Memorial Day, 2011

As an Elite Member, U are cognizant of this Blog's overriding mission - to fulfill one small duty of citizenship in the greatest nation ever conceived, the last best hope of all mankind. It is because I believe in American Exceptionalism that I seek to contribute, however on the margins, to America as a shinning beacon of freedom to the rest of the world. Sure, I know - what kind of egomaniacal person thinks this way? Well, this Blog is never about me, so that irrelevant question must remain for others to ponder.

Here, today, and tomorrow and every day thereafter, we celebrate the best and brightest of the nation's citizens - our citizen soldiers. Most succinctly stated, we are free because many others are dead, willingly. The magnitude of such sacrifice is beyond my limited powers as a rhetorician to honor adequately. Instead, whenever I share a public space with a service person, I overcome my natural shyness and say to him or her - "thank you for your service." Not enuff, but its my starting point on giving back. Enjoy this weekend with your friends and family, and the whole American family.

O Jerusalem, Part Trois

I am loathe to be seen as being a pedantic bore; nonetheless because the survival of Israel is fundamentally about the future contours of all western civilization, free or slave, I am compelled to orate on this matter thrice more. And lest we forget, brave palestinian freedom fighters get streets named after them on the west bank - but only when the number of Jewish school children murdered on a bus ride home exceeds thirty-five. Just three weeks ago, wild celebrations erupted in Hebron after palestinian terrorists (oops brave freedom fighters) crept into a west bank settler's home and slaughtered this family, including two children under the age of three.

This asymmetric war results in the death of innocents daily, and do not for a second conclude that palestinian innocents, particularly children and other non-combatants caught in the proverbial cross-fire, are not mourned here, as well. No one ensnared in this cauldron of endless violence should be deemed a life not worth saving.

It is for this reason that I am so concerned by Presidential rhetoric that seems only to enflame and embolden those committed to Israel's demise. The Mid-east is too explosive today for careless or poorly conceived speeches that play well to the international community, but put lives on both sides of the conflict in greater jeopardy.

Here is the cognitive dissonance that I find inexplicable from a serious-minded national leader:

Israel is today, and always will be, the national homeland for the Jewish people. No Palestinian demand to dismantle the Nation of Israel will be permitted or seen as consistent with the obligation of the Palestinians to live in peace with their Jewish neighbors.

(Paraphrasing Mr. Obama's many statements to Jewish audiences, most recently AIPAC);

"I need to articulate the legitimate scope of a fair settlement, so that the Palestinians will be assured that they can attain their own homeland through direct talks with the Israelis, and not by seeking unilateral recognition by the United Nations and with the greater international community." (Almost direct quote from Mr. Obama's AIPAC speech);

The "Right of Return" for palestinians (descendants of those who fled their homes in 1948, estimated to be in multiple millions) is a matter entirely appropriate for the parities to negotiate and resolve themselves through compromise and fair accommodation of each others interests in this regard.

(Paraphrasing Mr. Obama's Press Conference this week with Prime Minister Cameron in London)

Why would the President find the Right of Return to be necessary for the establishment of a Palestinian homeland, as this means they want no part of it, as they insist on moving to Israel.

Indeed, we have a President who says that peace is too urgent to be delayed even another single year or month. Accordingly, simultaneously, he tells us that the Palestinians must know that the Jewish Homeland's right to exist is non-negotiable, but the Right of Return (which will extinguish this same Jewish state, overwhelming it with non-jews) constitutes a negotiable issue for "ending" this conflict.

Where is the adult in the room who tells the current tenant of the WH that he can not hold two wholly inconsistent concepts to both be valid simultaneously? Just asking . . .

O, Jerusalem, Part Deux

To my tardy listeners only - do not read Part Deux until u have read Part Une (See below).

In response to the several negative responses (see part une) to the Man Made Disaster delivered on Thursday, the President went into the Lion's Den yesterday, AIPAC, seeking to give it to his many critics - that is, the Answer to the only real question - why now?

Here is his straight forward and true, I believe, answer:

"The march to isolate Israel ... will continue to gain momentum in the absence of a credible peace process. For us to have leverage w/. the palestinians, w/. the arabs and w/. the international community, the basis for negotiations has to hold out the prospect of success. So, in advance of a five day trip to Europe, in which the Mid-east will be a topic of acute interest, I chose to speak about what peace will require."

There u have it, without a doubt, Mr. Obama did it so the French and Italians will not speak harshly to him about Israel over the next five days. We should all be reassured - now that the "international community" has Israel's back, peace in our time is just around the corner.

Clearer still from his remarks to AIPAC is the President's cognitive dissonance commitment to the two state solution - Israel and Palestine - two sovereign nation's side by side, together in harmony:

"As for security, every state has the right to self defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself - by itself - against threats ... The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated w/. the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a SOVEREIGN AND NON-MILITARIZED state. "

Sorry, Mr. President, you can give the palestinians a sovereign nation or a non-militarized state, but not both together. As U told us - "every state has the right to self defense" - so when Palestine joins the community of nations in the United Nations, it will be fully entitled to have an army, a navy and an air force to defend its international borders against foreign threats.

So, again we are left with but one question - does this President not know the meaning of the word "sovereign", or does he not care that we do know, so long as the mean Euroes are nice to him this week? ... Just asking.

O, Jerusalem

In the several weeks of hiatus for this Blog, I have considered a number of disparate topics. One candidate gave rise to a bone to pick with a number of elite males, but writing about Big Men behaving Badly left a bad taste in my mouth. Accordingly, Men behaving Well instead swelled me with pride for my gender. Thursday, in an almost unprecedented act of principle, President Obama called for the destruction of America's only dependable ally in the Mid-East, just when the entire Region is convulsed in violent upheaval. Amazing; never before have I seen an American President demand the Jews proceed to negotiate the dismantling of Israel, when no rational person can believe that they will willingly march back into the proverbial ovens of national suicide.

As Prime Minister Netanyahu stated: "It's not going to happen and everybody already knows it". Then, this presidential act of utter futility demands a one word question: whydoit? Spectacularly untimely, and more so because it came from a President facing a tough reelection bid, one in which the Jewish vote may prove decisive, I applaud the sheer courage of Mr. Obama's principled stand; well sort of, were I to have some insight into the why now question. With the recent "Unity Government Accord" entered into by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (thereby making it the official policy of the palestinians that the Jews should be exterminated, but only after they have been driven into the sea), there is no possibility of peace negotiations resuming anytime soon, let alone a settlement being reached.

So whydoit? Well, many in the main street media say that this President is a real leader who is willing to take risks for real peace. Yet, that refrain merely reminds me of Mr. Netanyahu's retort when a U.S. diplomat tried to foist that same canard on him in a private meeting:"I will not be schooled, by you Sir, on the need for Israel to take risks for peace promises, when you reside comfortably in Chevy Chase, Maryland. Talk to me about what you deem reasonable risk after you move your own wife and children to the very shadows of the Golan Heights, which you now want to be riddled with arab rocket launchers having all Israel population centers within range."

The only plausible outcome for this stunning reversal of fifty years of bi-partisan US policy toward Israel is that at the 2012 election, Mr. Obama will be hearing form all Americans - next year in Jerusalem, undivided and unsurrounded.

No Guts; No Glory

Let me be very clear here; I sincerely congratulate President Obama on his recent summary execution of Osama Bid Laden. Due to his seemingly terrible karma, I am both pleased and surprised that the Navy Seals accomplished their almost impossible mission without any collateral damage or casualties suffered by the assault team. No miranda warnings needed, as Osama was pre-emptorily granted his right to remain silent, permanently. So neat and tidy.

Clearly, the President is now on a roll in "Being the Man"; indeed, in the same weekend that he off'd the planet's most wanted terrorist, he also clobbered "the Donald" at the Washington Correspondents' Dinner. When his oral assault on Trump had ended, not even the Donald's hair was unbent or unbruised. Truly, this amount of vitriolic ridicule was unbecoming of a Chief Executive, particularly when directed at a "carnival barker", who's status as a periodic irritant was unworthy of such elevated attention.

Now, Osama was clearly worthy of Commander-in-Chief's attention, and the personal time spent on this effort was commeasorate to the task at hand. Capture and interrogation was the actual stated goal of this special forces operation, so when analyzed in that context, it was not as perfectly accomplished as we are being told. Nor was it the "amazingly gutsy call" that only a President willing to take great risks could have made. Osama was discovered, not in an isolated mountain village or cave, but rather in an urban center in which thousands of top Pakistani military leaders live and work. Pakistan's military controls dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear bombs. Had the President authorized the bombing of Osama's three story building and the resultant explosions caused the death of even one General's child playing in the yard next to this compound, the consequences could have been dire indeed. Imagine what the reaction from Pakistan would have been had an errant cruise missile wiped out next year's graduating class at their West Point Academy, located less than one-half mile from the target.

Hey, the Seals were expendable after all. Why, just last year, this Administration court- martialled three Seals for allegedly slapping a captured terrorist, so putting Seal Team Six in harm's way, with the unequivocal understanding that no prisoners would be slapped around, was just another day's work for these super soldiers. Just want to emphasize that these American heroes should all get medals and not be subjected to "Holderesk" justice.