For some, today is the end of Hanukkah. For Al Gore, it is the end of the world. 

Al Gore is a private citizen. He has as much right to spout off as the village idiot in the town square of his choice. Heck, I do it on a daily basis on my blog. Yet for some reason, unlike me, he does not seem interested in saying anything meaningful or relevant.

He may not have the answers to global hotness (unless he has Shannon Doherty’s phone number and can get it to me), but at least he cures insomnia, although it is not true that he invented Nytol.

Nevertheless, whenever I need a column right away, ripping this fellow is not only easy, but good for the intellectual environment.

He recently wrote one of his smug self satisfying columns in “The Nation,” entitled, “A Precious and Painful Vision of the Future.” That column has already been written. It is called, “President Hillary.” Mr. Gore would agree with me on that one, since it forces him to check his ambitions at the door given that no evidence has surfaced that Bill Clinton and Al Gore ever slept together. Although…no…not going there.

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/04/hey-al-gore-its-freezing-outside/

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/04/no-global-warming-in-new-yorkam-i-back-in-la-yet/

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/11/are-the-greeniacs-wrong/

Al Gore is speaking, so hopefully like a tree falling in the forest, nobody will hear it. 

Now, for the Borealog.

“I have a purpose here today.”

So does everybody else. Relevant people do not need to announce they are relevant. That is why I do not keep protesting how handsome I am. I let my mom handle that.

“It is a purpose I have tried to serve for many years. I have prayed that God would show me a way to accomplish it.”

I pray to God as well. He answered my prayers in 2000. Pray quietly, God does not like being invoked loudly.

“One hundred and nineteen years ago, a wealthy inventor…”

Zzzzzzzzzzz…Don’t worry Mr. Gore. You are not any more boring than any other pointy headed academic professor discussing things only you care about.

“Seven years ago tomorrow, I read my own political obituary in a judgment that seemed to me harsh and mistaken–if not premature.”

That is not for you to decide Mr. Gore. Perhaps you would like to regulate my column as well. As for your political obituary, it was delayed 5 weeks because of your selfishness.

“We must act.”

Your entire Vice Presidency was an act. I pray there are no more showings.

“Life or death, blessings or curses. Therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”

What does the environment have to do with abortion? Al Gore and other liberals are another reason republicans might want to consider being pro-choice.

“We, the human species, are confronting a planetary emergency–a threat to the survival of our civilization that is gathering ominous and destructive potential even as we gather here. But there is hopeful news as well: we have the ability to solve this crisis and avoid the worst–though not all–of its consequences, if we act boldly, decisively and quickly.”

Yes, it’s called Islamofacism. Perhaps if Al Queda blew up some trees he would understand this.

“So today, we dumped another 70 million tons of global-warming pollution into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding our planet, as if it were an open sewer. And tomorrow, we will dump a slightly larger amount, with the cumulative concentrations now trapping more and more heat from the sun.”

Where does he get his numbers? Doesn’t New Jersey contribute twice that every day? The state still exists (ok, unfair, I admit).

“As a result, the earth has a fever. And the fever is rising.”

The heat is rising, I think, is an x-rated film. I personally have the fever for the flavor of a Pringle (oh great, now that obscure commercial from a couple decades ago is in my head).

“We asked for a second opinion. And a third. And a fourth.”

Saddam Hussein would ask his sons who they supported to lead Iraq. There was complete consensus. Want a 5th opinion? You’re boring, and most likely, wrong.

“The experts have told us…”

Experts are useless. Experts give Al Gore an award, so he is now an expert, and he received an award from people who happened to agree with him. I took logic in college, but mathematical symbolic logic, not circular.

“We are what is wrong, and we must make it right.”

Mr. Gore, you sired children, I have yet to do so. Therefore you are the problem. Tell your fellow liberals to stop breeding. I am not the problem, and resent you blaming me. Oh, and I would happily fly a private jet, and would not lecture others. Perhaps you can spread equality by giving mink coats to poor third world children. They will starve, but look fabulous. Hey, at least I do not pretend to help.

“Northern Hemisphere…(blah blah blah redacted)…seven years from now.”

We will all be burned to a crisp in 2014. I am glad I party like it’s 1999.

“In the last few months, it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter.”

Yes, again, it’s Islamofacist terrorism. Come on Osama, destroy a wetland already so the left will care.

“Desperate farmers are losing their livelihoods.”

Yes, it’s called the death tax. I wonder if more excessive regulations on tobacco farmers are what Mr. Gore wants, since he despised tobacco inbetween stints of spiking, planting and growing it.

“The very web of life on which we depend is being ripped and frayed.”

Perhaps Al Gore would have Spiderman fight Al Queda.

“One of the very first winners of the Prize in chemistry worried that, ‘We are evaporating our coal mines into the air.'”

We have more coal than we know what to do with. Besides, coal mines cannot float or fly into the air. Ever try to lift one? Coal can be gassified safely, and should be.

“Yet as George Orwell reminds us: ‘Sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.'”

I avoid false prophets, especially former politicians with no controlling legal authority or moral credibility.

“Indeed, without realizing it, we have begun to wage war on the earth itself. Now, we and the earth’s climate are locked in a relationship familiar to war planners: ‘Mutually assured destruction.'”

Does this mean the Earth is trying to kill us? Mutual requires both sides trying to kill. Heck, then we should kill the Earth. It would be self defense! No, not really.

“Now science is warning us…”

No, you are warning us. Science is apolitical, and has no agenda.

“There is an African proverb that says, ‘If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.’ We need to go far, quickly.”

You need to go far, quickly, and more importantly, quietly. My friends and I would pay the plane ticket, but you have a private jet.

“we must ensure that in mobilizing globally, we do not invite the establishment of ideological conformity and a new lock-step ‘ism.'”

Good. I disagree with you, and will not conform to your nonsense. Stick to lockbox-ism.

“That means adopting principles, values, laws, and treaties that release creativity and initiative at every level of society in multi-fold responses originating concurrently and spontaneously.”

Yes, it is called ingenuity, which is found in the private sector.

“We must understand the connections between the climate crisis and the afflictions of poverty, hunger, HIV-AIDS and other pandemics. As these problems are linked, so too must be their solutions. We must begin by making the common rescue of the global environment the central organizing principle of the world community.”

The central organizing principle is combatting terrorism. (Grabbing a bullhorn)…IT IS CALLED AL QUEDA YOU POMPOUS GASBAG!

“This week, I will urge the delegates in Bali…”

Bali is more concerned with nightclub bombings. You are as relevant there as you are here, which I believe is absolute zero on the Kelvin scale.

“And most important of all, we need to put a price on carbon–with a CO₂ tax that is then rebated back to the people, progressively…”

No thank you Robin Hood. You get enough of my paycheck.

“The great Norwegian playwright, Henrik Ibsen…”

I might hang myself with my necktie, so I hope someone else finishes this column for me.

“How did you find the moral courage to rise and successfully resolve a crisis that so many said was impossible to solve?”

I voted for George W. Bush in 2000, preventing emissions of gas emanating from your administration, not counting the nocturnal emissions of Mr. Clinton.

“So let us renew it, and say together: ‘We have a purpose. We are many. For this purpose we will rise, and we will act.'”

For once, Mr. Gore is right, even as he is far left. I will be acting now to save the world from real proven threats. I shall vote republican in 2008. Killing the terrorists protects free speech. Yes, it protects Mr. Gore as well, but that would only be a price to pay if anyone of significance was listening and taking him seriously. Oh wait, I forgot about the “experts.” They give each other awards, so they must be right.

Mr. Gore, I won the 2007 Bloggers Choice Award for most passionate fan base, so I am automatically right and you are wrong.

Wow, my credentials are impressive. That was easy.

eric

As the 8th night of Hanukkah approaches, I would like to share with you all some Jewish wisdom. Luckily for all who value wisdom to begin with, it will not be coming from me. Much finer minds than mine had a discussion about issues a couple days ago in San Francisco that reached sky high levels of the intellectual stratosphere.

In the Belly of the Beast, San Francisco, republicans and others not hostile to conservatism came to Temple Emanuel to hear Dennis Prager, Mona Charen, and John Podhoretz discuss issues. The esteemed panel was moderated by Michael Medved.  The event itself was sponsored by the Jewish Policy Center, led by Jonathan Schanzer. 

Yesterday I discussed the quality of the event, which was sky high.

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/12/the-belly-of-the-beast/

Today is the substance of the transcription, and there was substance in abundance. With that, below is the recap of the discussion.

Michael Medved: “Are there reasons for optimism coming out of the recent Arab-Israeli Peace Summit in Annapolis?”

Mona Charen: “No. This is like Lucy holding the football, and Charlie Brown thinking he is finally going to kick it. How many times does Lucy have to pull the football away before Charlie Brown realizes this is not going to happen? ‘Peace process’ is an absurd expression. Peace is a state of being, not a process. Although President Bush is the most Pro-Israel President America has ever had, this is a betrayal. Annapolis is a negotiation with a weak Abbas. He is not a man of peace. The only question regarding Annapolis is how much damage will be done. Failure itself is not in doubt.”

John Podhoretz: “Syria sent their deputy foreign minister to Annapolis. You know a country wants no desire to be a part of anything when all they send is their deputy foreign minister. He walked around scared to death the whole time that somebody might ask him a question. However, the major danger in Annapolis is not Syria, it’s Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Ohlmert. Ohlmert has questiond the legitimacy of the 1967 borders. Jerusalem is supposed to be on the table, and the surrender of Jerusalem is a preposterous non-starter. Israeli attendee Tzivi Livni was wondering why no one would shake her hand. Annapolis is meaningless. Unlike most negotiations that start fresh, Israelis always begin with the last point of negotiation from the last summit, and are then asked to move more.”

Dennis Prager: “My whole life I was open to land for peace. I am no longer willing to delude myself. There are two types of liars, those who lie to others, and those who lie to themselves. Those who lie to others are sinners. Those who lie to themselves are hopeless. There cannot be peace when there is no one to make peace with. Peace activists are sweet, but naive human beings. I told a leftist Jewish peace activist to go up to the Arabs, disclose they are an American peace activist, and ask them if Israel should exist. They came back and said they did not understand the response. It is a yes or no question. An unclear answer is a very clear answer. The answer is no. Annapolis was based on two preconditions, that Israel not be defined as a Jewish state, and that terrorism not be mentioned. What is left to talk about? I love peace, and I love Israel being alive. If you hate President Bush and Israel, the left loves you. The New York Times reserves page A 46 for terror stories, and even they did not cover Annapolis. There are only two purposes for Annapolis. Either this is purely emotional, or the same State Department still will not give up its goal of undermining President Bush.”

Michael Medved: “Does the new National Intelligence Estimate report justify the view by many on the left that, ‘Bush lied, people died?'”

John Podhoretz: “The NIE is a perplexing document. The old report stated that Iran could have nuclear weapons by 2009. The new document states that Iran stopped actively pursuing nuclear weapons in 2003. However, it also states that because Iran currently harvests uranium, it could harvest enough uranium to build a bomb by 2009. Nothing has changed. The report was declassified because if it was leaked, President Bush would look bad. It is awful that we have gotten to the point where classified information has to be released for political reasons to avoid public relations nightmares. People have speculated on the reasons why Iran stopped their weapons program in 2003. Nobody in America knows. The only people who know the reasons for what they do are Armageddonijad (sic) and the Mullahs. Some say international diplomatic pressure was the reason, but in 2003 there was no diplomatic pressure on Iran. Were there phone calls from Germany, Russia and France telling Iran to cool it? Were they on the phone saying that Bush was a cowboy, and they could not stop him if Iran did not back down? This is doubtful. We do know that in 2003, Saddam was deposed and Khadafi then stopped his weapons program.”

Dennis Prager: “What keeps me sane? We live in the age of stupidity. Why is this the age of stupidity? Because so many people have gone to college. They think they know things. I make an exception if you went to Community College. University Professors are secular. We live ina  secular age. There is no wisdom in secularism. Secular intellectuals are people who give girls trucks and boys dolls. What often happens is the girls name the trucks and take care of them. Expertise has nothing to do with wisdom. Firefighters have expertise putting out fires. However, go to any school and all the doors are locked. School fires are so incredibly rare, yet classrooms are scorching because of prohibitions on opening the doors. Fire codes set in place by experts for situations that virtually never occur. Expertise is not wisdom. Let non-intelligence experts receive information and evaluate it themselves. Experts can present their findings and non-experts can analyze it. I want to know what people know, not what people think. By leaking this document, the NIE subverted American security.”

Michael Medved: “My boys used Barbies as guns.”

Mona Charen: “There is no getting around nature. As for the NIE, how could we be so blind in the 1930s? Yet we were. We are still blind in 2007. The NIE report makes this whole Iran mess seem like nothing more than a terrible bad dream. I was reading a book to my sons, ages 8 and 10, about mice being attacked by rats. The rats disappear into the shadows, and the mice then think everything is safe. My sons innocently asked me if this was a book about liberals. As for our intelligence experts, the CIA stereotype of the tough guy that comes in rough and savs the day no longer exists. The CIA is now filled with Valerie Plame types. They are Milquetoast, New York Times editorialist readers.”

Michael Medved: “The Arab world is actually now disseminating a documentary explaining why Walt Disney created Tom and Jerry cartoons as a Jewish conspiracy. The documentary states that Walt Disney was a Talmudic scholar, which he wasn’t. Walt Disney did not create Tom and Jerry. The Jewish angle is that Jerry represents Israel, who is tiny, but somehow always manages to escape and oppress bigger Tom. How do we deal with a virulently Antisemitic media?”

Dennis Prager: “The worldwide media is a problem. One palestinian video was staged to show a dead child being carried out, but at the end of it the child looks up to see if it was staged ok. Footage of videos that is damaging to their cause gets lost. One video had a boy being carried out on a stretcher. The guys carrying him tripped and fell, and then the boy got up off of the stretcher and and away. I want to believe in the resurrection of dead guys. The media story of our time is the perversion of life. This is why talk radio is so valuable because it provides and alternative view. The mainstream news cares about blondes killed in places like Aruba.”    

Jonathan Podhoretz: The internet is the best thing that has ever happened. It is a fact checker. It allows for amateur communicators, and exposes commentators, who often know less. I am a commentator, but lawyers and doctors know more about law and medicine even though people like me may write about them. Newspaper columnists have been anointed, but in the past the newspaper columnist was the guy that didn’t get the editor job. Being a columnist meant you were shunted aside, not given prestige. The internet allowed one guy whose expertise was music to bring down Dan Rather. He knew enough about computers and the web to see that the documents were typed using Microsoft word. One music guy was a fact checker. The mainstream media spends more time covering palestinian celebrations. Has anyone asked why they love cars so much? Palestinians are always celebrating around cars. They are probably celebrating that they stole the cars from Jewish people.”

Mona Charen: “Despite the internet, the mainstream media still decides what is news, what are scandals, what gets discussed. The internet helps, but the mainstream media is still in charge.”

Michael Medved: “Was Mitt Romney in his speech discriminating against secularists?”

Mona Charen: “I liked the speech. You hear groups such as Americans United come out against the speech, but then find out that Americans United is basically Barry Lynn and his wife. Romney was passionate. His speech was about America’s civic religion. It was a great civics lesson. He did sound a bit like he was neglecting the non-religious, but this to me was an oversight.”

John Podhoretz: “Mona is more generous than me. I thought it was nothing mroe than republican boilerplate. It solidified the connection between Romney and Mormonism. Many people had no idea he was Mormon, and now when they think Romney, they will not think tax cuts or anything else. They will associate Romney with Mormonism. Mormons are 2% of the population. Christians make up 74%. This is not timing. Also, the purpose of the speech was to solve a political problem, and justification of one’s religion should not be used for political purposes.”

Dennis Prager: “I thought it was a magnificent speech. Christians see Mormons the way Jews see the Jews for Jesus. They see them as a cult. Christians do not object to Jews because they understand that they are an entirely different religion that does not claim to be Christian. Mormons claim to be Christians, and Christians do not see this. I do not know if they are or not being a Jew myself, but Jews do not object to Christians who call themselves Christians. We object to Jews for Jesus because they claim to be Jews, and they are not. As for the evangelical concerns about Mormons, I pray for America’s sake and the evangelicals’ sake that they get past this. Theology does not equal values. I know people who share my theology that have awful values. I know people with completely different theological beliefs that have wonderful values. All religions have things that seem odd to other religions. Does anybody think it is weird to have an Eruv? How about Yom Tov Sheni?

(An Eruv is a long rope that stretches around a community. It is a physical rope around a town. Jewish law says Jews may not carry items on the Sabbath, such as keys or their wallet. However, with this long rope, they can, because they are within their own community. Set up an Eruv, carry at will (As a non-theologian, it is a strange loophole).

Michael Medved: “I believe in Yom Tov Sheni.”

Dennis Prager: “No you don’t. You practice it, but you don’t believe in it.”

(Outside of Israel, the biblical Jewish holidays have an extra day added to them, known as Yom Tov Sheni shel galuyyot (the second day of the festival in the diaspora), or more commonly as Yom Tov Sheni. Reform Judaism, the msot liberal branch, wants to eliminate this practice. Orthodox Judaism wants to keep it.)

At this point audience questions were asked. These were “lightning round” questions, so brief answers were requested by the moderator.

1) What can we do about Syria?

John Podhoretz: “Unfortunately, beating up on Israel gives the USA credibility, and we seem to badly care about credibility from places like Syria. We have to stop.”

2) What can we do about Saudi Arabia and oil?

Dennis Prager: “They are barbaric, misogynistic…I need more big words…people, yet we regulat Detroit. We need to ge tour own oil. We have it in Alaska. The caribou like oil lights. They make love better around heat. Alberta, Canada has oil. We need to invest in nuclear power. 56 people died from Chernobyl, and that was a badly built facility in Russia. The left prefers windmills.”

3) How do we get Arabs out of Israel?

Mona Charen: “The Israeli Arabs like their standard of living in Israel. They do not want to leave. Legislation was proposed to rmeove them, and they got very nervous. I don’t think you can remove them.”

4) How can we counter Arab propaganda?

John Podhoetz: “The administration sends out Karen Hughes to explain to them that we want to understand them. We have not countered anything yet.”

5) What do we as Jews do about Iraq?

Mona Charen: “Many Arabs believe that the Iraq War was a Jewish conspiracy, aka the Neocons. Most Jews were against the initial invasion. There should not be an official Jewish position. There should be an American position, and that should be to win the war, despite the leftists.”

Dennis Prager: “It is one of the greatest shames of Jewish history that Jews opposed the deposition of Saddam Hussein, a man who murdered Jews and paid $25,000 to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers. Opposing the removal of Saddam is a disgrace among Jews. It is a disagrace among Reform Judaism, that issued a resolution opposing the war. It is a disgrace on all of American Jewish life. It is mind boggling.”

6) What can be done about anti-semites such as Ron Paul, Jimmy Carter, Pat Buchanan, and James Baker?

John Podhoretz: “Rupaul (sic) is an anti-semite, Carter is an anti-semite, Buchanan is an anti-semite, James Baker is not in the sense that he is not an existential opponent of Jewry. They are irrelevant.”

Mona Charen: “Rupaul (sic), Carter and Armageddonijad (sic) all saved Israel! They keep Israel alive in the press. David Duke is campaigning for Rupaul (sic).”

7) What should Israel do?

John Podhoretz: “Sometimes there are no ready solutions. Cures cannot be invented if the disease is not isolated.”

8.) What about God’s promise to defend Israel if Jews become religious, and punish them if they stray?

Denis Prager: “I don’t know. We bury somebody and then daven Mincha (the afternoon service). We fight with God, but stay devout. We are devout because God said so, not to get benefits.”

9) Why were some in the mainstream media so hostile to Romney’s speech?

Dennis Prager: “The NY Times editorial board reviewing religious anything is like a tone deaf person reviewing Mozart. They are simply tone deaf.”

10) How do we respond to those who think that being Pro-Israel and Pro-American are antithetical?

John Podhoretz: “America and Israel share a love of freedom, and the idea that all are equal in the eyes of God. A hard work ethic and self reliance are common. This allowed Israel to turn a small area of Arab desert into a lush greenery.”

Mona Charen: “Most Christians are more Zionist than most Jews. We have similiar kinships, politics in the sense that both are democracies, and shared values.”

Michael Medved: “Some Arabs fantasize that the mothership will come from above and remove all of the Jews and then there will be peace. Has anyone seen Gaza? Israel believes in peace. Israel’s existence helps the United States as an agent of peace. Terror places like Gaza hurt the United States.”

11) How do we convert San Francisco from left to right?

Michael Medved: Jewish experiences should move Jews to the center, and then the right. Our grandparents succeeded through the free markets. They eschewed government programs. We were business people, not mebers of labor unions. We should thank God every day for the USA as Jews. A recent poll found that 89% of republicans believe America is good. Only 50% of democrats believe this. We as Jews succeed because America is good, we are politically free, free to practice our religion, and economically free through free markets.”

I would again like to thank this outstanding panel of Mona Charen, Dennis Prager, John Podhoretz, and moderator Michael Medved. Special thanks again go out to Jonathan Schanzer and the Jewish Policy Center. Lastly, Temple Emanuel in San Francisco should be given all the thanks in the world for allowing hundreds of republicans to enter the Belly of the Beast, and leave the way they came…in peace.

Ronald Reagan described America as the shining city on a hill. Intelligent discussions such as this one fill me with his hope and optimism for the future.

If republicans can live in peace, even for a couple hours, in the heart of San Francisco, free from liberal terror, then anything is possible in this world.

A Happy Hanukkah to all. Happy Hanukkah indeed.

eric

The Tygrrrr Express detoured from Los Angeles into an area that no republican should be without bodyguards…Northern California. If the 7th night of Hanukkah in LA is anywhere near as fantastic as the 6th night in San Francisco, it will be an amazing festival of lights indeed.

The Bay is where the good, the bad, and the ugly take place. The good took place in Guantanamo Bay, where some terrorists are still being kept away from decent society. The bad came in Green Bay, where the Packers throttled my Raiders. The truly ugly takes place in a city not too far from my personal Mecca of Oakland, that being the San Francisco Bay.

Yet even the worst of situations can sometimes temporarily yield to sheer beauty. This past weekend in San Francisco, while not changing history, could be a starting point if the city ever somehow becomes normal.

I arrived at Haight Street (Yes, that Haight Street made famous by all things toxic), barely arriving on time due to traffic congestion caused by fairweather 49er fans leaving early after another McGovern-Mondale-Dukakis type loss.

A private reception held by two Jewish men, one a venture capitalist, was the place to be. Yes, there was wine, and there was also cheese, but this was no typical affair. The two owners of the house happened to be gay, and I use the words “happened to be” to emphasize that anywhere outside of San Francisco, while this would not be “typical,” it should still be peripheral. One of them was also French.

What truly made these men unique was not their sexual orientation, but their ideology. Living on Haight Street, these men were…gasp…of all things…republicans. In “The Belly of the Beast,” San Francisco, a large party was taking place. While officially non-partisan, it was heavily republican. So yes, gay, Jewish men living in San Francisco felt comfortable among a tolerant crowd, that being republicans.

The invited speakers were intellectual heavyweights. Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Mona Charen, and John Podhoretz were all there to mingle with the crowd in the first part of a two part evening. While it was enjoyable to meet them all, the real meat of the evening was after the reception, when Temple Emanuel in San Francisco hosted an absolutely brilliant dialogue sponsored by the Jewish Policy Center.

www.jewishpolicycenter.org is a place for rationale, serious thought. Jonathan Schanzer organized the event for the JPC, and a home run out of the ballpark would be an understatement.

Tomorrow I will publish the transcript of the event. Today I just want to focus on the speakers themselves.

John Podhoretz was a columnist for many years at the NY Post. His book, “Bush Country–How Dubya became a great President while driving liberals insane,” is an easy and enjoyable read. It cuts through the myths surrounding “The Dub.” Another book of his is “Can she be stopped?”. Yes, Hillary can be derailed, but anyone who underestimates her is foolish. Mr. Podhoretz gives a detailed blueprint on what it will take to defeat her. Also, Mr. Podhoretz is the son of the revered Norman Podhoretz, the father of the Neocon movement. Norman Podhoretz wrote, “The case for bombing Iran.” Norman Podhoretz is currently an advisor to the Giuliani campaign, and John Podhoretz has written admirably about the former Mayor of New York City. John Podhoretz has recently taken over the reigns of Commentary Magazine from his father. Commentary Magazine should be mandatory reading.

www.commentarymagazine.com

Dennis Prager is a well known radio host who often speaks about religious ethics. While he has tough convictions, he is not shy about acknowledging when he is wrong. He also has a delightful sense of humor.  

http://stores.dennisprager.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc

He has a deep knowledge of politics, but at heart he is a theological genius. He has an ability to look inward, unafraid to tackle crises targeting his (and my) own Jewish community.

Michael Medved is a renowned film critic, and an Orthodox Jew. He has a deep knowledge of biblical texts, and is often a sought after speaker on cultural issues. His book “Right Turns,” is a deeply moving story of how he went from being a 1960s campaign manager for ultra-liberal black Congressman Ron Dellums to a conservative republican. With equal meaning he also discusses his transition from a secular upbringing into a devoutly religious life that he now leads. His radio show is also heard daily, and he speaks from the heart, which in his case is gigantic. He did live for several years in San Francisco, which he still claims was “the best two weeks of his life.”

http://www.michaelmedved.com/

Mona Charen is a nationally syndicated columnist, and her book, “Useful Idiots,” is what I am currently diving into full throttle. While she takes a clear conservative stance on issues, she is not afraid to criticize other conservatives when they stray from principles. She is proud of her Jewish heritage, and will not allow anti-semitism to be whitewashed just because it comes from somebody that may support tax cuts. Her work is often found at the Jewish World Review, and it is worth reading.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/charen.html

All of the speakers are on Townhall as well. www.townhall.com

The panel of Mr. Podhoretz, Mr. Prager and Ms. Charen was moderated by Mr. Medved, and while the dialogue was voluminous, there were no wasted words.

I also want to say one other thing about Ms. Charen. She is one of the nicest people I have ever encountered. I drove her and a mutual friend back to their respective hotels after the evening had concluded. She is a patient person, finding humor in the fact that only yours truly could get lost using a GPS tracker. After 16 consecutive right turns, I realized that we were only 196 laps away from completing the Indy 500. While “Right Turns” is Mr. Medved’s wonderful book, and while all the speakers were conservatives, Ms. Charen would have been trapped in San Francisco had we not at some point allowed ourselves just this once to turn left.

Only after we saw a street known as “Bush Street,” did I realize things would be fine. First of all, David Frum wrote “The Right Man,” about the President, and even in San Francisco, to get anywhere successfully, one had to pass through Bush Street.

Ms. Charen found some of the above remarks funny, which only proves how overwhelmingly gracious she is. As for the conversation in the car, it shall remain confidential out of respect for her privacy. Nevertheless, to say she was delightful to get to know was also an understatement. I also feared that if she was not dropped off at her hotel safely, her next column would be about a planted blogger from the Daily Kos or Moveon.org trying to derail conservatives by any means necessary. I am a genuine conservative, and she was dropped off safely. I wanted her to have a safe and easy flight back because her flight to San Francisco had her near a passenger downing five vodkas. Contrary to rumors, as a friend of mine at the event pointed out, it was not Senator Ted Kennedy causing the problem. 

As for the event itself, the synagogue was packed to capacity. There were between 600 and 1000 people, and it was a very right of center crowd. Yes, in the heart of San Francisco, conservatism is thriving. Republicans here often keep quiet for fear of being “outed” and then treated with hostility (The host of the pre-event gathering has faced less hostility from the right for being gay than from the left for being a republican…another example of liberal tolerance).  

There were no protesters. Despite rumored threats from the Code Pinkos and the “Paulestinians,” aka supporters of Presidential Gadfly Congressman Rupaul, the evening was civilized. I have often said that republican discussions are adult discussions in a serious manner. This enrages many on the left, but when liberal protesters stay away, intelligent discussion can thrive. Ron Paul, Medea Benjamin and Cindy Sheehan had their supporters making a decent amount of noise in the days leading up to the event, but in a city known for virtually nothing besides protests, there were zero protesters to mar this excellent evening.

So as much as I would like to take credit for entering the Belly of the Beast and descending upon Haight-Ashbury, I was not alone. I would like to thank Mr. Prager, Ms. Charen, Mr. Medved, Mr. Podhoretz, and especially Jonathan Schanzer of the Jewish Policy Center for putting together a fabulous evening.

I am also thrilled at the nearly 1000 republicans, most of whom were local, who refuse to back down. The city may wish to destroy itself, but it will not be because of these fine people, and it will not be on their watch. The republican party is alive and well, and conservative principles are being carried everywhere…even to Haight Street in San Francisco.

eric

As Hanukkah enters its 5th night, I remind the entire world that again what is being celebrated is a military victory. The Maccabbees came, saw, and kicked rumpus. They did not negotiate, or dialogue, or sing kumbaya. They did not have pointless meetings. They did not take photo ops. They got the job done militarily, and were rewarded with the right to stay alive.

One of the reasons the Jews were able to win battles in the dead of night is because there were no print media at the time revealing secret troop movements. There were no anti-war movies. The ACLU did not exist, so the Maccabees could kill with impunity.

If we are all dead, then all the civil liberties in the world will not matter. This brings me to the greatest generation, those who fought the good war, the heroes of World War II.

First of all, we just had another anniversary of Pearl Harbor Day. December 7th, 1941, was the day that Franklin Delano Roosevelt correctly said would “live in infamy.” The soldiers of World War II saved the world. They defeated two threats that would have destroyed civilization and ended life as we had known it. When we see one of these fine people, we should say, “thank you and welcome home.”

Yet while the soldiers of WW II are beloved, and FDR is revered by many, what is less known is the set of steps that the government undertook during this war. For those who want to read a fantastic book, I recommend Tony Blankley’s brilliant work, “The West’s Last Chance.”

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/tonyblankley/

On pages 116 and 177, Mr. Blankley lists steps that were taken by the National Association of Broadcasters less than two weeks after Pearl Harbor.

“Do not broadcast personal observations on weather conditions. Watch sports broadcasts for this. A late night comment that ‘it’s a fine clear night” might be invaluable information to the enemy.”

“Do not broadcast any long list of casualties. This has been specifically forbidden.”

In February of 1942, the federal government offered more restrictions.

“Criticism of equipment, appearance, physical condition, or morale of the Armed Forces of the United States or any of its allies” is to be censored. Also outlawed is the “reporting of rumor or atrocity stories.”

Seventy newspapers were banned, and in a delicious irony, Father Charles Coughlins antisemitic newspaper “Social Justice” was banned. I say ironic because leftists Jews have claimed that the Torah (Old Testament) commands Jews to engage in social justice, which therefore commands them to be politically liberal and hate all things connected to republicans and conservatism. If only these bleeding hearts knew that Social Justice, aka their reason for existing, was an antisemitic paper. Then again, give how angst ridden and self hating many of these Jews are, I would not be surprised if they happily read this paper at the dinner table.

The bottom line is that in the same way that the Jewish community was tough, aka sensible, the federal government did what needed to be done to win wars and save all we hold dear. Leftists claim that George W. Bush is destroying their civil liberties, but what his administration has proposed is nowhere near as extreme as what FDR proposed and carried out. Yes, the very FDR that is lionized as a demigod by liberals everywhere actually cared about a muscular foreign policy.

That muscular foreign policy that was once bipartisan is now under assault from within. Reasonable minds can disagree on whether or not America should wage war under certain situations. What should never be in dispute is that deliberately trying to sabotage a war effort is wrong. It is beyond wrong. It is sedition.

It is wrong to give away secret troop movements. Anything that hampers America in terms of strategy should be the domain of our enemies. Arthur Sulzberger, the owner of the Jayson Blair Times, should have been arrested and thrown in jail the minute that story broke. The first amendment is not an absolute right. Mr. Sulzberger went to a crowded theatre located in the heart of where our enemies reside, and yelled to those enemies to fire at will on American soldiers.

It is wrong to insist on dialogue when agreements reached in previous dialogue sessions have been dishonored or broken. America could have crushed Muktada Al Sadr and put a pair bullets in his heart. Instead, on the verge of victory, we decided to negotiate with him. We were holding all the cards, and we bargained. He lived to wreak more havoc. We had a chance to destroy Fallujah, and instead we pulled back for talks. More Americans died. Only when we went into Fallujah again and destroyed everything, which by the way the main function of a successful military, did the problem get better.

Yet if the real battles are difficult, the public relations war has been a nightmare for anyone who loves the U.S. Military. During World War II, even when censorship was not in place, Hollywood voluntarily supported the troops through movies that supported the war effort. America and the Allies were the good guys, and the Axis were the bad guys. It was not shades of gray or other John Kerry type nuances. It was black and white, and the good guys won the war and saved civilization.

Nowadays, movies show America as the villain. Everybody else can be redeemed. Muslim terrorists are freedom fighters, while the real evil sociopaths beyond redemption are corporate executives, especially republican ones.

Where is the sense of honor? What about loyalty? What about love of a nation that enriches these people? Forget the legal freedoms that these parasites have. What about a moral sense of decency?

General David Petraeus says the surge is working, and that we are succeeding in Iraq. People who have never been to Iraq disagree with him. These people have the right to feel this way. Free speech exists. Yet so does the Flat Earth Society.

ROTC is banned from college campuses, but terrorists such as Armageddonijad are welcomed under some concept of diversity, which apparently is extended to everybody except for those who defend American freedom.

Defending the right to exist with military force allows this existence t actually take place. When Judah Maccabee and his Israeli Brethren destroyed their enemies militarily, it started a tradition deeper than Hanukkah. It started the Jewish people’s fight for survival, one they have still not relinquished.

In World War II, villages were burned to the ground, homes were razed, and the body count was deep. Pearl Harbor was not a time for dialogue. It was a time for waging war, and even with a liberal president, waging war is exactly what we did. America and the world was significantly better off because of this.

Now we have the 9/11 generation and the War in Iraq. Islamofacists want to kill us all. Those that want to go on Oprah or Phil Donahue (thankfully canceled) and talk out our differences do not understand that the gap is not bridgeable. They want to kill us, we wish they would not do so. That does not leave much room for common ground.

From the Maccabees to Pearl Harbor, good was united against evil. I pray to Almighty God that those that truly believe that civilization and barbarism are equivalent will stop trying to get in the way of those who truly do wish to see civilization win. Some say that evil wins when good people do nothing. Evil wins when those who have the opportunity to support good are unable to tell the difference…or worse…know the difference, and refuse to care.

The Islamofacists are genocidal lunatics. They need to be rooted out with overwhelming brute military force. As Mr. Blankley reminds us, this is the West’s last chance. If we fail to support the military solution, there may be nobody left alive on our side to engage in dialogue.

eric

As the 4th night of Hanukkah prepares to involve significant amounts of parties, the day involves a serious look at one not so serious party, that being the demagoguic party.

One of the reasons I feel the democrats running for the presidency are not up to snuff is because they are scared to death of the voters. They will not condemn Al Queda, but will brag about who can be tougher on Bill O’Reilly, who to my knowledge did not fly a plane into the towers. They do not express hatred for Saddam Hussein, but seem to despise Dick Cheney. They will not try to remove Armageddonijad, opting for dialogue instead, but would impeach President Bush rather than engage in any constructive dialogue.

Most importantly, a complicit media will simply not ask the democratic candidates tough questions that actually matter. In addition to the 42 questions I previously recommended that the democratic nominees be asked, I am adding 8 more, one for each candidate, and one for each night of Hanukkah. That will bring it to an even 50, and the lamestream media will have no excuse for being unable to come up with intelligent questions that any first year blogger could think of with ease.

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/06/21-questions-cnn-should-ask-the-democrats/

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/06/21-more-questions-cnn-should-ask-the-democrats/

Also, these questions are meant to be tough, but fair. Yes, I am a partisan republican, but the purpose of these questions are not to embarrass, but to provoke serious discussion.

43) Mrs. Clinton, you are a very polarizing figure. Give that a plurality of people in this country despise you, how can you lead America? Your husband could not unite people, and despite wanting to change the tone in Washington, George W. Bush could not unite people. You have been genial to your Senate colleagues, but George W. Bush got along very well with democrats in Texas. Given how tough you have been on republicans the last 15 years, how can you get them to work with you given that you will absolutely need republican support to get things done? How can you be effective?

44) Mr. Obama, you have declared that you will meet with foreign leaders from rogue nations in your first year in office without preconditions. Would you be willing to meet for face to face meetings with leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other groups on terrorist watch lists? What makes you think that you can get rogue leaders such as these, Armageddonijad, and Kim Jon Il, to keep their word and honor agreements you may make with them, given that they have broken their word with every Western leader so far? Isn’t the only thing that gives diplomacy any credibility is the overwhelming military force that can be unleashed if diplomacy fails? Why not make these leaders honor past agreements before getting the right to dialogue with you at all?

45) Mr. Edwards, you became a successful attorney by suing medical institutions. Given how vital medical professionals are to the success of our nation, how can you get a health care plan passed when most doctors see you as an antagonist? What can you do to reduce the number of unnecessary medical procedures such as unwarranted ceasarean sections that are performed as defensive medicine? Despite your being pro-choice, abortion clinics are closing up, partially due to lawsuits. How can you persuade them to stay open? What can you do to establish credibility with a vital segment of America at a time when health issues are becoming critical, especially among retiring baby boomers?

46) Mr. Richardson, you want to pull out of Iraq right now. If this happened, many American soldiers would be killed, and America would be seen as retreating in defeat and humiliation, as we did in Vietnam. If the generals on the ground were to tell you that staying in Iraq for some time is necessary, would you listen to them? Also, since many of them are saying that now, would you be open to considering their viewpoint now so that you do not run the risk of having to reverse course if you get elected?

47) Mr. Biden, your idea of partitioning Iraq into three parts has been dissected itself, and many military experts see it as a bad idea. How would you divide the oil revenues in a fair manner, and isn’t your proposal, while emanating from noble intentions, a form of either Balkanization or Apartheid? Isn’t it impossible to give all three groups an exactly separate but equal share? The United States is a diverse group of individuals with many ethnic neighborhoods, from Irish to Italian to many others, but we all come together as Americans. Shouldn’t Iraqis be given a chance to come together as a unified nation, and allow them to show national pride as when their soccer team won?

48) Mr. Dodd, your fellow Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman was basically kicked out of the democratic party for following the courage of his convictions. Senator Dianne Feinstein is currently being attacked by the far left. You like many of your coworkers, attended the Daily Kos convention but boycotted the more moderate DLC convention. How can you be expected to lead all Americans when at the first sign of deviating from left wing orthodoxy, you will be excoriated? Can you name any significant policy achievements where you worked with republicans, and can you name areas where you disagree with the Netroots?

49) Mr. Kucinich, many democrats, primarily liberals, agree with you on almost every issue, but are currently not supporting you based on your low poll numbers. While polls can change, you have never topped 5%. If people agree with your views but still do not support you, what can you do to make yourself more palatable to voters? What, if anything, do you need to do differently? Also, how can you be a good steward when your policy prescriptions are considered hostile towards business?

50) Mr. Gravel, you come across as very pessimistic, even by the standards of today’s democratic party. Americans elect optimistic people from Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton, and reject those that come across as dour, such as Bob Dole, Al Gore and John Kerry. What aspects of America and the world today are you most optimistic about, and what are we doing right?

I have said on so many occasions that the democrats are a bunch of children unable to answer adult questions in an adult manner. I sincerely want to hear how they would answer these questions. If they do answer them, even in ways I disagree with, I will be the first to give them their due.

I believe in the republican party, but a stronger democratic party will force the republican party to better itself as well. Winning by default only leads to complacency, which does not benefit Americans.

We shall see.

eric

Fresh from a ton of parties on the second night of Hanukkah, I now need to prepare for partying on the third night. I love this holiday. Since I do not drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, or do drugs, I will stick with my vice of choice…women.

Sticking with women, one of the reasons Judaism is seen as “weak” by outsiders, and why Jewish men are seen as “momma’s boys,” is because our religion emasculates men. Of course we call it “celebrating women,” but it is out and out emasculation of men. We have holidays specifically dedicated to the power of women.

That is another reason to love Hanukkah. It is pure male testosterone. We came, we saw, and we conquered. We kicked some rumpus. Pure military force allowed the Maccabees to just smack around the enemy like they were women in need of a good backside slap.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/man_finally_put_in_charge_of

For those of you wondering why out of nowhere I am deliberately advocating the denigration of an entire gender, just relax, the twist is coming any sentence now.

Ever since the feminist mistake, women have been up in arms looking for ways to exact vengeance on the male gender. It was supposed to be about the right to vote, and equal work for equal pay. Now it is about attempting to destroy men. Unfortunately for the radical feminists (redundant, I know), they are cannibals. They eat their own. They betray each other. They do more to commit violence against their fellow females than most men ever could.

Therefore, in the spirit of Hanukkah, I will describe eight situations where it is perfectly acceptable to abuse women physically, sexually, or psychologically, one for each night. You can take these women and paddle their backsides, and there will be no consequences, unless gratification is a consequence. Do not worry about the feminists getting angry, which is how they normally go through life. They will allow this abuse to happen. So for those of you out there looking to abuse women, here are the eight acceptable situations.

1) The male sexual predator has to be politically liberal. Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton have carte blanche to abuse women. If the woman ends up dead, it is acceptable, provided that the abuser is pro-choice on abortion. Of course they will be pro-choice, because that way they can be irresponsible and be able to get rid of the evidence. If abortion is not the way to get rid of the evidence, driving over a bridge is plan b. Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones…sorry ladies. The feminists do not care. Anita Hill? No evidence required. Republicans do not get this exemption, even if they are pro-choice. Sorry Bob Packwood.

In fact, the NOW announced that Bill Clinton should be praised because after he tried to get lewd with Kathleen Willey, he did not try a second time. He took no for an answer. Therefore, every man in America gets one free chance to cop a feel.

2) The woman can be a beauty pageant contestant. They are fair game for being violated. Feminists hate beauty queens, due to obvious jealousy. Angry women have more wrinkle lines. Desiree Washington alleged rape against Mike Tyson, and I do not recall any feminist groundswell.

3) The woman must be politically conservative. Radio djs recently advocated raping Laura Bush and Condoleeza Rice. Stone cold silence. I can advocate taking a paddle to Hillary’s badonkadonk and believe you me the secret service will have something to say about it as soon as they find out what a badonkadonk is.

4) Poor and/or ugly women are not given the same protection as attractive women, provided the women are not too attractive as to be in a beauty pageant. If a woman is considered hideously ugly, a man can abuse her because nobody would believe that he would be interested anyway. If the man is considered handsome, then the case is closed. There is no way Bill Clinton could have raped Juanita Broderick. He is considered pleasing to look at, while she is not.

5) Muslim women can and should be beaten as often as possible. From Detroit to Dubai, from Afghanistan to Zambia, the feminists condone the brutal beating of Muslim women. The feminists really struggle with this one, because they want to be against male violence towards women, but those who abuse the Koran for their own evil purposes also tend to hate Republicans, especially George W. Bush. Besides, if they succeed in destroying America, and we become part of the Caliphate, there will be no Republicans left. If some women get beaten in the process, such collateral damage is part of a greater good.

6) Non-Muslim women in Muslim nations are entitled to forty lashes at a minimum. Any woman that allows a teddy bear to be named Mohammed should know better. The feminists of America will not speak up to save her. They will treat her as if she smoked tobacco or caused global warming. To get an exemption, one has to submit to Islam and denounce all Republicans, primarily George W. Bush. This how Nancy the Pelosiraptor escaped her lashes. She wore a Burkha, sipped Tea with Assad, and denounced the tyranny of an American President.

7) Prostitutes can be beaten. Feminists will go insane when some radio shock jock refers to women as “nappy headed hos.” Some feminists will even criticize music that refers to women as b*tches and hos. Ironically, these same feminists will not stick up for actual hos getting pimp slapped by…well, pimps, I guess. It could be because prostitutes tend to be attractive, and feminists despise women who succeed by being pretty and offering sexuality, whether they be strippers, call girls, etc. Besides, many women have lost their men to these women. Once Hugh Grant cheated on Elizabeth Hurley, aka proof that perfection exists, no woman was safe anywhere.

Before going further, all people are prostitutes. I am a corporate slut. I will not compromise my principles, unless there is money in it for me. I sold out to the establishment for money, and got a decent haircut. The old joke is quite true. A man asks a woman if she will sleep with him for a million dollars, and she says that she would. The man then asks if she would for $10. She responds that she is not a hooker. The man explains to her that, “we’ve already established that you’re a hooker, now we’re just negotiating the price.”

8.) Women can be beaten in the movies. After all, the feminists cannot advance their agenda unless society is convinced that every white, conservative investment banker in the movies is busy sexually violating minority women in between drinking oil flavored martinis at lunch and chopping down trees for sport. After all, if both genders actually felt life was getting better between them, the feminists would have no power. They are the angry, white liberal versions of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Exacerbating hostility between the genders allows these feminists to have something to do. Most women in Hollywood are liberals, but since Hollywood is about acting, the more liberal the woman on the screen, the more oppressed she is. Only in real life are liberal women protected.

I want to make it clear that I support women receiving equal pay for equal work. I also support women achieving full equality in society, because if the radical feminists ever do shut up, men and women will be better off. We will not have to listen to women comparing marriage to slavery while secretly praying for flowers and a wedding ring from a strong, smart Adonis who will turn them into paddle Queens.

It is very important that men do not try to physically or sexually abuse women who are politically liberal, the correct amount of attractiveness, or the wrong religion or ethnicity. For those who are still unclear which women are fair game and which women are off limits, Barbara Boxer’s office will be publishing a list of the women she has defended and ignored over the last three decades. The list will be available in Spanish, Braille, and Ebonics. Coincidentally, Ms. Boxer herself is the first woman in the protected column, meaning that conservative Republican men should not even think about spanking her liberal hide.

The world now knows the eight categories of acceptable abuse of womyn, one for each night of Hanukkah. May the men of this world enjoy this testosterone driven holiday, and as for the women of America, I suggest you join a protected group very soon.

Ok, off to find my tennis racket and go visit a certain Republican Jewish brunette. Don’t worry sweetie, I will bring some ointment for you after I am done. You may object to this, but you do not have a say. The feminists will not defend you, since your beliefs justify my misogyny.

Actually, I have no desire to hurt anyone, although I would not mind the radical feminists having their mouths ductaped while I am trying to watch football. They could voluntarily shut up until the commercials, but that has never happened.

The bottom line is either all women should get abused, or none of them should get abused. I prefer none of them get abused. I also prefer to live in a world where feminists actually stop promoting a liberal agenda, and start fighting for all women to be treated with respect. Men and women would both benefit from this.

eric

As the wonderful holiday of Hanukkah prepares to enter its second night, Jewish people engage in behavior that strict Islam forbids, that being drinking alcohol and gambling.

The Jewish religion is loaded with alcohol. We even have two drinking holidays, one in March and one in September. Sometimes we show solidarity with our Catholic brethren when the March one coincides with St. Patricks Day. Before delving into the consequences of alcohol, a happy Hanukkah story for you.

Two religious Jews in a synagogue could not find a Menorah with less than an hour before the first night of Hanukkah. Yes, I still remain incredulous that a synagogue would not have a Menorah laying around, but I witnessed this incident myself. These two very enterprising young men quickly between them drank 8 bottles of beer. A Menorah actually has holes for 9 candles, with one of them being higher than the other 8. Therefore, these two creative, but at this point inebriated men drank a bottle of what they referred to as “Rabbi Smirnoff.”

At this point these devoted, pious, and completely blitzed individuals did what any blasted individuals would do at this point…play with matches. By taking candles and lighting them, this created wax. The wax was used to fuse the bottles of beer and vodka together to form a makeshift Menorah. In a reversal on the story of Hanukkah, they had enough alcohol for 8 nights, but miracle of miracles, they drank it all on the first night.

I remember these two guys dancing on the table that night. While they were highly entertaining, the lesson I learned from that night is that for those who want to witness human stupidity, just add alcohol, mix, and wait.

It is in this spirit of overindulging on spirits that I bring up the issue of Iran. Liberals everywhere have just declared world peace, and I can only hope that they all came back from a drinking party at Ted Kennedy’s compound. Otherwise, an entire political party is engaging in mind boggling stupidity, reminding us again that, to quote rock group Spinal Tap, “the more it stays the same, the less it changes.”

The National Intelligence Estimate has stated that Iran stopped trying to pursue Nuclear Weapons in 2003. The implications are that Iran is no longer a dangerous threat to the world, President Bush knew about this, and he purposely and dastardly hid this information so that the Neocons could deliberately wage war with Iran.

Ok liberals, put down the peace pipes and stop smoking whatever illegal substance is inside them. Once again, the suicide of logical reasoning needs to be stopped before we invite Armageddonijad to Friday night synagogue services for jelly donuts, latkes (potato pancakes) and games of Dreidel.

The report is called the NIE, which stands for National Intelligence…what was that word again? Oh yeah…estimate. It is not called the NIC, or National Intelligence Certainty.

Why is it that reports of countries trying to kill America and blow up the world are considered sketchy, but that countries refusing to murder us are taken at face value, no questions asked?

Iraq was thought to have WMD. They were never found, leading many to think President Bush lied, or at worst was incompetent. I have maintained that Saddam did have WMD, he hid them in Syria, and even if there were no WMD, I never cared. The left said we were waging war over WMD because they desperately wanted to have it both ways, depending upon how the war went. We went to war to get rid of Saddam, and we were right.

Libya learned form the Iraq War. Iran did not. Khadafi decided to become normal. Armageddonijad went bonkers.

Saddam acted like he had WMD. Even if he was lying, who cares? If a group claims responsibility for a terrorist attack that they are innocent of just so they can burnish the Arab version of “Street Cred,” then they deserve to get blown to kingdom come.

Armageddonijad is acting like he is on the verge of nuclear weapons. It is he who is saber rattling, not George W. Bush.

Can the NIE be right? Yes. Does it matter? No. Should we blow up Iran anyway? Yes.

Yes, you all heard me correctly. I am advocating that either Iran immediately decides to knock it off, or they and Syria will be turned into 50,000 hole golf courses. They fund Hamas and Hezbollah. They control the world’s supply of oil. They think we are imperialist now? Let’s show them some real imperialism. The slogan can be “kick their @ss and take their gas.”

Jews live today to celebrate Hanukkah due to one thing and one thing only, and that is the appropriate use of overwhelming military force.

I say again that we should take an American flag and shove it up Armageddonijad’s hide until he goes to the toilet red, white and blue. Given his love for the Jewish people, we can hang the Israeli flag from his two tiny weapons of mass sexual dysfunction. In fact, in the same way we brought down Noriega with rock music, we can do the same with Armageddonijad. I recommend George Thorogood and the Destroyers singing, “Move over little dog, there’s a mean old dog moving in.” That big dog’s name is America.

Respected republican pollster Frank Luntz emphasized that the Israelis do not believe the NIE report, and while my heart bleeds American, Israeli intelligence is the best in the world. So before we start inviting Armageddonijad to go shopping with us at the holiday sales at Bloomingdales, let’s keep in mind that this fellow, despite being an honorary Poison Ivy Leaguer, is a terrorist.

He played a direct role in the taking of American hostages. Every one of those 444 days back in 1980 was connected to him. He funds worldwide terrorism.

One does not need to down bottles of Rabbi Smirnoff to understand that this guy is a lunatic who on the surface is not afraid to die. Ask, and he should receive.

The Greeks tried to kill us off, and today Jews celebrate Hanukkah. The Romans tried, and as impressive as their empire was, Israel at the least matches Italy. The Germans tried, and the third Reich lasted 12 years. The Arabs try every few years inbetween plotting to kill each other.

Thousands of years later, we will not back down from a madman that wants to wipe Israel off of the map. If he truly does not have WMD, then t’tkhmyaeierying tot theOr we can wait until planes fly into towers, at which point the Jayson Blair Times will blame the republican president for not “doing something to prevent this.”

We can try crippling sanctions until the country cracks, which would only hurt the Iranian people. North Korea is proof that this can fail. Or, we can repeal the law banning political assassinations, and take the madmen of Iran out. That includes every Mufti, Mullah, Ayatollah, Ayamufti, Muftitolah, and other multisyllabic hybrids that are merely Persian for the word “terrorists.”

Some will say that if we act this way, then they will. They already are, or did people not notice a British woman being threatened with death for a teddy bear named after the Prophet? Perhaps people forgot about Daniel Pearl and Theo Van Gogh.

Enough is enough. Iran is claiming they will soon have weapons. The NIE report to me is toilet paper. It can be used to clean up the Mullah’s palaces when they are eliminated.

At the very bare minimum, which is all I ever expect from the left anyway, let’s be calm about this NIE report. Armageddonijad is a serious problem. World peace did not break out today.

I want to celebrate Hanukkah next year with my fellow Jews. I also want to celebrate July 4th with my fellow Americans. This cannot be done if we are wiped off of the map. Just because some report by a flawed agency says that it will not happen tomorrow does not mean we should forget about the day after that.

Off to play Dreidel while listening to my favorite 1950s songs,”Yakkety Yak, Bomb Iraq,” by the Coasters, and “Bomb Iran,” by the Beach Boys.

eric

Happy Chaka Khan!

What can I say? For those who do not celebrate this lovely holiday, “I feel for you.” For those who truly want good things in life, the world truly does need “higher love.”

As the Hebrews get ready to celebrate the festival of lights, I shall use the next 8 days to either expand or drive away my audience, depending on any number of factors.

Both spellings of the holiday have 8 letters, so if you add a C, you subtract a K. It is Chanukah or Hanukkah.

First, let’s dispel some myths. People like to pass on beautiful stories of miracles. People hear that the Jewish fighters only had enough oil for one day, and miracle of miracles, the oil magically lasted for 8 days. For those of you with small children, have them leave the room so some hard truths can be discussed.

Santa Claus is not real, Palestinians are an invented fictional people, the secret formula for Coca Cola is (redacted), and the person who shot JFK was (redacted). Oh, and this oil lasting for 8 days is a bunch of mularkey.

So what is Hanukkah? Folks, Hanukkah is my favorite holiday because it is the Jewish version of July 4th. It is a Neocon’s fantasy. As a Neocon, I never get tired of the true story of Hanukkah. We fought some Greeks in battle, and b*tchslapped them. That’s it. People think of the Jewish people as constantly suffering and weak. Actually, our history has been our military strength. I have nothing against the Greek people of today, but back then they were the bad guys. They destroyed the first Holy Temple, but we took care of them. Gorgias? Get out of here! Nicanor? Knock it off!

We royally smacked them around, and they have not been a power since. We are still here. For those that are troubled by this…deal with it.

Yet the actual celebration of Hanukkah is a tad bittersweet for those that are educated about this holiday. We as Jews won the battle but lost the war.

What I mean by this is that there was a major difference between how the Jews and the Greeks celebrated their holidays. Greeks celebrated holidays created in the wake of their military victories, which were many. Jewish tradition was to not name holidays after military successes. We did not glorify blood triumphs.

The Greeks wanted Jews to assimilate, or they would kill us. Thankfully we never had to face that threat again. Just kidding. Jews were fighting for the right to remain independently Jewish, without forced assimilation into Greek culture. So after Judah Maccabbee and his brothers helped the people of Israel crush the Greeks in battle, the first thing they did was hoist a flag of victory and declare this military victory a Jewish holiday. So after fighting for the right to prevent assimilation, we adopted a Greek tradition we were against. To this day, some would argue that what Hitler failed to do to the Jews, we do to ourselves through a 52% intermarriage rate.

Cynical people would say that we broke the war rule because we were so used to losing that even we were shocked to have won, and were concerned we may never win anything again. These people can (x-rated, redacted) themselves. Others say that we needed to adopt different traditions to give us flexibility in the future so that we would face less internal conflict when Jewish teenagers needed a historical justification for skirt-hiking and balling Roman Catholic teenage girls. Actually, only I say that, but I am right.

The bottom line is Hanukkah, while my favorite holiday, is the least important holiday in the Jewish calendar. It is an excuse to party for 8 days, or 14 days if you count pre and post Hanukkah parties. The only reason Hanukkah gets any attention is because it occurs around the same time as Christmas.

Briefly returning to the Neocon aspect of this holiday, the true lesson of Hanukkah is a political one that the 70-80% of Jews that like to sing Kumbaya with those that hate our guts would do well to heed. The lesson of Hanukkah is simple. Force works. There is no dialogue or negotiation with those that refuse to recognize your right to exist. Survival is not pretty. It often involves spilling large amount of blood. When your enemy is on their knees with their face bleeding, negotiation is possible.

The other lesson that comes from the Jews during this time is the idea of mercy. We did not rape the Greek women, chop heads and limbs off, enslave their people, or indiscriminately engage in deliberate cruelty. We defended ourselves. In keeping with the values that unite Jews and Americans to this day, both remain a people that use their power for noble and good purposes. America through its economic and military power, and American Jews through their sense of justice, help feed, clothe, protect, and defend others all around the word, many of whom are neither Jewish nor American.

Hanukkah is a celebration of serious life saving accomplishments, but it is also a lighthearted holiday filled with food, alcohol, and candle lighting ceremonies around the world. Life for the Hebrew people has had much darkness, but for the next 8 nights there is only light.

So as I light candles and hope that a certain young Hebrew brunette will show up at my door wearing a blue and white Hanukkah bow…and only a Hanukkah bow (negotiations are ongoing)…I look forward to the next 8 nights.

Happy Hanukkah everybody! Shalom!

eric

Much has already been said about the CNN-You Tube republican debate. Another angle has been offered up by the Los Angeles Times. While I have often said that the LA Times is the illiterate cousin of the Jayson Blair (New York) Times, they are free to offer rampant speculation about CNN’s motives, since at least they are not claiming that their theory is fact. Granted, they do not claim it is theory either, but with the LA Times one can only ask for so much in terms of quality. Like a blinking VCR that is right at noon and midnight, the LA Times did offer a very interesting train of thought in addition to the standard consensus that CNN is merely anywhere from incompetent to corrupt.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/business/newsletter/la-et-rutten1dec01,1,2183723.column?ctrack=1&cset=true

The entire article is above, but here are some portions of it.

“CNN: Corrupt News Network

A self-serving agenda was set for the Republican presidential debates.

December 1, 2007

The United States is at war in the Middle East and Central Asia, the economy is writhing like a snake with a broken back, oil prices are relentlessly climbing toward $100 a barrel and an increasing number of Americans just can’t afford to be sick with anything that won’t be treated with aspirin and bed rest.

So, when CNN brought the Republican presidential candidates together this week for what is loosely termed a “debate,” what did the country get but a discussion of immigration, Biblical inerrancy and the propriety of flying the Confederate flag?”

Ok, so the topics could have been better. That is agreed, but so far that would not be corruption by itself if the democrats also had to face such questions. They don’t.

“According to CNN, its staff culled through 5,000 submissions to select the handful that were put to the candidates. That process essentially puts the lie to the vox populi aura the association with YouTube was meant to create. When producers exercise that level of selectivity, the questions — whoever initially formulated and recorded them — actually are theirs.”

Ok, fair enough. Executives are responsible for the content they put on the air. Again, the issue is planted activists, right? The LA Times finds a more sinister motive.

“That’s where things begin to get troubling, because CNN chose to devote the first 35 minutes of this critical debate to a single issue — immigration. Now, if that leaves you scratching your head, it’s probably because you’re included in the 96% of Americans who do not think immigration is the most important issue confronting this country.”

This is where things get a tad hairy. The overall American public is not freaking out over immigration, but what about the republican electorate? I honestly do not know the answer to this. I myself have found that those that are obsessed with illegal immigration are a vocal, but small, minority. Yet they speak so loudly that it is hard to tell if they are a majority of the republican electorate or not. Rupaul has fervent supporters, but he is absolutely a gadfly with a fringe following. What about the illegal immigration voters? Maybe I am losing touch, and maybe my pulse is not in tune with the mood, but I am not convinced the illegal immigration issue truly is as powerful as some make it out to be.

“So, why did CNN make immigration the keystone of this debate? What standard dictated the decision to give that much time to an issue so remote from the majority of voters’ concerns?”

Ok, enough with the suspense. Survey says…

“The answer is that CNN’s most popular news-oriented personality, Lou Dobbs, has made opposition to illegal immigration and free trade the centerpiece of his neonativist/neopopulist platform. In fact, Dobbs led into Wednesday’s debate with a good solid dose of immigrant bashing. His network is in a desperate ratings battle with Fox News and, in a critical prime-time slot, with MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann. So, what’s good for Dobbs is good for CNN. In other words, CNN intentionally directed the Republicans’ debate to advance its own interests. Make immigration a bigger issue and you’ve made a bigger audience for Dobbs.”

This is a very serious charge. While all networks consist of people that have agendas, this accusation by the LA Times has every employee of CNN from Wolf Blitzer to Anderson Cooper to be taking their marching orders from Lou Dobbs. It is one thing to slant reports due to personal ideology, which is bad enough. Yet could correspondents actually be forced to tailor their broadcasts due to the agenda of one other correspondent?

MSNBC is a left wing network, but there is no evidence that Keith Olbermann has his agenda disseminated to Glenn Beck or Joe Scarborough. Fox News is right of center, but apparently Alan Colmes does not get his marching orders from Rupert Murdoch.

Again, this is speculation, and while there is no direct evidence of this, it is not farfetched.

Lou Dobbs is not just any correspondent. He is one of the highest ranking CNN executives.

Some would say that because immigration is a big deal in the republican party (if that premise is accepted), this justifies spending so much time on it. The LA Times offers a reasonable dispute for this.

“That’s corruption, and it’s why the Republican candidates had to spend more than half an hour “debating” an issue on which their differences are essentially marginal — and, more important, why GOP voters had to sit and wait, mostly in vain, for the issues that really concern them to be discussed.”

The problem with this is that the major candidates have very minor disagreements on the War on Terror, which IS a major issue among all Americans, primarily republicans. Nevertheless, the issue was ignored.

Another problem is that Lou Dobbs is not a one trick pony. He is almost a two trick pony, perhaps one and a half tricks. He obsesses about outsourcing, which to my knowledge, was not asked by the questioners. If Dobbs were pulling the strings, surely outsourcing would be part of the debate.

The LA Times article brings up the disgusting practice of delving into the candidates’ religious convictions well beyond policy issues, but I want to stick with the Lou DObbs theory because it is a new wrinkle.

CNN is sinking in the ratings, but most people deeply concerned about the illegal immigration issue are republicans. Democrats want them registered to vote as quickly as possible. Since republicans mainly watch Fox News, Lou Dobbs may not be seeing increased ratings from his rantings. This does not mean he is acting out of sincere convictions. He could very well be a demagogue. I have no idea. I just think that it does not seem to translate into news gold. Sadly enough, as much as it enrages me, Fox News strikes platinum with stories like Natalee Holloway and the various Petersons who kill and are killed, which no candidate will or should ever get asked about.

The Lou Dobbs connection could be any one of the 3 C’s: Coincidence, Correlation, or Causation.

At the risk of making things even more complicated, the LA Times itself is not actually the writers of this article. It is the work of one columnist for the paper, that being Timothy Rutten. He is considered the “champion of ethics” of the paper, but Robert Byrd is the “conscience of the U.S. Senate.” Labels mean nothing. The Jayson Blair Times has an ombudsman, who I suppose eats bananas like the compliance officer in the movie “Boiler Room.”

Timothy Rutten has been interviewed by Hugh Hewitt more than once. Hewitt is a conservative. This would explain why a liberal organization like the LA Times would dare criticize CNN. Is he the LA Times’s version of William Safire? I cannot say this for a certainty. On the other hand, Rutten gets lambasted for defending the New Republic in their corrupt involvement with the Scott Beauchamp affair.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2007/10/018882.php

So between all the conjecture, innuendo, theory, speculation, and other synonyms of those five dollar words, I have offered you everything but answers.

I am not an advocate on this one. I am merely a fourth C…a conduit.

Let the debate begin Wild West style…one blogger to another.

eric