When I was a kid, we'd freely use the term, "Indian giver." To us kids it meant someone who promised something, or actually gave something and then took it back. Looking back, I must confess I have absolutely no idea as to how this term arose or how it got currency. All I know is that all the kids used it.
It is clear, however, that in his dealings with Israel, Obama is an Indian giver. Leaders of the U.S. and Israel had exchanged understandings. Now, Obama refuses to accept America's earlier understandings, but expects Israel to hold to promises it gave under those earlier understandings. I say to Obama, "Indian giver. Indian giver. Indian giver."
Friday, April 30, 2010
The Congressional Lilliputhians vs Goldman Sachs
I'm not saying Goldman Sachs did, or did not, do anything that violated the law. But, earlier this week I saw an exchange between Sen Levin and Goldman's Blankenfein that had me rolling on the floor trying to keep my from sides splitting from laughter.
Levin: So, you took taxpayer money?
Blankenfein: We didn't ask for it. The government insisted that we take the TARP. And, we've paid it back with good interest.
Levin: Did you pay AIG back?
Blankenfein: No. They had insured us for our loss. They simply fulfilled their obligation by paying what they owed us.
Levin: Ha Ha! So you did take tax payer money.
Blankenfein: We took what was owed us. It was the government that decided to support AIG.
Levin: Yes, but it was taxpayer money. If we hadn't supported AIG, you wouldn't have gotten any money.
Blankenfein: Respectfully, but that's not correct. We had taken out insurance coverage in the event that AIG failed.
Levin: Yes, but you did take the AIG money, didn't you?
Blankenfein: We took the money from AIG that they owed us. Had they not done so, they would have been in default. It was the government that decided that they didn't want AIG to default. It wasn't our call.
Levin: But, you did take taxpayer money. You can't deny it. Admit it.
I don't remember how Blankenfein responded. I don't think he rolled his eyes. That would have been disrespectful. But, we, watching this exchange on TV, had no such constraint. My eyes teared from laughter. Is this really the best kind of Senate our political system can produce?
Levin: So, you took taxpayer money?
Blankenfein: We didn't ask for it. The government insisted that we take the TARP. And, we've paid it back with good interest.
Levin: Did you pay AIG back?
Blankenfein: No. They had insured us for our loss. They simply fulfilled their obligation by paying what they owed us.
Levin: Ha Ha! So you did take tax payer money.
Blankenfein: We took what was owed us. It was the government that decided to support AIG.
Levin: Yes, but it was taxpayer money. If we hadn't supported AIG, you wouldn't have gotten any money.
Blankenfein: Respectfully, but that's not correct. We had taken out insurance coverage in the event that AIG failed.
Levin: Yes, but you did take the AIG money, didn't you?
Blankenfein: We took the money from AIG that they owed us. Had they not done so, they would have been in default. It was the government that decided that they didn't want AIG to default. It wasn't our call.
Levin: But, you did take taxpayer money. You can't deny it. Admit it.
I don't remember how Blankenfein responded. I don't think he rolled his eyes. That would have been disrespectful. But, we, watching this exchange on TV, had no such constraint. My eyes teared from laughter. Is this really the best kind of Senate our political system can produce?
Monday, April 19, 2010
Hard for People To Change or Even Understand
A friend I recently encounterd agreed that things didn't look good for Israel with this current administration. (It was "this administration" not "the Obama administration" although he knew it was all one and the same.) "But, I'm still for health care reform," he quickly added.
I explained that I understood, but that that wasn't what we were talking about. If he wanted to discuss healthcare, that was another discussion. In fact, I too was in favor or healthcare reform, but the bill that was passed was anything but a reform bill. It was nothing but the mindless expansion of an entitlement that would only hasten financial grief for America.
"You'd rather see people starve or die, I suppose," he shot back.
I explained that I was pleased that services would be expanded, but that we couldn't keep doing it the same old way. Medical costs were much higher in the States than in Canada or Europe. In fact, they varied widely within the U.S. Why wasn't there any effort made to understand why this was so and to try to apply the lessons that might be learned? Perhaps then we could begin to get a handle on costs that were shooting into stratosphere.
But, you can see how he couldn't help but divert the conversation away from Israel. I tried to pull it back, but it was of little use. "Yeah, sure," he continued, "what Republican has concerned himself with healthcare?"
And, of course, he had a point. But the real question was how good could a healthcare bill be, if it made more perilous America's already perilous debt situation?
My friend and I, though from different ends of the political spectrum had the same problem. The country was bumping about and passing bills, but in the process creating ever bigger problems. And some of these problems were difficult for the average citizen to understand. For example, what led to our latest financial calamity? Was it something Congress did? Was it the banks and their bankers? Was it the mortgage brokers? Was it the public that had signed up for mortgages far bigger than they could ever hope to repay? Was it the Federal Reserve?
Most of the public has very little idea of what the Federal Reserve is, or how it operates. They hear cries for more regulation, not realizing that the banks have been one of our most heavily regulated institutions. Also, they have little idea of what Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are, or what they do? And this situation continues despite the stacks and stacks of books that have been written on our recent economic meltdown.
Is it any wonder that even well educated people, people relatively prosperous, and people up in years, are fearful of where this country is going? Is it any wonder that they distrust both Republicans and Democrats? (What was Bush W doing during his two terms? What were the Democrats doing when they had achieved majorities in Congress?) People desperately wanted hope. And so that's what they did; they voted for hope. They voted for the first African American in American history.
Now after a year in office, we see that while he speaks as smoothly as ever, Obama is nothing but the same old, same old. In fact, he seems a bit oilier. He spins far faster than his marble mouthed predecessor. With back room deals straight out of old ward politics, he uses his majorities in Congress to pass the very worst sort of legistlation under the most high sounding of names.
Were can the people turn when the candidate offering hope betrays them on issue after issue? The Tea Party is their answer. It's got the Republicans praying that this group will help to rehabilitate them. It's got the Democrates wheeling out their arsenal of dirty tricks and media campaigns. You've got Bill Clinton trying to tie them to the Oklahoma bomber McVeigh. You've got liberal reporters trying to tie them to racism. And, that's only for starters. Wait until we get closer to election day. It'll make old fashioned ward politics seem squeeky clean by comparison.
I explained that I understood, but that that wasn't what we were talking about. If he wanted to discuss healthcare, that was another discussion. In fact, I too was in favor or healthcare reform, but the bill that was passed was anything but a reform bill. It was nothing but the mindless expansion of an entitlement that would only hasten financial grief for America.
"You'd rather see people starve or die, I suppose," he shot back.
I explained that I was pleased that services would be expanded, but that we couldn't keep doing it the same old way. Medical costs were much higher in the States than in Canada or Europe. In fact, they varied widely within the U.S. Why wasn't there any effort made to understand why this was so and to try to apply the lessons that might be learned? Perhaps then we could begin to get a handle on costs that were shooting into stratosphere.
But, you can see how he couldn't help but divert the conversation away from Israel. I tried to pull it back, but it was of little use. "Yeah, sure," he continued, "what Republican has concerned himself with healthcare?"
And, of course, he had a point. But the real question was how good could a healthcare bill be, if it made more perilous America's already perilous debt situation?
My friend and I, though from different ends of the political spectrum had the same problem. The country was bumping about and passing bills, but in the process creating ever bigger problems. And some of these problems were difficult for the average citizen to understand. For example, what led to our latest financial calamity? Was it something Congress did? Was it the banks and their bankers? Was it the mortgage brokers? Was it the public that had signed up for mortgages far bigger than they could ever hope to repay? Was it the Federal Reserve?
Most of the public has very little idea of what the Federal Reserve is, or how it operates. They hear cries for more regulation, not realizing that the banks have been one of our most heavily regulated institutions. Also, they have little idea of what Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are, or what they do? And this situation continues despite the stacks and stacks of books that have been written on our recent economic meltdown.
Is it any wonder that even well educated people, people relatively prosperous, and people up in years, are fearful of where this country is going? Is it any wonder that they distrust both Republicans and Democrats? (What was Bush W doing during his two terms? What were the Democrats doing when they had achieved majorities in Congress?) People desperately wanted hope. And so that's what they did; they voted for hope. They voted for the first African American in American history.
Now after a year in office, we see that while he speaks as smoothly as ever, Obama is nothing but the same old, same old. In fact, he seems a bit oilier. He spins far faster than his marble mouthed predecessor. With back room deals straight out of old ward politics, he uses his majorities in Congress to pass the very worst sort of legistlation under the most high sounding of names.
Were can the people turn when the candidate offering hope betrays them on issue after issue? The Tea Party is their answer. It's got the Republicans praying that this group will help to rehabilitate them. It's got the Democrates wheeling out their arsenal of dirty tricks and media campaigns. You've got Bill Clinton trying to tie them to the Oklahoma bomber McVeigh. You've got liberal reporters trying to tie them to racism. And, that's only for starters. Wait until we get closer to election day. It'll make old fashioned ward politics seem squeeky clean by comparison.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
I dreamt of Israel
My dream, actually nightmare, was that Israel haters such as Zbigniew Brzezinski, Brent Scowcrof and Samuel Berger, all former national security advisors met in the White House with Gen. James L. Jones, the current national security advisor and laid out Israel's fate. The current president, Barak Obama had approved of this White House meeting because of Israel's instransigeance in giving the Palestinians what his administration had decided Israel must surrender; namely, East Jerusalem, surrender of the Holy sites in the Old City to international agreement, and a return to the '67 borders (before it captured East Jerusalem and the West Bank) give or take a few territorial swaps.
This group of Arab sympathizers meeting in the White House did throw a bone to Israel. The Palestinians would have to accept that there would be no right-of-return. Still, the Palestinians would have to be given some sort of compensation. There was no mention of the equal number of Jews tossed out of Islamic nations and who lost far more than the Arab farmers who ran from Israel fearing that the Israelis would do to them what they so dearly wanted to do to the Jews.
But, wait a moment. This was no dream! The aforementioned individuals actually did meet at the White House. In fact, Obama had, at times, joined in the meeting. There, in my lap, was the newspaper reporting this meeting. It was the New York Times, International Section, on Thursday April 8th, 2010.
Among the people who brought me this nightmare were the many Jews who had caste their vote for Obama in 2008. I understand Brent Scowcroft just as I understand Henry Ford and the various other industrialists at the start of WW II. I understand Zbigniew Brzezinski as I understand the Polish partisans who hunted Nazis and Jews with equal vigor in their Polish forests and in the hay lofts of their Polish farms. But why, oh why, didn't we see through this 20-year long congregant of Rev Jeremiah Wright? Because he has Passover Seders in the White House?
This group of Arab sympathizers meeting in the White House did throw a bone to Israel. The Palestinians would have to accept that there would be no right-of-return. Still, the Palestinians would have to be given some sort of compensation. There was no mention of the equal number of Jews tossed out of Islamic nations and who lost far more than the Arab farmers who ran from Israel fearing that the Israelis would do to them what they so dearly wanted to do to the Jews.
But, wait a moment. This was no dream! The aforementioned individuals actually did meet at the White House. In fact, Obama had, at times, joined in the meeting. There, in my lap, was the newspaper reporting this meeting. It was the New York Times, International Section, on Thursday April 8th, 2010.
Among the people who brought me this nightmare were the many Jews who had caste their vote for Obama in 2008. I understand Brent Scowcroft just as I understand Henry Ford and the various other industrialists at the start of WW II. I understand Zbigniew Brzezinski as I understand the Polish partisans who hunted Nazis and Jews with equal vigor in their Polish forests and in the hay lofts of their Polish farms. But why, oh why, didn't we see through this 20-year long congregant of Rev Jeremiah Wright? Because he has Passover Seders in the White House?
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Ann Coulter
I love Ann Coulter (metaphorically; I actually have never met her). I love her columns. She writes with panache and gets it right 99% of the time.
It becomes clear, from time to time, that she is a practicing Catholic who values Right-to-Life. She's also taken a swipe on occasion at Jews. But, as to wacking away at Jews, it's something done with even greater vigor by the likes of Michael Moore and Jimmy Carter. And, they don't express themselves with half the humor to be found in an Ann Coulter piece.
It becomes clear, from time to time, that she is a practicing Catholic who values Right-to-Life. She's also taken a swipe on occasion at Jews. But, as to wacking away at Jews, it's something done with even greater vigor by the likes of Michael Moore and Jimmy Carter. And, they don't express themselves with half the humor to be found in an Ann Coulter piece.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)