One of the nice things about elections is they bring clarity, now that it’s clear that US policy is to be run by Barack Obama rather than Mitt Romney for the next four years apparently Israel decided it was time to take off the gloves:

After suffering through hundreds of rocket attacks coming from Gaza (more than 700 have struck Israel since the beginning of the year, and more than 120 since Saturday) earlier today IDF directed a precision attack on Ahmed Jabri, the head of Hamas’ military wing in the Gaza Strip.

Let’s go to the tape

I don’t tend to cheer these things as war is a bad business but I’m taken aback at some of the outrage here that was not. After all it’s not as if Hamas has hidden for a single moment of its existence that the destruction of Israel is its goal.

What’s really interesting is I don’t recall a single story about the rockets hitting Israel this week until Israel hit back, as Melanie Phillips put it.

Rocket attacks on Israelis are not news; Israeli military action to defend Israel against such attacks is. Suddenly, media indifference has been transformed into media hyperactivity. And in the eyes of the British media and foreign office Israel is at fault; astoundingly, it is apparently Israel which is responsible for inflaming the situation, not the Palestinians. Never mind the 120 rockets in four days or the 50 further rockets this evening, including 17 Grads fired at the city of Beersheva; or that since the beginning of 2011, 1,100 rocket have been fired on Israeli targets, 797 since the beginning of this year; or that a staggering 5274 rockets have been fired from Gaza at southern Israel since 2006

Of course England also has a large Muslim population that it doesn’t want to police so it has objected, with one notable exception:

British Foreign Secretary William Hague on Thursday denounced the barrage of rockets fired by Palestinian terror factions into Israel, saying “I utterly condemn rocket attacks from Gaza into southern Israel by Hamas and other armed groups.”

“Hamas bears principal responsibility for the current crisis,” Hague continued, adding that the rocket fire “creates an intolerable situation for Israeli civilians in southern Israel, who have the right to live without fear of attack from Gaza.”

And Israel may be doing less damage than people think:

Ed Morrissey tells us Egypt is a tad worried:

Egyptian intelligence reportedly tried to negotiate a ceasefire between the two sides a few days ago, after Hamas started firing rockets. Whether that was window dressing to disguise the fact that Hamas is coordinating with the Brotherhood on this or a genuine sign that Morsi et al. don’t want Hamas feeling too frisky just because their friends are in charge in Egypt now, who knows.

That’s interesting but I think it’s also a clue to why Israel decided to play twisted sister today.

I think it was to push the Arab world that might feel emboldened by the President re-election. I think this idea is to demonstrate his weakness.

Barack Obama is a lot of talk but it’s too soon to the election for him to reveal all his promised the Jewish Community aloud is BS. By taking care of business now Israel preempts him in the future and discredits him among his Arab allies who won’t soon forget what side he put himself on.

Two birds with one stone.

Additionally it checkmates Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood, they have to either act before they are ready by several years (and have their Military destroyed) or sit back and do nothing and be shown as feckless to the radical Islamists who back them.

Make that three stones.

But all of this comes at a risk, a regional war, coupled with a strike on Iran perhaps, and maybe Turkey taking advantage to go after Syria ostensibly to stop the slaughter but perhaps the first step in their return to the Middle East proper as an actual regional power.

But what am I talking about, yeah things look bad but we’ve got the bestest most pro-Israel president that the US has ever had to take care of us. The Media said so. There’s nothing to worry about. Obama’ll fix it…

…just like he did for the victims of Hurricane Sandy

As my day off ends (really a day and a half because I watched NO news on Sunday, odd to be the least informed person in the house) I see that the White House is claiming a mandate for Tax Increases:

In characteristic fashion, President Obama held a post-election “press conference” on Friday that didn’t involve him answering any questions. He just made pronouncements. And while there was a bit of conciliatory language sprinkled in, he was adamant that his narrow re-election victory means everyone must now submit to his theories about a “balanced approach” to deficit reduction.

Now I find this entire “mandate” argument a tad odd. Forgetting that we have a president winning by a smaller margin in re-election (not seen since the 3rd term of FDR) we have the same president, the same senate within a seat or two and the same control of the house (and not just by a seat or two either).

Maybe it’s just me, but it seems to me the American People have spoken and they said, “we’ll stand pat.”

But in the grand tradition of optics over action (Yeah Sandy is still Katrina on the Hudson but it’s dropped off the National Radar now that the election is won) there is a school of thought that suggests we should consider some tax increases.

For a for a long time Glenn Reynolds has pointed to a particular direction:

The movie excise tax was imposed in response to the high deficits after World War Two. Deficits are high again, and there’s already historical precedent. Of course, to keep up with technology, the tax should now apply to DVDs, downloadable movies, pay-per-view and the like. But in these financially perilous times, why should movie stars and studio moguls, with their yachts, swimming pools and private jets, not at least shoulder the burden they carried back in Harry Truman’s day — when, to be honest, movies were better anyway.

For extra fun, they could show pictures of David Geffen’s yacht and John Travolta’s personal Boeing 707 on the Senate floor. You want to tax fat cats? I gotcher “fat cats” right here! Repeal the Hollywood Tax Cuts!

Bill Jacobson has a suggestion for our liberal friends in College:

Revoke the tax deduction for contributions and their tax exempt status, make them pay local real estate taxes like the rest of us, maybe that will shut them up from demanding that taxes be raised on everyone else.

A reader has this suggestion:

A one time excise tax on the fair market value of the endowments of all the private foundations would work nicely. An to be fair, the rate should be low for the small guys and 90% for the behemoths like Ford and Carnegie.

and Human events has more suggestions:

Capping the mortgage interest deduction at $250,000, for example, would hurt those rich blue enclaves with high property values – 8 of the 10 richest counties in America voted for Barack Obama in 2012. Taxing trust funds and hoards of foundation money would hurt the Left, as outside of Hollywood, rich liberals are more likely to be sitting on piles of inherited assets, while conservative millionaires tend to be actively generating and re-investing income. Ending the federal tax deductions for state and local taxes – an idea prominently advocated by Newt Gingrich during the Republican primary – would end the practice of federal taxpayers subsidizing the government greed of those big-spending blue states. It’s actually a form of inter-state redistribution as it stands, so let’s do away with it.

I’m sure tax & money people can some up with more but the trick isn’t thinking them up, the trick is turning them into a bill and getting the word out before the left can counter.

These proposals should go straight to the American public with these proposals before going to the White House and let the Democrats explain to the people who they’ve told for years why we can’t raise taxes of these folks.

The Democrats have been telling us for years that if we only give a bit on tax increases “Obama’ll fix it”.

Let them prove it.

A very strange thing happened in during Mass today.

Just after the Gospel reading the priest got up to tell us the second collection (for which there was no envelope) to help relieve the suffering of the people devastated by Hurricane Sandy.

While I was delighted to hear that 95%+ of money that goes to Catholic Relief Services goes to actual relief, pretty much neck and neck with the a strong Jewish Charity I was very confused.

I know I saw Barack Obama walking with Chris Christie

I KNOW I saw the president promise to eliminate red tape when it came to helping people.

And if you were following the news as I was you couldn’t HELP but see over and over every single media outlet absolutely gushing over the handling of Hurricane Sandy by President Barack Obama to the point where according to MSNBC 4-10 voters told them Hurricane Sandy was a factor in their voting.

Yeah I know there is a whole body of work that seems to suggest that this is Katrina on the Hudson but we KNOW that’s not the case.

I’m pretty broke but given this Gospel reading (Mark 12:38-44):

In the course of his teaching he said, “Beware of the scribes, who like to go around in long robes and accept greetings in the marketplaces, seats of honor in synagogues, and places of honor at banquets. They devour the houses of widows and, as a pretext, recite lengthy prayers. They will receive a very severe condemnation.

He sat down opposite the treasury and observed how the crowd put money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. A poor widow also came and put in two small coins worth a few cents.

Calling his disciples to himself, he said to them, “Amen, I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all the other contributors to the treasury. For they have all contributed from their surplus wealth, but she, from her poverty, has contributed all she had, her whole livelihood.

…I still kicked into the collection even though despite what my pastor said, it certainly can’t be true that the need is there I KNOW Obama’ll fix it…

After all, if the Government is doing such a poor job taking care of people suffering, without power,  food, or shelter, particularly in the biggest city in the country, the caring honorable mainstream media would NEVER have pushed a false narrative of relief and recovery.

Would they?