My Big Surprise from Presidential Debate One

I watched the first Presidential Debate of the 2012 Election Cycle with low expectations and not expecting anything that might actually change my despair of the coming day I had felt I had little choice. Where I will not jump to any conclusions or dance with joy, but I now have found a glimmer of hope. It just might be that those who had tried to dispel my exasperations about Mitt Romney winning the Republican nomination may have had a valid point, though they likely did not state it as well as Candidate Romney did during the debate. This was after an even earlier piece of discouragement when John Bolton, our once recess appointed United Nations Ambassador, announced that he had no interest in running for the Republican nomination race for President. After that I had some lesser amounts of hope of which none was ever placed in Mitt Romney. Much of Romney’s record as Governor of Massachusetts did not inspire any evidence of a great conservative constitutionally guided leader. What it had shown me was a pragmatist who would lead only as far as the possible and not take on the big challenges of pushing monumental change. The one thing I believe we need right now in the United States is a monumental transformation returning us to the original intentions expressed in our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights respectively and in that order of importance.

What I expected from the debates was Mitt Romney touting an economic plan to make an environment where businesses could flourish and people would be rewarded for choosing to invest and risk their time, treasure, and efforts in order to pursue their dreams and establish new ventures, businesses and opportunities. Well, I definitely got that performance from Mitt Romney. As far as President Barack Obama was concerned, I fully expected a better showing despite his previous problems when having to speak without his little friend the teleprompter and answer questions off the cuff or defend his positions when challenged. What I saw instead was a wondrous destruction and dismantlement of the President who appeared unprepared for any confrontation. President Obama almost appeared as if he had expected assistance from the moderator to cripple any thrusts by Romney and permit the President to give his typical long winded, delusional answers which leave people impressed despite having garnered no information or knowledge from another extensive, tendentious, overly-long, vacuous oration relatively devoid of substance. We did not even get a performance worthy of this description. Instead President Obama came across disconnected, distracted, distant, and unable to connect with the audience, the questions, or the conversation. The debate was between a prepared and on his game Mitt Romney against an unprepared, distraught and off his game President Obama. It was not a fair representation of the best of both candidates, but this too was not the surprise which rocked my view of Mitt Romney.

Those who have read Beyond the Cusp likely know the Tenth Amendment almost by heart as it is one of our favorites among all the integral documents which were written by inspired men during the events at the beginnings of the United States. We have even claimed at one point that simply by a dedicated review of every piece of legislation, every law, and every regulation with regard to the Tenth Amendment would restore the intended balance of powers between the over-bloated Federal Government and the disempowered individual State Governments and the People of the United States. When Mitt Romney mentioned the Tenth Amendment in its proper context I almost fell off my chair. He followed this up by mentioning the importance of State rights and empowerment. And then came his stating the Founding Fathers reasoning for empowering the States over the central government, that each State would be better able to serve the individual and distinct needs of their residents than any program fashioned by a distant Federal government in Washington DC. He also hit the point that by empowering the individual States to address problems we set forth fifty separate experiments with each one taking a potentially different tact to address and fill the needs and problems on any issue. Romney pointed out that through this method the individual States which were most effective, efficient, cost-efficient and versatile means of serving the public could then be copied and even refined further as other States adopted the items from all of the State efforts which proved to be the most suited and promising. This grasp and apparent affection, dare I say love, with the Tenth Amendment and his display of his full and complete understanding of all the intricacies spawned by the Tenth Amendment was close to inspiring. The remaining debates just got more interesting and likely very important. I can only hope that Mitt Romney can incorporate more of the intricacies and implications from the original intentions of those geniuses who crafted the Declarations of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and especially the Tenth Amendment. The one last particular I would like to hear out of Mitt Romney would be his dismissing Romney Care as something he did as a Governor and something allowed by the Constitution and something he would be prohibited from retaining as Obama Care as that is an offense and contradiction to the Constitution. No more repeal and replace, simply applying the Constitution and relevant limitations to remove this onerous conglomeration of obscene and illegal amassing of power by the Federal Government.

Beyond the Cusp

Can Israel’s Image be Salvaged and Polished?

Once there was a time where Israel was seen for what she is, the tiny little country holding tenaciously onto a small, insignificant, former wasteland which was barely visible on maps which is surrounded by the entirety of the Muslim Lands which stretch from the North African Atlantic Coast all the way to the Indonesian and Philippine Islands in the Pacific Ocean. She was viewed as that sparkling gem of freedom, liberty, individual rights and democracy in the midst of a sea of oppressive, repressive, despotic, tyrannical states which crushed human spirit. Israel was once the underdog who had to scrap and fight for her survival against near unimaginable odds and who had managed successfully to do so at every turn. Israel once stood for equality of mankind, individual liberties, endless possibilities, religious freedoms, and unbelievable scientific and cultural achievements that not only survived but thrived against all of the odds stacked against her. What happened that took a place of such acclaim and hope and turned world opinions so horribly against her. How did Israel transform from her once proud and laudable stature into a nation spurned by the world at large, constantly answering charges of crimes against humanity, oppressor of religious beliefs, and usurper of Palestinian lands with an expansionist agenda eyeing all the lands between the Rivers Nile and Euphrates to expand and conquer for the sake of a Greater Israel?

The answer to this enigma is twofold, first is the rise of the ancient hatreds out of history and second the exquisitely planned and expertly executed assassination of the Israeli character carried out on all of the world’s stages beginning with the United Nations and finding its way into every new outlet even to include all too many within Israel herself. After the failure of the Armies of Egypt and Syria during the Yom Kippur War, which was launched in a surprise attack on Israel starting on Saturday October 6, 1973 which was both the start of Yom Kippur and the Sabbath, the Arab nations sought a different approach in order to defeat and destroy Israel. Initially, the combined forces made sizeable gains on all fronts before Israel fully mobilized, which took longer than usual as almost all public and private services and operations were on essential only staffing for the high Holidays, and mounted a counter strategy. This defeat of the combined forces of Egypt and Syria after scoring complete surprise and taking full benefit of every possible advantage available convinced the Arab World that a new, innovative and alternative approach was needed. Thus was the protracted victory through attrition due to terrorism and guerilla warfare tactics was adopted and with it the carefully planned and executed campaign to demonize Israel in every form of media, on every available stage in the world, and through commitment to use organizations such as NGOs and PACs. Quickly, this new tactic began to show progress in the world media the Arab and Muslim offensive to turn the Israeli reputation in the perspective of the world from shining gem and exemplary outpost of freedom in the Middle East to that of a pariah state brimming with oppression and guilty of the occupation of lands which rightfully belonged to the Palestinian People requiring the reestablishment of the ancient state named Palestine. Their success brought with it a steadily increasing number of nations, governments, unions, organizations, political parties, politicians, colleges and the United Nations with its entire assembly of NGOs and commissions.

So, against such an advanced campaign to delegitimize, defame, divest, boycott, and eventually destroy Israel, what can be done to prevent these schemes from eventually attaining their goals? The first step required appears to be counterintuitive, which is for Israel needs to stop apologizing and answering every single charge or allegation no matter how seemingly insignificant simply to attempt to prevent being overwhelmed by negatives. Israel needs to get out from under the repressive effects of the Oslo Accords which have been skillfully applied in a manner that has handcuffed Israel and those who protect her while having no ill or restrictive effects on the Arab, Muslim and Palestinian side. This step could be easily accomplished by taking two simple and immediate steps. The first is to file a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations requesting they sanction the Palestinian Authority, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the PLO for failing to amend the Palestinian Charter by removing the still standing section which calls for the utter and complete destruction of the State of Israel and the subjugation or elimination of its Jewish people. Follow up with pressure in order to get some response, even if it is simply a motion noting the Palestinian failure to comply without making it an actual judgment carrying a penalty for noncompliance. The other step is to provide the Palestinian leadership with copies going to the United Nations General Security Council, the United States, the European Union, Russia, all the leaders of European nations, all the leaders of the Arab and Muslim world and generally announce this last and final offer for peace through the establishment of a state for the Palestinian people called Palestine. This proclamation should state with accompanying map the borders Israel is willing to offer in this final attempt to reach an amicable peace. Where these borders are drawn is actually of little importance as the Palestinian leadership have painted themselves into a corner where they are unable to accept any peace proposal even if it contains each and every one of their wildest aspirations as by doing so they will have committed an unforgivable sin and would have to face the repercussions from their own people. This proclamation should also contain a second map which denotes the borders Israel is prepared to declare should the Palestinian leadership refuse this final offer. Once whatever deadline has been reached which was written into the offer, Israel should annex whatever sections of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) as they require or even simply desire and exile the leadership of the numerous terror groups along with the political leadership of the Palestinian Authority back to their pre-Oslo accommodations in Tunis, Tunisia.

Israel and the Israeli people need to recognize a truth about people and the ways in which the world works; nobody, no organization, no country, no world body, absolutely nothing will be kinder and like you more than you are able to express the same feelings about yourself. This is a basic truism about people and a basic truism that also applies to countries. As long as Israeli politicians, newspapers, organizations, broadcasters, or people are unable of praise and giving testimony to the goodness of Israel, the world at large will continue to disrespect, disregard, and assume the worst evils of Israel. If Israel really desires wiping the tarnish off her international reputation, she first must change her voice which speaks so loudly to the world which consists almost exclusively of detrimental degradations impugning Israel’s character and denouncing her rights for the respect shown a state who acts and rules honorably. One of the initial tasks which must be accomplished to rehabilitate the Israeli image in the world would be to either redirect or found new news services which speak in English and other languages other than Hebrew which take an attitude and view of Israel that is positive and not simply regurgitate echoing every claim and disparagement spoken by those who would erase Israel and likely the Jews from the face of the Earth given the slightest opportunity. If Israel but echoes the propaganda which are released by her enemies while ignoring the truth, then the world has but one side of the discussion and will never hear the other side, This has the effect of limiting the conversation to the only view being projected, the Israel is an evil and horrid entity. We have had a recent set of events which give perfect example to this phenomenon.

During Shabbat for the last month the Arabs, with incitement, encouragement, cooperation and support of Israeli Jews who hold great spite and hatred for anything Zionist in nature, set fires to the fields surrounding the Yitzhar community in Samaria. When emergency personnel arrived to extinguish the flames before they spread to the community and the homes within, they were greeted by the Leftist Jews and their Arab compatriots showering them with rocks attempting to deny their ability to put out the flames. When the residents of Yitzhar responded in kind to protect the firefighters, the leftist Jews from B’tselem made sure to catch this on tape. Afterwards, these leftist Jews further edited the tape and distributed to the television news departments and sent selected picture to the print media along with a suggested dialog scurrilously depicting the situation as the Jews from the community of Yitzhar as having started the fires and initiating an attack on the Arabs completely unprovoked. This was the sole evidence available as the Jews who live in Yitzhar are observant Jews and thus unable to film the confrontation due to the Sabbath. This past week they had received allowance from their Rabbis allowing them to film the altercations even on the Sabbath. This week the television news organizations received both films, the heavily edited film from B’tselem as well as the longer and unedited film from the Yitzhar community. The news outlets unanimously showed the B’tselem video while deciding not to show any of the Yitzhar taken raw film which showed the Arabs exiting a Red Crescent ambulance and setting the fires and one of the Arab men pulling a knife and setting to attack the firefighters. The Arab was wounded by IDF troops who were called to protect the firefighters and disperse the rioting Arabs and B’tselem Jews. Israel will have no chance of escaping the scorn and rebuttals from the world as long as the Israeli news organizations for the most part appear to be a further outlet for Al-Jazeera News or Palestinian Authority or Hamas Official News Station. The other side of this erroneous picture drawn by the liberal Israeli press has been the near total blackout of the ever escalating rock attacks and car-jacking being perpetrated by Arab gangs in Judea, Samaria and Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem. These attacks have included daily incidents against the new Jerusalem light rail system which runs through one of the major Arab sections of Jerusalem.

Add the one last slant often taken by much of the world media is the propensity to report every single retaliatory strike by Israel in response to rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli civilians in the communities and cities within range of these munitions fired from Gaza. While the rocket and mortar attacks originate from Gaza where Israel has already removed all their citizens and all IDF troops from stationing within Gaza leaving all of Gaza under direct and independent Hamas rule, the Israeli retaliations target weapon storage facilities, rocket manufacturing locations, and the smuggling tunnels which cross the Gaza borders either heading to Egypt to facilitate supplies being brought to Gaza or to Israel which are used to infiltrate and attempt to attack or abduct Israelis. These reports almost universally report the Israeli strike in active and forceful terms while making only the slightest references to the initial rocket attacks and using passive terms to describe the terror strikes. This is also often the view expressed in Israeli television and other new sources. If Israel actually wishes to retrieve their former respect, then they must first recall the pride and justness of their actions and transfer this emotion and perspective to their reporting and make such the centerpiece of their activities with not only the rest of the world, but with each other in their everyday dealings and reporting. Simply reporting the entire story is all that is required. Israel has no need to pretty up the truth in order to be depicted as honorable, they have honorable as their source guiding their every move. All Israel and her reputation require to shine once again as the virtuous country they are is for the truth to be told without any requirement for polishing or positioning it in anything but a cloak of virtuous honesty.

Beyond the Cusp

The Electability Myth

The Republican mainstream pundits have been stressing the fact that Mitt Romney won overwhelmingly of people who claimed in exit polling that they had chosen who they thought could beat President Obama in the general election. For some reason I am having great difficulty justifying these voters with the number of polls which have claimed that any generic Republican would win against President Obama. If one is to believe that as long as the Republican candidate is not a serial killer they would defeat President Obama, then why not vote for the person you find most represents your views. I guess part of my problem with people voting this way is that they are simply voting the given Republican Party line which makes the claim that Mitt Romney is the most electable candidate. Remember this point four years ago when all of a sudden it was posited that John McCain was the strongest and most electable candidate against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? Remember how well that turned out? How was that President McCain Administration? Oh, that’s right; it turned out that Mr. McCain did not turn out as electable as first claimed. I just hope that should Mitt Romney, the apparent Party favorite and the one who was given the title of next in line and favorite son, become the Republican candidate for President as it has apparently been ordained that we do not end up with another lackluster, weak, tepid campaign leading to a reelected President Obama.

Is it wrong to question the wisdom of the republican hierarchy? I remember that it was this same Republican hierarchy that gave us such standout candidates as John McCain, Bob Dole, actually a really good man but not much of a candidate, and George W. Bush, not exactly the most strident of conservatives. Perhaps my problem is my desire for an honest and real conservative candidate from the Republicans for whom I can feel proud and enjoy pulling the lever and voting. I have grown tired of appearing to have some neural disease when voting for the lesser evil. Eventually one reaches a point where voting for the lesser evil becomes recognized as still voting for evil and one no longer can rationalize and pretend that voting as such is a necessary, let alone good, thing. It really should not be our desire to vote for somebody because they are the not Obama but to vote for the candidate who honestly represents our principles. This election is a rare opportunity to elect a through and through conservative, or at least the most conservative of the available candidates just as we were granted with the 1980 elections when incumbent Jimmy Carter made virtually anybody electable. Let’s not waste this opportunity by voting on a compromise candidate on the theory of electability over principle when honestly either will win in the general elections.

The reason I fear about Mitt Romney is that he has shown by past actions that he will swerve and shift leftward when pressured. Once Romney gets to Washington the pressures to slide down the slippery slope from the pinnacles of conservatism to the bogs of progressivism often appears to be the natural state of things. The pressure to bend to the left is an undeniable preeminent force built into the Washington culture. The press, the people, the air you breathe all draws people leftward and only the most strident and strongest of conservatives can survive and resist these influences. I do not believe that Mitt Romney has the pure conservative principles and steadfast conservative bearings to remain true to conservative principles with any more diligence and steadfastness than he did as Governor of Massachusetts. I want a candidate who I believe will resist whatever pressures and influences are placed upon him to force them away from their conservative promises and have a track record that proves they have such character. My belief is this is not Mitt Romney.

Yes, I plead guilty of being a Rick Santorum supporter and can give you what I feel is one convincing reason. I know there are people more conservative on some issues than Rick Santorum, but none of those are currently in the hunt for the Republican nomination. My personal choice if I could choose anybody was John Bolton, but we do not get our wishes as much as we might like. Sans Mr. Bolton, I will support Rick Santorum. I’m not going to repeat the campaign slogans and bullet points but instead will give you one action from Rick Santorum’s past that most who support him actually avoid, yet I believe is also one of the best reasons to support him. As we all know, Rick Santorum won two terms as Senator from Pennsylvania but lost a relatively close election for a third term. What most do not know or remember is the main reason Rick Santorum lost that election. Rick Santorum has the kind of conservatism that is earthy and holds people’s rights as paramount which is why he was able to win in a mostly Democrat State as Pennsylvania. He supported President Bush on many issues as President Bush was his party’s President. This included the surge which President Bush called for in Iraq. Rick Santorum was running for reelection that was held leading up to the surge and that was the big issue in the elections. All Rick would have needed to do in order to probably have easily won reelection would have been to abandon his principled support for President Bush and the surge in Iraq. Rick Santorum held his position proudly and had even stated when challenged about simply changing sides in order to win he stated his intention to hold to his principles even if doing such would cost him reelection. That is being principled, even if you disagree about the surge, which more people seem to have done with time, and shows that Rick Santorum will be exactly as advertised and has the intestinal fortitude to stick to his guns, or at least his ideals.

Beyond the Cusp