David Foster

Obama, the Democrats, and Israel

by

Speaking in France, Jesse Jackson expanded on the ways in which American foreign policy will change in an Obama administration:

Prepare for a new America: That’s the message that the Rev. Jesse Jackson conveyed to participants in the first World Policy Forum, held at this French lakeside resort last week.

He promised “fundamental changes” in US foreign policy – saying America must “heal wounds” it has caused to other nations, revive its alliances and apologize for the “arrogance of the Bush administration.”

The most important change would occur in the Middle East, where “decades of putting Israel’s interests first” would end.

Jackson believes that, although “Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades” remain strong, they’ll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

While predicting that the Obama administration will implement drastic changes in domestic policy as well, Jackson declined to be specific about what might be done. He was more willing to be concrete with regard to foreign policy, specifically the Middle East:

Jackson is especially critical of President Bush’s approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

“Bush was so afraid of a snafu and of upsetting Israel that he gave the whole thing a miss,” Jackson says. “Barack will change that,” because, as long as the Palestinians haven’t seen justice, the Middle East will “remain a source of danger to us all.”

More at Power Line.

Jackson doesn’t have authority to speak for Obama, of course. But the attitudes he expresses here are disturbingly common in the higher reaches of the Democratic Party.

Anyone who cares about the survival and well-being of Israel needs to consider very carefully before voting for any Democratic candidate. Because American diplomatic and military support for Israel has a clear inverse relationship with the power and influence of the Democratic Party as it stands today.

And Israel’s safety is something all Americans should care about, for the same reasons Europeans and Americans should have been concerned about the safety of Czechoslovakia in 1938.

UPDATE: See this analysis, which was published yesterday in the Israeli internet publication ynet.

Hockey Moms and Capital Markets

by

An intersting piece in Asia Times argues that much of America’s economic strength is due to our Sarah Palins.

via Lead and Gold.

Raging Against Palin

by

…also against McCain and other Republicans/conservatives.

Michelle Malkin has a photo essay: insane rage.

The fury directed at Sarah Palin, in particular, is so extreme that I don’t think it can really be explained by disagreements on policy or by genuine doubts regarding her qualifications. It seems pretty clear to me, rather, that much of this anger is driven by snobbery and status anxiety.

Stresses of Globalization

by

Unfortunately in the year XXXX the whole world was one large international workshop. A strike in the Argentine was apt to cause suffering in Berlin. A raise in the price of certain raw materials in London might spell disaster to tens of thousands of long-suffering Chinese coolies who had never even heard of the existence of the big city on the Thames. The invention of some obscure Privat-Dozent in a third-rate German university would often force dozens of Chilean banks to close their doors, while bad management on the part of an old commercial house in Gothenburg might deprive hundreds of little boys and girls in Australia of a chance to go to college.

Read more

Sad and Disturbing…but not Surprising

by

McCain/Palin supporters walk through the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

Affluent liberals and “progressives” respond with the grace, class, and tolerance that we have come to expect of them.

(via Neptunus Lex)

UPDATE: See also my 2004 post an incident at the movies. I’d bet there is a 90% overlap between the kinds of people booing this recruiting film and the kinds of people snarling at the McCain supporters in the above video.

Also, be sure and read Ginny’s post.

UPDATE 2: Bookworm writes about another example of “progressive” rage at anyone who dares disagree with them.