Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Hollywood Experts! David Friedman's Nomination Causing Heartburn Among Liberal Jews. Lunch With Elliott Abrams!

Image may contain: 1 person, text

Though this has not been verified it makes a valid point that we have far too many entertainment
"experts" when it comes to what causes climate change and other social ills whose opinions are also not factually verified. (See 1 below.)
This from a very dear friend and fellow member reader who knows Mc Master: "McMaster is a great choice in my book. I know him from his stint as CG of Benning.  C------"

Meanwhile,McMaster gave a speech regarding never forget the Holocaust. (See 2 below.)
Trump's nominated Amb. to Israel is causing heartburn among America's Jewish leftists (See 3 below.) 
Trump's approval rating remains high.  (See 4 below.)

The Board of The SIRC, and a few invited guests,  had lunch with Elliott Abrams today and the first question asked was his view of how Trump was doing and his response paralleled  something I recently posted in a memo.

Elliott reminded us Trump had been in office only a month, his cabinet members had not all been appointed, his agencies lacked depth of Trump appointments ( deputies and secretaries etc.) and until that is complete and they have begun to work together it would be imprudent, even impudent, to judge his results.

Elliott responded to question for over an hour and his comments and responses were quite insightful. He obviously has the feel of what is going on and I believe Trump's failure to appoint him to the number two position at State was a "uge" mistake.

Elliott's relationship and respect for Trump's son in law is excellent and one would have thought Mr. Kusher would have had more influence. That is a shame.

This truly is the final memo for the week as I leave in the morning, after taking Elliott to the airport, for Athens.
1) Most of them rely on knowledge clouds drifting across the Pacific, 
perhaps from an Asian mystic who wears lots of colorful beads.
The mystic has brought them deep understanding of economics, 
governance, military affairs and especially science. It inspires bold 
words on most topics.
LEONARDO DeCAPRIO's self-declared climate expertise enables him to speak 
on the world's environmental issues with a high-school education. He never took 
a college biology, chemistry, physics or climatology course, yet he knows more 
than most scientists. He proved that by addressing climate change before a full 
gathering of the UN.
SEAN PENN's quick takes on everything put him at the lofty level of an Einstein. 
He visited Iraq once and became an expert on that country. The same for Iran. He also became buddies with the brutal Venezuelan communist Hugo Chavez and consistently lauded that murderous thug. Now that Chavez is gone and Venezuelans are raiding dumpsters for food scraps, Penn is having a rare silent moment. 

Penn deserves some credit for becoming a world-affairs genius based on two years of auto mechanics classes at Santa Monica College.
KATY PERRY's passion about politics and economics freed her to quit high school at 
15 without compromising her expert status. Asked the square root of 64, the name given the Constitution's first 10 amendments and to explain PE ratio, her answer might be, "Republicans are for the rich." 

She recently demonstrated wizardry by making an anti-Trump video. It suggested the new president would commit acts similar to forced World War II 
lockups of loyal Japanese-Americans. Perry probably did not know the internment plan was developed and executed by DEMOCRAT President Roosevelt.
ROBERT DeNIRO must also be a quick learner. He acquired amazing scientific knowledge
 before dropping out of high school. He knows so much about geology that he joined Artists Against Fracking. (All the producing wells in his native Manhattan must have provided first-hand experience.) 

He's also an expert on pediatric medicine, enabling him to speak often
 against vaccinating infants and children.
HARRY BELAFONTE is another multiple-subject whiz who needed little formal education. 

Some people might think this talented singer might limit his words to songs since his IQ is so low. Don't worry. Despite advancing age, he remains expert on most things. When black people of greater intelligence (that's most black people) say something moderate or conservative, he hurls the N word at them. 

Decades ago, he loudly denounced Reagan's elimination of CETA, 
the Comprehensive Employment Training Act. It was one of the most wasteful federal programs ever -- many vanished dollars, few jobs. Belafonte tore into Reagan during an interview Finally, the interviewer asked Belafonte what CETA stood for. Belafonte had no clue. He knew almost nothing about the act.
ROSIE O'DONNELL was my personal favorite long before her hateful remark that Trump's 
10-year-old son looked autistic. Her coarse philosophy must be that if you say something loudly, it need not be correct. Her bombast probably created lots of turmoil with both the women she  "married." 

She also must have skipped chemistry during her high-school education. Otherwise, she would have not have offered "proof" that 9/11 was an inside job. She often bellowed that planes could not have brought down the Twin Towers because "steel doesn't burn." This constant jackass must not know that high temperatures DO reduce steel's strength.
AL SHARPTON would be America's greatest at-large criminal, if not for Hillary's tens of millions 
swapped for influence and favors. Sharpton owes nearly $5 million in delinquent taxes to IRS and New York state. Makes you wonder why NBC/MSNBC would ever hire him. 

Sharpton accumulated vast theological knowledge by age 9, when he was "ordained" as a preacher. He didn't need more than a high-school education to keep marching forward. His most successful high school class must have been Shystehood. Despite one scandal after another, his 2004 run for president 
stands out. The Federal Election Commission forced him to return $100,000 in taxpayer money  provided by FEC. 

One of many abuses was his $145,146 charge for "Campaign letter preparation -- Kinko's." Later, FEC fined Sharpton $285,000.
JULIA ROBERTS proves that physical beauty does not ensure a beautiful brain. 

She had a fling at Georgia State University before pursuing acting lessons and joining a modeling group. Her acting and modeling skills guided her to such thoughtful observations as "Republican" comes between "reptile" and "repugnant" in the dictionary. Impressed?
BROOKE SHIELDS, an Obama supporter, verifies the Roberts theory -- that physical beauty does 
not guarantee a beautiful brain. During her days as a boisterous animal-rights supporter, Shields had a mink coat custom-made.
BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN could have been No. 1 on this list. 

He squabbled with nuns when in Catholic school. Transferring to a public school, he thought so little of the education experience that he skipped graduation. Had he gone to college, he might have majored in Hate 101. That's 
what we hear when he's not singing. 

He claims Trump is a "moron" who advocates "white nationalism." 

Springsteen demonstrates the analytical skills' void of most show-biz folk when he laments America's industrialization decline. Somebody please whisper to Springsteen that his party's business-crunching  regulations and world-leading corporate tax rate compels U.S. manufacturers to go elsewhere. 

Finally, two others are outside the entertainment world, disqualifying them from winning an Oscar, 
Emmy or Grammy. 

Politicians Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters do compete for the Rock Head of 
the Year trophy each time they speak. Pelosi frequently wins with comments like needing to pass a bill "so we can find out what's in it." Waters has already locked up the 2017 trophy for suggesting a Trump impeachment over his campaign antics. Listen closely, Maxine. Presidents can be impeached only for what they do in office.

Oh well, Hollywooders believe they set the moral tone for American character. At least they are in the right profession because their comments are so often entertaining.

In 2012 Speech, Incoming National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster Emphasized Importance of Remembering the Holocaust
 Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster. Photo: US Army Public Affairs via Wikimedia Commons.
US President Donald Trump announced on Monday that Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster has been chosen to serve as his next national security adviser, replacing Michael Flynn, who resigned last week less than a month into the job.
McMaster, 54, is a 1984 West Point graduate who served overseas in both Iraq and Afghanistan over the course of a decorated three-decade military career.

“He is a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience,” Trump said on Monday of McMaster. “I watched and read a lot over the last two days. He is highly respected by everybody in the military, and we’re very honored to have him.”
On August 26, 2012, McMaster spoke at the dedication of a new Holocaust exhibit at the National Infantry Museum at Fort Benning in Georgia. The transcript of his remarks — in which he talked about the importance of remembering the Holocaust — was unearthed by The Algemeiner on Monday and can be read below:
Good afternoon.

It an honor to represent the Maneuver Center of Excellence and Fort Benning at this opening of the National Infantry Museum exhibit dedicated to victims of the Holocaust and in memory of Colonel Aaron Cohn, soldier, fellow Brave Rifles cavalry trooper, public servant, example for all of us.

Members of the Cohn family, community leaders, leaders of the National Infantry Foundation and the National Infantry Museum, fellow soldiers, Fort Benning civilians and family members, distinguished guests:

In the Germany of the 1920s and 30s, humanity was eroded by xenophobia in general and anti-Semitism in particular – and then in the 1940s, gave way completely. The scale of the human toll, the suffering during the holocaust, is really unimaginable — six million Jews, five million others systematically murdered.

On a recent trip to Israel, I made my third visit to the Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem. One enters the memorial and is immediately gripped by a sense of foreboding. It is Europe in the early 1930s. Grey granite walls narrow toward the ceiling and squeeze out the light as one walks downward, descending as humanity descended during a period when good men did nothing.

By the time one reaches the lowest point in the memorial, knees are weak. The mass murder of Jews, prisoners of war, homosexuals, people with certain disabilities, had already begun. But Germany’s colossal genocidal project grew in scale in the beginning of 1942 when the SS took the lead. The criminals who led the SS quickly determined that mass shooting, although it would remain a significant element in their “process” did not work with the speed and efficiency they desired. They began to use gas vans which they first tried out on Russian prisoners. They then decided to reverse the approach they adopted in the summer of 1941; instead of bringing the murderers to the victims, they would bring the victims to the murderers. Large shipments of German Jews began on October 15, 1941. At the Wannsee conference in December of that year, leaders and bureaucrats of government agencies deliberately planned the implementation of the program to kill all the Jews of Europe. Their plans included not only all Jews in German-controlled and influenced areas, but those — like the ones in England, Spain, Sweden, and Portugal — which it was assumed would soon also be under Nazi domination.

It was around this time that The United States entered the war after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. America mobilized. The war involved all of America. The U.S. Army grew from an army of 190,000 to an army of almost 8.5 million — a 44 fold increase. A total of 16 million Americans served in uniform in WWII; virtually every family had someone in harm’s way, virtually every American had an emotional investment in our Army. That WWII army of 8.5 million existed in a country of about 130 million; by comparison, today we have an army of roughly 500,000 in a country of 307 million.

It is when that American Army, alongside British forces crossed the English Channel in June 1944 that the floor at the Yad Vashem memorial begins to slope upward toward sunlight streaming in through the window at the far end of the memorial.
Hitler’s and Nazi Germany’s genocidal campaign would continue until soldiers liberated the concentration camps and Hitler’s murderous regime was defeated.

Mass murderers had to be stopped physically. Their inhuman, fascist ideology of hatred and violence and murder also had to be defeated. And, ultimately, it would fall of the shoulders of American soldiers to stop these mass murders and defeat their ideology — soldiers like Colonel Aaron Cohn of the 3rd United States Cavalry who led his troopers into the concentration camp at Ebensee, Austria on 9 May 1945. What he and his troopers found was deplorable. The 25 Ebensee barracks had been designed to hold 100 prisoners each; each of them held over 700 emaciated men. In the weeks prior to liberation, the crematorium was of course unable to keep pace with those who were murdered or starved to death; the death rate had reached about 350 per day. Naked bodies lay stacked up outside the blocks and the crematorium itself. American soldiers found a ditch outside the camp where bodies were flung into quicklime.

We should celebrate the end of this horror — it was a real victory for our nation and for all of humankind. A victory won by men like Judge Cohn. But this memorial and this museum also reminds us that victory in war is only possible through sacrifice. In World War II, the U.S. military sustained almost 300,000 battle deaths and about 100,000 deaths from other causes. The war lasted 2,174 days and claimed an average of 27,600 lives every day, or 1,150 an hour, or 19 a minute, or one death every three seconds.

The human toll of World War II and the Holocaust is hard to imagine. But we must not be numbed by statistics and remember the singularity of every death.

At the end of Yad Vashem’s historical narrative is the Hall of Names — a repository for the Pages of Testimony of millions of Holocaust victims. A memorial that helps bring home the singularity of those who perished. As our fellow citizens enter this wonderful museum and come to this spot, I hope that they realize that the vast host memorialized here, the victims of the Holocaust — died one by one. And I hope that they also realize that the American soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines who gave their lives to defeat Nazi Germany and end the Holocaust gave their lives one by one and that they died for all of us and all of humanity. We must, as author Rick Atkinson has said so well, remember that every death was as unique as a snowflake or a fingerprint.

As President Obama observed in Oslo on 10 December 2009, “To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.” He observed that “a non-violent movement could not have stopped Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms.” America, he observed, has used its military power “because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.”

Our Army is a living historical community. That is why this memorial and this museum are important to us. The American soldiers memorialized in this great Infantry Museum and those serving today are both warriors and humanitarians. Colonel Judge Aaron Cohn was a warrior and humanitarian.

Proverbs 22:1 says that a good name is to be valued more than riches. We come together to commemorate the human tragedy of the holocaust. And we also come together at this memorial and in this great Infantry Museum to celebrate two good names — Colonel Aaron Cohn and the American soldier.

The legacy of Obama and Kerry is changing the calculus of American Jewish voters

David Friedman, US President Donald Trump’s nominee for ambassador to Israel, has managed to anger Jewish Voice for Peace, J Street, Rep. Jan Schakowsky and the Union for Reform Judaism. It’s a safe bet that every Jewish leftist who ever cut a check to the New Israel Fund is enduring sleepless nights. Friedman must be doing something right.
The nomination reflects a growing divide in the Jewish community, one that was partially etched into the voting returns in Brooklyn on election night. The Orthodox neighborhoods voted for Trump. The secular ones went for Clinton.
 This, however, is only a partial indicator of a growing chasm in the American Jewish community between liberal Jews who are incapable of separating their Jewishness from allegiance to the Democratic Party, and the growing number who are rejecting the party of Barack Obama and John Kerry. They are the political leaders who made Iran a nuclear power, and their party has nominated Rep. Keith Ellison to head its national committee despite Ellison’s past ties to the Nation of Islam and his defense of its antisemitic leader, Louis Farrakhan.
·          The legacy of Obama and Kerry is changing the calculus of American Jewish voters. The political apostasy has caused families to rupture and friendships to unravel, exacerbated by Trump’s unanticipated victory. The intensity is palpable as seen in Peter Beinart’s questioning Jared Kushner’s Jewishness in The Forward. Liberal Jews not only believe they have a monopoly on the moral high ground, but their corrupted perspective of Tikkum Olam (repairing the world) justifies action that has made the world a more dangerous place for Jews and Christians.
Nowhere is this intensity more pronounced than in the opposition to David Friedman. Lara Friedman, director of policy and government relations for the leftist Americans for Peace Now, invokes the antisemitic canard of dual loyalty in attacking David Friedman. He owns a home in Jerusalem, contributes a column to a conservative newspaper and, like many Jews and non-Jews alike, does not believe Israeli policy should be based on Arab promises. She also notes that David Friedman has been identified with the “settlers’ movement.”
Ms. Friedman’s use of her blog in The Hill to impugn David Friedman’s loyalty is a reckless reinforcement of antisemitic stereotypes.
If David Friedman is appointed ambassador to Israel, he will swear an oath of allegiance to the United States, not the State of Israel.
That the dual loyalty accusation against Jews represents a double standard is abundantly clear from the fact that no one in the mainstream of America dared raise the issue that Obama’s father was a Muslim; his stepfather was a Muslim; his African grandmother was a Muslim; and his African family is Muslim. He attended a madrassa in Indonesia. His name is Muslim. It was forbidden even to say that Obama had Muslim sympathies. Any remote allusion to Obama having any relationship with Islam was considered inappropriate for public discourse.
But no such consideration is granted to David Friedman, certainly not by leftist Jews, because Friedman would implement Trump administration policies totally at variance with the policies that the liberal-dominated American Jewish community considers sacrosanct.For over 60 years, the Jewish community leadership has bought into the fable of a democratic, secular Palestine living side by side in peace and security with a Jewish state. It hasn’t happened. It isn’t going to happen because the conflict is not about borders and settlements but about the Jewish state, which the Palestinians see as one big settlement. David Friedman is perceived as a disrupter. He is already reshaping conventional thought about the conflict, and even before he is confirmed he is forging new ideas that progressives find appalling.
J Street, which even Obama eventually silenced, giving their seat at the progressive table to a revamped Israel Policy Forum, has been further discredited on the Hill by the emergence of the Christians United for Israel lobby group, CUFI Action Fund.
CUFI lobbies Congress with the effective support of over 3.3 million members. The organization recently brought over 250 activists to Washington with just a few days’ notice to descend on congress. Their agenda was to “end Israel-bashing at the United Nations, support moving the American Embassy to Jerusalem, and confirm David Friedman.”
This is a substantially different set of proposals than that of the previous administration and much of the liberal Jewish community.
An American ambassador who is committed to confronting the intractable problem of the Israeli/Palestine conflict with this new vision will expose the irrelevance of the Jewish community leadership. That is why they fear David Friedman’s appointment.

Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati, and a distinguished fellow with the Haym Salomon Center.

Trump's Approval is Very High Despite Endless Media Attacks

Author(s):  Unknown     Source: The Political Insider
Listen to the mainstream media, and you’d think everyone and their mother is opposed to Donald Trump and every single thing he’s done since taking office.
But if you look at the polling on Trump’s approval rating and for the policies he’s done thus far, and you’ll find a huge majority of people approve. The most popular policies thus far have to do with illegal immigration, squashing regulation, and ending Obamacare. Even the majority of Hispanics agree with Trump’s immigration policies according to one poll.
Even bigger news is Trump’s overall approval rating. Right now, he’s at 55%! Could you even have guessed that based on the vile hatred spewed by the liberal media?
So what explains the divergence between the media’s reporting and public opinion? To a large extent: reality. Nobody is believing the chicken littles in the media – and if it weren’t for them, the numbers would be even more slanted in favor of Trump.
Rasmussen was one of the few polls that showed Trump and Hillary polling within the margin of error before the election. On the day before the election, they had Hillary ahead by two points, but a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percent. So unlike other biased polling outlets, Rasmussen wasn’t totally blindsided by Trump’s victory.

No comments: