CONCOCTING A GENOCIDE

On 10/7/2023 demonic terrorists invaded Israel, raped, beheaded, tortured, and kidnapped civilians, and began a war that is arguably the most morally unambiguous since WW II. Universal condemnation would be the the expected outcome. And it was, for 5 minutes. In today’s inverted world, righteousness is subservient to victimhood. And when the defenders are Jews, well, they become the offenders by default.

Hamas had its tunnels, but by far its greatest weapon was world opinion. The groundwork had been carefully laid. By lobbying as victims for decades, most people were convinced of an estwhile Palestinian state that never existed. They were willing to ignore historical ties of the Jews to the land of Israel. It became fashionable to label them a “colonial” power, and depict the Palestinians as beleaguered subjects. The refusal of Egypt and Jordan to grant the perennial refugees a state when they were in charge could be buried in short-term memory and ignorance. The refusal of Arab neighbors to take them in could be dismissed, and used to reinforce their victimhood. By denying all peace accords over decades they cemented their place in history as ultimate victims. It didn’t hurt this cultivated image that Israel was affluent, educated and successful, and a potent military power. So eventually, when the Palestinians were granted the opportunity for self-governance and a potential place in the world community, they opted instead to be led by terrorists. We don’t know what percentage of Palestinians hated Jews in their hearts at this point, only that 20% of the Israeli citizenry was Arab and that it was the only Middle Eastern country in which Jews and Arabs could live peacefully side-by-side, in the sole regional democracy that permitted multi-ethnic participation. But the new leaders, Hamas, had a plan to reinforce the necessary anti-Semitism to support the extermination of the Jews, as mandated in their constitution: indoctrinate small children at a young age and educate them in hate, terror and murder. In the interim take the $ billions donated in international aid for infrastructure and use it to make a formidable arsenal of bombs to harass and maim the Israeli “overlords,” all the while faking governance and eschewing the development of a thriving economy. In such a way they could effectuate perpetual victimhood. Much of the world sympathized and lamented, and some donated. But no one, Arab or otherwise, wanted to take them in, anticipating nothing but trouble.

Trouble came on 10/7/2023, when a complacent Israel, ignoring warning signs, was attacked in a coordinated way they did not imagine was possible. To some it may seem suicidal for a limited power such as Hamas to take on Israel, but the terrorists were fueled by hatred, and knew they had several things in their favor: their extensive tunnels, the stockpile of bombs, the international perception of victimhood, and rampant, world-wide anti-Semitism.

After the 5 minutes of condemnation for Hamas’ invasion and brutality, the terrorists implemented their military and propaganda strategies, the latter arguably the more successful. They knew the hostages were not only bargaining chips, but would slow the advance of the IDF. While Hamas could callously use its citizens as human shields and propaganda tools, each death (reported or real) a contribution to the war effort, they knew Israel would be hampered by moral and public relations concerns. The Israelis’ success in prosecuting the war by dint of superior forces, fire power, and air superiority could be used effectively against them. All Hamas had to do was concoct a “genocide.”

On one level it’s surprising and another no, that the Palestinian death toll figures, released with such uncanny alacrity by the terrorists themselves, would be accepted on face value with limited skepticism. A head nod was made by the world to the fact that Hamas hid behind citizens and under hospitals, but increasingly the alarm was directed toward the escalating numbers of reported civilian deaths (how many “civilians” were “innocent” remains unknown, with a recent poll indicating 70% of Palestinians favor Hamas’ actions on 10/7). Early on we were told of Israel’s unprecedented attempts to minimize civilian collateral damage by dropping leaflets and creating safe passage corridors, despite Hamas’ efforts to hamper this. But as the war progressed in Israel’s favor, all the international attention shifted to civilian casualties, now accepted by many as “the genocide.” Calls for humanitarian aid (stolen by Hamas) and then cease-fire became more strident as Israel came closer to the end-goal of exterminating the terrorist threat. Ironically, all the earnest compassion became directed toward Israel, with not even an equivalent, much less a more forceful, call for Hamas’ surrender and the release of all hostages. The UN Security council passed a non-binding resolution directed at Israel for a cease-fire. The US abstained. President Biden placed increasing pressure on the Israelis not to make the final military push, in the view of many to shore up Islamic votes in Michigan in his failing presidential campaign. Others called for a “proportionate” response, whatever that means (it sounds virtuous, though). Cries for the elusive, repeatedly declined 2-state solution resurfaced, despite the obvious lack of any potential moderate leadership to fill the void.

The world-wide outbreak of overt anti-Semitism internationally and in our own country, especially on our campuses, was a wake-up call for me. I could no longer accept the premise that you could hide behind the term anti-Zionist. Yes, chants of “from the river to the sea” do mean exterminate the Jews. Although I still believe the US is the least anti-Semitic place in the world, it’s clear that both here and abroad the Jewish hate crimes that have been a persistent part of the social landscape are the tip of a much larger iceberg. I don’t believe all Muslims, either here or abroad, hate Jews, but I now believe a much larger proportion are Islamists than have publicly declared. Pro-Palestinian activists are all suspect as either woefully misinformed, morally bereft, or both.

Israel will continue to prosecute the war until it’s done, because it has no other choice. Its coalition government of Netanyahu and his opponents, and the Israeli people, are all on the same page. At this point, slow-walking the final stage is not garnering them favor on the world stage, so a rapid resolution would be welcome. A new Gallup poll reportedly shows a disturbing decline of Israeli support here to less than 50%. There is no bomb more powerful than propaganda.

No one is claiming the Israelis are saints; mistakes will happen, and innocents will die, because war is Hell. But if we lose our way due to moral confusion, Hell is no longer limited to the battle field.

AN OPEN LETTER TO TRUMP

Dear Mr. President:

As a citizen and a constituent it pains me to say you’re a terrible politician, and hence a failure. I know you were elected as an outcry against the status quo, and your training and background are as a businessman and an entertainer. Like many, I thought not being a politician was a plus. I was wrong.

The decline of our nation has been so insidious, so well crafted, that at least half the country now believes that the system is evil and must be excised, or are oblivious to what the notion of “fundamental change” means. The Left has convinced too many that “hate speech” must be exorcised, and they define what it is. They have convinced too many that dissidents to their ideology of diversity, intersectionality, and “anti-racism,” nothing more than Orwellian terms for separation, socialism, and racism, should be “canceled,” demonetized, muffled, and unemployed. They are taking the nation down the path of the Soviet Union, China, and Venezuela. And too many can’t see it despite its unfolding right before their eyes. The increase in racial tension, the violence, the suppression of dissenting voices—and you are, in large part, to blame.

I will give you credit for your energy and perseverance. Few people, at any age, could have swum against the political currents as you have, righting an anemic economy, passing criminal reform legislation, confronting Chinese deviousness, and increasing the security at our border. You have been consistently demonized beyond your flaws, and they are many, and lied about. It’s not surprising you’ve had judgment lapses in the setting of a 2-year hoax promulgated by the Left of Russian collusion with the full-throated support of the mainstream media, followed on its heels by an outrageous politically-motivated impeachment. And without recognition of any accomplishments. To the contrary, everything has been blamed on you, including COVID-19. You have become, to many, the devil-incarnate. It has been the second most impressive marketing campaign ever undertaken, only eclipsed by resurrecting the image of the United States, probably the fairest, most tolerant nation in the world in 2020, as the most systemically racist and economically elite. But I still blame you.

To quote a prominent conservative thinker and commentator, you constantly commit political malpractice. There are still many of us out there that believe in the fundamental principles that undergird the country. Many of us can still distinguish between the value of equality of opportunity and the evil of enforced equality of outcome. Many of us still understand the reason our Constitution defends all speech, because tomorrow someone who disagrees will decide your speech is “hate speech.” Many of us still understand that anti-white hatred and discrimination is also racism. We see that the cities suffering the most, tragically presided over and populated by the same citizens of color that blame you, have been run for decades by the very people calling you out. We are not fooled by references to past sins to paper over the present in service of a malignant movement, and can understand statistics and hard facts that undermine the Leftist talking points being used to fundamentally change the country. And you’ve failed us with your tweets. You take a step forward with grand speeches, and instead of pressing forward, presidentially, and underscoring the inevitable outcome of the ascendant Leftist agenda of more violence, race hatred, and restricted speech, your ego takes over and you take two steps back, devolving into self-absorbed tweets about trivia, such as Bubba Wallace and the noose incident. You’ve reinforced the media’s false narrative so many times that even those who don’t like the lurch to the far Left that has consumed the Democrat Party won’t vote for you.

I know you think your tweets helped you win the last election. I used to think so too. Now I realize you won in spite of them. I now believe you would have won not only the electoral college vote, but the popular vote as well if they had been less off-putting. I believe the current polls, indicating double-digit losses to probably the weakest presidential candidate ever (yes, that includes Hillary) reflect your own political sabotage. There are few votes out there for Biden; he’s a place-holder—they’re anti-Trump. The current climate of violence and racial tension fomented by the Left should be your political ally. Even the COVID-depleted economy, in the setting of your prior demonstrated success, should be a friend. But instead, your political malpractice and malfeasance has let us down. Under your continued leadership, our recovery would by no means be assured, but it will assuredly be devastated by your opponent and his as yet unnamed but likely far-Left running mate. And your intransigence may also shift the balance of power in the Senate.

If you can’t overrule your temperament and ego and place wisdom between your twitter finger and the screen, and quickly, you will fail the country. Too many of us are counting on you.

Sincerely,

A Worried Constitutionalist

THE ONGOING BATTLE RE LIVES VERSUS LIVELIHOOD

I’ve been forwarded material decrying the reaction to COVID as a political “hoax,” with deleterious outcomes far below that predicted by the models and reportage aimed at magnifying the risk, in the name of consolidating power and undermining Trump. I think we need to turn a sober eye on these accusations.

It is true the models were poor, and in retrospect, the evidence is suggesting that the response was more overreaching than warranted. It is also true that some politicos have used the crisis to exercise unbridled and sometimes unwarranted power (the Michigan governor being the most recent and extreme example of this). It’s also true the media has hyped the situation by showing the most extreme examples (which catch the most eyeballs), but this is always the case. The left is using the pandemic to try to unseat Trump (big surprise) just as they’ve been using every incident, big or small, real or unreal, since he took office. Do I believe this is an “evil genius” attempt to consolidate power? No, I don’t.

First, I don’t think the people we elect to harass…I mean govern us are any smarter, in the aggregate, than the rest of us. Seeing the devastation in Italy and Spain, and then in New York, it doesn’t surprise me that alarm ruled the day amidst visions of a “worst case scenario” and supportive, though now known to be poorly predictive, models. Underreacting would also cost much more than overreacting politically, and potentially in terms of lives lost (although if the economy flounders badly and long enough, the cure may indeed turn out to be worse than the disease). Just as I don’t feel Trump is either a moron or playing 3-D chess, I don’t think the progressives are playing a long game in which pursuing policies that further cripple the economy as the route to new found power or their vaunted “transformation” of America, though I have no doubt they’ll continue to use the economic fallout to their political advantage if they can (“never let a good disaster go to waste”).

One of the theories for California’s more benign course in this pandemic than places like New York despite its being a destination for Chinese nationals is hidden herd immunity from earlier exposure. There are some reports of and undiagnosed flu-like illness having made the rounds sometime in November or December. This theory is yet to be proved. However, we should keep in mind that California and other parts of the country that have done relatively well thus far may have benefited from the rather extreme social isolation. I know, it’s said that the models have already factored that in and still grossly overestimated the carnage. I’m not a statistician, but what if the models failed because they underestimated the positive effects of social isolation?

As a retired physician, reading the first-person accounts of nurses and doctors in the hardest hit hospitals, it’s hard for me to conclude that this is “just another flu.” I think the potential for a larger disaster loomed great with the knowledge we had at the outset, and I don’t fault the overreaction as many now perceive it, in hindsight. Still, if we don’t rapidly adjust our policies in the light of more recent knowledge and prevent a major economic disaster (if even possible at this point), I’m not willing to be as forgiving. I also don’t forgive the lack of preparation, on both the state and federal levels, past and present, for an eventuality that was clearly predictable.

Lastly, the crisis is not over yet, and there will certainly be many future opportunities to shine and to fail. I guess we’ll find out what we’re made of.

BIAS AND THE BATTLE FOR THE HEART OF AMERICA

I’m a “senior citizen.” From this lofty perch of advancing age I’ve had the privilege of seeing many changes, and have been hoodwinked more than once. I can’t speak with authority about eons past (although I’ve read others’ thoughts and experiences from bygone eras), but I can say that within my lifetime I’m both amazed and appalled at the efficiency and pervasiveness of an infrastructure built around the premise of disinformation.

Some of the workings of this unprecedented-in-human history digital loudspeaker are intentional, the rest a product of their own making, but it is built on a powerful communications dictum: If you repeat something often enough and loud enough, it assumes the veneer of truth.

Complicating matters, bias is difficult to perceive by the biased. And who is to determine who is biased, since they themselves may be tainted? Those truly seeking truth look for facts over feelings. But in the new digital world facts can be easily hidden like saplings in the midst of a great tropical forest (you know, the one that was “disappearing,” only it wasn’t).

Those purveying falsities or who are unwittingly or knowingly buying untruths come in three flavors: foolish, ignorant, and evil. The foolish buy without due diligence, getting secondary gains from group identity, supported by the illusion of acceptance under false premises of a greater good. They have little capacity to change. The ignorant, while similar to the foolish, could change if they took the time to inform themselves, but find it easier instead to accept the pervasive thought in the circles they routinely travel, with repetition and acceptance defining “truth.” Evil is, well … evil.

Bias is a dragon that is difficult to slay. Only the twin spears of an open mind and courage to explore new ideas can overcome it.

It’s a constant battle.

COMEY, COMEY, COMEY…THE SYMPTOMS OF A PSYCHOTIC AMERICA

If you’ve been trying to find out what’s going on in the world—you’re out of luck. You see, the media is preoccupied. In case you haven’t heard (and if not, you’d better stop binge drinking)…James Comey was fired.

There may be other important events occurring in this world of over 7 billion people, but none of them can hold a candle to this, the most significant of the present time—if the incessant media coverage is any indication. I thought perhaps it was just me agitating over the endless, redundant reportage and analysis of the firing of the FBI director by President Trump, an admittedly newsworthy but hardly earth-shattering event; but a recent poll documented that about a third of those asked had no opinion on the story. I don’t think the politicos and the journalists are in that camp.

I suppose it’s no surprise in an increasingly polarized political/ideological environment that this sort of psychosis will play out. The left, particularly Trump haters, believe or fervently want to believe that the president is in cahoots with Russia as this is the quickest and easiest route to impeachment, so spinning the firing as an attempt by Trump to smother the investigation is very attractive. The obvious about-face (you may recall a chorus of demands for Comey’s departure rang out after the Hillary email debacle) would be comical if it weren’t so disturbing. There were no complaints about Russia’s nefarious actions prior to Trump’s unexpected rally and win, as raising concerns of a tainted election would have been counterproductive to the anticipated Hillary rout.

In an Unraveling that precedes a Crisis, this type of behavior does serve a useful purpose: It plays nicely into the denial necessary to maintain the present degree of unstable equanimity. By avoiding the red-lining economic, cultural and societal issues that are being systemically neglected in the setting of a chaotic international scene, side issues provide cover for the fact that these failures have no simple solutions and may have progressed beyond the ability to reverse. Furthermore, many of the governing elite, media, and citizenry avoid it by not seeing it at all. The mindset, or the hope, is that “things are always like this, go up and down, and will eventually turn around.” This is actually true. However, a study of history reveals that these 80-100 year cycles “turn around” after a period of costly, deadly collapse and reset amidst a collective gasp of incredulity by the populace. And a positive final outcome is not preordained.

I used to see myself as a doomsayer. It’s true that the cries for a reversal of our present intransigence, for fiscal and personal responsibility and smaller government are more strident but are lost in an echo chamber of indoctrination for social justice and entitlement. Now I reserve my optimism for the post-Crisis reset: I still believe that there may be enough idealism left in America to rebuild the ethos that underpinned the foundation of this, the greatest experiment in human history.

I just wish the cure didn’t require electroconvulsive shock therapy.

THE COLOR POLITIC

Disregarding the radical fringe on either side of the political aisle, there is large segment of the electorate that is thoughtful, reasonable and informed that sees the world through different colored lenses.

This may be a “duh” moment, but for me it was starkly highlighted again yesterday during a polite but sometimes spirited family debate. My brother is intelligent, well-read and politically savvy. Although only a couple of years my senior, his interest in things politic antedated mine by many years—I remember a poster of then-presidential candidate John Kennedy hanging on our bedroom wall when I was in grade school.

During this highly unpublicized telephone debate he presented his arguments and I mine, neither of us expecting to convert the other. We had common ground on a few important points, agreeing that crony capitalism had to stop and Wall Street fraud must be more effectively policed. We agreed that a reboot of botched anti-monopoly regulation is sorely needed, and tax reform is long overdue. But when I told him that I believed the coming election is, to quote commentator Dennis Prager, a plebiscite on the nation’s ideology, he strongly disagreed. Instead, he began to attack Romney’s record and suggested I spend more time reading analysts willing to call both sides to task.

I don’t disagree that a balance of views is important; in fact, it’s the hallmark of a free society. But I submit that it’s not a question of defending Romney against Obama, or the bad behavior of any Republican against his or her Democratic counterpart. There are sinners in both camps. For me, it’s a question of a belief system—one based on the values that founded the nation versus a progressive agenda that leads us down the path that Europe is following, a road that veers left through a pass called social justice and opens on the cold moraine of frank socialism.

So my brother and others who share his views will continue to see the world as bluish green, and I as greenish blue, despite maps looking to define the country as blue or red. We see the same things and yet we don’t.

One of us must be color blind.

OUT OF CONTEXT

On February 1, Mitt Romney said he didn’t care about the poor. Of course, that’s not what he meant; he was taken out of context with a poor choice of words intended to convey the notion that safety nets for he indigent were already in place, and he was most concerned at the moment about the beleaguered middle class. His status as a multi-millionaire, however, painted a large political target on his back which his chief competitor du jour, Rick Santorum, wasted no time loosing a barb into. Romney spluttered for days trying to undo the damage.

On  March 19, Santorum, clumsily trying to underscore that his message was much bigger than one issue, said he didn’t care about the unemployment rate. The Romney campaign had its revenge, its captain proclaiming in no uncertain terms that the American public could rest assured that he, Mitt, cared. A lot.

Perhaps this illustrates why the support for the front-runner in the Republican race is, at best, lukewarm. My idea of a leader is some one who rises above the fray, the pettiness that clutters the political landscape before every election. Had Romney come forth with the statement, “I know my esteemed colleague just used a poor choice of words, as I did last month. Of course we all care about the poor and unemployed,” he would have garnered my respect. Worse than what the candidates’ behavior says about their character is what it says about their view of the American people: we’re too stupid to understand contextual speech.

Or … perchance I’m the dunce. I’ve heard many a political pundit describe how negative campaigning is very effective. Perhaps enough people follow the political process so peripherally that sound bytes taken out of context are at the heart of their decision-making. In which case the candidates, regardless of their inclinations, feel they must follow their campaign advisors’ warnings and ramp up this mindless sniping. Just once, I’d like to see a leader rise above it all, like a modern-day George Washington, and speak the truth we’d like to hear from men of honor. But George is long gone. In his place remains only a city honoring his name.

Sometimes I think he’d take it back if he could.

HOPE OR CHANGE

I’ve heard that several polls indicate that if the election were held today, Barack Obama would beat any of the Republican candidates. If true, this is compelling evidence for an electorate hungry to maintain the status quo. This seems illogical unless the majority believes one or more of the following:

• Conservatives are all evil, greedy rich people bent on accruing more wealth at the expense of the downtrodden worker.
• The president’s plan is solid and has only failed to produce results because he hasn’t gone far enough due to obstruction from the right.
• As indicated by recent statistics, the economy has begun to turn around despite the failure to balance the budget, develop a workable plan to reduce the debt or revise the current tax system.
• Government subsidies and redistribution trump concerns about debt accrual and “quantitative easing.”
• Government sponsored crony capitalism can be offset by more aggressive attempts at wealth redistribution.
• Without tight-fisted government control of the marketplace the world will be polluted or heated to extinction anyway so economic failure is a secondary concern.

I also suspect a significant proportion of the would-be Obama supporters are either marginally focused on the issues or craving normalcy to the point of engaging in wishful thinking.

A Republican president won’t guarantee success in turning this nation around. But a reelection of the current leader will be seen, with good reason, as a mandate to continue the current policies; policies which I predict will lead to a Greece-style disaster—with guns. So it’s more than an election—it’s a referendum on our dominant ideology.

While we get side-tracked with issues of contraception and abortion, it bears remembering that this is indeed the most consequential election in our lifetime. A baby conceived today will be taking its first breath at the moment in history we chart its future.

HEAR, HEAR!

The new health reform bill vaulted its first hurdle this past week with the Senate vote permitting its debate. As those of you who have been following my rant know, I’ve been incensed by the headlong rush to dramatically reorganize 17% of the national economy in one fell swoop, rather than in a considered, deliberate manner over time. It has the acrid stink of the worst kind of politics. Every so often (all right, maybe more than that) someone says it so clearly there’s no way that I can do it better, so for your edification and convenience I provide the following link: 

http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/11/27/kill_the_bills_do_health_reform_right?page=1 

I only hope that we can rein in those miscreants in Washington in time.