More Democratic Demonization of Israel: 'Someone Explain to Me Why We Need to Make Israel Happy?'

Why today's Democratic-leftists continue to berate American support for Israel is beyond me sometimes.



The centrality of the Jewish state in U.S. foreign policy goes back to 1948 and the founding of that country. Indeed, it was the Democratic Party that worked to establish and guarantee the survival of Israel, as Ron Radosh tells it in his book, A Safe Haven: Harry S. Truman and the Founding of Israel. As the New York Times book review put it, Harry Truman was a "Zionist in the White House."

But today's Democrats have abandoned the moral clarity of earlier generations. Indeed, a large contingent of the mainstream Democratic Party has sought to excoriated Israel and cast off the Jewish state to extermination. One of the most ugly examples of this is found in the notorious anti-Semitic Daily Kos post, "Eulogy Before the Inevitability of Self-Destruction: The Decline and Death of Israel."

The entry recounts all of the historic anti-Semitic conspiracies against Israel. The essay notes, for example, that Israel embodies "the vessel of boiling blood of horror and perfidy in demonic vileness for its pattern of terrorism and murder in the name of Zionist ideology."



Most right-thinking folks abhor such evil talk. But what we do see is a more subterranean discourse on the left that excoriates Israel by questioning U.S. support for the regime. The end result, much like the uglier side of the debate on The Israel Lobby, is ultimately a crude repudiation of Israel as a hegemonic oppressor whose people are undeserving of American support.



We see this despicable meme yet again in an essay by the slithering Dr. Hussein Biobrain, "Appeasing Israel":

'Would someone care to explain to me why we need to make Israel happy? I don't even buy into the idea that having them in the middle-east is some great strategic advantage for us, and think it's the exact opposite. Israel is one of the biggest problems we have in the middle-east. That's not to say I don't support their existence or anything, merely that I fail to understand their strategic importance to us or why we need to keep appeasing them. As with our embargo of Cuba, I believe our support of Israel is more about domestic politics than foreign policy and anyone who suggests otherwise is selling something.'

Actually, what others are "selling" is moral clarity of world historical importance. Melanie Phillips can "explain it" to Dr. Hussein Biobrain:

... the reason why Israel figures so heavily in any discussion about the predicaments of our era is that Israel is the defining moral issue of our time. It is Israel, and the century-old existential onslaught against the Jewish people in its ancient homeland, which stands at the very centre of the titanic fight by truth against lies, fact against propaganda, freedom against totalitarianism, liberty against slavery, justice against injustice and reason against irrationality in which the entire free world is currently engaged. Israel is the quintessential canary in the mine. It is the front-line in the defence of the free world. If it goes down, the rest of us will go down. Those who are on the wrong side of the Israel issue are on the wrong side in the great struggle for civilisation against barbarism. That is why I return to it again and again.

And that is why I return to it again and again.



And to answer Dr. Hussein Biobrain, yes, it is about domestic politics, for the preservation of Israel remains central to the partisan debates in the domestic politics of U.S. international security.



See also, Ed Lasky, "The Democratic Party and the Jews."

Sarah Palin to Divorce? Left's Biggest Fantasy-Smear Dead on Arrival - UPDATED!! Atlas Shrugs: Time to 'Ratchet Truth' on Obama Predilections

From the Christian Science Monitor, "Palin Getting a Divorce? Nope":

Word of a pending divorce between former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and former First Dude Todd is gaining a lot of traction in Internet land.

“Palin divorce” is the fourth-most searched topic right now on Google Trends.

There’s only one problem with that. It’s not true. Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton is shooting down the story by an Alaskan blogger who claimed to have inside information on a split.

Stapleton posted a response to the charge on Palin’s Facebook page.

“Yet again, some so-called journalists have decided to make up a story. There is no truth to the recent “story” (and story is the correct term for this type of fiction) that the Palins are divorcing. The Palins remain married, committed to each other and their family, and have not purchased land in Montana (last week it was reported to be Long Island),” Stapleton wrote.

“Less than one week ago, Governor Palin asked the media to ‘quit making things up.’ We appreciate that the more professional journalists decided to question this story before repeating it,” she said.

The article links to Ace of Spades HQ, "Team Palin: Um, No, We're Not Divorcing; Please Stop Makin' Things Up." Ace then links to Conservatives for Palin, "Palin Camp Shoots Down Ridiculous Divorce Rumors Spread by CNN Stringer Dennis Zaki."

For the smears, check Memeorandum. Here's one, for example, "Todd and Sarah Palin to Divorce: Affairs on Both Sides":

According to C4P:

The release is in response to a ludicrous rumor being spread by Alaskan CNN stringer Dennis Zaki. Zaki, who previously bought into rumors of Trig Truth, picked up these allegations from the same source - the rabidly anti-Palin, Trig Truth-espousing anonymous blogger "Gryphen" of the blog "Immoral Minority". Gryphen is a friend of Zaki's, along with fellow Team Truth members Shannyn Moore, Phil Munger, and "AKMuckraker" of the Mudflats.

The rumor was already being picked up and spread around the echo chamber of the Alaskan Team Truther blogs...not only by Zaki, but by fellow Trig Truther "Doctor Phil" Munger of Progressive Alaska.Sounds like the Palins are cutting these rumors off at the knees.

Good for them.

More at Memeorandum.

**********

UPDATE! From Pamela Geller, "CNN Tells, Sells More Lies About Palin, it's Time to Expose the Truth About Obama" (FULL CONTENT WARNING: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S MOTHER ANN DUNHAM SOFT-PORN PICS AT ATLAS SHRUGS!! LINKS BELOW!! - CLICK AT YOUR OWN RISK!! - REPEAT!! CLICK ANN DUNHAM NUDE PICS AT YOUR OWN RISK!!):

The Palin camp has issued a statement decrying rumors of a Palin divorce being spread by Alaskan CNN stringer Dennis Zaki, sourced to an anonymous Anchorage blogger and the National Enquirer.

Let's understand this, CNN won't touch the birth certificate issue, the Rezko/Auchi corruption, his anti-semitism, ACORN/SEIU ties and corruption and legitimate stories that need investigation. But they write fiction about Palin. Daily. So why not tell the truth about Obama and his reported strange sexual predilections? My question is, it is well know[n] that Obama allegedly was involved with a crack whore in his youth. Very seedy stuff. Why aren't they pursuing that story? Find the ho, give her a show! Obama trafficked in some very deviant practices, where's the investigation?

Why isn't CNN pursuing the nude pornographic of Obama's mom, Stanley, (untouched pictures here and here and here) - I never ran the pics as it was unseemly and wasn't relevant. But this assault on Palin is too disgusting. It's time to tell the ugly truth about the enemy in the White House and their whores in the media. It's Obama operatives spreading the Palin lies. They know we won't play dirty, so it's time to play dirty.

I strongly recommend that conservatives start sending emailing these family pictures taken by Obama's spiritual father, Frank Marshall - child rapist and famous communist. I say when they ratchet up the lies, then we ratchet up the truth.

Now that's what I'm taking about!

See, "Democratic Stimulus Funds Go to Perv-Porno Promotions: 'Four Men, Three Women and a Gorilla'."

Added: Robert Stacy McCain:

QUOTE FROM SARAH PALIN

"Divorce Todd? Have you seen Todd? I may be just a renegade hockey mom, but I'm not blind!"

-- SARAH PALIN

Yes, that is her OFFICIAL response, which I got via phone at 5:35 this afternoon. Take that to the bank [original typos corrected].

**********

UPDATE II: Actually, I didn't know the Ann Dunham nude shots were published in October. See, Astute Bloggers, "Naughty Obama Mamma."

I guess I wasn't the only one.

The Truth About Obama’s Pressure on Israel

There's some considerable debate flying under the wire regarding some recent editorial comments on the Middle East peace process. See for example, the Los Angeles Times, "Obama's Evenhanded Mideast Policy," and the New York Times, "The Settlements Issue."

Well, check out Jonathan Tobin's response on this, "Editorials Skewer the Truth About Obama’s Pressure on Israel":

Yesterday the Washington Post stated the obvious when it noted that under President Obama, America’s relations with the state of Israel had deteriorated. In contrast to the administration’s desperate efforts to curry favor with Venezuela, Russia, and Iran, the focus of American foreign policy in the past seven months has been to heighten tensions with the Middle East’s sole democracy.

A day later, as if on cue, the Los Angeles Times and the New York Times responded with their own editorials in support of Obama’s blundering.

The L.A. Times’s stance, titled “Obama’s evenhanded Mideast policy,” is a straightforward defense of an abrupt change toward Israel while disingenuously claiming that Obama’s friendship with it ought not to be questioned. The editorial endorses the downgrading of the U.S.-Israel alliance from one of close cooperation and support to a more equivocal relationship, in which Israel would be subjected to pressure to conform to specific ideas about achieving peace. Considering “evenhanded” a good approach means ignoring the isolation that would ensue if the United States abandons Israel: the Jewish state would be effectively left without an ally in the region and surrounded by a hostile Islamic culture that still rejects its legitimacy even in those few states that have officially come to terms with it.

But the claim of evenhandedness is itself a falsehood since it is very clear that Obama’s public pressure on Israel far outweighs Washington’s gentle urgings that the Palestinians should cease their support for the infrastructure of terror and to halt the official incitement of hatred toward Jews and Israel that is the hallmark of Palestinian political culture. Nor has the administration’s call for Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations to tone down their hostility toward Israel been either energetic or successful.

The L.A. Times goes as far as to say that Obama is right to scrap George W. Bush’s commitments to Israel, which recognized that a complete withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines would be unrealistic in any peace agreement. Israel paid for this promise in hard currency through a complete withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 and was rewarded for this concession with the creation of a sovereign terrorist Hamasistan that remains free to bombard southern Israel with rockets. If Obama repudiates this promise, why should Israelis trust him when he makes his own guarantees about their country’s safety once a Palestinian state is put in place?

But even more to the point, the notion that as a prerequisite for peace, the U.S.’s demand for an absolute freeze to all building over the green line in both the West Bank and Jerusalem is as absurd as it is unfair. Israel has proved time and again that it will uproot settlements in exchange for peace or even for the false hope of quiet, as was the case with Gaza. The demand for a freeze does not advance negotiations; it is a substitute for talks, since squeezing Israel in this manner predetermines the outcome in favor of the Palestinians. That is not a negotiation but rather a dictate.

There's more at the link.

See also, The Astute Bloggers, Israpundit, Power Line, and Yid With Lid.

Hat Tip: Memeorandum.