In that post I had linked approvingly to Jeffrey Goldberg's Atlantic Monthly profile of McCain. So by way of explanation, here are some of the quotes in the article that I approved of:
His constancy is noteworthy. Nothing in his experience, recent or not-so-recent, has moved him away from his essential belief that the president has a duty to confront perceived threats well before they reach American shores. I asked Kissinger whether he thinks that McCain can be too inflexible on the subject of preemption. He said McCain will not change his mind if he feels that the nation’s defense is at stake. Much of this, Kissinger continued, is related to McCain’s sense of national honor, and personal honor. “He will not do the easy thing,” he said....
In my conversations with McCain, however, he never appeared greatly troubled by his shifts and reversals. It’s not difficult to understand why: tax policy, or health care, or even off-shore oil drilling are for him all matters of mere politics, and politics calls for ideological plasticity. It is only in the realm of national defense, and of American honor—two notions that for McCain are thoroughly entwined—that he becomes truly unbending...
McCain’s father, Kissinger said, saw the world the same way McCain sees it. “He was a military man, not a diplomat. Both men grasp the notion of consequences. From about 1967 on, we were experiencing a national trauma, with obsessive doubts about the fitness of government and with a yearning to just get out of Vietnam and get it over with, with a refusal to look at the consequences. Both of them understood that withdrawal without honor has costs. The son knows this from his own experience and from his father.”
I once asked Lindsey Graham to name something unusual about McCain in the context of the debate about Iraq; he said that McCain believes, among other things, that “some political problems have military solutions.” A related McCain belief that’s even more out of sync with America’s current mood: wars are quagmires only until someone figures out a way to win them...
FROM CAROL HERMAN
ReplyDeleteA lot of good it will do ya!
First of all, Jews are the pigmies in American politics. Where at least 12% of the electorate is Black. And, supposedly, 90% of all Blacks are voting for Obama. While the Jews, at least those who attend Morris Talansky's temple, are beacoup in the minority. To say the least!
What gets counted in America are STATES. And, even when wins are close ... you see a split where 24 states go blue; and the winnah of the red states, picks up the balance.
What's seriously in play? Well, Dick Morris posted his version of the Electoral College map. And, he put California as PINK! That's next to impossible. Obama is supposed to win CA (54 Electoral College votes.) And, NYC. Which is Clinton's home court. And, counts for 22 Electoral College votes, I think.) Meanwhile, Dick Morris dropped Florida into the PINK ZONE. Which means "toss up." But favoring McCain.
The bigger story? Well, just like 2004, you can expect the leftist media to hide this: BUT BUSH HAD COATTAILS.
In other words? In 2004, not only did John Kerry lose; the GOP dug deeper into congressional seats. (This was lost in republican territory in 2006. When the "average GOP voter" turned against the selection of House Members; and put dems in charge of da' House.) Oh. This gave you Nancy Pelosi.
The democrats haven't got the hang, yet, of what's popular. Sure. They're like a brand. But a brand that no longer attracts customers, who are "passers by." And, over the long haul?
Here you have an election that should have swept in DEMOCRATS. But the democrats, themselves, chose Obama. Over Hillary.
And, McCain hit the democrats hard, by choosing Gov. Palin. (Who has an astronomically high approval rating in Alaska.) So, don't go and expect any "October surprises" to undermine the GOP star. It was the dems who blew it.
Of course, like any horse race, it makes 11/4 an exciting time to turn to the Internet, to watch the incoming "buzz."
In Israel, this stinking "buzz" just went to Livni. Proving? You sure can lie to the Jews! Imagine all those Israelis who thought Livni was in for a collosal ride to the top. ANd, she got less than 500 votes. More Kadima members chose to stay home.
And, Olmert has just given his resignation; which the pundits told ya would be grasped in his hands for another six months. How do you say that the pundits haven't got a clue?
Same way you'd say it to gypsies. Who "guarantee" the winning lottery numbers, for a price.
Someday? Well, the price came due on Lehmann Bros. Another prima-donna concern run by a few Jewish fellas. But don't expect to go and learn anything there.
Since we're floating now on "make believe" money ... that may or may not stop the avalanche of bad debt.
Sure looks like Livni picked "bad debt," though. Too many Israelis can figure it out now. The media LIED. Down to their exit polls.
Why are Jews the last to discover these "secrets?" You'd think we'd be the first on the block!
Oh, if Livni "holds her coalition" together ... it means Ehud Barak "blinked." And, then? You're stuck with him. This will leave Bibi still free to keep on kicking the tires are a stalled Livni "go-cart."
Anyway, go ahead. Talk among yourselves. Obama blew a victory that should have been an easy "take." And, McCain capitalized on the flaws. Will this be enough?
STAY TUNED!
Just as you're doing from the seats of your pants in Israel.
I find the liberalism of Jewish voters something of a mystery. Mind you, I'm so conservative myself that McCain isn't conservative enough for me, nor close. He's always been a "moderate." But leave that aside. If you're an Israeli who is also an American citizen, concerned for Israel and concerned to use your vote well, it astonishes me that you could have any _thought_ of voting for Barack Obama. How could it be hidden or go unnoticed that this guy surrounds himself with the loony left? I fully admit that George W. Bush hasn't been exactly good for Israel. I know to my shame as an American the sorts of concessions he has pushed Israel to make--insanity. But you ain't seen nothing, I would guess, compared to what you'd get with Obama in the Presidency. And shallow? It's even becoming evident over here that Obama's grasp of issues, etc., is exceedingly shallow. The luster is beginning to fade.
ReplyDeleteAll of this even-handedness (to use a mild term), this hesitation over whether possibly to vote for Barack Obama, can arise only from the fact that liberalism (here using that word in its usual American sense) in politics is bred in the bone of so many Jewish voters. It's a shame, really, and it hasn't done Israel herself much good, it seems to me.
Reb Yaakov
ReplyDeleteI ,too, read the Atlantic piece, and the very quote that is selling you on McCain struck me as further evidence of the basic problem with his candidacy. Health care and tax policy mere political issues! Good heavens, the man has admitted he knows nothing about the economy and his wild swings ( sort of like Reggie Jackson swinging and missing)) in the last week highlight his fundamental unsoundness on the key issues that should dominate this campaign. Unless the US picks itself off the floor and rebuilds its infrastructure ( physical, ,financial, social, educational) there will be no military might for future leaders to use to prove their patriotism. As to the comments above ( and to the apparent views of my fellow frum Jews about Obama ( and don't even get me started on Palin) all one can do is shake one's head and be thankful that the Jewish vote probably won't be decisive this year.
FROM CAROL HERMAN
ReplyDeleteJews have lived in America, now, for quite some time. Meaning? The old "first generation" ... and those born in Europe, who came and lived in NY, without moving away ... has seen "shifts" in influence JUST THE SAME.
Including that with FDR, who counted on the Jewish vote; when NY State was a prime battle ground state ... (But now only contains 22 Electoral College votes). Whereas California contains 54 ...
Should point that "politics" is no longer in the hands of the unions. Or true-believers in socialism. Heck, or even the Catholic Church! (The Catholic Church's Father Coughlin bedeviled Franklin Roosevelt.)
Even the status of "once was" in hollywood; has been inherited by innept dope-addicted children. Who no longer display anything even resembling the mainstream.
One reason you can confuse Israelis about American politics is that in Israel, the extremists RULE! The smallest party; at the edge of acceptance, becomes a big player when someone, for instance, like Livni, is trying to form a government with 60 willing members. Some? They just go "in" to hold up the taxpayers. There's very little binding people together.
Yet when the extremists get into power, oh, boy!
Of course, the "other bastion" is academia. Where, at one time, mostly men went. And, were proud of being "the first member of their families to go to college." Today? It's shifted. There are way more women on campus. Especially since gender politics "bent" academia. And, gained access to "power." (Similar to hollywood, there seems to be shifting sands, here.)
As to how the McCain/Obama ticket plays out? No one bets beforehand, if all you have to do is wait.
Just like Israelis are now "waiting" to see what Livni can cobble together. (And, where "resignations" just mean "time out." But the seat's kept warm, just the same.)
Two different systems!
Too bad for Israel that the American dynamics ... which mixes together 50 separate states ... And, only requires ONE CANDIDATE to appeal to the nation. Everyone else is "local." And, the taxpayer pot is used for self-aggrandizement. Many more games than just "double-receipts" on a meal.
Of course, it is in America, that DONAVAN's statement hangs out.
Donavan was called before Congress, and royally smeared. When it was over? It was proven he was innocent; so he asked the senate-critters, "Now, where do I go to regain my reputation?"
As to politicians, here in America they are held in low regard. Along with other lawyers. And, journalists. People with big paychecks, but not much brain power to show for this payout.
The other thing to recognize? If you're trying to read tea leaves ... look and see if you see crowds.
For me? I kept looking to Rabin Square, to see if sign-carrying hordes came out to scream at Olmert. Nothing doing.
Here, in America, there's a new good place to look. NEW VILLAGES, FLORIDA; a retirement community about one mile north of Orlando. (Orlando: Home to Disney world.) Why you should look? Sarah Palin just went there to speak. And, the press, itself, reports a turnout of 60,000 people. (The chief of police said it was 70,000 people.)
Biden? He drew 2,000 people.
And, Bush, in 2004, drew 20,000.
Sometimes? You can read if someone's (or something) is popular enough, just by the lines that form.
You could see, for instance, that jeans ... once only worn by American sailors while at sea; became a fashion icon. And, bunced the French off the list of "fashionable women dressers." Sure. You can believe me. Or not.
But Obama now has some real problems. Top off that Americans vote IN SECRET. So you could tell a pollster that Obama is your man; but that you don't take race into account. Heck, he's half white.
But Obama is definitely radical left.
Good luck to ya if you're backing that horse!
Meanwhile, guess what?
Back in 1963, when Martin Luther King, Jr., was asking Blacks to revolt; he was hoping they'd revolt down south. That didn't happen. They revolted in Chicago. And, New York City. Where the Blacks attacked the Jews. Because Jews owned property in Harlem. And, places like that in Chicago.
It is, as a matter of fact, the reason JFK panicked. And, LBJ told him "tough titties." IF he wanted to "save Texas" ... FFK had to go down there, himself.
Okay. So you know what happened "next." Followed by other "nexts."
As to the democrapic party; Hillary would'a been a shoo-in ... in comparison to Obama's changes.
But radicals, when they get close to the top, go insane. Just like Livni did, too. (In my opinion.)