If you want to know what is coming, one of the best predictors out there is FOX News. Look for the guy they are all ganging up on and laughing at, telling him he is crazy; that man is right. The question is, why are FOX News reporters always wrong? If they were just dumb, they ought to be right nearly half the time, right? Who stood to profit by getting the gullible to buy into these institutions?
Today, the post on the official Pat Buchanan website is entitled “Has Israel Become A Neo-Nazi Germany?”
Pat has done the unthinkable for a major political commentator, he has invoked Godwin’s law at the highest level, comparing the Jewish state to Nazi Germany.
James Carville once said about Hillary and Obama, “If she gave him one of her cojones, they’d both have two.”
I would say of Pat Buchanan that if he gave Bush one of his cajones, the man wouldn’t be able to lift it.
I’ve changed my mind about talking about Israel. It needs to be said. I don’t plan on making a habit of it though.
CNN has come right out and said on live television that Israel broke the cease fire. Sources are listed here in another great video found over at The Osterley Times. President Carter also has come out with a similar statement in the Washington Post. The Times has been giving their full attention to the conflict in Gaza, with strong condemnation of Israel, which I can’t find much fault with. Neither side is innocent in this conflict, but which includes both fighters and children, who they bomb nearly indiscriminately. They are a nuclear nation sending national military tanks and jets given to them by the U.S. into civilian areas to fight people who are using rocks and small rockets.
“If words are words, or death is death, or powder sends the ball, You spoke the words that sped the shot — the curse be on you all.” -Kipling
Israel is in violation of 35 UN Resolutions.
According to the international community, the Gaza strip is not Israeli land.
The U.S. has sent over 100 billion dollars in mostly military aid to Israel. That is $300 per U.S. Citizen, or $14,000 per Israeli.
According to U.S. law, “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents. If Israel weren’t recognized as a nation, Its acts would be those of terrorism. the U.S. doesn’t recognize Palestine’s right to exist, therefore, Any military action taken by Palestinians falls under the legal definition of terrorism. Israel uses this to their advantage in ways they couldn’t against another sovereign nation, which is the real reason any peace talks inevitably come to a screeching halt with each side demanding recognition as a nation.
Israel should be held accountable for every innocent death. That is what it is supposed to mean when you decide civilian losses are acceptable; that the situation is so dire that you will accept all repercussions and try to make amends, not to claim that it was OK because there were probably terrorists in the area. The Palestinians on the other hand should be treated as individuals, since their acts are not those of a nation’s military. Until we close Israel’s loopholes we will see no proportionality.
I think the primary problem is their near unconditional U.S. support. The nation status really is right at the heart of the problem. Make the people aware of why and suddenly the propaganda that was convincing begins to make them feel dirty.
“The fellow who says he’ll meet you halfway usually thinks he’s standing on the dividing line.” –Orlando Battista
When you hear the top political candidates speak, one of the more common qualifications you hear them push is their ability to get compromise between democrats and republicans. What does a bipartisan compromise mean in America?
These are a few ways we compromise to break the deadlock:
- One is when individual representatives decide to sacrifice their convictions on the current issue in exchange for pushing through their own pet project they know would never fly otherwise. We call this pork.
- Another is to remove all the parts of the bill that are offensive to anyone, usually removing the taxes that will pay for the project, or the regulations on how it will be used.
- Or they can just spread panic and try to push it through under public pressure before realization and regret set in.
- Or they can just reallocate the money from something vital and force the other side to re-fund that (as seen with the Iraq surge, and California budget under Schwarzenegger)
None of these are helpful. The second example, splitting the difference, is what most often appeals to the public. This is like having each party with a hand on the steering wheel. The Democrats wanting to turn left, the republicans right; meanwhile the media is in the back seat rooting for the underdog. We will hit the center divider every time.
There are ways to affect compromise that aren’t dirty. An example would be this plan put forth by Bob Ingles. He proposes starting up a carbon tax (democrats want), but offsetting the tax by reducing taxes elsewhere, such as income taxes (republican opposition evaporates). I’m a fan of taxing problems to fund solutions. Pollution is a much bigger problem than income. If we give the free market incentive to clean up, they will do so. Since this is as much a behavioral issue as a technological one, I would consider it progress. Imperfect progress (for much the same reason as traffic cameras), but still far better than the business as usual methods of compromise.
This motion picture from the depression era explains nearly everything. Well, this is a cow…