Monday, May 31, 2010
First off, it was a lovely, absolutely perfect afternoon in a friend's backyard...hot dogs, burgers, and all the fixings, but REALLY good...watermelon,, carrot cake, you get the picture...NICE. I knew about four people out of 25 or so.
A fellow who turned out knows a very dear friend of Mr. Z's and mine happened to sit down next to me and we realized we both knew this friend very shortly into our conversation so we had something in common right off the bat......and he was fascinating. We talked about many things but the thing that got my dander up was when he told me about his granddaughter who's 8 years old and who was in her public school when they showed a film on Ruby Bridges the other day, Bridges being the little black girl whose parents were encouraged by the NAACP to enroll her into a segregated school in New Orleans in 1960 (Rockwell caught the moment in the painting I've published above). The film they showed these second graders showed this poor black child being taunted by whites and parents pulling their kids out of classes, etc. You can imagine the message his granddaughter got, and she relayed it quite eloquently over dinner that night...how Americans are mean and don't like black people and on and on about this poor little black girl trying to go to school.
This man thought that it was not something we need American children seeing until they're able to grasp things in context and learn the good about this country before they learn the bad, which they should learn about in high school or college but not the formative elementary school years.
We spoke about a lot more, this man's career, the death of his wife, his kids, etc., but I had one ear on the liberal guy, Don, who lives next door to my hostess.
Don was a pip (and no, I don't mean he sang with Gladys Knight!). He came to our table and started schmoozing with some of the ladies near me while I was in conversation with the other guy. Don started talking about how anybody could possibly vote for Meg Whitman for Governor of California when she's very rich and "obviously is just another Republican buying this election" and he was waxing eloquent about Jerry (Moonbeam) Brown who's running for Governor, too, on the basis of his being Pat Brown (previous governor)'s son....that seemed to be the pedigree Don thought was enough to run California.
He then went into a tirade about Dick Cheney, information of which I haven't ever even heard of....and I kept ignoring him as he droned in my ear and I tried to listen to the guy next to me, who WAS interesting but you know me and politics... I SO wanted to argue with Don but I couldn't (God is good :-)
Don then went into how he's a Jew and he feels that as much as he loves Israel he really can't support most of what Israel does because he feels the Palestinians are so right and so sad and so innocent............and the Jews are so rough on them. (!) OH, did I WANT TO TALK? Then, I heard him say he'd just been on a plane where he spoke to a muslim who owns something like 58 Dominos Pizza shops and what a nice guy he was and how he told him muslims don't want to kill Jews and that the Koran never says they should. "Nowhere in the Koran does it say to KILL JEWS" he says, but he admits he'd like to look more into that. (Good, Don, you do that). Okay, now I'm tingling with desire to say something but I can't interrupt the man telling me about his life, right? :-) At one point, I DID say "OH, you are all so lucky I'm not getting into your conversation!" (Don had a group of conservative women and one man as a captive audience because they're really nice people who were afraid to venture any alternative viewpoint!) But, I then turned back to my conversation......
This guy Don was SUCH a nice guy but you could just hear he's full of Olbermann and CNN and hasn't paid any heed to a viewpoint other liberal in his whole LIFE. And I so didn't want to get into it at my friend's barbecue!
Well, I did enjoy my conversation but it wasn't easy with one EAR ON DON! ....and not feeling I should really speak up. But, I wanted so badly to say "Right, Don, Muslims don't want Jews dead, the Koran doesn't tell us that, Israel's wrong and Palestinians are right, and Jerry Brown would be a perfect governor because you liked his dad." OH, and I forgot...Don was telling these people he did go to a party full of Republicans "and they're so vociferous on every subject about their own views"..."and one of the guys said Obama was really wrong about one thing; he didn't put all the bankers in PRISON!" Don seemed thrilled with that encounter..."now HERE is a REPUBLICAN I COULD LEARN TO LIKE!" Oh, cool, Don, glad you approve of THAT Republican.
Memorial Day at Frank and Ellie's, 1998*
The lake bumped the sand
causing the water to wrinkle
at the end of the long grass slope
that started back up at the house
The slope was lime green and shadow leaves swayed across it in the breezy heat
The barbecue was smoky with hamburgers,
and the table was piled with bowls of cole slaw, potato salad,
pickles, catsup and mustard
We sat under towering oak trees
with black angled branches
and a white blue sky
that held the heat in like
the lid on a pot of corn on the cob
Bessie the dog ran through the trees and into the lake
while the four small boys splashed in the water
and Grandpa shouted advice about their plastic raft,
him being an old Navy man
The furniture in the house was American Primitive,
dark wood-spoked chairs on an intricate wood floor
and bright orange crate labels from the family business
hung framed against pine slat walls
A small American flag waved out of the large spoon pitcher on the stove next to Grandma’s three layer chocolate cake, and the childrens' popsicles were red, white and blue
and left their mouths patriotic with color
It was Memorial Day that warm
We didn't mention it, but it was there.....
Z *a reprint
Between the burgers and the ribs, the chance to have a day off in the sun with friends and family or shop for a new mattress at the sales which save us money but seem the wrong emphasis for a weekend such as this, stop and remember who made all this possible. Blessings to you who fought and came home, blessings to you who lost a loved one fighting for our freedom, and blessings to you who are missing someone now who’s still at it. We owe you a lot. No, we owe you everything.
I posted this Friday, but I had to post it again today....I want as many people as possible to watch it.........thanks.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Have a wonderful Memorial Day ....tell the young people around you about the meaning of tomorrow and make sure they're listening because they don't get it much in schools anymore...and maybe we can all make some small sacrifice for someone today, in memory of those who made such a huge sacrifice for us. GOD BLESS AMERICA
Saturday, May 29, 2010
The black man said "The Lakers are up 8 points!" I said "Great! And, you know, McCain is NOT racist."
He then smiles, and says "I KNOW." I grabbed his arm, said "God BLESS YOU!" with a big smile....he positively beamed at me and I told him goodnight and went back to my table.
GOD BLESS THAT GUY...."I know"... That felt SO GOOD! I wanted to HUG that guy!
AND THE LAKERS JUST WON!! (Lo Siento, Los Suns)
Friday, May 28, 2010
How does an American soldier not attack, as described in the link, when he sees his fellow soldiers in big trouble?
Here's a paragraph that tells it all.....from this abc link:
"But in this war, making sure you kill the enemy -- and no one else -- can take far more discipline and even courage, as we would soon find out. In fact Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who is the commander in Afghanistan, calls this discipline, "Courageous Restraint." It means even if someone on the ground is in trouble, you have to make sure you know what your target is and that you do your best not to hurt innocent civilians. "
And another couple of paragraphs:
"Sometimes not firing can be tough. Pilots say it’s hard to watch their fellow soldiers on the ground taking fire."
“We have to use restraint when it’s tough,” Col. Jack Briggs said. “We’re listening to these kids on the ground, and they’re taking fire."
Who wants innocent people dead? Do your best not to hurt innocents....but SAVE OUR SOLDIERS, please! Where do we go from here when our soldiers are being told to put others' lives in front of our fighters? How do you look your comrades in the eyes when they're not really sure you will be there for them, which I believe is THE most important thing boot camps, etc., teach our kids? I have never been in the armed services, but am I wrong about this?
And, the very thought of a town honoring its fallen hero, like the one in the video above, because his fellow soldiers COULDN'T put his life first and save him is almost more than America should bear.............z
Here's where it gets MORE INTERESTING...Click HERE and read the article if you've got a few minutes, it's not too long and you'll get the gist of his 'reporting' in the first few paragraphs...but, THEN READ THE COMMENTS SECTION!!!!! I am stunned, delighted, and hopeful. Time Mag is not a Conservative magazine so you will be shocked to see what its commenters think of the Sestak situation and Grumwald's writing. Do yourself a favor, it'll give you a lift!
UPDATE: Most of you have heard by now that this morning's story is that this was all CLINTON! HE is the one who offered Sestak something....but, wait....why didn't they just say that immediately when all this came up? AHA, I just saw this statement at the very end of my linked article: "One thing is clear, though: If White House officials weren't at least a little worried, they would have released this information at some other time than the Friday before a holiday weekend." Why, indeed?
ANOTHER UPDATE: From THIS ARTICLE:
"White House Counsel Robery Bauer on Friday rejected claims that Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak was offered a top administration job in return for dropping his Democratic primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter.
In a memo released by the White House, Bauer says his office has "concluded that allegations of improper conduct rest on factual errors and lack a basis in law," and runs through the various potential positions that have been reported to have been offered to Sestak, who defeated Spcter for the Senate Democratic nomination earlier this month."
Is this it? Does America just say "Oooooh, I SEE...the White House rejects any claims of impropriety" ?? Did that happen for Bush? Did it happen for "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton? REALLY? is that it? Or does the White House think that's that?
Quotes from the New York Times Article:
"When we returned, we saw nothing like this,” Mr. Blumenthal said. “Let us do better by this generation of men and women.” "The New Haven Register on July 20, 2006, described him as “a veteran of the Vietnam War,” and on April 6, 2007, said that the attorney general had “served in the Marines in Vietnam.” "On May 26, 2009, The Connecticut Post, a Bridgeport newspaper that is the state’s third-largest daily, described Mr. Blumenthal as “a Vietnam veteran.” The Shelton Weekly reported on May 23, 2008, that Mr. Blumenthal “was met with applause when he spoke about his experience as a Marine sergeant in Vietnam.” “We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam,” Mr. Blumenthal said to the group gathered in Norwalk in March 2008."
"In 1970, with his last deferment in jeopardy, he landed a coveted spot in the Marine Reserve, which virtually guaranteed that he would not be sent to Vietnam."
"He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records."
"But what is striking about Mr. Blumenthal’s record is the contrast between the many steps he took that allowed him to avoid Vietnam, and the misleading way he often speaks about that period of his life now, especially when he is speaking at veterans’ ceremonies or other patriotic events."
"Sometimes his remarks have been plainly untrue, as in his speech to the group in Norwalk. At other times, he has used more ambiguous language, but the impression left on audiences can be similar. "
The NYTimes adds this: "It does not appear that Mr. Blumenthal ever sought to correct those mistakes." Apparently, not, and thanks for being honest, NYTimes... Okay, folks...so having read those quotes............now read THIS ARTICLE from the Associated Press published on Yahoo...it includes this:
"Blumenthal, the longtime state attorney general, admitted he misspoke about his military service on various occasions by saying he served "in" Vietnam when he actually served stateside as a member of the Marine reserve."
REALLY? THAT'S ALL HE SAID? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? The ONLY QUOTE THEY MENTION is what they say is a MISSPEAK...like "oops!..well, no biggie!!"...THAT'S IT, FOLKS! THAT's all that the AP decided people should know among all of Blumenthal's quotes (sorry "quote", singular, according to the AP?!).......imagine that? This dishonest and so incomplete AP article irks me MORE than the LIES! See my point?
And, really, COULD YOU VOTE FOR THIS GUY? EVER? HE LIED BLATANTLY...it's Memorial Day in a few days...........many, many Americans did go to Vietnam and many didn't return.......think of those soldiers who died! This guy LIED!
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Please watch this...........and if you think Newt's wrong, tell us why. If you think he's right, what point or sentiment stood out to you the most as you watched? thanks.
and thanks, Pris, for emailing it to me. Z
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Jean Grillo, 65, a writer from TriBeCa, said shutting out any faith undermined American values. “What better place to teach tolerance than at the very area where hate tried to kill tolerance?” she said.
My goodness. America...God bless you, you REALLY need it. Does anybody care what Americans think of this? Anybody give a darn about the families of those who died at the hands of islamists on 9/11? (“The pain never goes away,” Mr. Hanson said. “When I look over there and I see a mosque, it’s going to hurt. Build it someplace else.”) It's not SO much the construction of the mosque, there are many of them in NYC and around this country very suddenly (many more since 9/11), it's WHERE it's being built. Why doesn't that matter? Mayor Bloomberg is squarely on the mosque's side in this, by the way.
Here's another quote : "The families of Sept. 11 victims "would be wounded by erecting a mega mosque so close to the place where their loved ones were massacred," said Viviana Hernandez, a chaplain. "Even though they may have altruistic reasons, the real terrorists will see it as a win on their side."
Amen, Chaplain Hernandez. Then there's this from this link:
But Manhattan borough president Scott Stringer said that "for anyone to imply that a mosque is not appropriate in New York . . . , that is just an un-American attitude."
What are your thoughts on this? Please let us know.
Obama won't be at Arlington Cemetery........and I just added new info on Obama you might like to see, I sure did...it says a LOT about him
WASHINGTON -- The news that President Barack Obama and his family will return to Chicago for the Memorial Day weekend has triggered a guessing game.
Where will they dine? What will they do for fun? With the Sox on the road and the Blackhawks skating into the Stanley Cup finals, might the first family ditch its predictable pastimes -- basketball, golf and tennis -- and go to the United Center for hockey?"
"Where will they DINE?" Is that a joke? Isn't it odd? I felt a wave of sadness when I saw that our president won't be at Arlington and Chicagoans care WHERE HE'S DINING in their city? It made me feel so badly for America that her President is taking his family to his hometown on Memorial Day instead of doing the traditional wreath laying at Arlington. He's sending Joe Biden instead. But, of course, Obama will be visiting a cemetery in Chicago, as this says:
According to a White House official, the Obamas will arrive Thursday and stay until Monday, when Obama will participate in a Memorial Day ceremony at Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elwood. The veterans' cemetery is about 50 miles south of Chicago.
I guess that ought to do it for me, but I'm feeling a little odd about it and I am quite sure I'd feel odd about it if a Republican president did this, too. Maybe they have and maybe it's my bias showing....but it feels BAD. He was there last year, see my image above, but with all the sentiment against Obama these days, with his numbers so down, his allegiance to this country that many feel is questionable, wouldn't you think this would be one weekend he could have sucked it up and attended this event that so honors all of our fallen heroes? Does he care what anybody thinks?
z (thanks for the scoop, major...when I saw your comment, I thought you were joking, but, alas...)
UPDATE Wed. morning; Please visit THIS BLOG, "Another Black Conservative"...he has an amazing piece with information I hadn't heard about Obama and how he relates behind closed doors with the Republicans. You won't want to miss that. (and it's a good blog, a very good blog)
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
- Obama says Phoenix Suns protest of immigration law ‘terrific’ Toronto Star - 8 hours ago
- TNT's Albert interviews President Obama at White House NBA.com - May 22 09:10am
Also, the Republicans are now saying that the president says today that he does not "embrace" closing the borders. Oh, that's not Calderon, that's Obama, if you were wondering.......(I have to admit I saw Coulter say that in reaction and thought it was pretty astute) I'll find that link as soon as Google (yesterday called one of the two of the world's most reputable companies....who cares if Google's an Obama shill and covers for him, too, right?) let's that information out.
Don't you find yourself asking "Wait, whose side is Obama ON?" I do.
UPDATE: Our commenter buddy IMPERTINENT just sent me THIS LINK...Obama's asking for $500 million for 1200 guardsmen at the border (ya, I THINK it's OUR side of the border :-)!...read it, it sounds like "can't we just have an effective FENCE?" to me) (thanks, Imp)
An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.
Roger Barnett, 64, began rounding up illegal immigrants in 1998 and turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol, he said, after they destroyed his property, killed his calves and broke into his home.
His Cross Rail Ranch near Douglas, Ariz., is known by federal and county law enforcement authorities as "the avenue of choice" for immigrants seeking to enter the United States illegally.
Trial continues Monday in the federal lawsuit, which seeks $32 million in actual and punitive damages for civil rights violations, the infliction of emotional distress and other crimes. Also named are Mr. Barnett's wife, Barbara, his brother, Donald, and Larry Dever, sheriff in Cochise County, Ariz., where the Barnetts live. The civil trial is expected to continue until Friday. (Z: the illegals could get $32 MILLION)
The lawsuit is based on a March 7, 2004, incident in a dry wash on the 22,000-acre ranch, when he approached a group of illegal immigrants while carrying a gun and accompanied by a large dog.....
The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF).......It (the suit) also said Mr. Barnett acknowledged that he had turned over 12,000 illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol since 1998.
In March, U.S. District Judge John Roll rejected a motion by Mr. Barnett to have the charges dropped, ruling there was sufficient evidence to allow the matter to be presented to a jury. Mr. Barnett's attorney, David Hardy, had argued that illegal immigrants did not have the same rights as U.S. citizens.
Mr. Barnett told The Washington Times in a 2002 interview that he began rounding up illegal immigrants after they started to vandalize his property, northeast of Douglas along Arizona Highway 80. He said the immigrants tore up water pumps, killed calves, destroyed fences and gates, stole trucks and broke into his home.
Some of his cattle died from ingesting the plastic bottles left behind by the immigrants, he said, adding that he installed a faucet on an 8,000-gallon water tank so the immigrants would stop damaging the tank to get water.
Mr. Barnett said some of the ranch´s established immigrant trails were littered with trash 10 inches deep, including human waste, used toilet paper, soiled diapers, cigarette packs, clothes, backpacks, empty 1-gallon water bottles, chewing-gum wrappers and aluminum foil - which supposedly is used to pack the drugs the immigrant smugglers give their "clients" to keep them running.
He said he carried a pistol during his searches for the immigrants and had a rifle in his truck "for protection" against immigrant and drug smugglers, who often are armed.
.....His sprawling ranch became an illegal-immigration highway when the Border Patrol diverted its attention to several border towns in an effort to take control of the established ports of entry. That effort moved the illegal immigrants to the remote areas of the border, including the Cross Rail Ranch.
"This is my land. I´m the victim here," Mr. Barnett said. "When someone´s home and loved ones are in jeopardy and the government seemingly can´t do anything about it, I feel justified in taking matters into my own hands. And I always watch my back." end of article.
Can anybody blame him? And WHERE IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHICH SHOULD BE PROTECTING HIM?
Monday, May 24, 2010
A pretty good idea for getting rid of the oil spill............check out the link!
What do you think?
Here are the paragraphs which most caught my eye and my curiosity:
"Today, the Supreme Court affirmed that job-seekers should not be denied justice based on a technicality," said John Payton, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., who argued the case. "This victory goes well beyond the immediate results in Chicago. It should ensure that no other fire department or employer uses a discriminatory test, and LDF will go the extra mile to make sure that they do not."
Anyone who scored 64 or below was deemed not qualified. But the city set a second cutoff score of 89 points.
Officials told applicants who scored below 89 but above 64 that although they passed the test, they likely would not be hired because of the large number of people who scored 89 or above. The majority of those in the top-scoring group were white; only 11 percent were black.Only 11 percent in the top-scoring group were black so we lower the bar? Shouldn't we help those blacks do better instead of dropping the bar? If anybody raised the bar JUST to keep blacks out, they should be FIRED IMMEDIATELY, obviously! But, if this was proven, wouldn't that have happened? Does this leave cities less safe because we'll be allowing in people who aren't qualified for these important jobs? Doesn't that matter?
The actual suit is about the time people have to file a suit when they feel discrimination has happened, that's fine...........but the gist of this suit, what set off this suit, seems more important to me. Why wouldn't we just put a SET NUMBER on the testing and anybody, regardless of color, either passes or doesn't...those who don't pass, aren't hired. Or, give them a second chance with all the information review they need to learn and pass? Is that so impossible these days? Are we that far gone? If I was a black man desirous of working in the fire department, I'd demand they find the most reasonable cut-off number for the testing grade and stick to it....and, if I didn't pass, I'd study until I did. And I'd feel proud that I did, wouldn't you? I wish that for the kid in my image above, IF he chooses to become a fire fighter.
The title of this review is : Biased account, but with inside access,
|By||D. J. Nardi "TurtleDom" (Washington, DC) -|
What do I mean by "sympathetic"? I don't certainly mind if an author admires his subject or favors his policy choices. However, Alter seems determined to find no fault with Obama and dismiss all of his failures as the fault of others. In the introduction, Alter seems to blame Obama's first-year woes on the president's overconfidence in the - get this - the American people. Too often, voters are portrayed as dumb, Republicans as devious, and Obama's policy choices as all brilliant, if misunderstood. However, let's be honest - there are many people who have honest concerns about Obama's policies. I myself agree with some (foreign policy), but not others (healthcare). This sort of bias in The Promise: President Obama, Year One is simply unacceptable in real a history. (Z: the cheapest part of the Imus interview was Alter mentioning that Carla Bruni, Sarkozy's wife, told Michelle Obama that sometimes her husband's being president limits their time for love making...Alter tries to act as if Imus had got him to spill the beans as he admits it was the Queen of England Bruni told Michelle they made wait while they had sex, but when Alter promises a few other hot little items like that you know this was a contrived 'teaser'; any cheap come-on to sell a book is what this sounded like. As for "Republicans as devious," as it says above, I had to laugh when I found this review because that was the exact impression I got when Alter included in his interview, in his always-disparaging treatment toward Republicans, that Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt loves this book...... "because he can exploit it.") This type of "journalistic history" book is really built around a few revealing anecdotes, without much substance or depth. Probably the biggest reveal is that Greg Craig was offered a judgeship in an attempt to get him to leave the White House quietly. Of course, if you live outside the Beltway, you probably don't know who Greg Craig even is. There are also some interesting comparisons between Obama and Bill Clinton by staffers who worked for both. However, frankly, you could probably read about the most interesting tidbits on Politico's or other political blogs. I wouldn't recommend buying the book unless you're a political junkie. (Z: another point Alter enjoyed driving home was the amount of bad language used by Obama and the rest at the White House staff, which he seemed highly favorable towards...like it was some badge of honor and fun information we don't already know) The reviewer goes on....
Overall, this is a 3-star book - with that third star added in recognition of Alter's hard work getting access and anecdotes. As a study of Obama's first year, it falls short (end of review). (Z: I'd say that the whole Obama first year falls short, not just in this "study", but to say Alter had to work hard at getting access when they love him at the White House for all the pro Obama pieces he writes at Newsweek is a bit of a stretch, don't you think? I mean, really...how hard is it to give access to someone they know will paint their hero in a favorable light?? Wikipedia says about Alter that he views FDR as the "savior of American democracy and capitalism"...I rest my case.)
Unsurprisingly, Amazon's "editorial review" (non-biased?!) said this!: "This brilliant blend of journalism and history offers the freshest reporting and most acute perspective on the biggest story of our time. It will shape impressions of the Obama presidency and of the man himself for years to come." Oh, and here was an interesting review:
"Could only stomach a few pages of this book. Thank God it was given to me versus buying it. In fact they were giving them away by the hundreds. I guess that is one way to stay on the best seller list." (Z: that's true..hmmm).
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Bring back all white tennis clothes, please......What was wrong with tradition?.....I don't WANT to see Venus Williams in black and red corsets.
I SO don't want to. You agree?
"Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious JOY." I Peter 1:8 (what fabulous Scripture, huh?)
Find joy...take a walk, turn off the TV news, watch an old black/white film with popcorn, help a sick friend, hug someone......tell me what YOU do to take a break from what bugs you!
Saturday, May 22, 2010
What do you suppose he meant and what's your take on borders in this regard?
And, do you think Congress should have walked out when Calderon dissed the State of Arizona? My commenter Silvrlady thinks so, and I agree with her..........STRONGLY.
Friday, May 21, 2010
.......what year would it be? And why? I think we'd ALL admit the last year's been a freakin' NIGHTMARE for America, so I got to thinking about better times. What year (or few years) do you think America was at her best, or your favorite years, anyway...politically, economically, culturally, excitement-wise...?
Hit me with your best shot! (and please don't miss watching that AMAZING VIDEO below! thanks!)
Thursday, May 20, 2010
BRAVO, Mr. McClintock............FINALLY, somebody stands up to Calderon and the Left. What the heck kind of people applaud a man who insults us? Obama followers.
By Philip Klein (Z: I hope to read more from him and am honored to print him here)
In the past, I've remarked to friends that the difference between a Jewish liberal and a Jewish conservative is that when a Jewish liberal walks out of the Holocaust Museum, he feels, "This shows why we need to have more tolerance and multiculturalism." The Jewish conservative feels, "We should have killed a lot more Nazis, and sooner."
I (Philip Klein) thought of this as I read Peter Beinart's new essay, "The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment," which argues that "liberal Zionism" is in danger unless groups such as AIPAC start to take a more critical view of Israel's actions. Beinart, using a Frank Luntz survey of young American Jews as a jumping off point, writes:
Particularly in the younger generations, fewer and fewer American Jewish liberals are Zionists; fewer and fewer American Jewish Zionists are liberal. One reason is that the leading institutions of American Jewry have refused to foster -- indeed, have actively opposed -- a Zionism that challenges Israel's behavior in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and toward its own Arab citizens. For several decades, the Jewish establishment has asked American Jews to check their liberalism at Zionism's door, and now, to their horror, they are finding that many young Jews have checked their Zionism instead.
The problem, however, isn't with leading Jewish organizations that defend Israel, but with liberalism. As sickening as it sounds, Jewish liberals see their fellow Jews as noble when they are victims being led helplessly into the gas chambers, but recoil at the thought of Jews who refuse to be victims, and actually take actions to defend themselves. It isn't too different from American liberal attitudes toward criminal justice or terrorism, where morality is turned upside down and the lines between criminals and victims become blurred, and in certain cases, even reversed.
In the case of Israel, what changed over time was that Israel went from a state that exemplified Jewish victimhood (a role that Jewish liberals are comfortable with) to one in which Jews were actually in a position of power, which liberals are not comfortable with. Meanwhile, Palestinians, aided by the media, effectively exploited Jewish liberals by portraying themselves as the real victims, and Israel as the oppressors. I experienced this first hand once when I went on a Birthright Israel trip (which is a paid trip for American Jews to travel to Israel). At one point, we went to the cemetery at Mount Herzl, which is sort of Israel's equivalent of Arlington National Cemetery, and is located by Yad Vashem, Israel's main Holocaust Museum. While stopping at the cemetery, we were asked to offer our feelings standing in a cemetery honoring fallen Israeli soldiers, and the first American Jew who commented was this liberal girl who reflected, "All I can think about is how many Palestinian graves there are."
Israel, right now, is surrounded by terrorist groups dedicated to the nation's destruction. Palestinian society teaches its children to aspire to slaughter Jews much in the same fashion as the Nazis indoctrinated their young. Suicide bombers who die in the act of killing Jewish civilians are celebrated as heroes. It's a culture that glorifies death and uses women and children as human shields to gain sympathy from the international community -- and especially liberal Jews. And the terrorists are receiving aid from Iran, a radical nation that vows to wipe Israel off the map within the context of seeking a nuclear weapon.
Yet against this backdrop, all liberal Jews want to do is to pin the blame on Israel's efforts to defend itself, and engage in the magical thinking that more Jewish concessions will create peace and security. By doing so, they are helping the enemies of the Jews who are intent on finishing the job that Hitler started. While Israel has no shortage of critics, when Jewish liberals attack Israel, it's that much more damaging, because Israel's enemies can say, "See, even Jews admit that Israel is the oppressor."
While I would never suggest that Jews who happen to be politically liberal would want a second Holocaust to happen, I do think that by participating in a campaign to defang Israel and prevent it from taking the actions necessary to defend itself, that Jewish liberals are making things significantly easier for those who do want to carry out a second Holocaust.
Luckily, though, there are a lot of Jews in Israel who are determined not to let that happen.
SO........what do my GeeeeeZ readers think? I hope I can get a lot of Jewish readers to comment, but I'd very much like to know all of your opinions on this situation. And your opinion of Obama on this subject. THANKS....
Z: Thanks, Imp...this is an important bit of writing/thinking.
Saturday, I received a letter from CVS Pharmacies telling me my pharmacy has closed and they have my records and will be so happy when I use them for my pharmaceutical needs now.
Does that seem LEGAL to you? I'm going to CVS today to see what's up .... will let you know. In the meantime, doesn't this sound strange to you? They have MY RECORDS without my consent?
Mike's email said "Dennis, it's hard to imagine Napolitano and Holder not having read the Arizona Law on immigration...I think they have to say they haven't read it because, if they admit they have, they could be asked just which part they thought was different from FEDERAL LAW and which part was so racist or unfair and there ISN'T anything!"
Good one, huh? Made sense to me, Mike....if you're reading this :-)
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
One person stunned to hear of Mr. Kahn's double life as a tea-party troubadour is top Hollywood record producer and Grammy Award-winner Walter Afanasieff. The two have worked on projects for years and are now midway through writing and producing an album for a young singer.
"And I'm just finding out about this now? Oh my God, I'm getting chills hearing it," Mr. Afanasieff says, when informed of his friend's sideline. "I mean, he's a member of a huge, Democratic, liberal organization called the Los Angeles entertainment business. After digesting the news, he adds, "It's very wise he's going incognito."
The song is AMERICAN HEART...Below, an excerpt of the lyrics of Jon David's tea-party anthem. Click here to listen to the song. (Or HERE at geeeeZ, where I posted the song almost a year ago) Here's just a part of the beautiful patriotic lyrics:
Needs a new coat of paint and a delicate melody
But I say
I like the bruises
And a melody don't mean a thing If we don't have the strength to sing
The linked article from the Wall St Journal ends with "Less clear is what his Hollywood career holds. After Mr. Afanasieff, the record producer, heard the news about his friend, he sent Mr. Kahn a text message: "Tea Party? Really?" Really, Mr. Afanasieff... It's real alright. A few celebs are finally feeling they have to 'come out'..........I'd have thought liberal Hollywood would be liberal enough to embrace all points of view!? (no, I'm just kidding; wishful thinking)We bloggers all have to have the 'strength to sing'...Get the real news out, write, comment, care........and pray Jonathan Kahn's career isn't hurt too terribly much now that he's had the guts to come out, huh? Thanks.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Appeasement: 1. An appeasing or being appeased. 2.The policy of giving in to the demands of a hostile or aggressive power in the attempt to keep the peace. (New World Dictionary)
Political Correctness: See appeasement. (Pris)
The excerpt below is an example of how far we've come in our war against Jihad. You can read the entire article HERE. It seems for our country to have suffered deadly attacks from radical Islam, there are those especially who are highly "educated" (I use the term loosely) such as doctors, who have decided we must sacrifice our civilized culture and reward those who would destroy America with primitive practices once thought to be confined to tribes which are removed from all civilization.
This is about condoning mutilation of girls, otherwise known as clitoridectomies. This is about acceptance, in America, of this abhorrent procedure. They are calling this a compromise of the full procedure, a "nick". How thoughtful isn't it? Just partial mutilation.
This turn of events is absolutely shocking. That this could possibly be permitted by law in America, is unconscionable. If muslims are in a bind because we won't permit it here, let them go back to where they came from. What a primitive mindset these people have.
Are we to regress into becoming savages before we realize that being civilized is a thing of the past? To appease people of a culture so removed from our own? My God. IMO, this has nothing to do with politics, it has to do with misogyny or remaining a civilized society. Multiculturalism is a country killer.
By, Pris, who also shares the following by the great Mark Steyn:
" Last week, the American Association of Pediatricians noted that certain, ahem, "immigrant communities" were shipping their daughters overseas to undergo "female genital mutilation." So, in a spirit of multicultural compromise, they decided to amend their previous opposition to the practice: They're not (for the moment) advocating full-scale clitoridectomies, but they are suggesting federal and state laws be changed to permit them to give a "ritual nick" to young girls. A few years back, I thought even fainthearted Western liberals might draw the line at "FGM." After all, it's a key pillar of institutional misogyny in Islam: Its entire purpose is to deny women sexual pleasure. True, many of us hapless Western men find we deny women sexual pleasure without even trying, but we don't demand genital mutilation to guarantee it. On such slender distinctions does civilization rest. Der Spiegel, an impeccably liberal magazine, summed up the remorseless Islamization of Europe in a recent headline: "How Much Allah Can The Old Continent Bear?" Well, what's wrong with a little Allah-lite? The AAP thinks you can hop on the Sharia express and only ride a couple of stops. In such ostensibly minor concessions, the "ritual nick" we're performing is on ourselves. Further cuts will follow." MARK STEYN
Z: Should this be condoned in America just to appease muslims in this country? Why is it that it's only since 9/11 this is coming up? WHAT DO YOU THINK, GeeeeeZ readers??
Thanks, Pris, your opinion is well stated and I hope people wake up!
Here's a paragraph from the linked article:
"In Cleveland, Onyango's lawyers Margaret Wong and Scott Bratton said that now Onyango will be allowed to receive a work permit, a Social Security number, and a driver's license or state identification card. She must wait for one year to apply for legal permanent residency, or a green card, and five years to apply for US citizenship."
Come ONE, COME ALL! Break our laws...........we LOVE IT! And, what an example the President's aunt has set for us all, huh? Now, I can understand why America might not want to deport the president's aunt, let's face it, but should she really get this kind of treatment when she'd been ordered home a few years back? And should he have let her live in public housing?
Oh, and PLEASE....lest anybody think I have any grudge against this woman and slam me for my thoughts here.....read the facts and read our laws. I wish her the best, why wouldn't I? I just think there's something fishy here. How could this have been handled in a way that impropriety wouldn't be raising its ugly head?
Monday, May 17, 2010
"In the secular age, as religion was marginalized, its role as a source of meaning, purpose, and transcendence was largely taken over by the myth of nationalism. The nation-state became a main source of identity, prompting sufficient devotion in citizens to die or to kill. Where religious wars were always primitive and immoral, national wars were patriotic and just. Today, the tie between citizens and the state is tattered, even in America, which, in its democratic liberalism, was nationalism’s greatest success. The hollowing out of US institutions, from a Congress in the grip of political paralysis, to an extravagantly funded Pentagon that cannot defeat enemies whose bombs are made with fertilizer, to an economic regulatory system that has no influence, much less control, over financial predators — all of this suggests a breakdown not just of government, but of the national idea. Meanwhile, patriotism has become an exercise in hatred."
Ducky adds this:
Seems the religious right has played a strong role in this sad state of affairs, primarily through their stealth Calvinism.
As I commented to him in response, Carroll shows much naivite and misinformation which only seems used here to fuel Ducky's unrelenting hate-Protestants mantra.........