheadings and burning living, sentient men in cages? Have we been on such a long winning streak that the wholesale slaughter, torture, rape and enslavement of untold hundreds of thousands in the Islamic State have no power to move us? They do assuredly hate us for our success and power- and how much more must they despise our smarmy, condescending, refusal to acknowledge the Islamic origin of their rage?

That Islamic world embodied in the Islamic State (calling it ISI or ISIL is a fool’s game! It is what it is.) does not share our values and our scruples. We cannot seem to believe it, but they have no interest in becoming like us. We are so busy trying to console them for being so backward that we cannot comprehend that they don’t see it that way. So our journalists and well-meaning, naive young women go there and are engulfed in the ocean of blood that is beyond their imagination.

Solzhenitsyn had been a sort of odd hero up until that speech. He was, after all a political refuge from the Soviet “world” who took refuge here by choice. He quickly became viewed as a crank after it. I remember the polite but troubled way in which most reviewers of that speech backed away from his ideas. They did not engage his observations because they had voluntarily foresworn the use of the words that would have been necessary to do so. They fancied themselves inhabitants of a world that had outgrown that kind of history and those words. They no longer had the words for it in their own vocabularies. And back then the vocabulary was so much broader and unconstrained than it is today. The Correctness Mafia has been picking off words and ideas progressively and spreading the debilitating blankness of omerta wider and wider.

We actually have become so polite about it that we feel that discussing those things that make Western Civilization better than (or preferable to) other cultures (let alone the measures that might be necessary to defend the west) in public constitute some kind of “bad form”. We even have whole sets of words and ideas that we refuse to use because they sound too harsh, too male dominated, too power oriented, too insensitive or judgmental. 

A special target of the politically correct is that greatest of cultural blueprints, The Constitution of The United States of America. According to them, The Constitution does not merit protection and reverence so much as it does “interpretation” and, even, “updating”. Arguments that twist equality of opportunity into equality of outcome. The expansion of the god-given rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to include three square meals, cash payments, free health care and a nice warm place to live at the expense of others is something that we could support for a limited time when times were fat but it has proved even worse for those that we granted those new rights (entitlements) to than it has for the country. We broke them and now, they tell us, we own them. Or maybe they own us.

In order to sooth ourselves that we are so nice that we will forgo the things that made our parents’ and grandparents’ generations great, we are literally throwing down our defenses. Political Correctness is Unilateral Cultural Disarmament.

Solzhenitsyn put it in the starkest of turns:

 “There is, for instance, a self-deluding interpretation of the contemporary world situation. It works as a sort of a petrified armor around people's minds. Human voices from 17 countries (Note: Of course, he was only speaking of the communist “world” add to those 17 countries the Islamic State and large portions of the other 49 Islamic nations of the world) of Eastern Europe and Eastern Asia cannot pierce it. It will only be broken by the pitiless crowbar of events.”

If we could put a good coach in charge, a geopolitical Belichik or an American Solzhenitsyn, he would put a stop to it before another game went by. Right now, we own the biggest, baddest crowbar why should we wait until a bigger one comes along? We should not be “putting up” now with that which could destroy us in future, less happy times.  

But then we are not likely to get a football coach to run for President of the United States so what are our alternatives? There are a number of good solid administrators and executives in the Republican ring who might serve well but my favorite is the surgeon. 

Dr Ben Carson is another type of man (like a great coach) who by training and nature would never fail to notice and correct sloppiness or error no matter how inconsequential. He knows that when a patient’s life is in the balance he needs to pay attention to every detail, every ounce of blood every brain cell and every suture. He has become our most outspoken critic of political correctness for that very reason. 

That only inspires the “Correctiods" to try to pervert what he says and to deride how he says it.

At last year’s CPAC, for instance he gave a speech in which he compared and contrasted our present politically correct leaders, the Islamic State and the founding fathers of our country. In doing so he found that the founders were similar to the Islamic State in that they had the dedication and courage of their convictions to the extent that they would dare everything - even life itself for what they believed. This comparison seemed to bring out the livid rage in much of the liberal press. They produced headlines that implied that Dr. Carson thought that there was some moral equivalence there. What he was really saying was that our leaders today lack even the courage to understand what threatens us let alone defend us properly against it.

Here is the money quote from Dr. Carson in that CPAC speech, and the reason I believe he is the important voice we need. After comparing the dedication of the Islamists and out founders he clearly called out the difference:

"They've got the wrong philosophy, but, they're willing to die for it while we are busily giving away every belief and every value for the sake of political correctness. We have to change that.”

The only way to change it is to stop doing it- just stop. I will plead guilty to being an emotional, even passionate writer (some might even say overwrought). As such I am in no way capable of conveying the simple, confident and clear vision that Dr Carson possesses. So I want to give you two quotes from a pair of his articles that I hope serve to sum up, not only his ability to put his finger on exactly the right course of action but his ability to do it in an amiable, if direct and open way. On the drift of Political correctness he responded to being called an extremist by the Southern Poverty Law Center, he told Bill O’Reilly:

“We need to be in a place where people feel free to express themselves and not to be intimidated by political correctness It’s destroying our nation, And there is a reason that our founders, (made) one of the very first amendments freedom of speech, freedom of expression.”

On the threat we face from the Jihadis he states what should be obvious to anyone who will open his eyes to the true situation:

“This is a critical time in the history of the world, and we must clear our heads and think logically about the consequences of underestimating the threat posed by a host of Islamic terrorist groups. It is very clear that they have a plan that they believe will yield a victory in their quest for world domination. Some in our country are arrogant enough to believe that such a goal is preposterous. Others believe that our time has come and gone and that resistance is useless.

Both of these beliefs are absolutely wrong and do not take into account the strength and resolve inherent in the American character. The battle we are entering will be difficult and will be fraught with surprises, but as Winston Churchill said, “You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. It is victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terrors. Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival.”

That is true and honest leadership, and honesty is the biggest crowbar of all.