Kerry's Sad Rant About Israeli Settlements

When I began listening to John Kerry's speech made in defense of Obama's no-vote, no-veto, allowing the U. N. Security Council to denounce the Israeli settlements, I heard a spoiled child whining because "he" didn't get what he wanted for Christmas. 

But, I also heard some very disturbing words.

Almost anti-Semitic, he said "Israel can either be Jewish or democratic -- not both."  Would he have said the same about the Muslim Palestinians?  No.  The implication is that Israelis must put their religion aside to bring peace.  While, the Palestinians are able to continue their hard-line Muslim beliefs including the belief that Israel has "no right to exist".

Then there was this statement "most right-wing coalition in Israeli history".   Of course, the implication is that the political right -- even in this country -- are all war mongers not interested in peace, and if the country was politically left,  peace would have been achieved.  Israel has been left-leaning in the past, yet peace has not prevailed for decades.  Like it or not, the "people" of Israel chose that right-wing "coalition" to run their country through democratic elections.  The reality, is that rocket and rock attacks, knifings, and mowing down Israelis with automobiles, trucks, and buses has pushed the country further right in a desire to more forcibly defend themselves.  Evidently, Kerry can't see that.

Kerry (and also Obama) need to get over it.  Peace was not achieved.  The desired "legacy" was more about him and Obama and less about the protection or the defense of our only true ally in the region.  That speech proved it.  The whole focus was only on what Israel should surrender, and not what Palestine should also give up. That was what that cry-baby, speech was all about.

References:

Kerry: Israel Can Either Be Jewish Or Democratic, It Cannot Be Both: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/12/28/kerry_israel_can_either_be_jewish_or_democratic_it_cannot_be_both.html

John Kerry in blistering attack on 'most rightwing coalition in Israeli history' http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/secretary-state-john-kerry-launches-9528455

Israel's right to exist - Wikipedia: https://www.google.com/search?q=israel+right+to+exist&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

How politics is redefining 'left' and 'right' in Israel: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/05/israel-right-left-camps-rule-of-law-minorities-rights-arabs.html

Cruz Crashes and Burns at the Convention

Prior to his convention speech, many speculated that Ted Cruz would use this platform to launch another run for the Presidency in 2020; even if Trump was President.  But, once again, Cruz proved why he is so hated in Washington.

His speech was merely another campaign speech and had nothing to do with bringing the party together.  As a result, he was booed and jeered and Trump had to enter the arena prematurely.  Of course, by doing so, the cameras and attention focused on Trump and away from Cruz who was still speaking.  Abruptly, Cruz's opportunity ended.

If he thought his performance would solidify support for another run in 2020, he was devastatingly mistaken.  People will remember this for years.  For many, both in the arena and those watching on TV, there will always be a negative opinion of him.  He truly ruined what was a great night of speeches.  On the following day, all the media talk was about Cruz and his appearance, and not about the other speakers. He should have just stayed home.

References:

Cruz gets booed after he declines to endorse Trump: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/cruz-gets-booed-after-he-declines-to-endorse-trump-during-convention-speech-225924

Ted Cruz stole the show, and then Donald Trump stole it right back: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/21/politics/republican-convention-2016-day-three-takeaways/

Ted's Selfish Gambit Backfires: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/20/ted-cruz-puts-his-political-career-ahead-his-count/

Ted Cruz Reopens Party Wounds on Dramatic RNC Convention Night: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-conventions/ted-cruz-reopens-party-wounds-dramatic-rnc-convention-night-n613826 

Why Everyone (in Congress) Hates Ted Cruz -- NYMag: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/12/why-everyone-in-congress-hates-ted-cruz.html

In the three years since he arrived in the U.S. Senate, Ted Cruz has become easily the most hated man in Washington: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/why-dc-hates-ted-cruz/426915/

Everybody Hates Ted | New Republic: https://newrepublic.com/article/128808/everybody-hates-ted 

Mr. Obama, Lying Has Consequences

Many people have shed their rose colored glasses when it comes to trusting Barack Obama.  It has definitely showed up in the polls with his approval numbers now hovering around 40%, and, it all stems from his lying.  Lying about his writing the book "Dreams of my Father" when, in fact, Bill Ayers "ghost wrote" that book.  Then, lying about his casual acquaintance with Ayers.  You know, the guy that wrote his book and launched his senatorial campaign from his home.  Then, there were all those ObamaCare lies regarding keeping your insurance and your doctor; and, how it won't add one penny to the deficit or, how it would lower your costs for health insurance.

Of course, there was also the lie about Benghazi being caused by a video.  Then, there was the extent of the IRS scandal; saying that it was just a few rogue people in the Cleveland office.  Or, lying about the extent of the NSA spying and how, supposedly, American's aren't in the NSA's spying net.  So, it's no wonder that, people couldn't care less when he gave his speech on changes to the NSA's manual on spying.  According to a recent Pew poll, only 8% were interested enough in what Obama had to say by listening to his whole speech.  Of those, 73% thought that the President's changes would make little difference in keeping American's privacy safe and, 79% thought the changes wouldn't have any measurable impact on out fight against terrorism.  That same poll said that more than half of those polled didn't hear anything about the President's speech.

If these numbers don't show Obama as being a lame-duck President; then, nothing will.

Reference: Pew Research: Obama’s NSA Speech Has Little Impact on Skeptical Public: http://www.people-press.org/2014/01/20/obamas-nsa-speech-has-little-impact-on-skeptical-public/

Jennifer Granholm Channels Elaine Benes At The Democratic Convention

I'm sure you all remember the Elaine Benes' now-famous dance scene from the Seinfeld TV series:



After seeing Elaine dance, George Castanza later told Jerry Seinfeld it was like watching dry heaves set to music.

Now watch as Jennifer Granholm channels "Elaine" in this viral melt-down speech of hers at the Democratic National Convention.  This time it looks like dry heaves set to a political speech:

Can You Believe Bill Clinton's Speech Last Night?

Rush Limbaugh has said that Bill Clinton is the only politician he knows of that can lie to you, straight faced, and you don't mind being lied to.  Hence, his widely held nickname of  "Slick Willie". Certainly, much of what he said last night was just that.  And, how do I know this? In making his points, he used that same boney, word-by-word cadenced finger pointing that he used when saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."  This kind of scolding gesturing is his way of saying that "you'd better believe me" (even though I'm lying). Otherwise, when telling the truth or when making honest comments, he tends to express himself with open outstretched-hands or with a hands-on-chest gesture as if to pull the audience into what he's saying.

Oh, and by the way.  Don't expect the liberal media to fact-check anything Clinton said last night.  That's because he is their god, and, to fact check god would be akin to blasphemy.

Obama On Jobs, Again!

Even before Obama got into office, his mantra has always been: Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! We've been told "by him" that, since he took office, he wakes each morning and goes to bed each night thinking about ways to create "jobs".

But, now, with nearly 1000 days in office under his belt, unemployment has climbed much higher than it was when he moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. With continued high unemployment, falling poll numbers, and increasing prospects of a one-term presidency, he's going to announce another jobs initiative; acting as if unemployment is now, somehow, something suddenly new.

One would think that, after spending nearly 1000 waking mornings thinking about ways to create jobs, a jobs plan would just roll off his tongue. But, no. Instead we have to wait another half month or more for him to unveil his latest -- let me guess -- spending and debt-ridden big-government masterpiece. In the meantime, another 400,000 plus Americans will continue to hit the unemployment lines each month with 15 million out of work already and with another 11 million out of work and totally discouraged from even looking for work.

In typical Obama fashion, the unveiling will be done through a "major economic speech" to be delivered sometime in September. Is there ever a speech given by this guy that isn't labelled as a "major speech"? I, for one, am tired of all his speeches without any real, documented plans; and, the polls show that most Americans are too!

Obama 101

This weekend, I heard one Democratic pundit say that when the text of the President's speech to our kids is released on Monday, the Republicans will be embarrassed by the fact that it is so politically benign.

The stupidity of that statement is the fact that we will never know what that speech was really going to say. This White House never, ever, released a prior statement as to what the President will be saying before they went ahead and told our nation's teachers to get prepared for the President's "command performance". For sure, it could have been greatly modified in those 5 days while this speech had blown up into such a heated issue.

But, let's be realistic. It wasn't really the speech, itself, that was at the true heart of the controversy. It was that lesson plan or course outline that accompanied the announcement of the speech. It didn't take a lot of imagination to get a little nervous about what was "in" that lesson plan. Even today, it still looks to be very much political in its content. For that reason, the President's team knew that they were literally caught red handed. To soft peddle this fact, they somewhat modified the outline to take out that clearly political step of thinking about ways to "help the President". But, this was just a ruse to make it look as if the White House was trying to be completely non-political. However, the other steps in the outline -- left up to the discretion of any completely left-leaning, Obama-loving union teacher --- could easily extend well beyond the non-political barriers and make that lesson plan a pure exercise in propaganda. In the days to come, I'm sure we'll hear about it.

For this very reason, I don't think there should have ever been a lesson plan. The fact that it even exists takes this speech out of the realm of being a simple pep-talk to our kids. Now, at the beginning of the school year, our children -- already failing at a rate of 30% across the nation and 50% in our major cities -- are being told that they now have to take "Obama 101" as part of their curriculum. That's what's wrong with this whole thing and that's why so many parents are so upset.

Obama doesn't get it.

The Obama "WE"

The word "we" is such a small word in our language. But, depending how it is used, it has at least two very distinct and powerful connotations. When used by anyone in behalf of a peer group, a group of like-minded people, it expresses a form of "solidarity" among all those in that group.

The word "we" is also used by a "leader" in order to "soften" the harshness of his or her "authority" by slyly asking his subordinates to "agree" to do something; even though, any real disagreement wouldn't actually be tolerated. This is opposed to that same leader giving a direct command. Certainly, "we can do this" is much more acceptable to an employee than "I want you to do" this, or that, or the other thing. This is really a form of reverse psychology and one that is used constantly in business by supervisors/managers and in the social world by teachers, counselors, doctors, psychologists, etc. But, make no mistake, the use of the word "we" in this context strictly implies a form of boss/leader and subordinate relationship.

Barack Obama uses "we" constantly in all of his speeches. Clearly, he uses it in the form of "a leader" asking for people to follow in some endeavor. I suspect it is a technique that Senator Obama learned, quite well, in his role as a community organizer; working in Chicago. This plays well to the domestic crowds that come to see him at his various campaign venues. They clearly see him as their leader and they enthusiastically want to follow him in "all" his "we" and "we can" directives. They certify this committment by loudly erupting in cheers for him.

Yesterday, Barack Obama gave his speech in Berlin, Germany. As usual, he used his "we" and "we can" word technique throughout that speech (Click to see the full text from the Drudge Report). But, unlike here, the crowds weren't in riotous agreement. They were generally subdued; except, of course, when he talked about getting out of Iraq. I think Obama made a mistake by using the "we" technique in that speech. His leadership was being implied in its use and the Germans aren't hardly his subordinates. In fact, most of Europe reacts negatively to America's leadership in anything. And, they don't need another American telling them what to do. In a way, I believe the bloom may have come off the rose in that speech; as far as the Europeans are concerned. But, only time will tell as they finally figure out how presumptive that speech really was.