This Jew Will Vote For John McCain

Ben Naftali, a guest blogger at China Confidential writes about why he will vote for John McCain:

So it’s over. The polls show that Barack Obama beat John McCain in the Presidential debates. No matter. This American Jew will vote for McCain.

This Jew will vote for John M. McCain instead of Barack Hussein Obama because John McCain says what he means, means what he says–and makes the most sense.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because of the two Presidential candidates he is most qualified to be Commander-in-Chief.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because John McCain has been thoroughly vetted over and again. We know who he is, where he’s been, and where he stands on all the important issues facing the United States.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because this Jew grew up in New York, a city that was almost destroyed by left-wing extremism and misguided liberalism.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because John McCain is a proven friend of Israel.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because he will stop Iran from acquiring atomic weapons–no ifs, ands or buts. In contrast, Obama’s “aggressive diplomacy” and proposed summit with the devil will provide the Islamist menace with the time it needs to build those weapons, including nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because this Jew can’t imagine voting for someone who has been advised by Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Samantha Power.

This Jew will vote for John McCain because this Jew can’t bring himself to vote for a candidate whose America-bashing wife–there, I said it–posed for a luncheon photo with the wife of Louis Farrakhan.

He lists a lot of additional reasons he will vote for John McCain. You can read them all here.

Whose Tax Plans Will Create More Jobs?

Whose Tax Plans Will Create More Jobs?

Mccainiac at Modern Conservative presents an analysis by The Heritage Foundation about whose plan will create more jobs:

More from

Job growth over the 10-year forecast horizon is more than twice as high under McCain’s plan than under Obama’s.

Senator McCain’s plan yields consistently higher forecasts of economic output than does Senator Obama’s. Increases in gross domestic product (GDP) under McCain are, on average, nearly three times higher than under Obama.

As McCainiac states,

Jobs will be the most important thing for our economy the next five to ten years. If predictions of a severe recession or depression are true (and I believe they are), then the most important thing is keeping as many people as possible employed. People with jobs pay bills, buy goods and pay rent or a mortgage.

People with jobs also pay taxes to fund all that government spending. When millions are out of work and unemployment is over ten percent (or 25 percent during the last depression), that’s a lot of people with little purchasing power, let alone any sense of any financial security.


Who Said John McCain Isn’t Funny?

Who Said John McCain Isn’t Funny?

John McCain raised the roof at the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner in New York City tonight. Both Senator McCain and Senator Obama addressed the crowd at the Waldorf Astoria. It was an amazing speech- witty, classy, respectful, self-deprecating and FUNNY!

Here is McCain at the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner:


Foreign Policy is Reason to Vote McCain

Foreign Policy is Reason to Vote McCain

Morrie Amitay, a Democrat and former Executive Director of AIPAC (American-Israel Public Affairs Committee), writing for JTA says he is going to vote for John McCain based on his foreign policy, particularly as it relates to Israel.

As a patriotic Jewish American, I care deeply about Israel’s well-being and security as well as that of our own country.

In having to choose between the two presidential candidates, I find myself looking closely at their statements, record of accomplishments, the people who advise them now and those they were influenced by in the past. I do this with our future foremost in mind, and what we could expect their policies would mean to Israel going forward.

This measuring rod is critically important in the face of the unprecedented national security challenges that we will face in the next few years.

Today the choice for the pro-Israel community is clear: Sen. John McCain is the one. I regret that this choice is not shared by more of my coreligionists. As they vote Democratic, more out of habit than out of self-interest, too many fail to appreciate the growing menace of Islamic extremism to both the United States and Israel.

Read the whole article.


The Jewish Case Against Barack Obama

The Jewish Case Against Barack Obama

Ben Shapiro who produced the videos referred to in the YouTube trailer above has written a guest post at

My name is Ben Shapiro, and I’m a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate, as well as a Harvard Law-educated lawyer in Los Angeles. I’m also a huge fan of Hugh’s show and his website, so it was truly an honor and a pleasure when Hugh offered to have me put up a guest post on the site.

I’m an Orthodox Jew — my wife hails from Israel, where we were just married in July. So the issue of Israel is very near and dear to me, as it is to most other Jews. With Israel in mind, this is an enormous election season for American Jewry. It pits a consistently strong defender of Israel in John McCain against a man who is at best an enigma on the issue of Israel. At worst, Barack Obama is far more dangerous. His advisors are largely anti-Israel. His friends are consistently anti-Israel. His running mate, Joe Biden, says all of the right things but has a questionable record on the Jewish State. And the candidate himself is ambivalent on his defense of Israel — he reversed himself on a united Jerusalem over the course of 24 hours, and states that he will meet with Hitler-lite Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions.

And yet most American Jews are convinced that Obama is a less threatening version of Bill Clinton. They believe that Obama loves the State of Israel, will stand up for Israel’s interests, and only wants to see the Israelis come to a quick and just agreement with Palestinian Arabs that protects Israel’s long-term safety and security.

There is no evidence to that effect. In fact, all the evidence points in the opposite direction.

To the end of educating American Jews on Israel — as well as Israel’s non-Jewish American supporters — I’ve produced a three-part YouTube video entitled “The Jewish Case Against Barack Obama. The trailer for the video (1 minute, 40 seconds) can be found here. Part I, which introduces the subject and discusses Obama’s advisors, who have ranged from the virulently pro-Palestinian Samantha Power to the Carter-style anti-Israel advocate Zbigniew Brzezinski, can be found here. Part II discusses two of Obama’s friends: Reverend Wright, who associates with Louis Farrakhan and believes that America’s Israeli policy is responsible for 9/11; and Rashid Khalidi, a former spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization. Part II can be found here. Part III examines Joe Biden and Obama himself, and concludes that the Democratic nominee for president cannot be trusted with the future of Israel. Part III can be found here.

For fifty years, Jews have been gratefully voting for Harry Truman. Truman, unfortunately, is gone, and his party has largely become a respository of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel sentiment. Jews cannot live in the past when it comes to 2008. They must make a choice between McCain and Obama. When it comes to Israel, the choice is clear.


Obama, McCain and Israel’s National Security

Obama, McCain and Israel’s National Security

By Yoram Ettinger

The policy of US presidents, toward Israel , is a derivative of their worldview, and not of their campaign statements and position papers.

A worldview shapes presidential attitude toward Israel as a strategic asset or a liability and toward Jerusalem , Judea & Samaria and the Golan Heights . A presidential worldview determines the scope of the US posture of deterrence in face of Middle East and global threats, which directly impacts Israel ‘s national security.

For example, President Nixon was not a friend of the US Jewish community and was not a leader of pro-Israeli legislation in the US Senate. In 1968, he received only about 15% of the Jewish vote. However, his worldview recognized Israel ‘s importance to US national security, as was demonstrated in 1970, when Israel rolled back a Syrian invasion of Jordan , preventing a pro-Soviet domino scenario into the Persian Gulf . It was Nixon’s worldview which led him to approve critical military shipments to Israel – during the 1973 War – in defiance of the Arab oil embargo and brutal pressure by the Saudi lobby in Washington , and in spite of the Democratic pattern of the Jewish voters.

On the other hand, President Clinton displayed an affinity toward Judaism, the Jewish People and the Jewish State. However, his worldview accepted Arafat as a national liberation leader, elevated him to the most frequent guest at the White House, underestimated the threat of Islamic terrorism, unintentionally facilitated its expansion from 1993 (first “Twin Tower” attack) to the 9/11 terrorist tsunami, adding fuel to the fire of Middle East and global turbulence.

How would the worldview of Obama, McCain and their advisors shape US policy toward Israel ?

1. According to McCain, World War 3 between Western democracies and Islamic terror/rogue regimes is already in process. According to Obama, the conflict is with a radical Islamic minority, which could be dealt with through diplomacy, foreign aid, cultural exchanges and a lower US military profile. Thus, McCain’s world view highlights – while Obama’s world view downplays – Israel ‘s role as a strategic ally. McCain recognizes that US-Israel relations have been shaped by shared values, mutual threats and joint interests and not by frequent disagreements over the Arab-Israeli conflict.

2. According to Obama, the US needs to adopt the world view of the Department of State bureaucracy ( Israel ‘s staunchest critic in Washington ), pacify the knee-jerk-anti-Israel-UN, move closer to the Peace-at-any-Price-Western Europe and appease the Third World, which blames the West and Israel for the predicament of the Third World and the Arabs. On the other hand, McCain contends that the US should persist – in defiance of global odds – in being the Free World’s Pillar of Fire, ideologically and militarily.

3. According to Obama, Islamic terrorism constitutes a challenge for international law enforcement agencies and that terrorists should be brought to justice. According to McCain, they are a military challenge and should be brought down to their knees. Obama’s passive approach adrenalizes the veins of terrorists and intensifies Israel ‘s predicament, while McCain’s approach bolsters the US ‘ and Israel ‘s war on terrorism.

4. Obama and his advisors assume that Islamic terrorism is driven by despair, poverty, erroneous US policy and US presence on Muslim soil in the Persian Gulf . On the other hand, McCain maintains that Islamic terrorism is driven by ideology, which considers US values (freedom of expression, religion, media, movement, market and Internet) and US power a most lethal threat that must be demolished. McCain’s worldview supports Israel ‘s battle against terrorism, demonstrating that the root cause of the Arab-Israel conflict is not the size – but the existence – of Israel .

5. Contrary to McCain, Obama is convinced – just like Tony Blair – that the Palestinian issue is the core cause of Middle East turbulence and anti-Western Islamic terrorism, and therefore requires a more assertive US involvement, exerting additional pressure on Israel. The intriguing assumption that a less-than-hundred year old Palestinian issue is the root cause of 1,400 year old inter-Arab Middle East conflicts and Islamic terrorism, would deepen US involvement in Israel-Palestinians negotiations and transform the US into more of a neutral broker and less of a special ally of Israel, which would drive Israel into sweeping concessions.

Obama’s worldview would be welcomed by supporters of an Israeli rollback to the 1949 ceasefire lines, including the repartitioning of Jerusalem and the opening of the “Pandora Refugees’ Box.” On the other hand, McCain’s worldview adheres to the assumption that an Israeli retreat would convert the Jewish State from a power of deterrence to a punching bag, from a producer – to a consumer – of national security and from a strategic asset to a strategic burden in the most violent, volatile and treacherous region in the world.


Tolerance and Love on the Upper West Side

Tolerance and Love on the Upper West Side

On Sunday, September 21st, supporters of the McCain-Palin campaign marched through the Upper West Side of Manhattan carrying McCain-Palin signs and American flags.

Since the Upper West Side of Manhattan is the home of the elite, the intellectuals and academics, you would think that they would love to hear all points of view and discuss them in a rational, intellectual way. Not exactly.

The People’s Cube has a video of the walk and the response from the happy denizens of the UWS.

A group of McCain-Palin supporters dare to march through the Upper West Side – and are met with hatred and rage for being infidels in the heart of liberal Mecca. Republicans are as out of place there as elephants at a donkey show. Area intellectuals jeer them well – just as they had been taught to do. FACT: The number of middle fingers in the “progressive” crowd is directly proportional to the number of PhD degrees in the ten-block radius.

To a liberal, the definition of unity is the elimination of dissent from their point of view.