THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS

Blue Moon of Kentucky, Keep on Shining…Shine on the one, that’s gone and proved untrue…

Blue Moon of Kentucky, Keep on Shining…Shine on the one, that’s gone and left me blue…

That wonderful song by Bill Monroe has nothing to do with this column. I just like it, although I prefer the Vince Gill version that was lip synched by Boomhauer on “King of the Hill.”

Anyway, Kentucky and Oregon are voting today, and I am going to pretend to care.

Oregon does their elections by mail, which makes for very efficient elections. This makes polls irrelevant, because with early voting, one cannot know exactly what percentage of people filled out their ballots when. They could have filled them out when either candidate was at the height of their popularity, or cratering at the bottom. Speaking of craters and bottoms, Hillary…never mind. This is not a sex column.

Anyway, the focus is on Kentucky. Obama is expected to Coast in Oregon, while Hillary is expecting a blowout in Kentucky similar to her romp in West Virginia.

The problem is that Kentucky has already predetermined this race, based on a race that occurred in Kentucky recently.

People often talk about the political horse race of a Presidential election season, but it was a literal horse race that doomed Hillary’s campaign.

The Kentucky Derby will be the day that Hillary’s quest for the White House ended in death.

For those who do not know, there are two significant occurrences regarding the Kentucky Derby, which is always held on a Saturday in early May. The Friday before the Derby, David Letterman has the voice of the racing announcer on his show by telephone. The man enthusiastically bellows out, “and down the stretch they come!” Letterman does this himself for several minutes before and after the announcer does it. In fact, the entire episode is Dave for no reason in particular randomly yelling out “and down the stretch they come!”

The other important aspect of the Kentucky Derby comes in the form of wagers. Yes, gambling is illegal in many areas, but some gambles are less harmful to society than others. If two mayors want to bet on the Superbowl in the form of wearing the t-shirt of the city, I do not lose sleep over it.

Nevertheless, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton picked out their horses. For those who wondered if Hillary bet on the bobtail nag, I would say it was Bill Clinton that bet on the nag 30 years ago. Some would say she is a hag, but that is more a physical critique, while being a nag is more an attitude. To say she is a hag would be perhaps unfair. Perhaps. She is a nag.

Anyway, Obama bet on a horse known as “Big Brown.” Hillary bet on a filly known as “Eight Belles.” Either Obama deliberately picked a horse that sounded like the nickname of a macho black man, or he is an expert on horse racing. Either Hillary deliberately selected a horse that was female, or she is a horse racing expert. Given her character, she has been a horse racing fan her entire life.

In what became a perfect replica of the most recent primary season, Big Brown was far out in the lead. Eight Belles came hard charing down the stretch, and was a very close second as the race was winding down. As they were headed towards the finish line, Eight Belles pulled back. Big Brown won the race. Yet this was not the story of the 2008 Kentucky Derby.

Eight Belles was too injured to even survive. She had to be euthanized. Right after the race ended, she was killed. It was a mercy killing.

While I want to make it crystal clear that there is nothing funny about the death of an innocent animal (as opposed to all the guilty animals that absolutely had it coming and deserved it), there are two things that must cease now.

First of all, the terrorists at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) should sit down and shut up. Yes, people who encourage bombing buildings, even to save furry lil critters, are terrorists. The only time anybody ever listened to PETA was when the hotter members of the group got naked. I saw Lisa Lange on television the other day. When she is fully dressed, she is no less useless than any other activist, or as I call them, lactivist. I wish it were legal for guys to ride members of PETA down the track and use the riding crops on their bare hides. Ok, maybe this is a sex column. I digress.

The other thing that must immediately cease is the Clinton campaign, or at least the media’s insistence on pretending it has viability.

Some may be wondering how I can engage in such specious and circular logic. Simple. The racetrack for the Kentucky Derby is a circle. Some may call it an oval, but upon getting elected, a President sits in the Oval Office. An oval is often an overglorified circle anyway.

“May the circle…be unbroken…by and by lord, by and by…”

That song also has nothing to do with anything. I just like it.

Anyway, those who liked the way that Old Yeller ended up would have loved the conclusion to the existence of Eight Belles. Hillary Clinton does not exit the stage gracefully. Like many other actresses that are past their prime, she needs to be taken out in the backyard and put out of her misery. The old female yeller at everybody who disagrees with her needs to go the way of Old Yeller. No, I am not advocating euthanizing the woman herself…just her campaign.

As for Hoss Hillary’s horse, there was a time when I felt that her campaign for President would never see this day. I still hold out fear and dread that she will find a way at the last second to steal the nomination. Yet that fear and dread is slowly lessening. Hillary might actually be dragged kicking and screaming from the stage. She might actually be close to being done.

When the stake is driven through her black heart (ok, even by my standards that was republican blogger hyperbole), I will believe it.

Hillary Clinton will win Kentucky by a large margin.

Unfortunately for her, the newest predictor of election results, that has a statistical sample of one and a current fallibility ratio of zero, showed her losing badly. The Kentucky Derby has as of now never failed to predict the Presidential race.

She could limp towards the Preakness, but Obama already won Maryland. As for the Belmont Stakes in New York, that race is irrelevant since John Kerry himself won that race by a long face.

One of the greatest horses of all time, even better than John “Smarty Jones” Kerry, was Seattle Slew. Seattle Slew was an elite horse. The city of Seattle is mainly elitist people. They support Obama.

Hillary may have thick hindquarters, but she cannot match the elegance of the younger steed that kicked dust in her face while kicking her rumpus.

Big Brown has won the first leg. Eight Belles has lost everything.

Her fate was a tragedy, but the fate of Hillary’s campaign is a cause for celebration.

The democratic donkeys can act like horse’s @sses, or they can get rid of her already. There is a glue factory for losing candidates waiting for her.

Like horses everywhere that will not stop braying, the time has come to do what should have been done a long time ago.

Hillary, you have brayed enough. It is time for your muzzle.

Blue Moon of Kentucky Keep on Shining.

Keep on shining indeed.

eric

I had the pleasure of meeting a top republican pollster recently. I was asked to keep his name confidential.

While I often criticize the Jayson Blair Times and others for using anonymous sources, I hope my credibility will allow me to do so in this instance. I have not verified the statistics I will be citing. I find them believable.

Unlike politicians and television personalities, who prefer the spotlight,  pollsters are like mad scientists. They like being deep down below the surface. Karl Rove is all over the television now, but during his White House years he was the Prince of Darkness.

Therefore, it was requested of me not to mention the name of this pollster on my blog. I can only say that he is reputable and respected.

With that, below are some statistical bones to chew on regarding the 2008 Presidential election.

“In 1992, only 19% of the country thinks we are on the right track. We lost that election. In 2008, the number is even lower. Only 15% of the country thinks America is on the right track. That is the lowest number ever in this type of polling.”

“85% of republican men support Israel, as do 85% of Fox News watchers.”

“The lowest support for Israel came from ‘weak democrats,” college educated democrats, and CNN watchers.”

The pollster was not referring to all democrats as weak. The pollster was referring to democrats with a weak party affiliation. Also, the pollster did not state why the percentage of republican men supporting Israel was equal to the percentage of Fox News watchers. Not every republican man watches Fox News, although there is significant overlap.  One theory is that Fox News simply has more Pro-Israel news anchors and programming, while CNN offers Christian Amanpour and offensive series such as “God’s Jewish Warriors.”

I can offer analysis up the ying yang, but this pollster offered descriptive statistics, allowing the audience to come to their own analytical conclusions.

“John McCain only needs 30% of the anti-Bush vote to win the election.”

“Americans are against the Iraq War by a two to one margin, but 25% of people against the war want us to stay and finish the job. The democrats keep mistaking sentiment against the war with wanting to lose the war. Americans want to win.”

“McCain is ahead of Obama by 12 points among independents, but down by 3 points overall.”

To me, this suggest an unhappy base. The base will fall in line.  In 1992, some republicans acted like spoiled brats and stayed home. They claimed they were standing on principle. No, they were standing on ceremony, and electing the Clintons. Republicans can fight McCain after the election, but there are clear differences between Obama and McCain. Falling in line is vital.

Democrats are crowing about winning special elections in Louisiana and Illinois, including the district of former Speaker Dennis Hastert. These districts were held by republicans for 30 years. The pollster offered some positive news on this front.

“Most newcomers start with low negatives. Both republican candidates started with high negatives that were unusual in nature and unrelated to the national GOP.”

Translation…they were bad candidates. In tough years, good candidates are less inclined to run. Nevertheless, in tough times is when they are needed most.

“Obama is too risky. He is too liberal. He is out of step with Americans on the issue of values.”

“39% of the electorate thought Jimmy Carter was a liberal. He won. 56% of voters saw John Kerry as a liberal, and 49% saw Al Gore as a liberal. They lost. 49% see Obama as a liberal.”

Before people claim that Gore won, he should have coasted to victory the way George HW Bush did. Bill Clinton ran away from liberalism, and Gore ran back to it. This is why he lost during peacetime with a healthy, albeit slowing, economy. He lost because liberals lose.

“With Obama, the key will be how liberal he is perceived as.”

“Resources are precious. At the risk of upsetting the national party, this is a good year to donate to specific seats, not the overall party. We should give to John McCain and republican Senator Norm Coleman, not the National Republican Campaign Committee.”

“We should donate to incumbents and republican open seats. There are very few ‘challenge seats.'”

Sincere comments were then offered about Barack Obama regarding Pastor Jeremiah Wright.

“I don’t believe that Obama believes what Wright believes. I don’t believe Obama  believes the anti-American rhetoric or  the conspiracy theories regarding the GOP deliberately giving people Aids. Obama did not stay for 20 years at that church because he was anti-American. He stayed with that Church because in Chicago, that was one of the few churches that would give him street cred.

Pastor Wright’s most recent comments are devastating. Pastor Wright said that he was a Pastor, and would do what he had to do, and that Obama was a politician, doing what he had to do.”

It is one thing for republicans to call Obama a hypocrite and a cynic. It is another when one of his own former supporters, even acting out of vengeance, levels those same charges.

“Reverend Wright changed the game. Obama is no longer transcendent. He is just another politician.”

Good pollsters do not spin. They offer cold hard data. The numbers in a vacuum are not good. The democrats have the upper hand in generic matchups.

Yet the news is far from dire. In specific matchups, we have John McCain, and the democrats have another liberal. Yes, he speaks much better than past liberals did. However, even a brilliant messenger cannot obfuscate a flawed message forever.

Obama is a liberal, and if trends continue, Obama will lose because liberals lose.

eric

I had the pleasure recently of attending the most recent leadership meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition. This meeting was held in Washington, DC. It was held at the St. Regis Hotel on K Street, across the street from the White House. The initial plan was to meet people at the White House, but due to logistics, the members of the President’s staff came to the hotel instead.

There were fine minds as always, and it was an absolute thrill meeting Sir Charles of Krauthammer. Given the substance of these meetings, more than one day is required to give the events justice. Also, for reasons of confidentiality, some information is redacted. Nevertheless, below are some remarks from some of the speakers, all of whom contributed to a quality conference.

Senator John McCain was represented by his campaign manager, Rick Davis. While he acknowledged that 2008 could be a tough year, the Presidential race is up for grabs.

In speaking about our fine republican nominee, Mr. Davis stated that “John McCain’s life is about serving the Commander in Chief, not being one.”

“Some lament the length of Presidential races. The length of these campaigns is actually a good thing. Some people want it to be over, but in America our races get you into the soul of the person who would lead the free world over a two year period. We learn much about them, and this is positive.”

“Even with two years of studying, we cannot predict the future. We could not have predicted 9/11, or that President Bush would have become the most important foreign policy President of this century.”

“While he has raised less money, John McCain actually has more cash on hand than Hillary Clinton.”

“The key is to targe states that seem out of reach but are within reach. In 2000, George W. Bush had 11 target states. John McCain has doubled that. He has 22 target states. Also, California absolutely will be targeted. California usually is a place where republicans come, raise money, and leave. We will compete for California, forcing the other side to spend resources here.”

“John McCain has been underestimated throughout his life.”

The next speaker was President Bush’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Joel Kaplan. He is likable and funny. His remarks were mostly policy, but my question for him was about politics. The question was a softball regarding the President himself, but was meant to be a hardball question towards those that are supposed to be his defenders. 

“Mr. Kaplan, I am deeply concerned about the President’s poll numbers. Every day this guy is taking a battering from critics that I believe are not fit to lick his boots. What is being done to hit back hard so that 20 years from now people will know what a good, decent man he is?”

Again, this may appear to be a softball, but I am genuinely ticked off that the people that are his toughest critics are wrong, unfair, and often unkind.

Mr. Kaplan offered an acceptable answer.

“First of all, I am going to punt on this question, and let (White House Press Secretary) Dana Perino answer it. What I can tell you is that this President is guided by principles, not polls. Would he like to be popular? Of course, we all would. That does not change the fact that he is going to do what he believes is right. When he says he does not care about shaping his legacy, he means it. History will sort that out. He is going to do what he thinks is best for America in the long run. Others can obsess about polls. He is about principles.”

Mr. Kaplan then went on to tell an amusing story regarding a mistake in a transcript.

“A few weeks ago Dana Perino finished her daily briefing, and I read the transcript. A question was asked about the President being sapped of energy down the stretch. Ms. Perino responded that ‘The President will be absolutely fine, there’s a lot of Jews left in the White House.’ I beamed with pride, but felt this was a bit much. I went up to her and thanked her for her support, but wondered if she had overstated the role I and others had played. She told me that the transcript was a mistake, and that what she actually said was that ‘There’s a lot of juice left in the White House.'”

I found Mr. Kaplan after his speech. I told him point blank that, “I don’t care if the man’s polls drop to 10%. I know he’s right, and I know history will vindicate him.”

He thanked me, and let me know that he does relay messages of support to the President, and that the support absolutely helps. I finshed with one thought.

“I know he has an impossible job. Let him know I am praying for him.”

Mr. Kaplan told me to keep doing so.

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino was next.

“President Bush is gender blind. He is comfortable around strong women because he is surrounded by them. From his mother to his wife to his daughters to his Press Secretary, we are everywhere.”

“One problem with the internet is the coarseness of the public debate. I hope women can change that.”

“In the Middle East, women play a prominent role. Israel has women in power, and Mahmoud Abbas has a female Press Secretary.”

When asked about how she stands the daily grilling from the media, her answer was simple, yet sensible.

“The way to do well is to be more prepared than the reporters. Be prepared, consult more experts, and have more facts. Tough opinions can be countered with hard facts.”

“There has been a tidal wave of competition since 2000. Everybody wants to get the best dig in. Yet we are still here.”

“This may surprise some of you, but David Gregory is actually pretty fair. He is tough, but he asks fair questions.”

I remember David Gregory as the judgmental guy who got drunk and went on the air babbling nonsense. It is not fair to judge him by that one episode, but a man who asks tough questions sure did not want questions asked of him about that incident.

“Helen Thomas is exasperating. She wears her agenda on her sleeve. I now answer all her questions by starting out by mentioning her name. That way when the transcript comes out, everybody can point to one of her questions and know that she asked it. I will say, ‘Helen, now you know…’ She finally realized I was doing it and called me on it, but I still keep doing it.”

She was not interested in helping Barack Obama.

“I won’t give Obama advice because he might take it. Stop it Karl Rove. Don’t help them. They might listen.”

She then showed some self depracating humor.

“Obama has a glass jaw. I actually am not exactly sure what that means. I know it is a sports metaphor, and I just wanted to sound like I knew sports.”

She then turned to my earlier question of Mr. Kaplan.

“As for the person who asked about the President’s poll numbers, he is not dwelling on them. He is perfectly comfortable going on to the next chapter of his life after the next President takes over. He will go back to his ranch, and be perfectly content to live his life outside of Washington.”

Unlike democrats, who have a tendency to never let go, and think that they still are President, republican Presidents leave with dignity, and do what an ex-President should do…shut up and be quiet, and let their successor form their own path.

Her last comment was with regard to a rumor that the President has lost support in Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.

“President Bush absolutely backs Condi Rice 100%.”

After her speech, when I met her, she stated that she would have somebody from her office contact me regarding an interview of her. I stated that I understood how busy she was. We shall see.    

The last speaker of the day was Richard Baehr from American Thinker. I have gotten to know him over the past year, and he is a friend. He is very solid on offering political analysis, and he does not sugar coat potential results.

“The democrats are having an internal debate right now on whether or not to give up on Florida. As close as Florida was in 2000, it is now fairly safe for the republicans. If the democrats give up on Florida, they would have to do a lot to win the White House. They would have to win Ohio. No republican has ever won the White House without Ohio. Another strategy that they would try to do is run the table of the four states of Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada. This is going to be tough because John McCain is a Westerner from Arizona.”

“One of the key hidden constituency group in this election is Asians. Republicans can do very well among this group. When Michelle Obama makes her remarks about America being unfair, and Asians are sitting at home with 1600 SAT scores and rejection letters, it bothers them.”

“California is not a lost cause. 35% of California voters belong to three groups that John McCain could do well with…Jews, Asians, and Hispanics.”

“Some would argue that republicans cannot do well with Jews, especially since George W. Bush was the best friend Israel ever had, and he still only received 25% of the Jewish vote. There are other reasons Jews did not support him. First of all, Jews did not like his father, and thought he would be like his father. Secondly, he wears his religion on his sleeve, and Jews are scared to death of religious Christians. They think that all Christians want to convert us. Most Jews that convert end up converting to nothing, not Christianity. Lastly, President Bush is a Texan, and Jews often sneer at Southerners. John McCain is a Westerner, and while he is a Christian, he does not go to Church that often or talk about his religious faith. Between that and his strong support for Israel, he could pick up more of the Jewish vote.”

In the coming days, the wisdom of Bill Kristol, and of course, Sir Charles of Krauthammer, will be offered.

Once again, the RJC made me proud to be a member of the leadership by putting on such a quality conference.

eric    

At the most recent leadership meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition, I insisted months earlier that I would not attend. I did not want to fly from Los Angeles to Washington, DC, for one day. To spend money on a plane ticket, and use up one vacation day from work, was not going to happen. I thoroughly enjoy RJC events, but I was absolutely not attending this meeting.  My time is valuable, and short of getting Charles Krauthammer as a speaker,  I was skipping this one.

Several days later, an email arrived in my inbox. The featured guest at the next RJC Leadership meeting would be none other than Sir Charles of Krauthammer himself. I shook my fist to the sky, said, “D@mn you Larry Greenfield!” (my dear friend at the RJC in Los Angeles, who keeps letting me know about such spectacular events), and immediately made plans to go to Washington. The event was directly next door to the White House, and with the exception of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, there is nobody that I wanted to meet more than Charles Krauthammer.

The word gets overused, but he is a genius. God has restricted him physically. He is confined to a wheelchair, and therefore rarely leaves Washington, DC. The rare times he has, the events were sold out to capacity. This was another reason I made the trip. As for limitations on his physical mobility, God compensated by simply giving him one of the finest minds on Earth.

The man is one of my intellectual heroes, and I do not have that many. I count the list on one hand.

Rather than offer any more well deserved effusive praise for this intellectual giant, I will let his words speak for themselves. With that, below is the wit, warmth, and wisdom of Solomon, or as he is known on Earth, Charles Krauthammer.

“I have gone in a quarter of a century from covering Walter Mondale to appearing on Fox News. My defense for my past is that I was young once.”

“I am a licensed psychiatrist. I have been a psychiatrist in remission for 25 years.”

“The world of psychiatry  and the world of Washington both involve dealing with people that have delusions of grandeur.  Washington is more dangerous because the people with delusions of grandeur have access to nuclear weapons.”

“Either God is a republican, or God has a good sense of humor. The democrats have nominated their weakest candidate. The republicans, by complete accident, have nominated their strongest candidate.”

“The republicans got lucky. First, Mike Huckabee had to defeat Mitt Romney in Iowa. Then John McCain  won New Hampshire.  Then Fred Thompson siphoned off just enough support in South Carolina to allow McCain to defeat Huckabee. In addition, heavy snowstorms affected the part of the state that was strongest for Huckabee.  In addition, the Giuliani strategy benefited McCain. Rudy Giuliani was his main competition. With John McCain, the republicans nominated the one guy who can win. None of the others could have won. Only McCain can.”

“Winning three straight elections is difficult. Only Ronald Reagan in the modern era won a third term,  in the form of George  Herbert Walker Bush.”

Mr. Krauthammer’s analysis of Barack Obama was equally brilliant.

“Obama may not believe the words of Pastor Jeremiah Wright, but Wright is correct when he says that Obama is just a politician.”

“It is interesting regarding the timing of Obama’s denunciation of Wright. He had 20 years to be offended, but only objected when he himself was attacked as a pandering politician by his former pastor. Insulting the United States of America is one thing. Insulting Obama himself really offends him.”

“Obama is not unpatriotic. He is a leftist academic, not a radical. He loves America, but he is an academic.”

“Obama has never expressed a gut position on Israel.”

“Pastor Wright said that ‘Zionism, not Judaism, is a gutter religion.’ This is quite the bizarre statement.”

“At the ABC debate, George Stephanopolis asked a clear question. ‘Is an attack on Israel an attack on the USA, requiring retaliation in line with the NATO Alliance?’ (Stephanopolis was not stating that Israel was a member of NATO. The question remains valid.) Hillary Clinton remarked that obliterating Iran would be the response.”

“‘Obliterating’ Iran was a ‘moderate’ way to put it (the crowd laughed hysterically), and an effective way to put it.”

“If we can make Persian History a memory, Iran might think twice.”

“Obama calls an attack on Israel ‘unacceptable.’ Now that is tough talk.”

“Obama is a rookie. He gave a non-answer to a new question. His answer was ignorance and prudence. Dilpomacy with Iran on the nuclear issue is nonsense and totally useless. We had three useless UN resolutions, then the EU 3 of Britain, France and Germany offered nothing. Obama is prepared to fly to Tehran, and tell them what? Is he naive or cynical? Unacceptable? That will scare the hell out of the Mullahs. Negotiation is an excuse to do nothing. He does not accept the premise that Iran is trying to go nuclear. Aggressive diplomacy?  That has meant nothing, and been tried for the last six years”

“Candidates spend time preparing for every possible questions in debates, and Obama was simply confronted  with an unexpected and new question. He chose what he thought was a safe, inoffensive answer, which is his general strategy.”

“President Bush has the legal authority to attack Iran. However, having the moral authority is tough with a 28% approval rating.”

“If we attack the Strait of Hormuz, oil will skyrocket to $200 to $300 per barrel, and Hezbollah will attack from Lebanon. In October of 2006 (When the NIE report came out and was manipulated to hurt the case for an attack), President Bush was resigned to no attack.”

“Some say Israel should attack Iran. Israel might not have the physical capacity to do it. This is not like attacking the Osirak reactor in 1981 or Damascus in 2007. Iran is further away from Israel. Refueling might be an issue. In September of 2007, Israel hit Syria through Turkey. Turkey allowed Israel to hit Syria. They might not be willing to do so again.  Iran is not a one day operation. It might take a couple of weeks.”

“The Mullahs will be overthrown. Half the population is under 25. They hate the Mullahs. The USA must simply have a ‘nuclear umbrella’ over Israel.”

“Israel at 60 is one of the great historical acts of all time. Israel is now in a stable situation from terror.  In 2002, there were 59 homicide bombings. In 2007, there was one.”

“President George W. Bush is the best on Israel since President Truman.”

“The Gaza withdrawal was a good thing, but Israel should have declared an immediate policy of deterrence. One rocket attack should have yielded 100 in response.”

“Why does Israel supply the Palestinians with electricity and food? Prime Minister Ehud Ohlmert botched the war in 2006, and Bibi (former and hopefully the next Prime Minister of Israel) would not tolerate such nonsense.”

“We must stay and succeed in Iraq. We have our General. The war is the most important issue for the United States and Israel.”

“Antisemites are pathological.  We’ve gone from  having no Holocaust at all to saying it was induced by the Zionists. Try understanding that one.”

“There is a certain psychosis in liberal Jews backing Obama, yet saying that they love Israel.”

“In April of 2002, President Bush gave Ariel Sharon free reign, not 48 hours. Yet liberal Jews see President Bush as the antichrist.”

Mr. Krauthammer was at his very best when he discussed the meetings at Annapolis, Maryland. Many stauch backers of President Bush wondered if the man who supported Israel fiercely for 6 1/2 years was beginning to waver. Was he so desperate for a peace agreement the way his predecessor was that he was willing to pressure Israel?

No, he was not. Annapolis meant nothing, and I personally was never worried. I kept telling my friends to calm down, that Annapolis was just feel good symbolism. President Bush every once in awhile needs to offer the mildest of criticism towards Israel to make it look like he is neutral. He has been a friend of Israel, and will remain so. One only needs to see Palestinians burning him in effigy with the passion of modern  liberals to realize that he had not changed his views.

I was thrilled when Mr. Krauthammer offered the same assessment I have offered since Annapolis. For a brief moment I felt like I was on his intellectual level. That disappeared when he expressed those sentiments in a much more eloquent manner.

“Do not worry about Annapolis. Annapolis is meaningless. It is a great photo opportunity, not a sellout. It looks great, and accomplishes nothing. It was completely useless. By diplomatic standards it was a total and complete success.”

The crowd howled with laughter.

“Jews support Obama over McCain by about 80%-20%. Liberal Jews see voting in their own self interest to be a violation of a moral principle. This is insane.”

As thrilling as his remarks were, meeting him was more of a thrill.

I asked him before his speech if I could give him a gift. He said, “not right now, afterwards is fine.”

It quickly occurred to me that if everybody placed gifts in his lap, it would make steering his wheelchair more difficult! He was appreciative, but wanted anyone offering gifts to wait until after his speech,  when it would be easier for him to navigate from the lobby to his car. He did so after his speech with several gifts sitting in his lap, including mine.

After his speech, I had my picture taken with him, and patiently waited my turn to speak to him. I allowed others to cut in front of me because I wanted more time, which comes to those who wait for the crowd to disperse. He was not pressed for time, allowing me to be gracious about it. He was being treated like a rock star, which I more than understood. Then I finally spoke to him.

I asked him if he had been knighted yet, and if he was now known as “Sir Charles of Krauthammer.”

He warmly responded, “I haven’t yet. I haven’t found a nation that has been willing to do it. That would be nice though.”

I then asked him a more serious question.

“Mr. Krauthammer, on a more serious note, given all the recent European leaders that are very friendly to Israel, such as Sarkozy (Nicolas, President of France), Berlusconi (Silvio, Prime Minister of Italy), and Harper (Stephen, Prime Minister of Canada), isn’t now the best time for Israel to attack Iran? Isn’t this a brief window of time with world leaders that would be ok with such a strike?”

Mr. Krauthammer empathized but reiterated an earlier point of his.

“It would be great, but I just don’t know if Israel has the physical capacity to do it.”

Lastly, I gave him my gift.

“Mr. Krauthammer, I am a republican blogger. Every day I take verbal brickbats to the Daily Kossacks and others (He thanked me for that). You are the model of how I want my column to be. I like that you raise the level of discourse while keeping your convictions. Forgive me, but my gift to you is more an attempt at shameless self promotion than a gift (he laughed). I hope you like some of my better columns (I gave him an envelope with some of those columns and a very nice note), and I hope they are up to your standards. If they are, I would be honored to interview you one day.”

He genuinely thanked me, and did not commit to a timetable for an interview. I certainly was not going to press the issue. In fact, I was concerned that even giving him the columns might be too aggressive. Nevertheless, I was not too concerned to refrain. I hope he found me polite about it.

When I went to shake his hand, he offered me a closed fist, which is what he did with everybody. I gently clasped his hand, and made sure not to accidentally hurt him. When he wheeled away with his gifts sitting in his lap, he seemed genuinely happy about receiving such a warm reception from the people at the conference.

Of course, this was to be expected. The Republican Jewish Coalition would offer extreme warmth to one of the greatest Jewish republicans in this country. In addition, he is a proud Neocon. Of course we love the guy.

To get to meet an intellectual titan was a thrill that even his words might describe. Well, maybe his could, but mine cannot.

He is a hero of mine, and I wish him well always.

I just hope that the Queen of England or some other dignitary finally takes my advice through osmosis and knights this man already.

I am absolutely not going to the next DC meeting. I don’t want to go. Short of getting Nicholas Sarkozy or Silvio Berlusconi, I am definitively and positively not going. Given what high caliber people go to these meetings, the RJC will most likely make me eat my words again.

After all, I was absolutely not attending this past meeting.

Then again, as a proud member of the (Republican) Zionist Crusader Alliance (For World Domination), it was a privilege to meet our unofficial leader, the honorable Sir Charles of Krauthammer.

eric

On May 14th, 2008, Israel declared itself an independent nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_government_of_Israel

On May 14th, 2008, I am beaming with pride.

I am proud to be a Jew. I am proud to be a supporter of Israel, the land of Milk and Honey.

I am proud that a nation could take uninhabitable land that nobody initially wanted, build some orange groves, and eventually become the Silicon Valley of the Middle East.

Israel is a fragile experiment in democracy. Surrounded by enemies that are technically human beings, but often fail to act like it, Israel is able to survive and thrive with dignity and toughness.

Below are some links of organizations that actually care about the survival of Israel as a Jewish state.

http://www.americanthinker.com/

http://www.israelsoldiers.org/

http://www.chabad.org

http://www.zoa.org

http://www.rjchq.org

http://www.thelikud.org/

For those who wonder which world leaders have been best towards Israel over the last 60 years, below is a sample.

George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill, Nicolas Sarkozy, Silvio Berlusconi, Ariel Sharon, Bibi Netanyahu, Yitzchak Shamir, Menachem Begin, and John Howard, and Richard Nixon, among others.

The United States House has Eric Cantor, Mark Kirk, Michelle Bachmann, the late Tom Lantos, and former Speaker Newt Gingrich, among others.

The Senate has Norm Coleman, John McCain, Joseph Lieberman, the late Henry “Scoop” Jackson, and former Senator Alphonse D’Amato, among others.

Pundits and media people include Sir Charles of Krauthammer, Victor Davis Hanson, Sean Hannity, Ralph Peters, Dennis Prager, and John Podhoretz, among others.

Below are some blogs that care deeply about Israel.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/

http://cultureforall.blogspot.com/

http://www.masada1234.blogspot.com/

http://gunnutsrus.blogtownhall.com/

http://hiram7.wordpress.com/

http://www.hughhewitt.blogtownhall.com/default.aspx

http://www.israelmatzav.blogspot.com/

http://www.jackiemason.com/

http://www.jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/

http://j-gop.blogtownhall.com/default.aspx

http://www.neoconexpress.blogspot.com/

http://www.neoconnews.com/

http://tonguesoffire.wordpress.com/

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

http://theroguejew.blogwonks.com/

http://www.tsofah.blogspot.com/

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/

http://www.rootforamerica.com/blog/

http://yourjewishmaster.blogspot.com/

There are a million things I want to say, but I am truly overcome with emotion.

Israel now and Israel forever.

Jews are here to stay. We are good people, and we will never leave this Earth.

May God bless the State of Israel and Jews everywhere.

60 years from now, I may still be among the living. I might have my sight and my hearing.

I will have my dignity.

I will also finally be putting my money where my mouth is 3 months from now. In August of 2008 I will be taking my very first trip to the Holy Land. From Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, I will be there.

Hineni. Here I am. I am proud to be a Jew, and proud to stand with Israel.

Happy 60th Israel. May the next 60 years bring joy, love, and security that allows for a true peace.

Shalom.

eric

Barack Obama is being done in by his own arrogance. Yes, a man can be black and be arrogant. Attitudes are 100% uncorrelated with melanin content. Anybody can be smug.

To make things crystal clear, I have often stated that I personally like Barack Obama. I disagree with his views on taxes and trade, but find him to be a decent fellow. I wanted him to defeat Hillary Clinton in the democratic primary because I simply like him better than her. I am voting for John McCain, but am thrilled that Hillary is on the verge of being taken down.

Nevertheless, Barack Obama has not closed the deal. Every time Hillary is about to be counted out, she has survived. Yes, the Clintons are the political equivalent of Lazarus. Yet Obama does not help the situation by driving the stake through his own heart when he should be finishing her off.

The bottom line is every time Obama is on the verge of wrapping up the democratic nomination, he gets too full of himself, and takes a step backwards.

After Obama crushed Hillary in Iowa, he was supposed to cruise in New Hampshire. Then when Hillary was asked about her likability, her major weakness, Obama got pompous. He coolly looked barely at her and said, “You’re likable enough Hillary.”

Most people agreed with him, but realize he should not have said it. His nose was so high in the air that he was starting to look French (pre-Sarkozy). “Looking French” is a death knell criticism. It did in John Kerry. Americans want a man’s man, not a guy who eats Brie cheese and surrenders in war. Yes, this is a stereotype, but stereotypes are based on truths.

Had Obama won New Hampshire, Hillary would have folded. He would have crushed her. Instead, she survived.

This was after he asked an Iowa corn farmer if he planted arugula. This is akin to when former President George HW Bush looked befuddled by a scanner at a grocery store. Ordinary people know what a scanner is, and they don’t buy arugula at the grocery. How could anybody running for a serious office not know that Iowa corn farmers plant corn? That is why they are called corn farmers!

After these gaffes, in San Francisco of all places, he made remarks about how bitter people cling to guns and religion.

First of all, liberal politicians should not even be seen in San Francisco. If they have to walk the streets, they should wear disguises similar to politicians or celebrities who visit prostitutes or gay bath houses. They should absolutely not be seen hobnobbing with “celebrities.”

These “bitter” remarks allowed Hillary to portray herself as culturally conservative. Yes, this is ludicrous. No, Hillary does not have anything in common with average Americans. Yes, she has contempt for Middle America. Those are facts. Facts do not matter when the perception to the contrary is overwhelming.

Now Obama is making another arrogant mistake. He is barely campaigning in West Virginia.

Obama has conceded West Virginia. Yes, he is technically in the state, but he is already campaigning elsewhere. He is treating West Virginia the same way Hillary treated South Carolina.

Hillary refused to compete in states with large black populations. She discounted losses there as not counting. This was racially poisonous, and bad judgment from a delegate standpoint. Her race based campaign in South Carolina led Obama to gain 90% of the black vote in subsequent primaries. This was not the case beforehand.

Now Obama is dismissing West Virginia. Rural white voters are simply not his target.

This only feeds into the perception that Obama is an elitist.

First of all, the notion that black people cannot be arrogant because they have traditionally been abused by society is a nonsensical argument. Societies are not individuals. Individual black people are not monolithic. They have all the same traits that white people have. So yes, a person can have a dark pigmentation and still have negative qualities.

I am not convinced that Obama is an elitist. I just think that sometimes he gets too full of himself, and does not have somebody to remind him that he is a mere mortal, and not the guy who could take a trip to the toilet and then sell it on Ebay. His wife is certainly an elitist, and she seems to have a seething rage that would make Hillary proud.

The fact that Obama grew up under tough circumstances does not mean anything. People often forget where they come from.

He once remarked that if he wanted to gain advantages in society, he would not have his name, since being named Barack Obama does not give one built in advantages in life. That is a great line, but it is false. His unique name gives him branding, which is key in politics. A guy named “Barry,” which he used to be known as, is simply less unique than a guy named Barack. In the same way Lamar Alexander wore a flannel shirt to appeal to lumberjacks in Tennessee, Barack Obama emphasized his ethnic background to appeal to people. There is nothing wrong with this, and it worked.

As for his wife, I absolutely do not blame Obama for comments his wife makes. However, Bill Clinton muzzled Hillary when she kept opening her mouth in 1992. One “baking cookies” remark was enough. Winning was more important than keeping the missus happy.

John Kerry would not shut his wife up. He lost. Michelle Obama is a loose cannon, and her comments about how she was not proud of America until Barack started winning was off putting.

The bottom line is while front runners occasionally stumble even after victory is well in hand (such as Jerry Brown defeating Bill Clinton in Connecticut 37-36%), for a front runner to lose by 20, 30, or 40 points is mind boggling. This only happens when the leader has not closed the deal.

Some will say that West Virginia does not matter, because Obama has already won the nomination. This is wrong because the general election is not that far away. West Virginia was owned by democrats for decades, until President George W. Bush won the state in 2000 and 2004. West Virginia has reelected liberal Robert Byrd to the Senate forever. Their other Senator Jay Rockefeller is also a liberal. Yet West Virginia also has coal miners and gun owners. They like democrats, but not liberal elitists. Only Al Gore and John Kerry could lose that state…and perhaps Barack Obama.

Barack Obama should have given one of his major inspiring speeches like he did in other states. Instead, he conceded the state.

I have argued for years that republicans must go into black neighborhoods. It is always better to talk to people, rather than ignore them.

https://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/04/republican-presidential-candidates-must-go-into-black-neighborhoods/

Barack Obama must go into culturally conservative white neighborhoods for one reason, and one reason alone. White people in West Virginia are human beings. The President has to lead everybody.

Democrats have been trying to win the White House with an 18 state strategy that ignores the 32 states that make up “flyover country.” Obama seems determined to run that same strategy. Even if it allows the democrats to eke out a victory, it does not allow for effective governance.

Barack Obama is basically a good, decent, likable man that occasionally gets too smug for his own good. Many of us are guilty of that on occasion. However, if he truly wants to lead all America, and his speeches are not phony platitudes, he must speak to all Americans. If he wants to transcend race, he has to reach out to the very people that do not automatically gravitate towards him.

West Virginia is not “white trash.” It is a state consisting of people.

Obama had better figure this out before he gets trounced in Kentucky.

eric

A thrilling debate about God took place several days ago at a Southern California Synagogue.

Dennis Prager offered Judaism. Dinesh D’Souza offered Christianity. Christopher Hitchens offered Atheism.

All three of these men offered sheer brilliance.

The opening statements and rebuttals were discussed with eloquent points and sharp counterpoints.

For those thinking that bringing the closing statements at the beginning of a column is further proof of a rumpus backwards column, those were transcripted days ago. Those that have the transgression of not having read them already shall scroll to the appropriate genius on their own time.

With that, some giant conclusions about God are below.

Hitchens: With regards to Kim Il Sung, it is said that on the date of his birth, birds sing in Korean. I do not know any birds that sing in Korean. As for Kim Jong Il, President Bush and other leaders refer to him as “Mr. Chairman,” not “Mr. president.” This is because for the last 13 years, the true supreme leader of North Korea is the deceased father. His son is merely carrying out his father’s instructions. This is not secular. This is mysticism, the result of believing in a supernatural intervention.

When God orders killing, you kill all, and spare nobody. Secularists do not even think about this stuff, or about things such as suicide bombing. The Founding Fathers were secular. How do you get from Deism to Theism? Theists care about who you sleep with and what you eat. Outside of religion, how does the big bang lead to virgin births? The fastest growing religion in America today is no religion.  Secularism is winning.

Prager:  The discussion tonight was the case for God, not the case for religion. We can debate religion another night, but this is about the case for God. If God created humans, then God would care how they fare. If we care and God does not, then we are greater than God. We are not, so God gives humans a conscience. The first two men created were Cane and Abel. One of them kills the other, and only then does God destroy all since he wants goodness.

Then comes Noah, and Noah gets laws. This is the second attempt that fails when laws are broken. God again destroys all. God’s third attempt at a good world comes in the form of the Hebrews. They were chosen not because they were the greatest, but specifically because they were the smallest. If even as the least among us, they can be a moral light, then all people can spread good. God wants goodness. From Adam to Noah to Abraham, we have the current Jews. There is more than one road to God, according to Jews. Christians have done God’s will. Yet while there is one empirical truth, there is not only one way to God. Jews must defend Christians for shared values.

D’Souza: Suffering is just as difficult for Atheism. The amount of evil is on a scale that is staggering. The lion may want to eat the antelope, but he does not want to kill them all. Serial killers are called bestialbut beasts do not act that way. Humans are worse. Secularists cite Neitzsche, but even Neitzsche said that “To remove God, and to hang onto the morality from God, is not possible.”

Darwinians ignore Rwanda. There is no bond. They are not family. Religion offers a final accounting, that current evil deeds do lead to future punishment, a type of caste system. Even Torquemada worried about a final judgment, but Mao or Stalin did not. Religion equals a ladder from man to God. It is God who comes down, not humans who go up. God is a bridge to human salvation.

The moderator then asked a few questions.

Moderaotr: WHy doesn’t God just reveal himself and end the argument? Will he?

Prager: If God performed a miracle, it would impact people for three days. Then scientists would explain cloud formations. God revealed himself to the Jews, and then we built a golden calf after he split the sea. People are ungrateful from birth. Babies do not shut up so parents can have peace. There is nothing new to be revealed or to be said. God gives an instruction manual. If we follow the manual, good things will happen.

Hitchens: There is nothing against child abuse or genocide in the 10 Commandments. There was no condemnation of slavery. Yet, coveting, yes, that is mentioned. That is man made.

Prager: The Egyptians celebrated death. The Pyramids are tombs. Jews celebrated life in a world centered around death. This tradition of Jews celebrating life when surrounded by a culture of death continues to this day.

Hitchens: I could not accept a loving God. You cannot design your own God, who owes no explanation. That is idolatry. Saying that one “has nothing to lose by believing” is dishonest. God looks kinder on someone who is not bribed by reward or punishment. If there was a God, I would like to think he would be kinder towards me for doing good deeds not because I want to make him happy or out of fear of making hi mad, but without caring about his opinion at all. We are responsible for caring for each other because it is decent, not because of Heaven or Hell.

D’Souza: Demanding material proof for the immaterial building is not practical. Gravity is inferred. Atheists remain unconvinced. They have a refusal to believe even if they were given evidence.

Moderator: What is the Atheist’s source of dignity?

Hitchens: The Golden Rule of doing unto others as you would want them to do unto you is Atheistic, despite religions claiming credit for it. Values are innate in all of us.

Moderator: How can Jews be saved without believing in Jesus?

D’Souza: All salvation is through Christ, but divine justice is unknowable. Christian theology can extend beyond Christians, but God may disagree.

Moderator: Who was Jesus?

Prager: Jesus was a religious Jew who would be baffled by decisions made in his name. One example would be religions that ban divorce. Judaism wants people to live a fulfilling life.  A bad marriage is unfulfilling. Looking at Jesus is not the same thing as looking at Christians. What brings one to the God of Israel is good. Jesus came to non-Jews. He had no reason to come to Jews. Judaism teaches that God never took a human form. Moses Maimonides, the Rambam, said that “Christians have brought more people to Judaism than the Torah.” Christianity in its goodness is better than some bad isolated acts by Christians such as the Inquisition.

Moderator: Atheism may offer no consolation, but why should there be any suffering, such as what happened to Job?

D’Souza: The premise is not God’s compassion, but compassion and justice. It is not about only belief, but about law. Physical laws exist. Moral evil exists because we have free will. The alternative is that we are automatons. Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust, not God. Atheism offers no moral explanation for evil, and that we are all just molecules. Religion offers hope and consolation.

Moderator: Where does the the Atheist’s morality originate? Why do we obsess about justice and fairness when little of either exists?

Hitchens: As I previously said, the Golden Rule is my guide. No society has savagery as a good, where goodness is despised. That will not be found.

D’Souza: What is the Darwinian explanation for the Golden Rule? How does it relate to business and family? It is religion that teaches us to give up our seat on a bus to an old person. It is religion that teaches us to give blood, and to engage in military service.

Hitchens: Saying that natural selection exists is not an endorsement. Look at the dinosaurs,  sheep, and rats. God did not care. The British Health Service never runs out of blood.  Blood replenishes, so one person’s gain is not  another person’s loss. Giving blood is not a self interest or a sacrifice. It is a rational calculation. The pleasure of doing good is based on the gift relationship. If I need blood, again, rational self interest kicks in. Higher primates adhere to the Golden Rule, yet we as humans are too lazy to study it. Giving God that credit denigrates man.

My ears are still ringing from the thunderous applause of the audience.

As for the Tygrrrr Express, no analysis could be as superb as the event itself in its descriptive form.

I remain a proud Hebrew with a deep respect for Christianity. Yet I can also appreciate the argument of a brilliant Atheist, regardless of my not being swayed.

All men may be created equal, but what they do with their gifts is unequal.

Mr. Prager, Mr. D’Souza, and Mr. Hitchens are absolutely brilliant, and their discussion was one for the ages.

eric