Sarah Palin on Israel
Republican Presidential candidate John McCain selected Alaska governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate on Friday. Palin, who has high approval ratings and a reputation for having cleaned up her state's government, is the first woman nominated for a national ticket by the Republican party.
Sources in Alaska say that Palin is very strongly pro-Israel.
"The Jewish community should be very excited that Sarah was selected. She has been very conscious of the Jewish community here in Alaska and now with the opportunity of her new position, she'll have the opportunity to look at the Jewish community globally," said Alaskan Republican Jewish Coalition member Terry Gorlick, who knows Palin well and has worked with her on several issues.
"Sarah's absolutely pro-Israel," he said, referring to conversations with her and comments she's made about Israel's security and its importance to the United States. He noted that as governor she signed a resolution honoring Israel for its 60th birthday.
Alaska¹s AIPAC chairman, David Gottstein, said that he had spoken to the governor about arranging a trip to Israel, but scheduling conflicts had kept it from happening to date.
"She has ties and interests in the Holy Land," said Gottstein, and also described her as someone who could be effective across party lines, noting that he worked well with her despite being a Democrat.
Ironically, the National Jewish Democratic Coalition rushed to attack Palin for her lack of foreign policy experience.
But the National Jewish Democratic Coalition used the fact that Palin hasn't been to Israel to attack her familiarity with the country and the crucial foreign policy issues connected to the region.
"In Governor Sarah Palin, McCain chooses a running mate with zero foreign policy experience," said NJDC executive director Ira Forman.
"For a party which claims it is trying to reach out to the Jewish community, McCain's pick is particularly strange. Prior to today's selection Palin apparently has never spoken publicly about Israel."
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! The Republican Jewish Coalition, and the local Lubavitch Rabbi (who is one of a handful of Orthodox Rabbis in Alaska) both came out strongly in favor of Palin.
"Senator Lieberman and Representative Cantor would also have been excellent choices," said RJC spokeswoman Suzanne Kurtz, but stressed that McCain¹s nominee was just as good.
"They¹ll make a great team," she said.
The RJC put out a statement on Friday saying that, "Palin has a proven track record of experienced and principled leadership. Palin has been a leader on the critical issue of energy independence and lessening our need to buy oil from nations not sharing America and Israel's foreign policy interests."
And she received praise from other Jewish quarters, including from Anchorage Chabad Rabbi Yosef Greenberg. He recalled Palin's support for a Jewish museum he is building there and her hora lessons at the annual Jewish gala she has attended the last two years.
He also spoke of her reaction to giving birth to a child with special needs.
"She said, God doesn¹t give you something you can't handle," he said. "It was straight out of the Lubavitch book."
Finally, I received the following in an email just before the Sabbath yesterday from a friend who is the country coordinator for Israel for the McCain campaign:
The Chicago Tribune and Seattle Times report that Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska has been selected as the GOP running mate, and has departed Juneau in a private jet for announcement in Akron, Ohio later today with McCain.
"Sarah Baraccuda" was born in Idaho, but moved to Alaska as a young child. Her father taught science and math in High Schools. She was the star point guard on the state womens basketball championship team, earning her nickname to this day, hitting the winning shot with a broken bone but refusing to leave the championship game. She returned to the Lower 48 for college, graduating in Political Science and Journalism from University of Idaho.
She is a first term Governor. She met her husband, a native Inuit (eskimo in non-PC parlance) while spending the summer as a commercial fisherman. She claims to have broken three fingers that summer on the boat, but pulled in her Big Fish by summer's end. Husband continues as an Alaskan commercial fisherman to this day. The Palins have five children, eldest son serving in Iraq. Palin is a founding member of Feminists for Life. When informed by her OBY/GYN that her fifth child was going to be Down's Syndrome she refused to abort, and regularly quips "so he has an extra chromosome. Who is to define what is perfect and correct but God?"
Palin has proven a true maverick in cleaning up Alaskan environmental issues, often at the expense of major corporations. Like McCain, she is considered part of the West Coast political leadership within the GOP and Washington, as opposed to Clinton and Obama, considered very Eastern Ivy League. Both GOP candidates have sons on active duty in Iraq.
The editorial comments are my friend's and not the campaign's.
And as Boker Tov Boulder points out, Sarah Palin is no Dick Cheney.
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 11:29 PM
Be the first to rate this [?]
You might like:
Passages 2009: Notable lives lost this year (USATODAY.com in Life)
Sarah Palin redux (this site)
Sarah Palin and Israel (this site)
Sabbath music video (this site)
(Selected for you by a sponsor )
4 comments:
At 3:01 AM, Orde said...
Oh yeah, very pro-Israel, her church background is same as mine. Not that replacement theology crap. Nor is it the lukewarm Christianity-lite so common today that's basically pop psychology w/a few proof text verses thrown in.
At 9:50 PM, NormanF said...
When you consider most American Jews are more liberal than they are Jewish, its amazing America does support Israel as much as she does. Most of the support for Israel comes from non-Jews!
At 10:19 PM, HCFPINMA said...
Sarah palin is a true Evangelical.
Based on her faith she belives to defend israel and to be pro-life and pro-Israel!
Her recent comments cleary provs that"
Palin said that" It was God'd task to send troops to Iraq!"
She siad that because she belives Israel needs to be protected in the Middle East!
I am Jewish , i AM VERY PLEASED WITH PALIN
At 7:51 PM, Letitfail said...
Dummies,Sarah Palin is Jewish. Both her parents were born in Lithuania,family name is Sheigam. Her grandparents are buried in a Jewish Cemetery in Lithuania. Sarah has an Israeli flag on her governor's desk. Can't get more Yiddish than than.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
54 Dem US reps and J Street hurt Israel again
Serious Words, Serious Consequences
by Matthew Brooks, Executive Director, Republican Jewish Coalition
The 54 Democrat members of Congress (no Republicans) who signed the January 21, 2010 letter to President Barack Obama initiated by Reps. Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Keith Ellison (D-MN) presumably wanted to make a thoughtful, serious statement of concern and a specific request for action. They were concerned for the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza and their request was that American government pressure be brought to bear on Israel to ease the restrictions on Israel's border with Gaza.
The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) took the letter and its words seriously. We saw that the 'Gaza 54' called for the loosening of security measures that Israel put into place to stop terrorism and reduce the ability of Hamas to launch attacks on Israel. The letter acknowledged that "the Israeli government has imposed restrictions on Gaza out of a legitimate and keenly felt fear of continued terrorist action by Hamas and other militant groups." But the congressmen did not make any mention of the potential consequences for Israel, or what alternate measures would provide equal protection for Israel's citizens against attacks initiated from Gaza.
The letter simply asserted, without foundation, that: "Easing the blockade (sic) on Gaza will not only improve the conditions on the ground for Gaza's civilian population, but will also undermine the tunnel economy which has strengthened Hamas... Most importantly, lifting these restrictions will give civilians in Gaza a tangible sense that diplomacy can be an effective tool for bettering their conditions. Your Administration's overarching Middle East peace efforts will benefit Israel, the Palestinians, and the entire region."
One in five Democrats in Congress signed a letter asking the president to pressure Israel to take unilateral actions that its leaders believe would undermine its security, with no concomitant expectation of concrete action on the Palestinian side to assure the safety of Israeli citizens. They are willing to bet that if American diplomacy forces Israel to make "tangible" changes to its policies, that will somehow "benefit Israel" in the long run.
This is at best, naïve. Israel can't afford to relax its security measures just because someone in the US says it will all be okay. Its enemies' commitment to its destruction has not waned. Loosening the "blockade" will not persuade Hamas to change its goals nor deter it from attacking.
THE DEMOCRATS' letter effectively demonstrates a mind-set all too typical of the Left, which we are seeing increasingly in more "mainstream" discourse: that Israel is doing wrong, Israel must make concessions, Israel is not acting morally except when it gives in. Unfortunately, history teaches us that appeasement leads to more violence, not less. The fact that so many Democrats signed the letter is troubling in and of itself.
The RJC (generously) called the letter signers "misguided." Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) agrees, telling The Jerusalem Post's Shmuel Rosner in a recent interview that the Gaza 54 are "misinformed" legislators.
The RJC decided to take action because we were troubled that 54 Democratic congressmen would call on the president to pressure Israel in this way. We asked our members to express their view on the letter. Within hours, a strong grassroots showing from across the country had signed the petition on our web site, calling for the letter signers to "take a firm stand against terrorism by disassociating yourself from this dangerous letter and upholding America's commitment to Israel's security in the future."
There are simple facts missing from the Gaza 54 letter about Israel's actions to help the residents of Gaza. The same facts were missing from remarks by one of the 54, Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA), who last week told students in Gaza that the US should bring in ships to the coast to break the Israeli "blockade" on the Gaza Strip.
As RJC wrote in our own letter to President Obama, asking him to repudiate Baird's remarks: Egypt also has a blockade of Gaza in place and is constructing a wall, similar to Israel's, to stop the smuggling of people and weapons across its border with Gaza; Israel allows huge quantities of food, medicine, and other humanitarian supplies into Gaza each day; Israel has prohibited only building supplies from coming into Gaza, to prevent them from being diverted by Hamas to military use. Israel has taken necessary and justifiable steps to stop terrorism originating from Hamas-controlled Gaza.
THE TRUTH is that the Palestinians are victims of their leaders and of their choices. For decades they have been taught to hate Israel (and Jews), to demand retribution and reparations, and to never compromise - by leaders who pocketed the funds meant to help them, corrupted the political system meant to lead them, and used them as foot soldiers against a reluctant enemy, Israel. Sadly, the lessons of hatred have been well-learned. Palestinian voters chose Hamas in the election of January 2006, giving them 74 of the 132 parliamentary seats and leading to the June 2007 Hamas coup in Gaza that split the Palestinian proto-polity in two. Afterward, hundreds of rockets were launched from within Gaza. The "blockade" of Gaza is a direct result of all these events.
The 54 Democrats who wrote to President Obama should understand this history and the Israeli security measures required to guarantee Israel's continued existence and safety. They paid lip service to Israel's security needs, but without confronting the hard question, which Israel faces daily, of how to keep Israeli citizens safe.
Lacking that important element, the letter was just another outrageous political attack on Israel and it deserved the condemnation of RJC and other friends of Israel. We stand by our characterization of the letter and by our statements about it.
###
by Matthew Brooks, Executive Director, Republican Jewish Coalition
The 54 Democrat members of Congress (no Republicans) who signed the January 21, 2010 letter to President Barack Obama initiated by Reps. Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Keith Ellison (D-MN) presumably wanted to make a thoughtful, serious statement of concern and a specific request for action. They were concerned for the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza and their request was that American government pressure be brought to bear on Israel to ease the restrictions on Israel's border with Gaza.
The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) took the letter and its words seriously. We saw that the 'Gaza 54' called for the loosening of security measures that Israel put into place to stop terrorism and reduce the ability of Hamas to launch attacks on Israel. The letter acknowledged that "the Israeli government has imposed restrictions on Gaza out of a legitimate and keenly felt fear of continued terrorist action by Hamas and other militant groups." But the congressmen did not make any mention of the potential consequences for Israel, or what alternate measures would provide equal protection for Israel's citizens against attacks initiated from Gaza.
The letter simply asserted, without foundation, that: "Easing the blockade (sic) on Gaza will not only improve the conditions on the ground for Gaza's civilian population, but will also undermine the tunnel economy which has strengthened Hamas... Most importantly, lifting these restrictions will give civilians in Gaza a tangible sense that diplomacy can be an effective tool for bettering their conditions. Your Administration's overarching Middle East peace efforts will benefit Israel, the Palestinians, and the entire region."
One in five Democrats in Congress signed a letter asking the president to pressure Israel to take unilateral actions that its leaders believe would undermine its security, with no concomitant expectation of concrete action on the Palestinian side to assure the safety of Israeli citizens. They are willing to bet that if American diplomacy forces Israel to make "tangible" changes to its policies, that will somehow "benefit Israel" in the long run.
This is at best, naïve. Israel can't afford to relax its security measures just because someone in the US says it will all be okay. Its enemies' commitment to its destruction has not waned. Loosening the "blockade" will not persuade Hamas to change its goals nor deter it from attacking.
THE DEMOCRATS' letter effectively demonstrates a mind-set all too typical of the Left, which we are seeing increasingly in more "mainstream" discourse: that Israel is doing wrong, Israel must make concessions, Israel is not acting morally except when it gives in. Unfortunately, history teaches us that appeasement leads to more violence, not less. The fact that so many Democrats signed the letter is troubling in and of itself.
The RJC (generously) called the letter signers "misguided." Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) agrees, telling The Jerusalem Post's Shmuel Rosner in a recent interview that the Gaza 54 are "misinformed" legislators.
The RJC decided to take action because we were troubled that 54 Democratic congressmen would call on the president to pressure Israel in this way. We asked our members to express their view on the letter. Within hours, a strong grassroots showing from across the country had signed the petition on our web site, calling for the letter signers to "take a firm stand against terrorism by disassociating yourself from this dangerous letter and upholding America's commitment to Israel's security in the future."
There are simple facts missing from the Gaza 54 letter about Israel's actions to help the residents of Gaza. The same facts were missing from remarks by one of the 54, Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA), who last week told students in Gaza that the US should bring in ships to the coast to break the Israeli "blockade" on the Gaza Strip.
As RJC wrote in our own letter to President Obama, asking him to repudiate Baird's remarks: Egypt also has a blockade of Gaza in place and is constructing a wall, similar to Israel's, to stop the smuggling of people and weapons across its border with Gaza; Israel allows huge quantities of food, medicine, and other humanitarian supplies into Gaza each day; Israel has prohibited only building supplies from coming into Gaza, to prevent them from being diverted by Hamas to military use. Israel has taken necessary and justifiable steps to stop terrorism originating from Hamas-controlled Gaza.
THE TRUTH is that the Palestinians are victims of their leaders and of their choices. For decades they have been taught to hate Israel (and Jews), to demand retribution and reparations, and to never compromise - by leaders who pocketed the funds meant to help them, corrupted the political system meant to lead them, and used them as foot soldiers against a reluctant enemy, Israel. Sadly, the lessons of hatred have been well-learned. Palestinian voters chose Hamas in the election of January 2006, giving them 74 of the 132 parliamentary seats and leading to the June 2007 Hamas coup in Gaza that split the Palestinian proto-polity in two. Afterward, hundreds of rockets were launched from within Gaza. The "blockade" of Gaza is a direct result of all these events.
The 54 Democrats who wrote to President Obama should understand this history and the Israeli security measures required to guarantee Israel's continued existence and safety. They paid lip service to Israel's security needs, but without confronting the hard question, which Israel faces daily, of how to keep Israeli citizens safe.
Lacking that important element, the letter was just another outrageous political attack on Israel and it deserved the condemnation of RJC and other friends of Israel. We stand by our characterization of the letter and by our statements about it.
###
Saah is the only major politician advocating bombing Iran
View my complete profile
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Palin endorses bombing Iran
Daniel pipes
Sarah Palin entered the fray yesterday. In a high-profile interview yesterday with Chris Wallace, she spontaneously brought up the topic of Obama's winning a second term by bombing Iran:
WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama will be to defeat in 2012?
PALIN: It depends on a few things. Say he played—and I got this from Buchanan, reading one of his columns the other day - say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really [to] come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do, but - that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now, things could change if—on the national security front …
WALLACE: But you're not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?
PALIN: I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying if he did, things would dramatically change. If he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies, I think people would, perhaps, shift their thinking a little bit and decide, "Well, maybe he's tougher than we think he's—than he is today," and there wouldn't be as much passion to make sure that he doesn't serve another four years.
Comments: (1) Buchanan disapproves of Obama taking out the Iranian nuclear infrastructure, but Palin and I "would like him to do" that, thereby removing the world's No. 1 security threat.
(2) After vilification from the Left and tepid reactions on the Right, it's nice to have a major political figure endorse my idea.
(3) I've always liked Palin and been mystified by the fervid hostility she engenders. Perhaps that results from her readiness, as Jeff Bergner puts it, to challenge "The Narrative" formulated by the Democratic Party. True to form, she is, so far, the only politician willing to touch the hot potato of the political implications of bombing Iran.
Posted by Jewu.info at 5:58 PM
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Palin endorses bombing Iran
Daniel pipes
Sarah Palin entered the fray yesterday. In a high-profile interview yesterday with Chris Wallace, she spontaneously brought up the topic of Obama's winning a second term by bombing Iran:
WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama will be to defeat in 2012?
PALIN: It depends on a few things. Say he played—and I got this from Buchanan, reading one of his columns the other day - say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really [to] come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do, but - that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now, things could change if—on the national security front …
WALLACE: But you're not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?
PALIN: I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying if he did, things would dramatically change. If he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies, I think people would, perhaps, shift their thinking a little bit and decide, "Well, maybe he's tougher than we think he's—than he is today," and there wouldn't be as much passion to make sure that he doesn't serve another four years.
Comments: (1) Buchanan disapproves of Obama taking out the Iranian nuclear infrastructure, but Palin and I "would like him to do" that, thereby removing the world's No. 1 security threat.
(2) After vilification from the Left and tepid reactions on the Right, it's nice to have a major political figure endorse my idea.
(3) I've always liked Palin and been mystified by the fervid hostility she engenders. Perhaps that results from her readiness, as Jeff Bergner puts it, to challenge "The Narrative" formulated by the Democratic Party. True to form, she is, so far, the only politician willing to touch the hot potato of the political implications of bombing Iran.
Posted by Jewu.info at 5:58 PM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
