Sunday, June 22, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
And if the DNC don't wake up soon, lookie what the Republicans did:
Democrats vs Obama dot com
See also in Wired: Angry Clinton Supporters Start Rallying for McCain Online
It is clear - whether they choose to abstain, vote third party or go to McCain - Hillary Clinton supporters are not about to simply settle and let Obama merely inherit their votes in the spirit of "Party Unity."
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Full story in the New York Sun
UPDATE: More Deatils in NY Obeserver
Friday, May 30, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Ron Paul must be SO Proud:
Today, House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Howard Berman (D-CA) released a statement responding to ThinkProgress’s report that McCain’s promise to “veto every bill with earmarks” may eliminate U.S. aid to Israel. Berman sharply criticized McCain for putting attempts to “please certain parts of the electorate” above “indispensable security programs”:For many years, Congress has earmarked critical military aid for Israel, our closest ally in the volatile Middle East. Confronted with this fact, Senator McCain last evening hastily issued what purported to be a clarifying statement indicating that he will ‘ensure America remains committed to the security of Israel, including maintaining America’s assistance levels.’
Unfortunately, this did little to explain his intentions. It is absolutely essential that Congress continue to require full funding for Israel. In the absence of an earmark, it is easy to imagine a situation in which funds hat are vital to Israel’s self-defense are diverted to the crisis of the moment or distributed to others based on political whims. Vague commitments to ‘maintaining … assistance levels’ offer cold comfort.
Senator McCain may be trying to please certain parts of the electorate by promising to cut pork-barrel spending, but he needs to learn to distinguish pork from indispensable security programs.
- 12 Page Pamphlet in English by Rabbi J. David Bleich on Halachos of Erev Pesach which occurs on Shabbos [Direct to pdf]
- OU Pesach 2008 - Product Search, Pesach Guide, Special Topics and Information
- YU Torah "Pesach To Go" 5768/2008 - Wealth of Materials - from Rabbi Soloveitchik and Beyond; Stuff for Kids, interesting Divrei Torah and Tibits and additional links
- The infamous "Bangitout Seder Sidekick" 2008 - 48 Pages pdf of Entertainment, Humor and Enlightening information
Child Prodigy Tickles Ivory Keys For Chai Lifeline This Pesach Will You be in Florida (or Rye, NY)? See a unique performance and help a great cause - 3 Perfomances additional info.
- Need a Seder? List of Public Seders
- Have something to add? Drop a note in the coments.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Holy flipping cow. This guy has chutzpah, and that is putting it mildly. Such cocky arrogance has not been seen on the presidential campaign trail since George W. Bush and Rudolph Giuliani thought they were actually qualified to be president. Sheesh.
The above statement is naive, ignorant and very very arrogant. Worse, it happened days ago, and of course has gone largly unreported and unchallenged. Imagine for a moment if Hillary Clinton had even dared to say such a thing? Imagine how they would have instantly jumped on her for "embelishments" and "tall tales."
ABC's Jake Tapper writes:
Somebody Call Abe Foxman April 09, 2008 8:22 PMOn what planet is the above statement even remotely accurate? Even the biggest most loyal Obama fans cannot deny this is a most psychotic delusion. Even if it is going to be explained that he didn't mean people like Wiesel and that he was referring to his opponents, well then he is still very very far from the most outspoken (Obama doesn't come close to Hillary on this issue).
In Levittown, Penn., today, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, was asked about his church's magazine giving an award to Rev. Louis Farrakhan.
ABC News' Sunlen Miller has more about the town hall questioning HERE.
"This was done by a magazine that was connected to the church," Obama explained. "I would have never done it. It was primary focused on the rehabilitation work that they do for ex-offenders in Chicago. That doesn’t excuse it, that just explains it."
Obama reminded the crowd that he'd denounced his church’s praise of Farrakhan, saying, "I’ve been very clear about saying that was wrong. And nobody has spoken out more fiercely on the issue of anti- Semitism than I have."
Really? No one?
Elie Wiesel? Simon Wiesenthal? Alan Dershowitz?
Obama is becoming unglued. He has been shooting from his cocky hip lately and is acting quite pompous, and yet - it goes unchallenged, unquestioned, and without explanation. Besides mentioning anti-semitism in his Martin Luther King Day speech, what pray tell has he done? What accomplishment on this green earth makes him the best?
Update, from HotAir:
First off, when has Obama spoken out at all against anti-Semitism outside of generic “hope and change” rhetoric about the tone and tenor of politics? He hasn’t been an activist for anti-Semitism even in his own church. He claims he didn’t agree with Jeremiah Wright’s honoring Farrakhan, but he didn’t speak out against it until people pressed him for a reaction to it. How about when his church reprinted Hamas propaganda in its bulletins? Did his fierce opposition erupt in protest? Uh, no.
And now “nobody has spoken out more fiercely on the issue of anti-Semitism” than Obama? That’s not just absurd, it insults the intelligence of everyone who heard it. Many people have spoken out eloquently on anti-Semitism on many more occasions than Barack Obama, which isn’t a difficult threshold to meet.
This is the Obama style of “hope and change”. When something controversial happens, hope that no one notices. If they do, change direction and get ahead of the event. In this case, Obama got so caught up in the moment that he transformed himself into the leading voice against anti-Semitism. Maybe no one heard him until now because of laryngitis.
"Things are so screwed up that while the Pope can visit the Western Wall in what was clearly the "Israeli" portion of his visit, President Bush can't make the same photo op as part of his historic trip marking Israel's 60th anniversary,” Lerner opined. “And now an example of the incredible lack of thinking on the part of whoever is working on this trip: instead of visiting places associated with Israel's rebirth or ancient life - the idea is a photo op at a place remembered in history for the group of Jews who committed suicide rather than fall captive to the Romans.” - Dr. Michael Lerner, IMRA
UPDATE: See here for full statement from Dr. Michael Lerner of IMRA
Some best friend. First this clown makes a huge deal about his last trip to the Holy Land, yet he slapped the Israeli government in the face by snubbing the requisite formal invitation by Israel for the American President to address the Knesset. (Israeli Parliament). The White House reasoned that he could not speak in the Israeli house, because he would be unable to give a reciporacle address to the Palestinian legislative council... because there would be Hamas lawmakers present. [The very same Hamas lawmakers whose election Bush himself pushed for, lauded and applauded and naivly declared ["It's too early to know their intentions"].
President Bush is planning another visit very soon to participate in the Jewish State's 60th independence anniversary celebrations. Bunnypants will indeed give a speech to the Knesset this time (did we miss in a change from the alleged reason last time?) however he will issue an entirely new snub. Mr. Religious will defer the visiting the worlds most popular holy site, because it is supposedly "too controversial." Moreover, Bush will instead opt to visit another popular Tourist destination, Massadah, a historical place where 100 Jews committed mass suicide. How appropriate and fitting for the worst best friend Israel ever had.
UPDATE: [The delusional J-Media and and Republican groups have largly ignored these issues, but the A7 is not. In addition to this piece from several days ago, our old friend Yishai Fleisher (founder of Kumah) discussed the matter at length yesterday on his radio program "President Bush snubs the Lord at the Western Wall and rejects the Patriarchs at Hebron." ]
Arutz Sheva / Israel National Radio's Ezra HaLevi reports:
Also see Haaretz: Bush likely to make symbolic visit to Masada, avoiding contentious sites
The Western Wall has been deemed too controversial a place for US President George W. Bush to visit. He is opting instead for Masada – where Jewish rebels committed mass suicide.
Bush will be visiting Israel as part of Israel’s 60th Independence Day celebrations. His visit will be 60 hours long. In addition to addressing the Knesset, Bush is reportedly searching for a symbolic location to visit, with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as his tour guide.
Haaretz reported that Bush’s aids were leaning toward the Masada fortress. The site was where Jews held out against the Roman army, but were eventually beaten and committed suicide rather than face the humiliation and torture of captivity. Haaretz
mentioned the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hevron, the Golan Heights and the Western Wall, explicitly, as places deemed too controversial for Bush to visit.
The Western Wall, also called the Kotel ("wall" in Hebrew) or Wailing Wall, is the western retaining wall of the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site. The mount itself is occupied by two Muslim structures and Jewish worship there is severely restricted. The Western Wall is highly symbolic as it has been the focal point of Jewish worship in the most recent return to Zion. It was approachable via a small alleyway prior to the War of Independence, was off-limits to Jews under Jordanian rule following the 1949 armistice and was liberated in the 1967 Six Day War. Among the most famous photos in Israel's history is that of IDF paratroopers looking up at the wall with awe following their participation in the battle for the Old City. Shortly after the victory, Israel bulldozed the area around the wall, creating a huge prayer plaza.
Muslims have recently been staking a claim not only to the Temple Mount, but to the Western Wall as well. They call it Al-Burak and say the religion's founder, Mohammad, tied his horse there during a midnight journey that took him to "the farthest mosque" - which they say is a reference to the Jerusalem mosque later given that name.
The Bushes also want to witness the Biblical prophecy of the ingathering of the exiles first-hand. White House staffers report that the Bushes are looking to meet with recent olim (Jewish immigrants to Israel) during the visit.
Bush will not be visiting Palestinian Authority-controlled areas or meeting with PA officials during his visit to Israel, but will hold a meeting with Fatah chief and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in Egypt afterward.
Media analyst Dr. Aaron Lerner of Israel Media Research and Analysis says that the phenomenon of Bush steering clear of the Western Wall does not bode well and belies statements by Israeli officials’ claiming an improved relationship with the US due to Israel’s willingness to make repeated concessions to Fatah.
“Things are so screwed up that while the Pope can visit the Western Wall in what was clearly the "Israeli" portion of his visit, President Bush can't make the same photo op as part of his historic trip marking Israel's 60th anniversary,” Lerner opined. “And now an example of the incredible lack of thinking on the part of whoever is working on this trip: instead of visiting places associated with Israel's rebirth or ancient life - the idea is a photo op at a place remembered in history for the group of Jews who committed suicide rather than fall captive to the Romans.”
Dr. Lerner concluded, with tongue-in-cheek: “Then again. How appropriate. PM Olmert, who critics warn is following a suicidal path with the Palestinians, will visit Masada with Bush.”
Organizers of Bush's planned two-and-a-half-day stay said they had been searching for a symbolic location for the president to visit, but wanted to avoid one that might stir controversy like the Western Wall, Golan Heights or Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron.What exactly are they afraid of?
This didn't happen under Clinton or Carter, it is being done by legacy starved "best friend" Bush and Condi.
The plan, divided into separate phases, among other things calls for Israel eventually to forfeit parts of the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site.
According to the first stage of the U.S. plan, which was obtained by WND, Israel would give the PA some municipal and security sovereignty over key Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem.
The PA would be allowed to open some official institutions in Jerusalem, could elect a mayor for the Palestinian side of the city and would deploy police forces to maintain law and order.
The initial stage also calls for the PA to operate Jerusalem municipal institutions, such as offices to oversee trash collection and maintenance of roads.
After five years, if both sides keep their certain commitments called for in a larger principal agreement, according to the U.S. plan the PA would be given full sovereignty over the eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods and also over sections of the Temple Mount. The plan doesn't specify which parts of the Temple Mount would be forfeited to the Palestinians.
After the five year period, the PA could deploy official security forces in Jerusalem separate from a police force and could also open major governmental institutions, such as a president's office, and offices for the finance and foreign ministries.
The U.S. plan leaves Israel and the PA to negotiate which Jerusalem neighborhoods would become Palestinian. According to diplomatic sources familiar with the plan, while specific neighborhoods were not officially listed, American officials recommended sections of Jerusalem's Old City as well as certain largely Arab Jerusalem neighborhoods such as Jabal mukabar, Beit Hanina, Shoafat, Abu Dis and Abu Tur become part of the Palestinian side.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
While people continue to question Obama for not criticizing his religious leaders the same question can also be asked of this country's most prominent methodists - the Bush's and Clinton's. Currently, one IS the president, the other wants to be his sucessor.
Beating on Clinton without even disclosing that Bush is too a member of the United Methodist Church is misleading and hypocritical.
I hear what you are saying. Bush isn't running. However, he actually is the president.
Are you saying that we cannot question actual leadership? (A fundemental aspect of our democracy?) Only the candidates deserve scrutiny? What about the people who are elected?
Bush actually IS the president for another whole year. Do you mean to imply that in eleven months from now when and if Hillary is the president that you're questions will no longer apply? Seriously, what you are saying is that in a year from now or six months from now, your challenge to Clinton will no longer apply. For if it doesnt apply to Bush now, it shouldnt apply to his fellow Methodist who will soon be in his same place. No?
BTW, this site has always had a comments feature. Sometime during our hiatus the service (Enetation) seems to have gone down for an undetermined time.