Friday linkfest

1. Top ten calamities for which global warming was blamed. (via HotAir)

2. Get your Koran on your cell phone, courtesy of . . . an Israeli company?

3. Yankees offer bleacher seats for 25 cents for exhibition openers. Scalpers begin drooling immediately.

4. The only thing better than a huge foul-smelling flower is its Latin name. (via Ace)

5. Indicted lawyer was "the Houdini of impersonation and false documents." Bonus: I met the guy back in the early 1980s but haven't seen him since then.

Click here to read more . . .

Tuesday linkfest

1. Joe the Plumber is more concerned about Israel than two-thirds of American Jews. (via HotAir)

2. Ouch. "That Colin Powell. What a great judge of character."

3. A federal judge is caught having made a campaign contribution to Obama. She describes her occupation as government lawyer. Well, I suppose it's literally true, but can you say "misleading"?

4. Hillbuzz confident about Pennsylvania?

5. Headline of the day: "Near-nude man runs down street firing crackers from head." (via BOTWT)

6. Bonus from the previous link: A photo gallery called "The Joy of Streaking." Really.

7. Quotation of the day about the incident in #3 #5: "'He was new in town, I think,' Mr Annas said." Mr. Annas?

8. This is 7-1/2 years old, but it never loses its charm: "Hi-tech toilet swallows woman / Temporarily." Even with the qualifier it's pretty good.

8. With evil toilets on the loose, maybe this isn't such a problem: "Japanese officials fret about toilet shortage in event of big quake."

Click here to read more . . .

The Jews empty the shelves of Kool Aid

I've occasional tried writing seriously about Obama and the Jewish vote, but I hate serious, and anyway, there's only so much one can say. The Jews are going to be drinking gallons of Kool-Aid (TM) brand artificially flavored drink mix this election day.

Amir Taheri writes about a presentation by Jesse Jackson in the New York Post:

He promised "fundamental changes" in US foreign policy - saying America must "heal wounds" it has caused to other nations, revive its alliances and apologize for the "arrogance of the Bush administration."

The most important change would occur in the Middle East, where "decades of putting Israel's interests first" would end.

Jackson believes that, although "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" remain strong, they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

* * * * *
Jackson is especially critical of President Bush's approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

"Bush was so afraid of a snafu and of upsetting Israel that he gave the whole thing a miss," Jackson says. "Barack will change that," because, as long as the Palestinians haven't seen justice, the Middle East will "remain a source of danger to us all."

"Barack is determined to repair our relations with the world of Islam and Muslims," Jackson says. "Thanks to his background and ecumenical approach, he knows how Muslims feel while remaining committed to his own faith."

Well, it's really nice to know that the Jews not only put the interests of a foreign nation before their own but actually control American foreign policy as well. Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43 -- we controlled them all. If I had only known . . . there were some specific actions I would have asked for.

As Ed Morrissey at HotAir points out, the Obama campaign has distanced itself from Jackson, but one wonders, nevertheless, given some of Obama's foreign policy advisors and past associations.

It seems to me that there are three major possibilities:

1. Jackson reflects a dominant view in the Obama campaign but is letting the cat out of the bag a little early.

2. Jackson is saying this in response to Obama's efforts to solidify his Jewish support, in order to negate the doubts that Obama's base on the left may be feeling about pro-Israel statements from Obama.

3. Jackson is just a narcissistic free agent saying whatever he thinks will garner him some attention.

I'm leaning toward 3, but maybe I'm just having too much trouble contemplating the awful possibility that it's 1.

By the way, Susan Estrich sees my 3 and raises it to 4. (Jackson is actually trying to sabotage Obama's campaign, she says.)

But as I've suggested, it really doesn't matter with respect to the Jewish vote. The Jews are drinking the Kool Aid.

So it occurred to me, and it may have occurred to you, too, to ask whether, if Jews are going to drink the Kool Aid, does Kool Aid at least have a hechsher (kosher certification)? You'll be pleased to learn that the answer is YES, it does! It's certified by OK.




I'm sure Jesse Jackson would approve.

UPDATE (10/16): Now the Jews are holding their ears and shouting "La, la, la, la, la!!!" Two Obama representatives have backed out of debates with representatives of the Republican Jewish Coalition. From Matt Brooks, executive director of the RJC: "We find it a curious paradox that Obama would engage Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad without preconditions, but the Obama campaign will not engage the RJC."

Click here to read more . . .

I'm still here

I'm still here, but I've been quiet for the past couple of days because of (a) work; (b) a computer that's uncooperative, if not outright hostile; and (c) a bout of weltschmertz.

So meanwhile, I invite you to do the following:

1. Consider my proposed new benchmark for the Jewish vote, written in November 2004. Am I way off base?

2. Look at the speech Sarah Palin would have given at the anti-Ahmadinejad rally, had she not been unceremoniously "disinvited," and tell me how much the Jewish Democrats have harmed the cause of American Jews and Israel, using a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is not at all and 10 is utterly and irreparably.

3. Read this article ("Clinton: 'I get why Palin is hot'") and watch this clip at HotAir. Then tell me whether Bill Clinton has read my most recent photo comic or, alternatively, whether his behavior is so obvious that I had little trouble getting it down to the last, er, electoral vote.

Click here to read more . . .

Wednesday linkfest

After I do a long photo comic, like the one I posted on Monday (Bill Clinton agrees to campaign for Obama), it's hard to get back to normal posts. Unlike most of the garbage I post here, photo comics take a long time, and the hardest part is working out the text, not doing the voice bubbles, which can be done in an hour or two.

So I'm going to coast a little longer by giving you some links I've been accumulating for the past several weeks.

1. This is actually not a link, but I'm including it, anyway. The son of our friends, a good friend of my son, is in Taiwan, where he applied for a scooter license. Among the questions on the exam were these:

1. When a motorcyclist is not happy, usually he/she: (1) is emotionless (2) is not compassionate (3) is angry.

2. Time for honking, each time is: (1) within 2 seconds (2) within 1 second (3) within half a second.

3. Motorcyclist's clothing: (1) is free (2) slippers are ok (3) must be clean.

Then, there were a bunch of signs with Chinese on them, and he had to guess what they meant.

2. No linkfest would be complete without a link to a post about an incinerating toilet. Be sure to watch the video at the company's website. No butt hair was singed in the preparation of the video. Bonus: Also at InventorSpot: Russian scientist solves problem of smelly feet.

3. We all hate grammar ignoramuses, and some of us are annoyed by typos, but few of us engage in vandalism over them. (via How Appealing)

4. A reader at Instapundit creates a political ad about the meltdown at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

5. We'll have to take Obama's criticism of a McCain ad on comprehensive sex education for kindergarteners with a grain of salt.

6. Is Obama too tight with his teleprompter? (hat tip: fee simple)

7. A follow-up by Steven Plaut related to Soccer Dad's post below on Michelle Obama's "rabbi" relative.

8. A columnist at Haaretz is scared to death of Sarah Palin. But the Republican Jewish Coalition flips Congressman Robert Wexler's idiotic linking of Palin with Pat Buchanan and shows that Buchanan's views on Israel are like Obama's.

9. "Tryst turns into $50K robbery for RNC delegate." Plus, quotation of the day: "'As a single man, I was flattered by the attention of a beautiful woman who introduced herself to me. I used poor judgment. If there is any good that can come from this humiliation, it is to caution others that date rape happens to men, too,' he said."

Click here to read more . . .

From the Pillage Idiot "Spam Period"

In Peter Schickele's hilarious biography of P.D.Q. Bach, the author divides the composer's work into three periods -- the "Initial Plunge," the "Soused Period," and "Contrition."

I thought it was the least I could do to create a period for myself called the "Spam Period," the roughly 48-hour period when Pillage Idiot was shut down by Blogger as a potential spam blog. I'm going to post some junk I was unable to post during that period. And I'd like to make it clear that I have not yet reached "contrition," if I ever do.

Kool-Aid party over at Rabbi Jack Moline's place

I'm relieved to see that nothing, nothing can shake the Jews out of their politika mi-sinai (my bastardized Hebrew approximately meaning "politics given at Mount Sinai"). According to the Washington Jewish Week, Northern Virginia Jews are mobilizing to support Obama. Isn't that special?

Rabbi Moline is actually a pretty sensible guy in general (but see), so it's even worse for him to be trying to sell undecided Jews like this:

Moline assured his listeners that Obama's record on Israel is "stellar," and that there is "nothing in the senator's record to indicate that he would make any other concessions than the current president" would make.

Questions about Obama's support for Israel are a cover, Moline said, for underlying prejudice.

"We have to own up to the prejudice in our own community. There are plenty of people who say they're ambivalent about him because he's black, he has a middle name that sounds like the deposed president of Iraq, that he's the son of a single mother," Moline told the gathering. "Those prejudices in our community generally don't get spoken. They get expressed in questions about Israel."

I guess Rabbi Moline thinks Jews can't legitimately be concerned about Obama's associations with folks like Rashid Khalidi or his 20-year association with Jeremiah Wright, whom he disowned for calculating political reasons, or his association with William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, two domestic terrorists, whom he's never disowned, or an ever-emerging cast of characters. No, it's got to be prejudice, because what right-thinking Jewish person could not want to place hope in someone like him? Did the Children of Israel doubt Moses himself? And when the Torah said (Deut. 34:10), v'lo kam navi od b'yisrael k'moshe, could it possibly have meant to exclude Obama?

In all seriousness, I'm sure that when Obama says he supports Israel, he's as sincere as he is about anything. But really, why should Jews who are concerned about Israel not have the right to doubt a guy who wants to scale back American power? Without American power, Israel is doomed, no matter what nice things a political candidate says.

But it sure is easy to dismiss the concerns that some Jews have about him as purely based on prejudice. Thanks a bunch, Rabbi Moline.

Economics 101 -- tax policy

I thought everyone knew that when you cut taxes your revenue dropped and vice versa, so that when you doubled taxes, your revenue would double. It's called "static revenue analysis."

Apparently not.

The Washington Post reports: "Cigarette sales have dropped by nearly 25 percent in Maryland since the state's tobacco tax doubled in January, as sticker shock apparently has curtailed some residents' smoking and sent others across the border for better deals."

And of course, the folks who think government exists to change human behavior often have a totalitarian mentality -- when people react rationally to your policies, you try to squash them:

Maryland law seeks to limit out-of-state cigarette purchases. It is illegal for Maryland residents to be in possession of more than two packs of cigarettes lacking stamps showing that taxes were paid in the state.

We're not crashing into people's homes to see if they've purchased a pack or two more than they should out of the state, but we have a very aggressive effort concentrated on larger smugglers," said Joseph Shapiro, a spokesman for the Maryland Comptroller's Office.

So this is the way it works: Try to increase revenue by raising cigarette taxes. People reduce smoking or shop elsewhere. Tax revenues go down. So you call these smokers smugglers and threaten prosecution. Brilliant.

Miscellaneous

Pillage Idiot appears 4,000 years ago in Sumer: "Flatulence joke is world's oldest"

Say what you want about the President, but he's a really decent guy: The Party Crasher

Click here to read more . . .

Obama and the condo wars

Right after the 2004 presidential election, I wrote a piece that discussed the fact that a surprising number of Jews seemed to have voted for Bush but were keeping quiet about it. It was called "The hidden Jewish vote."

An article in the New York Times today (hat tip: Son of the Right Hand) makes me wonder whether things are getting even more complicated this year. Quoting a number of older Jewish voters in Florida, the article talks about the problems Obama may have with these people, especially because of fears about his views on Israel.

Ace is really peeved about it, by the way. He makes the valid point that the article minimizes the Jewish voters' concerns about Obama's foreign policy and blames the negative views toward Obama on racism and false rumors about him. I would not deny, of course, that there are some older Jews who hold unfair negative opinions of blacks. But in fairness to them, it's based on fear and the generalization of particular experiences, rather than on conventional hatred. The man in the article whose mother was "mugged and beaten by a black assailant" is a good example. (I'm not trying to explain it away, just to explain it.)

But I look at the article through a different lens.

If you read the piece I wrote on the hidden Jewish vote, you'll see a discussion of what Judith Weiss called "the condo wars." In 2004, this same group of older Jewish voters was fighting with each other, and the hostility directed at Bush voters was boiling over. Some of these Bush voters decided to shut up about it to avoid the hostility.

What interested me about today's article is that these older Jewish Floridians were more willing to discuss in public the possibility that they would commit heresy by voting for the Republican. And one line, directed by one woman at her daughter, an Obama supporter is even more interesting:

“Aunt Claudie will kill you!” hissed her mother, Linda Poznak, 47, who said she would vote for Mr. McCain.

So now we have family pressure to vote for a Republican? Wow! It's all the more surprising, because the Democrat is (or likely will be) a black man. Bradley Effect, anyone?

I suspect, though, when all is said and done in November, most of these folks will vote for Obama. It's just too difficult for them to change.

The Times article concludes by mentioning their congressman Robert Wexler's vow to "convert voters one mah-jongg table at a time." Wexler is an Obama supporter. But the article finishes on a note that's too optimistic for me: "Still, Mr. Wexler admits, he has not yet been able to persuade his in-laws to vote for Mr. Obama."

It doesn't say they're supporting McCain, just that they're not supporting Obama.

UPDATE: Soccer Dad shares Ace's annoyance.

Click here to read more . . .

Deathright Palestine

Still in search of an original idea -- about anything -- the Palestinians have decided to adapt the concept of Birthright Israel, which was created "to send thousands of young Jewish adults from all over the world to Israel as a gift in order to diminish the growing division between Israel and Jewish communities around the world; to strengthen the sense of solidarity among world Jewry; and to strengthen participants' personal Jewish identity and connection to the Jewish people."

So now we have the Birthright Palestine program (hat tip: Son of the Right Hand), from an organization that modestly hopes to repeal the 1948 borders -- that is, to eliminate the entire State of Israel. Or should I say the "State of Israel"? Number 3 in the 10 reasons for the program is this:

Returning as a Means of Resistance: David Ben Gurion, Zionist pioneer and the founder of ‘Israel’, said in 1949, “We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinians] never do return… The old will die and the young will forget.” Thus, simply coming back to visit the land that your parents or grandparents were forced to flee from, is a form of active non‐violent resistance against the illegal Israeli occupation. This is because this simple act opposes everything that the ‘State of Israel’ was founded on (the idea to ethnically cleanse the Holy Land/Palestine of all Arabs, so as to create a purely Jewish State).

And as the Jerusalem Post notes, "the program does not support a two-state solution, offering trips to 'all of historic Palestine, which includes both the 1967 territories (West Bank, Gaza Strip - OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territories]) and [the] 1948 territories, which some people refer to as "Israel."'"

Yes, some people refer to it as "Israel." And some people refer to this program as "Deathright Palestine." Thomas Friedman could not be reached for comment.



More from Daled Amos over at Soccer Dad.

UPDATE (3/6): Well, that didn't take long to prove my case.

Click here to read more . . .

Obama and the Jews

I've been getting a bunch of visitors lately through searches for phrases like "Obama and the Jews." But I've never written on the subject before, and my visitors have ended up at one or another of my three gag posts called "If Barack Obama were Jewish, instead of the second coming of Jesus." The gag is that a Jewish Obama is shouting into his cell phone, either at his obviously difficult mother or, in one case, at Bill Clinton. Ha, ha. Get it?

But the issue of Obama's potential relationship with Jewish voters seems to be a very hot topic these days. An article in the Washington Post on Thursday. An article in the New York Times on Saturday. Tim Russert asked Obama at a recent debate what he thought of Louis Farrakhan's endorsement of him. Obama has met with Jewish leaders (whatever that means) in Cleveland.

Ed Lasky has two articles going through the concerns that Jews might have with Obama and the connections he has with anti-Israel policy-makers. Both are very much worth reading.

But I'd like to try to address this issue a different way. When I started Pillage Idiot, I wrote fairly often about the Jewish vote. For instance, I tried to explain why Jews are overwhelmingly liberal; why we need a new benchmark for the Jewish vote; and why the exit polls in the 2004 election did not accurately measure the Jewish vote for Bush.

Jews are predominantly liberal politically, but they are conservative in the sense that they do not adapt easily to political change. The political landscape has changed to the point that the political left, where so many Jews reside, is the current locus of not only radical anti-Israel views but outright anti-semitism. (Surprise! I've written about this, too.)

Jews aren't likely to budge, however. So I'd like to make two very basic points here, directed to my fellow Jews. I'm going to keep the points very simple, so that a people suffering from ideological vapor lock can understand them.

1. By and large, politicians of both political parties are going to be essentially friendly toward Israel. Sure, there are exceptions -- James Moran, Jimmy Carter, people like that -- but mostly, politicians will say they support Israel and will express generally reassuring statements about it. Cynical though I may be, I tend to accept these declarations of support as genuine. In a superficial sense, these politicians do indeed support Israel. And in this superficial sense, I have yet to see any identifiable difference between Hillary and Obama.

But this superficial support is not terribly relevant, and it should not be the basis of the decision of an individual Jew concerned about Israel.

2. Israel's security does not depend on superficial support from American politicians. It depends on American power. A strong America indirectly benefits Israel. A weak America, an America that that is constantly running away from confrontation, indirectly hurts Israel. (It directly hurts America, but that's a topic for another day.)

Think of it this way: The United States has a security umbrella that protects itself and its allies. Israel benefits from the American umbrella. If the United States lowers its umbrella, Israel's security suffers. And as far as I'm concerned, both Hillary and Obama will lower the American umbrella. We can quibble about how far each will lower it -- I tend to think Hillary is distinctly better on national security, and if I were a Democrat, I would choose her over him -- but both of them will lower it. If your vote turns at all on the security of Israel, it's important to focus on this point, and not on the candidates' superficial friendliness to Israel or on who their advisors may be.

I look at the Jewish vote, and I see consistent support for politicians who rail against the use of American power, who want to scale back American presence overseas, and who even want to cut the military itself. Fine. If that's your world view, sei gesund, but then don't obsess over Obama's anti-Israel advisors, because they really don't matter. What matters is their approach to American security.

In a world in which the United States refuses to act unilaterally if necessary, in which it feels it should get the approval not only of our sometime allies but also of the whole run of dictatorships that constitute the United Nations, in which it tries to get other countries to like us by withdrawing suddenly from a war that it has a good chance of winning, Israel will have precious little security.

If you support candidates who have that world view, don't blame Zbigniew Brzezinski or Anthony Lake. Blame yourself.

Click here to read more . . .

Monday evening linkfest

I've been collecting items that don't necessarily warrant their own post, and I'm going to dump them all here. Don't thank me. It's for your own good.

1. Have you ever thought to yourself, "Sure, Barack Obama is a well groomed and articulate young Negro, but what has the gentleman done for me?" Think no longer. Barack Obama is your new bicycle. Don't forget to keep clicking once you get there. (via Ace)

2. I'll tell you, though, what Barack Obama's done for a little townhouse in Greenwich Village that disappeared one day in 1970. Undoubtedly out of compassion for their loss, Obama has befriended some of the folks in the Weathermen unit with the guys who blew it up.

3. Speaking of Obama, an Obama supporter was choking his Hillary-supporting brother-in-law, who responded by stabbing the Obama supporter. Did you understand that? No? Well, read this, then. (via JammieWearingFool, via HotAir) And here's the punch line from the article: "On a side note: Voter registration records reveal that Ortiz, who supports Clinton, is registered Republican." Although that doesn't mean a heck of a lot these days.

4. Nobody but nobody gives Governor O'Malley credit for dealing with the crime problem other than the superannuated WaPo columnist David Broder. Maryland Conservatarian has got the goods.

5. Martin Kramer has great news for you if you enjoy being majorly depressed about the state of academics at certain Ivy League universities located in Morningside Heights. Amnon Rubinstein, a visiting Israeli professor has written a column about his time at Columbia. In Kramer's words: "Rubinstein discovered that the only truly active friends of Israel on campus were orthodox Jewish students. For him, a self-avowed secular humanist, it came as crushing disappointment that like-minded Israelis weren't standing up." Disappointment, yes; surprise, no. As Kramer points out, a professorship of Israel studies was set up in 2005, but the search committee included two notoriously anti-Israel professors. The result is that an Israeli was hired who "isn't a hard-left post-Zionist, but [is] far enough left to have signed a May 2002 open letter by some Israeli faculty" supporting Israelis who refused to serve as soldiers in the West Bank and Gaza.

6. On the lighter side, if The Graduate were being produced today by the U.N., it would not be "plastic" but rather "bugs." The headline says it all: "U.N. Conference Promotes Insect-Eating for Everyone From Famine Victims to Astronauts." (via Fark)

7. For those of you who are afraid to undergo a colonoscopy, please read this important public service announcement. From Dave Barry. (also via Fark) This will ease the fear, or at least keep you laughing about it. Regarding the "prep" -- that stuff you're supposed to drink to clean out your colon -- Barry writes: "The instructions for MoviPrep, clearly written by somebody with a great sense of humor, state that after you drink it, 'a loose watery bowel movement may result.' This is kind of like saying that after you jump off your roof, you may experience contact with the ground."

8. How do you know if your newspaper is on life support? One answer is: The entire 8-page sports section has two quarter-page ads, and they're both for non-medical remedies for erectile dysfunction. And I use the word "remedies" loosely. (via Ace)

9. Related: How do you know if your country is on life support? Answer: Your hospitals buy unisex underwear for the patients: "Male and female patients admitted to Swedish hospitals will soon be required to wear the same underwear." But there's a silver lining to these underwear. Now, some moron on MTV can ask Hillary this question: "Boxers or briefs?"

Click here to read more . . .

Up in the air

If you're an Israeli pilot in the air, you've got a lot to worry about. But maybe you're also thinking of this or this or this.

Which leads to the question why "Israeli fighter pilots may soon be receiving Viagra-style pills to help them to perform better at greater heights, according to a study by military officials released yesterday."

Apparently, a study of mountain climbers at high altitudes found that the substance found in various E.D. drugs helped fight fatigue and dizziness. Keeping the pilots up in the air. You can even use it on Passover with the right preparations.

(hat tip: fee simple)

Click here to read more . . .

Ron Paul chats with his cocker spaniel

"Doctor Paul": It really isn't very difficult to be President.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": All you have to do is read the Constitution.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": And Article II, which establishes the powers of the President, is very short.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Like only four short sections. There really isn't much to know.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Because the President has very few actual powers.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": I mean, look, he gets to "give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient" and to "receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers."

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": That's swell. But what really interests me about the position is to be able to "Commission all the Officers of the United States."

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": This President reads way too much into Article II. He thinks that when it says, "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America," it gives him all sorts of warmaking powers.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": That's plain wrong. All you have to do is read the Constitution!

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": I'm not even sure this President really believes any of what he says, anyway.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": He's just been getting brainwashed by a bunch of Zionist neocon likudnik Straussians who are loyal to a certain foreign power that doesn't have our best interests at heart.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": I have never -- never -- taken one cent from the Israel Lobby, and I will never come under their influence when I'm President.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Well, maybe if I need a good doctor.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Because being an OB/GYN is fine. But it's hard to deliver your own babies.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Though it's been my experience that you should make sure to have a Christian doctor in the room at all times when you're being treated by a Zionist doctor.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Just in case, I mean.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": Because if he knows I won't give a dollar to Israel in foreign aid, you never know just where he might start cutting away.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": And I want to be in top health on January 20, 2009, when I take my oath of office.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul": So I can do the best possible job of commissioning the officers of the United States.

Cocker Spaniel:

"Doctor Paul":

Cocker Spaniel: That's all well and good, but would you mind getting me one of those rawhide bagels. Unless that's, like, a little too Zionist likudnik for you. Hmmmmm?

***********

UPDATE (10/20): Check the comments. After I justify my post against criticism, a Ron Paul supporter comes by to prove my case. Which, I guess, is not surprising. For the latest: Video: Ron Paul supporters getting creepier by the minute (HotAir).

Oh, and I suppose for completeness I ought to link to my two previous Ron Paul posts:

Ron Paul goes to the post office

The reverse of love

UPDATE (10/23): Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but this is troubling: Ron Paul supporters advertising on Stormfront now? (HotAir) Yeah, I know. You can't blame him for his supporters, blah blah blah.

UPDATE (11/15): Cocker spaniel, part 2

Click here to read more . . .

A new form of hasbarah?

And speaking of immaturity featuring women...

When I first heard that there was a ruckus over an invitation issued by the Israeli consulate in New York with a photo of a scantily clad Miss Israel 2004, Gal Gadot, I assumed that the ruckus involved the ultra-orthodox.

Wrong. It was the feminists: "'It's unfortunate that the Israeli consulate chose to emphasize Israel's relevance with a portrait of a half-naked woman, instead of with one of women of substance and accomplishments,' [a female Knesset member] told Yediot Achronoth."

OK, I know you came here looking for the photo, so let's get that out of the way. [UPDATE: In case that one's down, try this.]

The consulate's invitation, by the way, is to an event with the men's magazine Maxim, which will feature in its July 2007 issue "The Women of the Israel Defense Forces." I'm sure it will be very tasteful.

Now, if you can believe this, and I have absolutely no reason to doubt it, then maybe the feminists have a little bit of a grievance here:

"Maxim was approached by the Israeli consulate to be a part of reshaping Israel's public image, specifically because of our unmatched mainstream reach to men aged 18 to 35," the magazine said in a statement. "We are pleased with the result of our work together."

I don't know. I suspect men aged 18 to 35 would go more for this.

Why go to Maxim, though, if you can have a serious photographer take photos of the women of the IDF? This photo shoot, by Rachel Papo, is completely tasteful. (via Kesher Talk)

I guess working with Maxim is a new form of hasbarah.

UPDATE: A commenter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs links to the official (or so it says) blog of the State of Israel.

Click here to read more . . .

The friend of my friend is my enemy

American Jews who care about Israel constantly face certain unpleasant realities.

For one thing, Jews are at most 2% of the American population, probably less -- a situation that (contrary to the delusions of the "Israel Lobby" conspiratorialists) gives them only a modest influence on American policy. For another, large sectors of the Jews' traditional alliance of liberal to leftist groups are harshly anti-Israel.

This situation leaves Jews with a question: When politically conservative, religious Christians offer their support for Israel, should Jews accept it?

Right now, you're probably thinking "Duh!" because that's the clear answer. Of course Jews should accept it. We don't have a lot of friends, and there's little doubt that conservative Christians truly support Israel. Menachem Begin understood this and was more than happy to greet Christian support with open arms.

But some Jews are morons.

Let me put this a little less provocatively: Some Jews think their left-wing political views are far more important than support for Israel.

In the current Washington Jewish Week, Rabbi Amy Schwartzman of Temple Rodef Shalom in Falls Church, makes precisely such an argument against accepting conservative Christian support for Israel.

You've heard the saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend?" Well, Rabbi Schwartzman flips that saying around and argues, "The friend of my friend is my enemy."

She writes: "I was deeply disturbed to learn that my rabbinic colleagues recently joined the Rev. Jim Hutchens, regional director of Christians United for Israel, at their gala event." Calling these folks "extreme right-wing Christians" and "extremist fundamentalists," she says that by working with them to support Israel, we are legitimating them somehow:

When we work with these people, we legitimize them as political players, strengthening their impact on agendas we find anathema -- from their opposition to First Amendment's guarantees of religious freedom to their callous opposition to programs most critically needed by the poorest among us.

The only issue on which we agree with CUFI's extremist fundamentalists is our shared support of Israel. They spend most of their time working hard to oppose the priorities and interests of the majority of American Jews.

Let me restate her argument. Although conservative Christians support Israel, that support pales in comparison with their opposition -- their "callous" opposition -- to poverty programs that have been tried for decades and failed. (Well, at least she didn't mention abortion rights, which is usually the top "Jewish" issue for the Left.)

Quickly, her three other arguments. One, Christians proselytize. "Teenagers regularly share with me the pain they experience when their peers from the youth-arm of the extreme religious right question their religious legitimacy and challenge their beliefs." Is she serious? Anyone who's religious constantly has his beliefs challenged by atheists. Why not by Christians? Instead of encouraging these kids to whine, she should be teaching them to defend their religious beliefs, assuming they have any. At a minimum, they should learn to say "No" politely to any attempt at proselytizing.

Two, conservative pro-Israel Christians are hostile to Muslims. I guess it's OK to call Christians extremists but not Muslims.

Three, my personal favorite:

Most mainstream Christians, our neighbors and colleagues whose support for Israel we are striving to secure, reject the leaders of CUFI. They see their ministers as charlatans. We risk our relationship with those potential religious partners when we associate with Rev. Hutchens and his ilk.

"Mainstream Christians" are decidedly anti-Israel. Rabbi Schwartzman is saying that we should forsake people who support us in order to try to gain support from people who hate us. The perfect response to this insanity comes from Rabbi Jack Moline of Congregation Agudas Achim in Alexandria (with whom I often disagree). In counterpoint, Rabbi Moline writes:

Politically, I find the most in common with mainline Protestants. But they are unreliable advocates for a safe and secure Israel. And for me, Israel is a bottom line issue.

He tells this story:

For many years, I have been positively engaged with the Episcopal Church in both Virginia and D.C. I was asked to sit on a panel at the Washington National Cathedral with then Middle East Bishop Riah H Abu El-Assal. His assertion, as I called for cooperation, that "Jesus hung on the cross for only three days; the Palestinians have hung there for 40 years" was about as anti-Semitic a remark as I had ever heard. It was greeted by applause from the crowd and silence from my hosts.

In contrast with these left-wing Christians, Rabbi Moline has found unshakable support on the right:

I am grateful for the unflinching support that many in the evangelical community have offered the state of Israel. And I am humbled to discover that many of my prejudices about these devoted Christians are wrong.

That is exactly how Jews should feel in these circumstances. It's mind-boggling that we're even having this debate.

(Included in Haveil Havalim #119.)

Click here to read more . . .

Incoming!

And as long as we're in photoshop mode, here's my take on a photo, the authenticity of has been debated over the past few days. Background is here. Charles Johnson says the photo is real but has his own spoof, anyway.

Click here to read more . . .

Judith fisks Robert Novak so you don't have to

At Kesher Talk, Judith Weiss fisks Robert Novak's latest asininity on Israel. Take it away, Judith!

Click here to read more . . .