I speak to Tami Kiser The Catholic Conference for Moms at the Catholic Marketing Trade Show

The Catholic Conference for moms is in February. Their website is here. their twitter page is here Their facebook page is here.

at Israelly cool there is a seven minute video (that I can’t get the embed code for) where Einat Wilf a former Israeli moderate explains what changed her position. Two key quotes

I remember going back from those meeting deeply troubled thinking: These are the moderates, so if these are the moderates than the conflict between us is about far more than what I was led to believe.

This was because the Palestinian “moderates” while recognizing the reality of Israel, supported by a powerful army did not recognize any Jewish connection to the land, to them it was a complete fabrication and they expressed such sentiments openly.

And comparing her willingness to recognize the right of the arabs to self determination and their connection to the land vs the lack thereof drew her to an inescapable conclusion:

I realized they don’t recognize my right, they recognized my might, but, what happens the day I no longer have might? They merely reinforcing the notion that I have to continue to have might to survive here.

The difference between the Palestinians and the Jews is very simple.

If the Palestinians disarmed tomorrow, if they got rid of every single mortar, bomb, rocket and suicide vest that they used against Israel in that moment there would be peace because the Jews would live their lives and leave the Arab alone to live theirs and if by disarming they were threatened by someone like ISIS, Israel would protect them:

“Today, no Arab feels safe in his country,” he said. “Ironically, the sole exceptions are Palestinians in the West Bank because they know Israel will defend them if ISIS attacks. Even in Gaza, most people secretly believe that Israel is their ultimate protection against ISIS fighters trying to strike roots in the Sinai.”

If Israel disarmed tomorrow, the war would also be over, but for a different reason. The Arabs would also be alone to live heir lives, but not the Jews because starting in that moment the Arabs would begin exterminating every single jew from the Jordan to the Mediterranean until there wasn’t a single one left.

That’s the reality it took Einat Wilf half a lifetime to figure out, that the reality proved over and over in Europe these days.

American Jews thousands of miles away from both Jerusalem and Paris have the luxury of ignoring this reality.

Ms. Wilf does not have that luxury.

Update: Compare and contrast the jews who come to pray at the Temple Mount & the Arabs who harass them:

Via Elder of Ziyon who notes:

The entire time the Jews are being harassed and screamed at, simply because they are Jewish. The Muslims aren’t there for prayer or for reflection or even to play ball – their entire lives are focused on trying to prevent Jews from walking around in peace..

Exit question. If there was not Israeli “might” there to protect those Jews in prayer, how long would they live?

Update 2: The Harassment is not confined to Israeli’s:

A delegation of U.S. congressmen in Israel was harassed by a large group of Muslim men during a visit to the historically significant Temple Mount in Jerusalem on Tuesday, according to a Jerusalem Post report.

Reps. Trent Franks (R., Ariz.), Keith Rothfus (R., Penn.), and Evan Jenkins (R., W.Va.), who was also joined by his wife, were approached by several Muslim men when they ascended the Temple Mount.

The men were “surprisingly intolerant and belligerent,” according to Rothfus.

Can I get an #unexpectedly here?


Normally I wouldn’t put it this way but right, with a car falling apart, a floor that needs to be torn up and some big debts I’m really in a bind and I’d really appreciate it if you can give me a hand getting out of it.

My goal for 2015 is Twenty Two grand which will give me a nominal living doing this.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. (including my writers like Fausta)  If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire me a blogger to help me get it done.

Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.

Choose a Subscription level

Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

If you could kick in I’d really appreciate it.


Donald Trump. My eyes glaze over at the thought of him. The hair, the loud mouth, the craven need for the spotlight, the relentless pursuit of patronage, the opportunism. All about Donald Trump bores me, because I’ve been hearing it for decades.

Unfortunately, there’s no end to it, because he is useful, and he knows it.

My initial reaction when I first heard Trump was running was, “1992: loud-mouthed millionaire forms third party, Clinton wins.” Trump has denied that Bill Clinton talked him into running,  and Trump may yet vow he won’t go third party (not that I put any value Trump’s word), but the comparison with Perot stands. Scott Johnson looks at its plausible causes (emphasis added):

Many Republicans like me have viewed the field of presidential candidates as remarkably strong, yet Trump’s ascent suggests a deficiency. It may be symptomatic of a weakness among the candidates, especially the politicians seeking the nomination.

Trump certainly reflects the anger of Republican and independent voters who lean Republican. We sense that these politicians can’t wait to sell us out. I refer to Jeb Bush above, but the case of Marco Rubio is also suggestive. He is a compromised character on the subject.

Trump taps into our anger on immigration, Iran, political correctness, and all the rest. He expresses repulsion to “weakness.” He promises strength.

Not that the media would give Trump the time of day, if he wasn’t useful:

1. Donald Trump is to the Republican presidential race what David Brooks is to the New York Times: Trump’s a liberal’s idea of a Republican candidate, while Brooks is the Grey Lady’s idea of a conservative columnist. Trump is the rich Republican Democrats want us to hate (as opposed to Billary, the people’s princes).

2. Every moment we hear about Trump is a moment we won’t hear about the disastrous Iran deal, Hillary being investigated by the FBI, the record-high 93 million Americans out of the workforce, and on and on. If we do, it’s all in terms of what Trump says about the questions, not on what the issues are and how the Democrats’s policies caused them.

3. Republican candidates trying to outdo The Donald will spend themselves under the table, and waste valuable air time talking about him rather than about the candidates’ own agendas.

4. Trump has nothing to lose. He craves this stuff.

The Republicans as a party, and the individual candidates themselves, must recognize, as Johnson did above, that there is “a current of anger on immigration, Iran, political correctness, and all the rest,” that the American public wants a policy of a strong America. The challenge to each candidate is to break through The Donald’s flim-flam and convince the public that he or she is the person who will deliver; and that he or she won’t sell us out. In short, a fighter.

We’re going to have to put up with Donald Trump for as long as he’s useful to the media. It’s going to be a long ride.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

I speak to author Mary Claire Kendal at the Catholic Marketing Trade Show

Her twitter page is here, Her web page is here

Yesterday I pointed out that the Iran deal vote is designed in such a way that President Obama only needs 34 Democrat Senators OR 146 House Democrats save the Iran deal (at least for the duration of his term).

I also noted that via the Fishbait Miller standard Democrats are doing their best to figure out who can be spared to vote “No” if it is necessary.

But there is one other wild card that might drive more democrats to support the President, and that a fellow named Bernie Sanders:

“Look, I’m not going to tell you that this is a perfect agreement … It’s so easy to be critical of an agreement which is not perfect,” he said during an interview with CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“But the United States has to negotiate with other countries. We have to negotiate with Iran. And the alternative of not reaching an agreement, you know what it is? It’s war. Do we really want another war, a war with Iran? An asymmetrical warfare that will take place all over this world, threaten American troops?”

While the Jewish Sanders qualified support will help the Whitehouse keep Democrats behind him, the fact that he is running is much more significant.

Sanders presidential race means that a large turnout of the farthest left of the democrat base, this is the group most likely to support Barack Obama’s Iran deal.

For a guy like Chuck Schumer that’s not a problem but what about a democrat in a normally safe seat?

In a year when progressive turnout is expected to be high a Democrat who opposes the president might have to worry about a primary challenge at a time when the electorate would be at its farthest left.

That, more than anything else is Obama’s ace in the hole.