Sunday, August 31, 2008

Patrick Buchanan and Sarah Palin: One Jew's Opinion and all of the usual suspects have jumped all over the Sarah Palin nomination. As usual, they are viewing the electorate as a series of ethnic, religious and interest blocs that need to be won over as if they were states. The fears and concerns of each group are played upon and manipulated, if not addressed.

Her greatest transgression has been reported to Jewish voters with breathless urgency. She campaigned for Pat Buchanan in 2000. Even politically conservative Jews have problems with Buchanan. His reflexive support for Nazi war criminals on trial is viewed with suspicion. His accusation that Jews urge the nation to war for their own interests has a negative historical resonance that is particularly strong with older Jewish voters. His revisionist approach to World War Two history and his statements about the holocaust bring his credibility issues with Jewish voters to critical mass.

There are other sides to Buchanan. His desire to defend America's borders, its cultural traditions and the faith of its citizens resonates deeply with millions. His opposition to gay marriage, abortion and the godlessness of public education are sentiments shared by many. The Democrats would have Jews quivering in fear of these sentiments. In truth, there are vast areas of overlapping concern to Jews who are guided by their traditions and Christians. Although Jews do not want to be mocked or missionised in public schools, the simple fact that most Americans are at least nominally Christian is an obvious fact.

Many Americans support Buchanan's domestic vision for America but have serious issues with his seemingly isolationist views on foreign policy. It was not an easy decision for me , but I shifted my support to other Republicans when Buchanan was running. I had the uncomfortable feeling that he would be as toxic to Israel as was Jimmy Carter. That was a decision I made with a heavy heart.

As much as I continue to oppose Buchanan's quest for high office, I am well aware of the millions like myself who were critical in their support of Pat Buchanan. The faults that others would overlook in supporting him were not the same ones I would overlook.

Sarah Palin supported Patrick Buchanan in 2000. If you do not know that now, it will be repeated endlessly from now until November. Sarah Palin has climbed the political ladder in Alaska from a small local mayoralty to the governor's mansion. She has established her reputation as an honest person whose personal values trump her party loyalty whenever the two are at odds. Her commitment to good government and the conformity of her personal life to her espoused religious faith have resonated with voters sufficiently to net her an approval rating frequently as high as 90% and never below 80%. Her ratings cut across Alaska's ethnic spectrum, as does her own household. (Her husband is of Yupik Inuit ancestry and a union member) Alaska's Jewish community is very fond of her. Her stated views on Israel are far more mainstream than those of Patrick Buchanan.

It is clear that Palin's ideological affinity to Buchanan is based on his domestic agenda. Like Buchanan, much of her political philosophy is derived from her religious faith. Orthodox Jewish voters share many of her concerns. Like her, they keep the popular culture at arms length in order that it not erode the foundations of the home.

The Democrats genuflect at the Wall of Separation Between Church and State. Many orthodox Jewish families labour under the burden of paying taxes to maintain public schools and paying tuition to maintain their own private schools. The same party that is pro choice and wants free abortions without parental support requires parental consent to administer Tylenol and prohibits school choice on on the public tax dollar. The party that rails against regressive taxes has no qualms about effectively taxing religious families into poverty. In the topsy turvy wonderland of Democratic political correctness, a prisoner may meet with the same clergyman on prison grounds who would be barred from a public school building to meet with students.

The Democrats have no mantle of sanctity when it comes to issues of Jewish concern. Obama remains the hands down choice of radical college professors who set the tone on campus after campus where the State of Israel is mercilessly villified. Jimmy Carter, Fidel Castro, Hamas and the Communist Party all swarm eagerly in the Democratic Party's "big tent" like flies on a dung hill. Sentiments and opinions once heard only in the precincts of the far left have now made it into the Democratic Party mainstream.

The Democratic Party has found many gullible customers for its fiction among Jewish voters. The same people who reject dietary and sabbath laws as outmoded speak of Roosevelt and the New Deal as reasons to vote for Obama. It is ironic that orthodox Jewish voters are most focused on the present in making political decisions despite accusations that we are living in the past.

The Democrats want us to focus on blocs. Women, Blacks, Gays , Jews Hispanics etc. In their market niche strategy, neighbours become strangers as they are pigeonholed into separate interest groups. It is a form of Balkanisation that erodes national cohesiveness.

Political parties build up individuals in ways that can be compared to software development. When beta software is tested, feedback from customers is incorporated into improved versions. Patrick Buchanan was in many ways a beta version of a presidential contender. If I were to look at Sarah Palin as his ideological successor, it would seem to me that a lot of the glitches have been ironed out. The Democratic Party has by contrast been slapping labes reading 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 on products that have not progressed beyond the beta stage of development.

The Democrats are adept at putting a dismissive label on an idea to stop all discussion. My rabbi once was talking to someone who pointed out that the Nazis supported capital punishment. Instead of answering with discomfited silence my rabbi replied, "Hitler wore pants. Does that mean I should wear a dress?"

Sarah Palin was famous for using a line item veto on the Alaska state budget. Like many Republicans, this executive power was for her a matter of principal. I have no doubt that she looks at the political agenda of Pat Buchanan much like she would a Alaska's state budget. I am sure she is looking at it with a line item veto perspective.

We now know that Palin is anti abortion, devoutly Christian and in favour of more drilling for oil. If you can't tell me what is wrong with her, please move on.

Friday, August 29, 2008

McCain's Vice President, Sarah Palin: My Comments

John McCain's pick for vice president has thrown the Democratic Party into a disoriented spin mode the morning after Obama's underwhelming speech at the Temple of Obamis in the mountains of Colorado. Joe Biden, a poster child for tactless remarks and appeasement now stands opposite an unabashed religious conservative. As governor, Sarah Palin of Alaska has been unafraid of stepping on toes, exposing and routing governmental corruption, even when the malefactors were of her own party. Any research into her record will uncover a stark contrast to Obama's entanglement in the Chicago political machine its corruption , and its racism. The structural similarity of state government to Federal government has historically made gubernatorial experience desirable in joining the presidential ticket.
Governor Palin is unabashedly pro life. She is the mother of a child with Down's Syndrome which adds a personal resonance to her pro life beliefs. This undoubtedly gives her a sensitivity to the issues of people with disabilities. She commended Senator Clinton for "putting cracks in the glass ceiling" that has blocked women's political advancement. It is a relief to many that McCain did not choose a liberal Republican like former Republican Jim Jeffords of Vermont or New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg.
It is unlikely that the ideologues and spin masters of the Democratic Party will concede that her appointment is a step forward for women. The Democrats only count a woman or an African American as "empowered" when they embrace the beliefs of the Democratic Party. To use Marxist jargon, they believe that political conservatives who are Black or female have "internalised the values of the oppressors. " Their patronising approach lends them an eerie resemblance to the"revolutionary vanguard of the proletariat" of which Gus Hall and Vladimir Lenin would certainly be proud.
The Democrats want the American political spectrum to be an ideological ghetto, in which ethnicity and colour determine where one may politically reside. To this end, they have distorted and falsified American history, robbing it of its many fascinating complexities such as the Republican judges who dismantled the Jim Crow laws and Nixon's creative attacks on poverty in America.
McCain has thoroughly challenged Democratic sterotypes and prejudices with his choice of Governor Palin as running mate. Perhaps now we can have a national dialogue about the very different visions for America held by the Democratic Party and the Republicans. This will provide a refreshing counterpoint to the distasteful task of reviewing Barack Obama's past record in Illinois politics
With his well timed announcement pushing the Democratic convention off the front pages, McCain has shown a tactical adeptness that will be of great help to our nation in the years ahead. His sharpness and winning oratorical style will make this an interesting campaign. The Democratic post convention "bounce" seems to be Obama's presidential ambitions hitting the sidewalk.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Fighting The Obama Campaign's Thought Police With Satire, Anger And Ridicule

Check Out Obama Mashup Site

Under communism, not every crime was punished upon discovery. A person may have had a black market operation, or a contact at the state owned bakery who sets aside good cuts of meat for them. They may have a friend in the factory who arranged for vacation time in the summer, or someone who bumped them up the ten year waiting list to get a car. Many things seemed to slide, and most of the time, life under communism was livable.
These accumulations of small "crimes" were often noted but not punished. They served as both a safety valve and collateral. If you are called in to speak to the secret police and shown a list of your transgressions, then you might become very docile and compliant. Your son's draft papers might be sitting on the KGB officer's desk. Will your son be stationed locally when he does his compulsory military service? Or will he be sent to the border with Mongolia, twelve time zones away? It's up to you. Are you going to be a hero, when you find out that some of your best friends informed on you anyhow? Or will you wake up to reality? Even if you are never called on to inform would you even dream of becoming a dissident? No way!! They have too much on you.They could lock you up without mentioning a thing about politics.

America now has complex tax codes and campaign finance laws. There are crimes that everyone can recognise, such as armed robbery and murder. Then there are white collar offenses that might, just might be illegal, if presented the right way to a prosecutor. The Obama campaign is very upset about attack ads that highlight Obama's friendship with former terrorist Bill Ayers. Instead of confining themselves to rebuttals, they are trying to interest the federal government in prosecuting the sponsor of the ad. (Read about Obama campaign's KGB tactics here)
What was an issue of fairness and accuracy is now an question of basic free speech. Do we as a nation want to introduce KGB tactics to stifle political dissent? Those who support free speech must combat and condemn this sinister attack by the Obama campaign on the vitality of political debate. Chairman Mao once used the expression, "Let a hundred flowers bloom" to advocate freedom of speech and tolerance of ideological diversity. In the age of the internet, this metaphor has a new meaning. CNN and FOX may cave in and pull an offending ad that is anti Obama. But such videos will be posted on thousands of websites . Because the ad has been suppressed, it will be sought out on Google and downloaded. Links will be e mailed. The ad that drives Obama crazy will spread across the internet.
This website is a free speech web site. If John McCain's campaign tries to suppress an ad, we will post it Since Barack Obama is the biggest offender against free speech, we will post everything he is trying to suppress. This posting is biased. It is angry. I am loading it up with posters and video content to taunt Obama's thought police. If this is how he behaves as a candidate, I don't even want to think about what he would do as president.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

A Break From Democratic Convention Coverage: Presidential Campaign Ads From the 50's and 60's

It is interesting to look back at presidential campaign ads when television was in its infancy. The top two ads on this posting show an advertisement for Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and for Eisenhower in 1952. Stylistically, they resemble advertising jingles for products. They contain little information. They seem to be mostly good old fashioned pep cheers.
By 1960, television had become a part of millions more homes than it had been in 1952, when it was an expensive luxury item. The percentage of homes with TV had shot from 34 % to 87% from 1952 to 1960. The third ad in this posting is a JFK advertisement from his successful 1960 run against Richard Nixon. Allthough the ad still has the pep rally approach, it advances the argument that Kennedy is both youthful and experienced. The ad further addresses the reservations many voters had about Kennedy's Roman Catholic faith in the course of the same jingle. It is interesting that the advertisement displayed African American voters at a time when many citizens of colour were legally disenfranchised and still struggling to outlaw segregation.
The Lyndon Johnson "Daisy Ad" shows a little girl counting down daisy petals against the ominous backdrop of a nuclear weapon launch count down. The ad was as deceitful as it was advanced. It portrayed Republican candidate Barry Goldwater as a trigger happy mad man. It was very effective. It is ironic that Johnson, the "peace" president presided over a massive military buildup in Vietnam that was hampered by political considerations. Goldwater's slogan was "In your heart you know he's right." The Democrats countered with the slogan, "In your guts , you know he's nuts.
It is interesting to note that Goldwater makes many points in the advertisement presented here that still resonate in our times. It seems that disagreement on American military policy that existed in 1964 between the two major parties was tactical and not a matter of basic political philosophy. I do not know if the same thing could be said today.
On a more optimistic note, Americans can and should be proud that all of our elections for President in the history of our Republic have taken place on schedule. Not even the American Civil War delayed an election. The widening of the circle of empowerment to include men and women of all races is a successful struggle in which we all may take pride. It is interesting to look into our past as a nation to get a better sense of the present. I hope my readers enjoy this look into our past, provided with the help of You Tube

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Can We Hold Obama Responsible For Bill Ayers? YES WE CAN !!!!!

Bill Ayers Expressing Reverend Wright's Feelings about America (2001)

There are two bars of justice that every citizen must face. There are the courts of law, and the court of community opinion. The courts of law function according to written rules and precedents. Community opinion has many local variations. Its verdict is hard to appeal.
In America there are certain cardinal sins that doom any quest for high office. It is safe to say that a murderer or a rapist should not even think of ever running for office, even after serving time.
There are are other acts which are very difficult to expunge from the public memory. Lester Maddox, George Wallace , Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan all have a history of bigotry. Millions will never forget their racist contributions to public life, from Al Sharpton leading chants of "Kill the Jews and railing against "white interlopers" in Harlem to George Wallace blocking African Americans from attending public schools with whites. One of the reasons that we have been so successful in combatting bigotry in America is because the majority of Americans attach such a high political price tag to its public espousal. There is no set term of expiation for the sin of promoting ethnic hatred. Though this may prove harsh to some truly contrite individuals, it is a very effective protection against public unrest.
Bill Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, a radical group that bombed government buildings, from police stations to the Pentagon. Some members even killed police officers. Bill Ayers even went underground, surfacing to receive a judicial slap on the wrist. Far from expressing regret for his criminal past, Ayers continues to maintain that he "did not go far enough."
Barack Obama has complained in political advertisements that he has been held responsible for Ayer's sins which were committed when Obama was a mere lad of eight years. Ayers in his "rehabilitated " state sponsored the early stages of Obama's political career. They served on boards of foundations together that promote radical views such as the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Foundation, both of which serve as a conduit for funds to radical groups. Obama was already a close political associate of Ayers when Ayers posed for a Chicago Magazine photo while stomping on an American flag. He amplified his desecratory pose by a statement to the New York Times in a 2001 interview that the notion of America as a fair and just country "makes me want to puke.” (Kurtz article in National Review)
Bill Ayers has never repudiated his own terrorist actions as morally wrong. He has even profited from his public notoriety through book royalties and job appointments. It would be safe to say that his return to legal activities is tactical and not moral. If that is the case, nothing would stop him from resuming terrorist activities in the future or urging others to do so.
Bill Ayers remains unrepentant. His public expressions during Obama's adult life and friendship with him are repugnant to most Americans. The picture at the top of this posting of Ayers staring defiantly into the camera with an American flag underfoot was taken during his friendship and professional collaboration with Obama. Can we judge Obama by his friends? YES WE CAN!!!!

Monday, August 25, 2008

Fifty Billboards in Denver Welcome Democrats With A Message: Martin Luther King Was A Republican

One belief central to my political principles is this. A citizen should vote for his values and interests. Party loyalty should be subordinate to faith and family. Only a spouse may rightly claim eternal fidelity. Both African Americans and Jews have since Roosevelt voted disproportionately for the Democratic Party. It is a loyalty that has yielded diminishing returns. A watery broth of rhetoric is seasoned with affirmative action and patronage does nothing to increase the size of the proverbial pie being divided. It defies logic to promise a vote while demanding nothing in return. Jews learned this the hard way with Jimmy Carter who after paying the customary lip service to Israel proceeded to sell it down the river.
Language and faith provide the means to bridge and transcend national divisions. A common language and a religiously derived sense of common values provide a means of unifying a nation. Even where deep seated differences remain, a code of how one may permissibly differ is essential to the peace and well being of a nation.
Dr. Alveda King is the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King. She has devoted her life to spreading her Christian faith. She views politics as a domain in which the values of faith may find practical expression in society. She is particularly concerned with the rights of the unborn. There is a common denominator, a common domain of understanding that I as a Jew feel exists with a woman such as Dr. King. It is possible to differ passionately about the hereafter and about the past and agree about the needs of the present. A political coalition of religious traditionalists that transcends theological boundaries would greatly benefit America.
Ethnic loyalties will always exist. There is a place for such feelings . But the perception of what is good for one's self for one's family and community should be derived from reason and applied principles of faith.
Dr. King seeks to build a social vision that is founded on her core values. In Denver, a mantra of unquestioned assumptions will over the next few days numb the collective intellect of the party faithful. It is the actions and choices of those who follow their intellect and strive for their vision who shape our country and set it on the right path.
The fifty billboards in Denver put up by the National Black Republican Association are a welcome wakeup call to the nation. At election time , the political parties come to the voter as supplicants. We, the voters should hold them to the task of representing our interests. Thank you, Dr. King for stating these principles so forcefully.

Michelle and Barack: Getting Rich By Talking Poor truth part 2 obama truth part 1

The Obamas have a winning formula. Far from a struggling existence, the Obamas live lives of luxury. They are adept at spewing clouds of populist rhetoric and creating the impression that they struggle for the good of the common worker. One of the central concerns expressed by the Democratic Party is the matter of health care. It is of direct concern to blue collar workers and of special concern in the poor neighbourhoods represented by Barack Obama.
It is an interesting coincidence that Michelle Obama's salary as an vice president of the University of Chicago Medical Center jumped by almost $200,000 when her husband became a U.S. Senator. Her job involved steering uninsured patients to other hospitals in the area. I can say from first hand experience that it is frightening to move a sick child for financial reasons when the sole focus should be on healing. With her job paying close to $400,000 as a hospital vice president, and another $100,000 dollar job on a corporate board of directors, Michelle and Barack were probably too busy to feel the pain of their constituents. These two videos tell the story of the Obama fantasy castle concealed in a thick cloud of lofty platitudes. They are good for three more months of jokes. That is about it. In November let's put term limits on their position as the laughingstock of America. Let them be the burden of Chicago and not of the country.
The videos with this posting tell the story of how to stretch a Senator's salary.

Breaking News!!!! A New Obama Endorsement Brought to You By T.N.N..

Denver Colorado ....T.N.N. (Tasteless News Network)
In keeping with Chicago's long standing tradition of empowering the dead community, Tasteless News Network has resurrected former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and secured his endorsement of Barack Hussein Obama. The minor technicality of his British citizenship is of no consequence to the Democratic Party. The same oppressive laws that keep non citizens from working and voting in America should not stand in the way of the world's dead community from participating in the political process. For thousands of years, the dead have been the silent majority ruled over by a minority of the living. This injustice, first challenged in Chicago, will now be defeated around the nation and the world. Mr. Chamberlain could not appear live at tonight's Democratic Convention, but he is ably represented by Jimmy Carter, as well as the video accompanying this posting. We believe that the juxtaposition of Obama's speeches, Jimmy Carter's political legacy and Chamberlain's immortal words to the British people will establish a clear thread of historical continuity. To have a leader who can function in a crisis, we need a leader who can create a crisis. Chamberlain, Carter and Obama..... They are truly men for their times. ...Tasteless News Network salutes you.

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Communist Party Backs Endorsement With Obama Infomercials (Classic Archival Footage) A T.N.N dispatch

(T.N.N.) Tasteless News Network

By now it is common knowledge that the Communist Party has endorsed Barack Hussein Obama. In the spirit of Cindy Sheehan, Gus Hall and Jimmy Carter, Tasteless News Network is donating these classic videos to provide reeducation to those who doubt the wisdom of dismantling America as a world power. To further downgrade America's economic influence, the shooting of this video has been outsourced to Poland, where the wages of the workers are a fraction of what they are in the U.S. Although there are language problems with poor translations from Polish, the outsourcing of jobs in the entertainment industry should be of great help to the Communist Party's objective of further weakening America. Negotiations are under way to film some Obama ads in the people's Republic of China, using prison labour. (The Obama abortion policy is very compatible with those in China) We think that outsourcing campaign ads will make Democratic campaign dollars go a lot further than if the ads were filmed in America. We hope you enjoy these new outsourced campaign ads compliments of the Communist Revolutionary Alliance for Progress. (C.R.A.P).

American Communist Party Obama Endorsement

Barack Obama is not a left candidate. This fact has seemingly surprised a number of progressive people who are bemoaning Obama’s “shift to the center.” (Right-wingers are happy to join them, suggesting Obama is a “flip-flopper.”) It’s sad that some who seek progressive change are missing the forest for the trees. But they will not dampen the wide and deep enthusiasm for blocking a third Bush term represented by John McCain, or for bringing Obama by a landslide into the White House with a large Democratic congressional majority.

A broad multiclass, multiracial movement is converging around Obama’s “Hope, change and unity” campaign because they see in it the thrilling opportunity to end 30 years of ultra-right rule and move our nation forward with a broadly progressive agenda.

This diverse movement combines a variety of political currents and aims in a working coalition that is crucial to social progress at this point. At the core are America’s working families, of all hues and ethnicities, whose determination to move forward does not depend on, and will not be diverted by, the daily twists and turns of this watershed presidential campaign. They are taking the long view.

Notably, the labor movement has stepped up its independent mobilization for this election. It is leading an unprecedented campaign to educate and unify its ranks to elect the nation’s first African American president. Last week, AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka told the Steelworkers convention that there is “no evil that’s inflicted more pain and more suffering than racism — and it’s something we in the labor movement have a special responsibility to challenge.”

If Obama’s candidacy represented nothing more than the spark for this profound initiative to unite the working class and defeat the pernicious influence of racism, it would be a transformative candidacy that would advance progressive politics for the long term.

The struggle to defeat the ultra-right and turn our country on a positive path will not end with Obama’s election. But that step will shift the ground for successful struggles going forward.

One thing is clear. None of the people’s struggles — from peace to universal health care to an economy that puts Main Street before Wall Street — will advance if McCain wins in November.

Let’s keep our eyes on the prize.

Friday, August 22, 2008

Joseph FarahSays No To McCain: A Principled Position and a Tactical Blunder

Joseph Farah has stated his presidential endorsement for 2008. It is "None of the above". Farah points to global warming and immigration as issues where McCain has diluted conservative principles to a critical extent.He makes the critical point that a Democratic Congress will be able to wring concessions from McCain, block his remaining objectives and then to blame the Republican Party for the resulting problems.His arguments are persuasive on paper.
As a New Yorker, I have faced the same decision locally that the nation now faces. Rudolf Giuliani is in favour of legal abortion and gay rights. He has left undisturbed the promise made by every New York mayor for over thirty years not to enforce federal immigration laws. In every other state except Vermont he would have been a flaming liberal.
When Giuliani ran for mayor the first time, I voted for the Right to Life candidate for the same reasons that Joseph Farah gives for opposing Obama and McCain. After four years of mushrooming crime that was even worse than it was under Ed Koch, and the loss of scores of businesses that relocated out of New York City, I made the same decision in 1993 that I am making in 2008. I voted for Rudy Giuliani. He was true to his word, and instituted changes in law enforcement that resulted in a plummeting crime rate. He reformed welfare , instituting work requirements and fingerprinting. The lowered taxes and safe streets have resulted in thousands of jobs due to the increased confidence of investors in the city.
When David Dinkins said that he would be guided by the policies of Mayor Lindsay, our panderer in chief during much of the sixties, I made a decision of which Joseph Farah would approve. I voted for principle, thereby indirectly voting for David Dinkins, who was true to his promise to follow in Lindsay's footsteps.
I feel that America is at a crossroads similar to those faced by New York in 1993. Believing as I do in an ideology that is both pro labour and conservative from a religious viewpoint, it is not possible for me to support any candidate, liberal or conservative without the nagging feeling that I have betrayed some tenet of my political philosophy. Despite these reservations, I compromise my principles all the time, hoping my candidates will disappoint someone else and not me.
I do not want to imagine the shape that America and the world will be in after four years of an Obama presidency. I think Farah's suggestion is impractical and dangerous. Yet I am posting Farah's criticisms of McCain because his reservations are my reservations . John McCain should know that such opinions exist among the American electorate in generous measure.
Yes, there are serious problems with both candidates. And yes, I am voting for John McCain. It is John McCain that I will criticise for four years if he is elected. There are 300,000,000 people in America to please. Under John McCain, I will certainly at times be disappointed. But I do not believe that traditionalist opinions will be demonised. I do not believe that such attacks on free speech as the "fairness doctrine" are likely under a McCain administration. In these critical times McCain deserves our support, just as Giuliani merited our votes in 1993 and 1997. He also deserves our opposition, but after he is elected.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Daniel Kurtzer Receives the First Annual Chaim Rumkowski Prize

Chaim Rumkowski was a wealthy Polish Jewish industrialist. He achieved his greatest fame (or infamy) in his capacity as head of the Lodz Ghetto. Before he himself was deported, his job was to come up with successive quotas of Jwish men for "labour assignments", which were really one way tickets to concentration camps. He rationalised this by saying that he was protecting the majority in the ghetto by giving up a "small" number of Jews. In the end, he saved no one.
Daniel Kurtzer is the recipient of the first annual Chaim Rumkowski prize. He was under Bill Clinton an American ambassador to Israel. Now he advises the Obama campaign on foreign policy. It is with apologies to Chaim Rumkowski that I bestow the award bearing his name upon Daniel Kurtzer,who has according to World Net Daily traveled to Syria on behalf of the Obama campaign. His advice to Syria was to press full speed ahead on negotiations with Israel to get back a big chunk of the Golan Heights, which Syria used in two wars already to attack Israel. (See excerpt and link below)

Obama adviser travels to Syria
Urges Damascus to speed up talks aimed at Israeli retreat from Golan

Posted: August 20, 2008
3:12 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Daniel Kurtzer
JERUSALEM – A key foreign policy adviser to Sen. Barack Obama has traveled to Damascus where he reportedly urged Syrian officials to fast-track negotiations with Israel, it has emerged.

Both Israel and Syria announced in May they were holding indirect talks aimed in part at an Israeli evacuation of most of the Golan Heights, which looks down on Israeli population centers and twice was used by Damascus to mount ground invasions of the Jewish state.

The talks have been progressing at a very slow pace, with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Russia today discussing military cooperation between Damascus and Moscow.

But Daniel Kurtzer, a top adviser to Obama on Israeli-Palestinian affairs who visited Syria last month, reportedly has offered Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem some advice.

"I urged him to move ahead in the Israel-Syria negotiations as much as possible so that whoever is the next president would not start from too far down the track," Kurtzer disclosed yesterday in an interview with the New York Sun

At the very worst, Rumkowski was trying to save himself and his family, in a situation we can not imagine. Daniel Kurtzer does not have any such excuse. Perhaps he fancies himself as an up and coming Henry Kissinger wannabe. Maybe he wants flashbulbs in his face as the press fawns all over him. But like Rumkowski he is advancing himself at the cost of Jewish blood. He is a disgraceful human being . Additionally, there are laws against private citizens conducting their own negotiations with foreign powers.
If Obama thinks he is winning Jewish support by employing slime like Kurtzer, he is sadly mistaken. There are unfortunately enough scoundrels in Jewish history to whom Kurtzer may be compared.
The Rumkowski prize will be a half rotten potato and a scallion, which in a concentration camp would have been considered a meal. I apologise to Mr. Wumkowski for comparing him to the likes of Kurtzer. For the sake of Israel and of America, I prsay for the failure of Kurtzer's endeavours

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

"Eclectic Power," Good Ideas From Mike Bloomberg and Some Suggestions

The best approach to energy independence is "all of the above". I like to call it "eclectic power". Paris Hilton made a lot of sense in her famous video response to the McCain political ad when she supported both off shore drilling and alternative energy sources. Mayor Bloomberg made a suggestion to set up windmills throughout New York City to lessen our oil usage. I am in a very cynical mood and hate to pass up a chance to make fun of our mayor, but Bloomberg is right. New York has wind and New York has thousands of acres of open rooftop that are good for more than just late night keg parties. Mike Bloomberg wants to harness the wind to create electric power. He has also made moves towards phasing in solar paneling in city buildings.
In my opinion, Bloomberg could go further. There should be tax incentives for private homeowners and businesses to "go green" and use wind or solar power. The city could even utilise its massive buying power to make such technology available to homeowners. Tax breaks could provide incentives to help homeowners stay afloat until the savings from a "green" investment kick in.
A new growth field is the production of reusable shopping bags. Some of these bags look very attractive. They present opportunities for advertising and fashion statements. Supermarkets could even have bar codes on the bags to reward customers who bring in reusable bags. What I like about these approaches is that they appeal to motives of profit, of vanity and of altruism. Eclectic power can be sold to environmentalists one way and to those whose predominant motive is national security and energy independence in a different way. Currently, the only incentives in New York City to aid the environment are negative. The city has made a growth industry out of recycling tickets. This has the effect of creating an adversarial relationship between the government and citizens who resent losing a days pay over a small infraction. Even if the change is slower, the changes in behavior that come from education are more profound and long lasting than coercive measures.
There is much to be said for an approach that puts government and the people on the same side. Speaking to people in a manner that presupposes a better nature brings out their better nature. This is true in families. It is true in business and in government as well. People should be addressed on these important issues in a respectful manner. Most people, whether they are billionaires like Bloomberg or blue collar workers struggling from paycheck to paycheck think of their immediate and long term interests. Identifying these needs among the tax paying and voting public should shape energy policy and the public education necessary to implement it.
During World War Two, there was a sense of enthusiasm and empowerment as the public worked together on everything from paper drives and victory gardens to saving tin cans and rubber. The sense that one's individual choices and actions can be of public benefit needs to be reinforced. This can and should be done as a partnership of caring citizens and not the begrudging subjects of a nanny state.
New York, despite being a one party system in four of its five boros is still an exciting place to watch and in which to live. Despite recent setbacks in crime reduction, New York has taught the world much about law enforcement. It would be of great benefit for our creative metropolis to blaze a path in energy independence.
Mayor Bloomberg has built a communications empire. His approval ratings have been consistently high. He has invested his money and his political capital with wisdom. His proposals for alternative energy sources would be to his benefit and that of the country. Despite my past and current disagreements with his philosophy of governance, he has earned my wholehearted support for his latest cause. In this area, I applaud his vision and creativity and hope his dream becomes a reality.
Click here to read article about Bloomberg's wind power proposals( from CBS)

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Thoughts over American Pilsener on a Summer Night

When I was visiting family in Pittsburgh, we had a barbecue with ample quantities of American beer. The conversation was profound. It ranged from America's political and ethnic roots to the local variations in ethnic composition from Brooklyn to Hawaii. The beer, which was indistinguishable from a Czech Pilsener was brewed in America. We expounded at length on its fitness as a metaphor for America's political maturation and our country's growth on its foundations in the old world . The metaphor was deeply meaningful to all. We poured a few pitchers of ice cold metaphors and proceeded to solve our nation's most pressing problems. There was an artistic glow by the light of the fire in the back yard. It looked like a classic 19th century American painting. We discussed American art from the 19th century to the present and how perceptions of beauty fall victim to slick marketing.There was universal harmony and brotherhood. As we proceeded to solve the world's problems, there was only one hitch. No one took notes. All that collected wisdom gone in the coolness of a summer night. What was I to do? My wife looked at my sad face with something resembling compassion. As I said my night time prayers and drifted off to sleep, I asked for a sign, with the vague feeling that the world revolved around me.
As the light of the noon day sun filled my room a few hours later, the answers to my questions came in the form of a classic country song. (Linked Below) I hope you all enjoy it.
I'm Going to Hire a Wino To Decorate Our Home by David Frizell

Monday, August 18, 2008

Esperanto Rights Activists Target This Web Site

Esperanto Rock Group "Dolchamar"

One of the pleasures of running blogs is the things you learn from your readers. I publicised a fictitious character named Manuel Layber, who runs a satirical blog on Barack Obama's campaign web site. In the course of running Layber's posts , I heard from one Esperanto listener and googled the existence of a whole community that is dedicated to the propagation of Esperanto culture. Ugly rumours are circulating that and its companion site are in fact hotbeds of anti Esperantian bigotry. There was even talk of bringing the web sites into costly litigation in front of the international court in the Hague on charges of propagating hatred of Esperanto. After consulting with my legal team, and to be in voluntary compliance with the fairness doctrine, I am presenting the Esperanto Anthem with a translation into English and a rock video in the Esperanto language from the group "Dolchamar".
If there is one thing that I have learned in blogging, it is not to run afoul of the powerful Esperanto lobby. Lest my readers accuse me of capitulation and pandering, both and will continue to satirise and to oppose the candidacy of Barack Obama. We will not, furthermore deprive the Esperanto militant, Manuel Layber of his platform on our sites. We will, however attend Esperanto sensitivity training classes.
I hope my listeners will enjoy the cultural excursion into the world of Esperanto music in this posting.

Sunday, August 17, 2008

The Racism of Howard Dean

I am thinking now of the day after election day with an open mind. I might be heavy hearted at the defeat of my candidate. Or I might heave a sigh of relief at Obama's defeat. It will be my duty and that of millions of Americans to accept the voice of the people.
Howard Dean has opened his mouth again. He has called the Republican Party the party of white people. He should try to explain away Martin Luther King's status as a registered Republican . He should explain away how the party of Lincoln produced judges in the American South who eviscerated Jim Crow with judicial rulings. It was Republican judges who supported desegregation from the bench. It was in Republican administrations that Condoleeza Rice served as Secretary of State . Who was the first African American to serve in that position once held by a white guy on the ten dollar bill? It was Colin Powell appointed by a Republican President. Prior to that he was the first African American chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also appointed by a Republican president.

So Howard Dean a member of the party of Lester Maddox , George_Wallace and J.B. Stoner, (who once referred to Hitler as "too moderate") see article has now called the Republicans the "white party". Aside from his rampant contempt for the record of history and recent events, Dean has attempted to attach pejorative connotations to white skin. The ideal adopted by the majority of Americans is that race and ethnicity are morally neutral. The majority of Americans believe that whatever cultural tradition you may choose to perpetuate that others deserve respect and tolerance. Perhaps Dean is of the American minority that does not share these values. His recent and most divisive comments seem to indicate that.

Supposedly, the Democrats want to get beyond race, but it is they who harp on it, hoping to translate white guilt and African American pride in a black candidate into an electoral victory. Many Americans have ancestry from countries that were racked by civil war. Indians, Pakistanis, Serbs, Croats and Albanians all have bloody conflicts in the fairly recent past that make the relative peace of America most attractive to them. The Balkanisation and partition of America into ethnic subgroups with mutually exclusive historical narratives is an anathema to most Americans.

Most Americans want equality of opportunity. They even want extra help for those whose personal struggles are hampered by poverty and personal adversity. Howard Dean's remarks attach pejorative connotations to white ethnicity. He has imputed ugliness to some of the tiles in the American mosaic. Lastly, he has banished shades and nuance from his vision of America. My neighbours are not just black. They are of Jamaican, Haitian Grenadian, Trinidadian Northern and Southern American ancestry. My neighbours are not just white. They are Italian, Croatian, Irish, Cuban, Argentinian, Norwegian, German and an alphabet soup of different nationalities. My neighbours are Jewish, Mormon, Protestant, Catholic and Muslim as well as a rainbow of Eastern Orthodox denominations. They have mutually exclusive theologies that do not preclude professional and personal relationships. America sinned and America erred in reaching this enviable manner of coexistence. And America continues to err in its ongoing search for truth and perfection. We are a work in progress.

My father used to have a darkroom in which he developed black and white photographs. He worked hard to render as faithfully as possible the range of shade in his pictures. A picture in which only black and white were to be seen appeared as a surrealistic jumble. It was meaningless. Hundreds of shades went into a well developed picture.

Mr. Dean, your vision of America is like a photo with no shades of gray. It bears no relationship to reality. Your picture of America would not hang in my father's dark room. It would lie in his waste basket.

Friday, August 15, 2008

Polish Investigators Tie Partisans to Massacre

My Comments on an article by Marisa Brostoff in the Forward

A movie is coming out in December called Deliverance. It is about the Bielski partisans. They are a group of Jews in Poland who fought the Nazis. Jewish Partisans in Poland did not fight on an equal basis with their Polish counterparts. Poles could choose to go with the flow or to take up arms. Jews could fight or die. And Jews were not only hiding from the Germans. They were hiding from the Poles. Even Polish partisans turned in Jews for the rewards offered by the Germans. It is not an accident that the biggest concentration camps were in Poland.
There is a new sickness sweeping Poland and Lithuania, both countries that killed over 90% of their Jews with a bloodlust that disgusted even the Germans. Lithuania is a country in which not one Lithuanian murderer of Jews has sat a day in jail. Lithuania is looking for Jews who are guilty of war crimes against Lithuanians. And the Poles, who so eagerly availed themselves of German "tech support" in solving their "Jewish Question" are doing the same thing. A Polish rightist party,"Prawo i Sprawiedliwosc" has hijacked the Institute of National Remembrance" or IPN for their own agenda.
Poland has always seen itself as an occupied nation. The disgusting pogroms across Poland, the concentration camps enthusiastically built with Polish labour and staffed by Poles afterward get little publicity. In the Final Solution, the Germans were aided by hundreds of thousands of willing collaborators. In Kielce, on July 4, 1946, 37 Jews returning from concentration camps to their homes in that accursed town were murdered by Poles who wanted to keep the homes they had stolen from Jews.
So I want to know, if you are going to investigate Jewish partisans, tell me about the Polish villages. How many lovely Polish maids led the Germans to the basement of the home in which they worked and handed over the Jews living there? How many farm hands turned on their Jewish employers or simply coveted the house of a Jewish neighbour? There are many such stories. I have heard them and if your investigators have not, it is because you have not sought them In many villages, the demise of the Jews was greeted with joy and taunting. So dear investigators from the abomination called IPN, please let me know what your findings are, and if you have compiled lists of Polish villages and cities that collaborated in the Final Solution. If you can find a Jew with the blood of these filthy collaborators on his hands, please let me know. Many of these old Jewish heroes are close to death, and I want to shake the hands of those who have avenged the blood of the innocent. I have, thank G-d met such avengers. I have had the merit of shaking hands that have avenged Jewish blood.
Your "Institute for National Remembrance " is a filthy sham. The survivors of the slaughter in which you so eagerly participated are elderly and dying by the day.You await their deaths like vultures so you can fill your history books with lies. Our partisans lived in fear not only of Germans but of Poles as well. We took in children who would be murdered if left unprotected. You went home to your families. Our partisans lived in the woods like animals. You insult our partisans? I spit on you. You would need a cherry picker to tie their shoelaces. You hope that the Polish earth will swallow the truth just like it did the rivers of Jewish blood you let loose upon it.
There were many Poles who risked their lives to hide and to help Jews. Poland is not bereft of merit. There are living survivors who owe their survival to the instincts of decency that were not totally extinguished. Now in assembling the fragments of history, nothing must be discarded if justice is to be done to the entire picture. During that dark chapter in European history, those who saved innocent lives also salvaged national honour. Writing Poland's history presents another such opportunity. To edit the truth is to falsify it. Tell the whole story.

*********************** *************************** ************************

As Paramount Pictures gears up its ad campaign for a new movie about a band of Jewish partisans who fought the Nazis, some in Poland are suggesting that the partisans in question may also have been murderers.

In anticipation of the December release of “Defiance,” — starring Daniel Craig, the actor best-known as the latest incarnation of James Bond — the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza ran an article headlined, “A Hollywood Movie About Heroes or Murderers?” The article contrasts the film’s portrayal of Tuvia Bielski as a Moses figure leading frightened women and children through the forest with a recently released report from a Polish government investigative body. The government report suggests that Bielski and his followers may have participated in a massacre of civilians in the eastern Polish town of Naliboki.

The tarnishing of the Bielski partisans has infuriated a number of people close to the memory of the group. Some of those people have also been involved with the production of the movie, directed by Ed Zwick (“Legends of the Fall,” “The Last Samurai”). Nechama Tec, who wrote the historical account of the Bielski partisans on which the film is based, told the Forward that allegations connecting the partisans to the massacre were “total lies.”

Those allegations “underline the antisemitic tendencies of the writers and the distortion of history,” Tec said.

The controversy comes on the heels of a Lithuanian government investigation into allegations that Jewish partisans committed war crimes during World War II. That investigation has been met with dismay on the part of Jewish communal leaders inside and outside Lithuania, who note that only three Lithuanians have ever been prosecuted for wartime crimes against Jews.

The reinvestigation — or, as some former partisans and historians claim, the revision — of what happened in the town of Naliboki in May 1943 began in 2001, when the massacre was first being studied by the Institute of National Remembrance, a Polish government agency known as IPN, that is devoted to prosecuting “crimes against the Polish nation.” The agency’s report, which has thus far been limited to a short brief released this year, claims that on the morning of March 8, 1943, Soviet partisans shot 128 civilians outside their homes.

About two-thirds of the way in, the report brings up the Jewish partisans affiliated with Bielski and his three brothers, noting that though some accounts by witnesses and historians place the group at the scene of the attack, these accounts have not been verified.

“Therefore the fact of participation of partisan soldiers of the Bielski Unit in the attack on Naliboki village is merely one of the versions of the investigated case,” the report concludes.

Robert Bielski, Tuvia Bielski’s son, said that his problem with the IPN report and the subsequent Gazeta Wyborcza article was twofold.

“The Bielskis were not in Naliboki in May of ’43,” he said, echoing historians who believe that the partisans did not arrive in the area until August of that year.

“But,” he added, “even if it were true, which I know it’s not, the 128 people are in no way close to the millions of people that the Polish people herded towards the Germans so they could be extinguished. I believe it’s just a consistent Polish antisemitism and the Poles are sloughing off their own crimes of being an enemy of the Jews during World War II.”

The IPN declined to comment on the controversy, citing the ongoing nature of the investigation. But Piotr Gluchowski, the Gazeta Wyborcza reporter who co-wrote the article on the IPN report — as well as a longer feature story about the Bielski brothers, published several days later — was more forthcoming. Gluchowski wrote in an e-mail that he was sure the Bielski partisans were not involved in the massacre, but that, on the other hand, the IPN “are no amateurs. This is a government organization, very serious thing.”

Gluchowski and his co-writer, Marcin Kowalski, are authoring a book about the Bielski partisans. Gluchowski said it will be published in December to coincide with the release of the film. (A publicist representing the film said she had no knowledge of the book project.)

“The Bielskis… are completely unknown in Poland,” Gluchowski said in the email. “But — I think — it will be hot in December, when ‘Defiance’ goes to the theaters.”

According to both Gluchowski and the detractors who found his article unsympathetic, the Bielskis are known in Poland only to the extent that some Polish nationalists have seized upon the idea that a Jewish partisan group collaborated with the Soviets to kill Polish civilians. The IPN itself is currently dominated by members of Prawo i Sprawiedliwosc, a rightist party, Gluchowski said.

Whether the debate over the Bielski partisans will seep into the reception of “Defiance” remains to be seen. The Variety story appeared briefly on the magazine’s Web site, is no longer accessible because, according to the publication’s editor, Dana Harris, it had not been properly edited.

As for the movie itself, shooting was completed last year, before the IPN released its report. Judging from the film’s trailer, there was no question in the minds of the filmmakers that Tuvia Bielski and his followers deserve to be celebrated.

hPoles Tie Jewish Partisans to Massacre(From The Forward)

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Immigration in America and Europe: A Tale of Two Continents

Back in the days when communism competed with capitalism to dominate the world, it seemed that the communists lived on their side of the border and we stayed on our side. Most of the fighting was done over red telephones between world leaders. Even the Vietnam War, although it touched the lives of millions of Americans was fought over there. Those Vietnamese who came to America became Americans.
A friend who was in the U.S. Navy during the Cuban missile crisis told me a story from that tense time that epitomised the prevailing spirit. He described Soviet ships faced off against American ships. Sailors from the opposing forces found that they were allies in a struggle against boredom. Faced off against each other, vodka and cigarettes passed from hand to hand over a border marked by language. Everyone was waiting for the call that would separate them into opposing camps. Everyone wanted to sail away in peace with good memories, but they were prepared for the worst.
Today, the West is faced off against militant Islam. One need not join the military to meet its ground troops. They are our neighbours, our co workers, our taxi drivers and sometimes our doctors. There is tension and distrust behind the polite facade that makes coexistence possible.
In Europe and Australia, the contempt Muslim immigrants have for the Christian immigrants among whom they live is fierce. Violent crime, including rape has become a wave with a flagrant tone of contempt for non Muslims from France to Australia. See Article on violent crime in Europe. Europeans seek to blame themselves and to understand the feelings of immigrant Muslim youth. This attempt at misguided compassion is repaid with more crime rationalised by a sense of religious superiority. Faith instead of modifying individual behavior becomes a rationale and a licence for crime.
So far, America seems to be less prone to this self flagellation that has blighted the daily personal and political lives of Europeans. We have the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans as national barriers to illegal immigration from Muslim countries. Although this protects us from the anti Christian violence that has blighted Europe, it does not protect us from other strains of illegal immigration. America and Mexico have the greatest income disparity of any two adjacent countries in the world. Thanks to the economic collapse in North Korea, North and South Korea might be contenders for this dubious distinction. As might be expected, such a disparity in incomes provides a powerful incentive for illegal immigration. Past wars in which the United States bested Mexico are revisited in popular history with a note of aggrievedness towards the U.S. The economic rewards of life in the U.S. undoubtedly fuel this contesting historical narrative, which has rapidly joined the Civil War as a fault line in the American historical landscape.
Both Democrats and Republicans seem to wink at the massive wave of illegal immigration from Mexico and beyond. The Democrats hope to tilt the political balance of power with the help of immigrants whose favour they have courted. Republicans seem to enjoy the dampening effect that waves of immigration have on wages. Our leaders talk with breathless excitement about creating common markets and have nothing but glib platitudes to offer in consolation for lost jobs and economic displacement.
America is a multiracial society. Language can and should be a social adhesive that along with a common historical narrative binds the nation together. The American flag is reduced it seems as a logo to put on commercial goods and ships. There should be a sense of mutual responsibility in the country for people of different stations in life to pull together for the common good. Instead, patriotism and putting America first is seen as an obstacle to business.
America needs to define itself and its national interests. Unlike Europe, we have had the same currency for two centuries. There is a lot more resistance in America to dissolving our borders and junking our currency. We seem to have some healthy instincts of self preservation that are sorely lacking in Europe. Despite this, the warning signs are there of impending crisis. Our leadership seems to be sound asleep. We, the people need to shake them from their slumber

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

American Blues and Music From Mali

Blues Music from Mali

Years ago I had a job working for an electronics retailer. A certain level of exertion was built into the job. I loaded air conditioners and televisions into people's cars. One day, a well spoken gentleman with his wife pulled up to our loading dock. Playing on his car stereo was blues music with vocals, guitar and light percussion. Although the music had a studio level of quality, it had a folk ring to it. As I was loading the man's car, I was amazed to note that it was not English was being sung but another language. I asked the man what music he was playing, noting the use of a blues musical scale. He said that the group was from Mali. It came out in the course of conversation that the American Blues actually originated in that part of Africa. Despite the breakup of language groups and even families under slavery, the survival of the blues pointed to the origins of many African Americans. Other types of music in Latin America can also be tied to other countries in Africa.
It is distinctly human to contemplate how one's ancestors and nationality affect one's outlook as an individual. One side of my family took with it very little information about the family tree and the anecdotes that go with it.Working hard and making it in a new country left family stories low on their hierarchy of needs. My interest in history is in some ways a replacement for frustrating gaps in family knowledge that will probably always remain blank pages.
It is for this reason that musical and artistic clues so fascinate me. Living in a neighbourhood that is heavily West Indian, I hear variants of English and French that carry within them fragments of African languages.
Haitian Creole in particular has within it many clues about the ancestral lands of the Haitian people.
Languages die and evolve with regularity. Immigration, though the birth of many a dream can be the death of a language. When I listen to music from Mali, it reminds me of this process. I hope that linguists and musicologists make an effort to preserve some of these cultural treasures.
The Oxford Unabridged Dictionary is like a museum. Every word in is defined by relating it to foreign cognates, as well as by giving examples of its evolution through the history of the English language. Some words go back to well before the year 1000. No other language has any work as extensive or comprehensive. It would be a pleasure to see the various dialects of English spoken in Brooklyn treated with the same scholarly attention.
The professor who pulled up at my loading dock later mailed me a cassette of music from Mali. Although I am not able to put that specific music on this posting, I am grateful to be able to include some You Tube selections that are very similar.
I hope that blues music returns to the popularity it once enjoyed. Aside from its beauty, it affirms in a tangible way ancestral ties that should not be forgotten.
Ali Farka Toure speaking with an American visitor about music and common roots

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Abortion: Obama's Record From Chicago Catches Up

Barack Obama has blood on his hands. In the Illinois State Senate, he had ample time to define himself in advance of any future run for office. A bill came before the Illinois State protecting infants born alive after an abortion. The bill extended the same protections to them that would be given to a baby born in a "wanted birth". Even the pro abortion group NARAL, the National Abortion Rights action League supported this bill. Barack Obama voted AGAINST it.
To put a sugar coating on his support for infanticide, Obama pointed to the absence in the state bill of a "non judgemental clause which would state "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive’ as defined in this section.” To save some lives, opponents of abortion sidestepped the question of what a live baby from an aborted birth had been during its mother's ride to the hospital and approved the "non judgemental clause", which was essentially an anaesthetic for the conscience of the legislature. For the sake of this technicality, Obama allowed babies born alive to be discarded in the garbage from the operating room.
Obama claims that his position on abortion has been misrepresented by his opponents, but his actions in the Illinois State legislature are a matter of public record. His denials and obfuscations damage what little credibility he already has
Checking the previous record of aspirants to higher office is a basic reporting obligation. A candidate's abilities as a legislator, his ideological orientation and his diligence all come out in such basic research. Such reporting has in the case of Barack Obama been relegated to bloggers and publications that are out of the print mainstream. Books critical of Obama are best sellers. Grass roots media is relaying information that is practically contraband in vast areas of the mass media. The newspapers that suffer from plummeting circulation such as the New York Times need look no further than the Obama campaign to find the reasons for their dismal failure in attracting the confidence and paatronage of media consumers.

************* ********************************************* **********************
National Right To Life Committee Website

Obama Cover-up Revealed

On Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill

New documents just obtained by NRLC, and linked below, prove that Senator Obama has for the past four years blatantly misrepresented his actions on the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection bill.

Summary and comment by NRLC spokesman Douglas Johnson: "Newly obtained documents prove that in 2003, Barack Obama, as chairman of an Illinois state Senate committee, voted down a bill to protect live-born survivors of abortion -- even after the panel had amended the bill to contain verbatim language, copied from a federal bill passed by Congress without objection in 2002, explicitly foreclosing any impact on abortion. Obama's legislative actions in 2003 -- denying effective protection even to babies born alive during abortions -- were contrary to the position taken on the same language by even the most liberal members of Congress. The bill Obama killed was virtually identical to the federal bill that even NARAL ultimately did not oppose."

In 2000, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) was first introduced in Congress. This was a two-paragraph bill intended to clarify that any baby who is entirely expelled from his or her mother, and who shows any signs of life, is to be regarded as a legal "person" for all federal law purposes, whether or not the baby was born during an attempted abortion. (To view the original 2000 BAIPA, click here.)

In 2002, the bill was enacted, after a "neutrality clause" was added to explicitly state that the bill expressed no judgment, in either direction, about the legal status of a human prior to live birth. (The "neutrality" clause read, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive’ as defined in this section.”) The bill passed without a dissenting vote in either house of Congress. (To view the final federal BAIPA as enacted, click here. To view a chronology of events pertaining to the federal BAIPA, click here.)

Meanwhile, Barack Obama, as a member of the Illinois State Senate, actively opposed a state version of the BAIPA during three successive regular legislative sessions. His opposition to the state legislation continued into 2003 -- even after NARAL had withdrawn its initial opposition to the federal bill, and after the final federal bill had been enacted in August 2002.

When Obama was running for the U.S. Senate in 2004, his Republican opponent criticized him for supporting "infanticide." Obama countered this charge by claiming that he had opposed the state BAIPA because it lacked the pre-birth neutrality clause that had been added to the federal bill. As the Chicago Tribune reported on October 4, 2004, "Obama said that had he been in the U.S. Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even though he voted against a state version of the proposal. The federal version was approved; the state version was not. . . . The difference between the state and federal versions, Obama explained, was that the state measure lacked the federal language clarifying that the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that legalized abortion."

During Obama's 2008 run for President, his campaign and his defenders have asserted repeatedly and forcefully that it is a distortion, or even a smear, to suggest that Obama opposed a state born-alive bill that was the same as the federal bill. See, for example, this June 30, 2008 "factcheck" issued by the Obama campaign, in the form that it still appeared on the Obama website on August 7, 2008. The Obama "cover story" has often been repeated as fact, or at least without challenge, in major organs of the news media. (Two recent examples: CNN reported on June 30, 2008, "Senator Obama says if he had been in the U.S. Senate in 2002, he, too, would have voted in favor of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act because unlike the Illinois bill, it included language protecting Roe v. Wade." The New York Times reported in a story on August 7, 2008 that Obama "said he had opposed the bill because it was poorly drafted and would have threatened the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade that established abortion as a constitutional right. He said he would have voted for a similar bill that passed the United States Senate because it did not have the same constitutional flaw as the Illinois bill.")

National Right to Life and other pro-life observers have always regarded Obama's "defense" as contrived, since the original two-paragraph BAIPA on its face applied only after a live birth; the "neutrality clause" added in 2001 merely made this explicit, and therefore the new clause did not change the substance of the original bill.

Moreover, the overwhelming majority of liberal, pro-abortion members of the U.S. House of Representatives did not embrace the initial NARAL position that the original bill was an attack on Roe v. Wade. The Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee, then as now, were a solidly liberal group, yet only one of them voted against the original BAIPA, without the "neutrality clause," and he cited a different reason. Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), who supported the bill, and who described himself as "as pro-choice as anybody on Earth" -- argued that under his understanding of Roe "if an abortion is performed, or a natural birth occurred, at any age, [even] three months, and the product of that was living outside the mother, and somebody came and shot him, I don't think there's any doubt that person would be prosecuted for murder." When the original bill -- with no "neutrality clause" -- came up on the House floor on September 26, 2000, it passed 380-15.

These facts should give pause to those who have unskeptically accepted Obama's claim that the Illinois BAIPA bills that he opposed in 2001 and 2002, which were modeled on the original federal BAIPA, were crafted to attack Roe v. Wade.

For the moment we can set that debate aside, however, for this reason: Documents obtained by NRLC now demonstrate conclusively that Obama's entire defense is based on a brazen factual misrepresentation.

The documents prove that in March 2003, state Senator Obama, then the chairman of the Illinois state Senate Health and Human Services Committee, presided over a committee meeting in which the "neutrality clause" (copied verbatim from the federal bill) was added to the state BAIPA, with Obama voting in support of adding the revision. Yet, immediately afterwards, Obama led the committee Democrats in voting against the amended bill, and it was killed, 6-4.

The bill that Chairman Obama killed, as amended, was virtually identical to the federal law; the only remaining differences were on minor points of bill-drafting style. To see the language of the two bills side by side, click here.

To see the official "Senate Committee Action Report" on this meeting, click on one of the links below. (The document is dated March 12, 2003, which is the day that the committee convened, but Chairman Obama recessed the meeting until March 13, which is the day that these votes actually occurred.)

Here are links to the official document that records these votes, in three different formats.

Senate Committee Action Report in HTML (web browser) format

Senate Committee Action Report in JPG (photo) format

Senate Committee Action Report in PDF (Adobe document) format

In this report, the left-hand column shows the roll call vote on adoption of "Senate Amendment No. 1," which was verbatim the neutrality clause copied from the federal bill. The right hand column shows the roll call by which Obama and his Democratic colleagues then killed the amended bill -- the bill that was virtually identical to the federal law that Obama, starting in 2004, claimed he would have supported if he'd had the opportunity.

To view the text of SB 1082 as it was originally introduced (without the neutrality clause), click here. To view the text of Senate Amendment No. 1 (the neutrality clause copied from the federal law), which Obama and his colleagues added to the bill at the March 13 meeting (before killing the bill), click here.

NRLC has also obtained two additional documents that report information on these events that is fully consistent with the Senate Committee Action Report.

To see the "Senate Republican Staff Analysis: Senate Bill No. 1082," click here. (If this Word document requests a password, simply hit "cancel" and it will be displayed.) The first portion of this analysis was written before the March 12-13, 2003, meeting of the committee that Senator Obama chaired. The committee's actions, amending the bill to exactly track the federal born-alive law, and then defeating the bill, are reported on the bottom half of the second page.)

Finally, to see an Associated Press dispatch dated March 13, 2003, reporting on the 6-4 committee vote that killed the bill, click here.

Less than two years after this meeting, Obama began to publicly claim that he opposed the state BAIPA because it lacked the "neutrality" clause, and that he would have supported the federal version (had he been a member of Congress) because it contained the "neutrality" clause. His claim has been accepted on its face by various media outlets, producing stories that have in turn been quoted by the Obama campaign and Obama defenders in attacking anyone who asserts that Obama opposed born-alive legislation similar to the federal bill. It has also been forcefully repeated by advocacy groups such as NARAL (see, for example, this June 30, 2008 "alert" from NARAL).

It appears that as of August 7, 2008, only one writer -- Terence Jeffrey, a contributing editor to -- had correctly reported the essence of this story, in a column posted on January 16, 2008 (read it here), but his report was ignored by the Obama campaign and overlooked by others at the time.

Now, the uncovering of the Senate Committee Action Report and the contemporary Associated Press report shed new light on Senator Obama's four-year effort to cover up his real record of refusing to protect live-born survivors of abortion.


Index of Documents Regarding Obama Cover-up on Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill (will be updated as new items come in)

Timeline of important events in the history of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act

NRLC archive on the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act

NARAL press release, July 20, 2000, expressing strong opposition to the original federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (H.R. 4292).

The official report of the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, explaining the intent of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (H.R. 2175), and explaining why such legislation was necessary (August 2, 2001)