Patrick Murray

With America absent, there has never been a better time for the enemies of Israel to make mischief.

Rioters in front of the Israeli embassy

in Cairo, August 26, 2011

By Patrick Murray

September 16, 2011

For over sixty years, unwavering, bipartisan American support for Israel has been a core tenet of U.S. foreign policy. In March 2009, Democrat Steny Hoyer and Republican Eric Cantor reminded the Obama Administration of this in a joint letter, stressing the “unbreakable bond that exists between our country and the State of Israel.” Unfortunately, the Obama Administration went in the opposite direction, and U.S.-Israeli relations have sunk to an all-time low. Now Israel finds itself increasingly isolated, dealing with violent attacks and unraveling diplomatic relations in the Middle East, and an emboldened Fatah leadership determined to ram through an irresponsible Palestinian statehood declaration at the United Nations.

The Obama Administration has made it clear to friend and foe alike that the U.S. no longer has Israel’s back:

• Obama makes the unprecedented demand that Israel revert to the 1967 borders that made it so vulnerable to attack from the Arab states that surround it. This radical policy shift came just as Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was enroute to Washington for high level talks. You can guess how well those discussions went.
• Obama chides Israel to negotiate with the now-linked Fatah-Hamas organization. The problem is that Hamas is a terrorist organization whose sole reason for existence is to destroy Israel. How does one negotiate with an entity who only wants you dead?
• Obama decries Israeli housing projects in suburban Jerusalem, even using his inaugural address at the United Nations to declare that “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” Instead, he should have insisted upon a perpetually free Jerusalem that is the capital of Israel.
• Despite the fact that Hamas and Fatah are now tight, Obama continues to provide financial support to the Palestinians. Thus American tax dollars are in part funding a terrorist organization. Jimmy Carter thinks this is a good idea, so that should tell you something.

For enemies of Israel, it seems there has never been a better time to make mischief. Fatah Leader Mahmoud Abbas is now systematically building international support behind a Palestinian Statehood vote scheduled for September 23rd at the United Nations in New York. While it won’t pass the Security Council, it will get through the General Assembly. A GA resolution won’t confer statehood, but it is a step up the ladder to that of “Observer State,” sufficient to confer a misplaced sense of legitimacy to aggressive anti-Israel elements everywhere.

Closer to home, Israel is struggling to retain long-standing diplomatic relations that have been the basis of regional stability for decades. Turkish-Israeli relations have plummeted recently, stemming from disagreements over Israel’s interception of a ship in a Gaza-bound flotilla last year. Even more urgent were the deadly attacks on Israel’s embassy in Cairo last week, which did major damage to the embassy and forced a harrowing evacuation for the Israeli Ambassador and embassy staff. This assault came on the heels of a terrorist attack along the Israel’s border with Egypt that left eight Israelis dead. Concurrently, imminent attacks on Israel’s embassy in Amman, Jordan led Netanyahu to order a preemptive evacuation there.

Egypt and Jordan are the only members of Arab League that have full diplomatic relations with Israel. Targeting Israel’s embassies, the tangible symbol of those diplomatic relations, is a clear indication that there is no shortage of Egyptians and Jordanians who want ties with Israel severed. If that happens (and with Mubarak gone, it could), the delicate regional diplomatic balance that has kept peace for decades would be destroyed.

The clock is running out, but there is still time for the Obama Administration to walk back some of the damage by taking the following steps:

• Make it clear that passing a Palestinian Statehood resolution at the UN will result in the immediate severance of U.S. funding to the UN.
• Publicly retract the dangerous policy of insisting Israel revert to the 1967 borders.
• Stress to Cairo and Amman the importance of retaining their respective peace treaties with Israel. Make it clear to Cairo that American recognition of, and support for, any future Egyptian government will depend upon this.
• Cut off all U.S. financial support that ends up in Hamas coffers.
• Stand up to a belligerent Iranian regime that for almost three years has attacked U.S. interests with impunity, including guaranteeing the demise of Israel, training and equipping Hamas and Hezbollah, killing American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, brutally oppressing resistance movements within their own borders and helping Syria do the same, all while relentlessly moving toward acquiring nuclear weapons.

America has long been seen as the ultimate guarantor of Israel’s security. Were this equation to change, Israel would find itself increasingly isolated, threatened, and ultimately set upon. We are witnessing the initial stages of that now. Israel remains our only dependable democratic ally in the Middle East; we need to prove to friend and foe alike that America still has Israel’s back.

The 9^th District of NY has had a Democrat Representative since 1923. Last night that all changed when Republican businessman Bob Turner decisively defeated Democrat David Weprin.

This is great news for America, for New York and for the Republican Party. It is also a harbinger for Left-leaning Districts across America, including the 8^th District of Virginia!

See you soon!

This weekend we learned of the tragic loss of 30 U.S. troops when the CH-47 Chinook helicopter transporting them was shot down by Taliban insurgents in the Wardak province of Afghanistan. This was the deadliest single incident in the war to date. Most of these men were members of Seal Team 6, one of our finest Special Operations units. The flight crew, a dog handler and a civilian interpreter were also lost, along with seven Afghan soldiers.

This is a bitter reminder that we remain a nation at war, and that Americans are fighting valiantly, and sometimes dying, in the service of our country.  As our political representatives in Washington wrestle over much needed budget cuts, they must keep in mind that a real fight is being waged in Afghanistan and Iraq. Defense funding is not just another line entry on a budget sheet that can be bargained down or cut without ramifications. American lives and American national security is at stake.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the families and friends of our fallen troops. We also keep in our hearts all of the troops who continue to serve in harm’s way. God bless them and their families, and God bless America.

Honor and courage,

Patrick Murray

Our sluggish economy is the direct result of Democrats’ attempts to overlay a progressive agenda on a nation founded in conservative values.

The latest unemployment rate of 9.2% points to a clear trend of a worsening economy. Jobs are nonexistent, more people are out of work, our debt is exploding and what do Democrats want to do? Raise taxes. Are you kidding me? Right now America is – and it pains me to say this – slipping. Why is this? How can this greatest of all nations be on a slippery slope when our Founders gave us a template for greatness and American patriots from Abraham Lincoln to Ronald Reagan have kept us on track for over 200 years? It’s a one word answer: Progressivism.

Liberal values seek to expand the federal government footprint, redistribute income, obstruct private enterprise and usher in a social welfare state. This agenda, which so fundamentally clashes with core American values, has been on an express train under the unholy trinity of a far Left White House, Senate and House of Representatives. We gave the keys to America to a cabal of hardcore Progressives, who in two short years drove us into a ditch. Yes its true, spending and deficits went up during the Bush years as well, but these people have raised irresponsible governance to an art form. Now with a conservative House of Representatives attempting to drag us back onto a responsible, free market interstate, the Left inexplicably and stubbornly still seeks to steer us over a cliff by insisting on raising taxes and refusing to deal with entitlement reform.

Our Founders knew that an incentive-based system where power flows up from the people instead of down from the government was a recipe for success. It’s human nature for people to want to live freely, raise families and pursue their dreams without the shackles of an invasive government. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; these are without question core American values; they are enshrined in our founding documents and are a core part of our national DNA. Our nation was built on the hard work, bravery and toughness of our intrepid ancestors. Many loaded the kids, tools and shotguns onto the wagons and took off for the wilderness where they carved a living out of the land. The millions of hard-working immigrants who came to these shores throughout our history do so because they understood that with diligence and hard work the American dream was real. They didn’t fight their way over here, often at great personal risk, in order to get healthcare, handouts or bailouts. They weren’t looking to have their mortgages subsidized, or being told where to build, what to plant, what to eat, where to fish, what to catch, where to hunt, what to teach the kids or where to send them to school. Their values centered on a firm belief in God, self-sufficiency, honesty, living within one’s means and the Golden Rule. Sound familiar? These are conservative values. Republican values. Tea Party values. American values.

What happens to your car when you ignore the owner’s manual? Sooner or later it stops working. It breaks down. It crashes. When asked what kind of government had been created at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Benjamin Franklin answered “A Republic, if you can keep it.” The Constitution is our nation’s owner’s manual. But we are not on cruise control, our present dilemma attests to that fact. Dr. Franklin was right – it really is up to us to keep our Republic.

Fortunately, we are the greatest nation in the world, in the history of the world, and we have the tools and capacity to turn this around. But time is short; our $14 trillion debt grows daily, and unfunded entitlements, exacerbated by millions of retiring baby boomers, necessitate immediate action. We should start by cutting federal spending and reforming those entitlements so as to keep them viable for the foreseeable future, lowering corporate tax rates, keeping marginal income taxes low, maximizing domestic energy exploration and repealing Obamacare. These common sense strides will reduce the debt, stimulate the economy, create jobs and secure the American dream for future generations. It’s up to us!

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” -Ronald Reagan

We live in the greatest country in the world, in the history of the world, but it is up to us to keep it. The words of President Reagan remind us that freedom is costly, that we must work to maintain it and that it should never be taken for granted. America was born in battle, and on occasion, including now, we have had to fight to keep it. On this 235^th anniversary of our great nation, take a few moments to reflect upon how blessed we are to be Americans, and remember those patriots throughout our unique history who founded, fought for and furthered the United States of America. We stand on their shoulders, but the future is up to us!

I am proud to be an American!

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. – Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. – And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

- John Hancock

New Hampshire:  Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:  John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:  Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:  Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:  William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:  Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:  Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:  Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:  Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:  George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:  William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:  Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:  Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

On March 18^th President Obama promised that America’s involvement in Libya – where America has no vital national security interests – would last “days, not weeks.” Instead the war blunders on, creating additional headaches for the Obama Administration.

Obama and Qaddafi shaking hands at the G8 summit in Italy, July 9, 2009

This Sunday, June 19th, will mark 90 days into the war with Libya that President Obama claimed would only last a few days. We have spent $750 million thus far pursuing a war where we have no vital national interests at stake. That’s not to say that, potential successors notwithstanding, we wouldn’t be better off without Muammar Qaddafi. However, the Obama Administration’s oxymoronic “lead from behind” approach to Libya has made this operation infinitely more problematic. Alongside the mounting costs, additional Libya-inspired fault lines are emergent:

• Growing risk of U.S. casualties: The longer our involvement in Libya the greater the likelihood for American casualties. This is valid not only in Libya, but also in Afghanistan. Shifting scarce combat, logistical and intelligence assets as well as thousands of servicemembers from the Afghanistan theatre of operations into Libya forces our 100,000 troops on the ground in Afghanistan to make do with less. The additional operations tempo also increases the stress on our armed forces.
• Be careful what you ask for: We still know next to nothing about Qaddafi’s enemies, who, if NATO ever figures out how to take down a mascara-wearing dictator, will inherit Libya’s 46 billion barrels of oil reserves, the largest in Africa. These rebels, our nascent allies, are also alarmingly supported by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the regional Chapter of Islamist extremists bent on the destruction of America and Israel. Under the rubric of “you-break-it-you-own-it,” we can’t just whack Qaddafi, declare victory and walk away. NATO (that means America) had better have a plan in place to stick around and mop up in the post-Qaddafi political landscape.

• An inconsistent foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East: Foreign policy continues to be an afterthought for the Obama Administration. We chose to go to war with Libya, ostensibly to head off a possible humanitarian crisis while ignoring ongoing atrocities elsewhere, including in Iranian-backed Syria, where Syrian military forces have killed over 1300 people to date and generated thousands more refugees and displaced persons. This same naiveté was on display last month when, on the heels of a disturbing rapprochement between the Palestinian Authority leadership and the terrorist organization Hamas, President Obama found it timely to announce that Israel should revert to the 1967 borders that made it so vulnerable to attack in the first place. Snubbing allies and rewarding enemies does nothing to advance U.S. national security interests.

• Protect this House: Libya has exposed some serious weaknesses in NATO’s capability; a fact alluded to by outgoing Secretary of Defense Robert Gates earlier this month in Europe. Gates stated that NATO’s campaign in Libya had “laid bare” the shortcomings of NATO, and that NATO was facing “collective military irrelevance” after years of insufficient defense spending. If nothing else, this should be a wake-up call to U.S. political leaders; America can’t afford to cut corners with our national defense.
• Separation of Powers: The Obama Administration is bumping up against the 1973 War Powers Resolution (WPR), which makes ninety days the cutoff for American involvement in hostilities absent congressional approval. Obama officials claim that NATO, not the U.S., is doing all the heavy lifting and therefore the WPR does not apply. However, the 15 June White House report to Congress entitled “United States Activities in Libya” makes it clear that, among other things, since 31 March U.S. pilots and aircraft have flown over 2500 sorties in Libya. Additionally, American assets provide the majority of refueling capability and over 70% of the intelligence. So clearly the U.S. is heavily involved in all aspects of the war, including kinetic operations. Therefore Congress has a constitutionally-mandated role in this conflict. While relying on the controversial WPR is problematic, Congress retains other tools, including the power of the purse.

It is no wonder that the Obama Administration has kept Congress in the dark on Libya and is pushing back on the need for congressional authorization. By wandering into a war with Libya absent objectives, strategy, or an exit strategy we end up spending more tax dollars that we don’t have, increasing the likelihood for American casualties, compromising operations elsewhere and sending mixed messages to our allies. Even if we do get rid of Qaddafi we have no assurance that whoever takes over in Tripoli won’t be immeasurably worse. One thing, however, is crystal clear: elections have consequences, never more so than 2012.

Honor and Courage!

Sunday June 19^th is Father’s Day. A salute to all the dads out there!

Virginia’s “Terrible Trio” of Democrat Congressmen voted to squander the American Dream for our children and grandchildren.

On May 31st the House voted on HR 1954, entitled: To implement the President’s request to increase the statutory limit on the public debt. This was a stand-alone bill about whether we should raise our national debt ceiling beyond $14 trillion without any commensurate budget cuts. The title of HR 1954 could’ve been: Should we continue on this reckless, destructive path of spending, or is it time to live within our means?

There is plenty of blame to go around for our $14 trillion in debt. In eight years under President Bush our debt shot up from about $5.5 trillion to $10.7 trillion. Under President Obama we’ve piled on almost $4 trillion more in two short years. Both Republican and Democrat Members of Congress have been complicit all along – right up to last year when Congress sunk to a new low in irresponsible behavior by adjourning without passing any budget at all – abrogating their responsibility in order to go home and protect their own jobs (Jim Moran cast the deciding vote to adjourn).

But the HR 1954 vote is about the future, about what we should do going forward. It’s about the fact that adding to our $14 trillion-plus of debt without budget cuts is sickening, that our debt is rising over $3.5 billion per day, over $2.4 million per minute. It’s about the fact that the national debt per U.S. taxpayer is some $118k and that we borrow 40 cents for every dollar we spend. This is about the inescapable fact that the decisions we make now will impact America’s future, our children and grandchildren.

Fortunately HR 1954 was handily defeated 318-97, with eighty-two Democrats joining all Republicans in voting against the bill. It was a no-brainer vote that should been unanimous, but nowadays we’ll take what we can get. However, what this vote did was draw a very clear line in the sand as to who is to blame for the debt as we go forward. Every one of the “Nasty 97” who voted in support of HR 1954 is saying that they want the irresponsible spending to continue, and are therefore openly hostile to securing America’s future (See the by-name vote here: (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll379.xml).

Sadly, but predictably, all three Democrats in the Virginia Congressional Delegation are part of the Nasty 97. Jim “bully” Moran, Gerald “what me worry” Connolly, and Robert “show me those tax dollars” Scott all voted to continue to spend with impunity. The vote of the Terrible Trio of Moran-Connolly-Scott is sad because right here in Virginia we have been schooling the rest of the country about what is the right path to prosperity.

Honest, common sense political leadership under Governor Bob McDonnell has delivered job growth, limited government and responsible spending. Right-to-Work Virginia now has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country (6.1% as of April 2011, down 0.1% from the previous month, 7th best in the nation) and a budget surplus achieved without so much as a nickel of tax increases. Lt. Governor Bill Bolling, Governor McDonnell’s “CINC-Jobs,” is going gangbusters in bringing new business to the Commonwealth, so look for Virginia’s unemployment rate to continue trending down.

The Terrible Trio vote is also predictable because all three have a history of irresponsible spending. For example, when Moran was first elected to Congress in 2000, the debt was a relatively modest $3 trillion. With his coveted seat on the Appropriations Committee, Moran’s twenty-one year spending and earmarking binge puts him squarely in the forefront of Members most complicit for quintupling America’s debt. His vote in support of HR 1954 shows he doesn’t want that party to end. If Moran is your Representative, he has done this on your behalf; if that doesn’t make your heart pound, you don’t have a heart.

We can’t change the past, but it is our responsibility as Americans to shape our future. Here in Virginia, any vote in 2012 for the Terrible Trio of Moran-Connolly-Scott is a vote for the past, a vote to squander the American Dream for our children and grandchildren, a vote without heart.

Throwing Israel under the Bus

President Obama’s border incursion departed from long-standing bipartisan position of unwavering American support for Israel.

Last week the President Obama became the first U.S. President to dictate to Israel that it must revert to the 1967 borders that made it so vulnerable to attack from surrounding Arab states. Despite what many have said, this speech was a ringing success…if you are Hamas and pursue the demise of Israel. No doubt Palestinians were dancing in the streets just as they did on 9/11 after learning that over 3000 Americans had just been murdered at the hands of Islamist terrorists. For the rest of us, it was about as sensitive and defensible as breaking up with your significant other via email. It was a mess in content, timing and tactics.

The concept of returning to pre-1967 borders is a non-starter. As Prime Minister Netanyahu pointed out, the old borders are indefensible. Israel was highly vulnerable with these borders, which in part was why they were being attacked by their hostile neighbors. Moreover, in the ensuing 44 years since the 1967 war, the situation on the ground has changed dramatically, particularly in the West Bank where thousands of Israelis now live and depend upon Israel for their security.

Content aside, the timing for floating such a policy departure is highly problematic. Did anyone notice that George Mitchell, Obama’s hand-picked Special Envoy to the Middle East, just resigned? And with whom would the Israelis negotiate? Earlier this month, Palestinian Authority president and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas signed an agreement with Hamas leadership which paves the way for a joint interim government. Lest we forget, Hamas is the terrorist organization whose existence is predicated on the destruction of Israel. Against this backdrop, the United States rewards Fatah with a huge concession on borders? Also, the Middle East is in the throes of something called “Arab Spring,” with the Arab street struggling to change their governments and societies from the ground up. In the middle of all of this instability, violence and change, it is doubtful there is much bandwidth for trying to unravel the Gordian knot that is the Israeli-Palestinian two-state solution. Finally, springing this when Israeli PM Netanyahu was enroute to Washington, D.C. for an official State Visit was thoughtless. It is no secret that there is no love lost between Obama and Netanyahu; any progress that could have been made went out the window when Obama tried to redraw Israel’s borders.

Let’s finish by suspending reality for a second and focus on the tactics of Obama’s speech. As an Army officer, I spent three years at the State Department negotiating bilateral U.S. political-military treaties with over 100 nations and another three years negotiating multilateral agreements in support of American interests at the United Nations. So I know a little bit about negotiating in high-level international venues. However, anybody who has ever sat across a table from a car salesman and haggled over price, options and trade-in value knows that you never, ever open negotiations by conceding one of your adversaries’ biggest positions without getting anything in return. What were they thinking? Unfortunately for American interests, this was not a one-time occurrence; we saw a similar rush to give away the farm when it came to negotiating a new U.S.-Russian START Treaty.

For over sixty years, unwavering American support for Israel has been the strongly held bipartisan position of the United States. As recently as March of last year, Democrat Steny Hoyer and Republican Eric Cantor authored a joint letter to the Obama Administration, signed by all reasonable Representatives on both sides of the aisle (surprise, surprise, Jim Moran refused to sign on), reaffirming the “unbreakable bond that exists between our country and the State of Israel.” Can you think of any other issue that has enjoyed bipartisan support for such a long period of time? It is unprecedented. Over the week-end in a speech to AIPAC, Obama tried to walk his comments back, but the seeds of mistrust have been sewn.

History is very instructive on this topic: it is only when Israel feels the most secure that it has made its greatest concessions. For example, when then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally withdrew Israeli Defense Forces and uprooted settlements from the Gaza Strip in August 2005, he did so knowing that he had the unwavering support and commitment of the United States. For Israel to be willing and able to enter into the difficult negotiations that could lead to an independent Palestinian state while ensuring for their own security, Israel must have no doubts that America has their back. Instead, we just tossed them under a Hamas-driven bus.

Attention!

Republican Jane Corwin is in a tight race in the NY-26 special election next Tuesday, May 24th.  This is a critical seat that we need to retain.

The Democrats are pouring money and union volunteers into the district, trying to make this a referendum on the new GOP majority and Paul Ryan’s plan to get us out from under our massive national debt.

My friends in the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) have asked us for volunteers for phone banking at their HQ in Washington, DC. If you are available I encourage you to lend a hand. Any commitment of your valuable time, however small, will be greatly appreciated. See below for details.

The NRCC will provide pizza (not as good as Bugsy’s from our campaign!) and beverages. Also, you can expect to see a few “special guests” stop by to lend a hand, including Senator Scott Brown.

If you have questions, please contact Mike Bober at the NRCC:       (202) 470-7086 / MBober@nrcc.org.

If you want to learn more about Jane: http://www.janecorwin.com/

Help us get out the vote and win this election!  Hope to see you there!

Honor & Courage,

Patrick

NY-26 Special Election

Phone Banks

We Need Your Help!

Join us in phone banking for

Republican congressional candidate,

Jane Corwin (NY-26)

at the RNC Building (310 1^st St SE) on level B-2.

Phone Banks are open:

Friday May 20^th- 6 to 9pm

Saturday, May 21^st -10am to 4pm

Sunday, May 22^nd -12pm to 6pm

Monday, May 23^rd –11am to 9pm

-and-

Tuesday, May 24th–ELECTION DAY

10am to 8pm

Jim Moran originally lauded the Mark Centerdecision as a “victory for Northern Virginia commuters.”

With the scheduled opening of the Mark Center four months away, Congressman Jim Moran continues his publicity campaign to convince all who will listen that he had nothing to do with the looming commute-from-hell, that he is just a victim of a bad Army decision like the rest of us. Too bad that Virginia’s 8th District didn’t have a Representative with influence in the right places, such as one who sits on the powerful House Appropriations Committee. Or better yet, a senior member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee with jurisdiction over the Pentagon budget, someone who has been in congress since dirt was discovered, who never shies away from a good fight (or from any fight for that matter), who could have stepped in at the outset and put a stop to this mess. Too bad indeed.

In addition to blaming the Army, Moran insists that he has hated this decision from the get-go. But when the Army announced the decision back on Sep 29, 2008, here is what Moran said in an interview with the Fort Belvoir Eagle:

Congressman Jim Moran, D-Va., whose 8th Virginia District includes part of Fort Belvoir, Springfield and the Mark Center, said the decision was good for commuters. “Preventing the Washington Headquarters Service from moving to the Engineer Proving Ground benefits the region’s commuters,” Moran said. “In that respect, this decision is a victory for Northern Virginia commuters.” “I appreciate all the hard work Army officials and civilians put into coming to this decision,” Moran said. “It was a monumental effort and they did an excellent job keeping all the stakeholders informed throughout the process.”

That visceral opposition really shines through, doesn’t it? What did he call it? This was a “victory for Northern Virginia commuters.” I don’t know about you, but my definition of “victory” is very different. This brings up a few questions Moran should have had to answer at the time, for example:

• Which Metro line is the Mark Center on? “There isn’t a Metro stop anywhere close.”
• Well then surely there is a dedicated exit ramp to the site? “Nope.”
• Then what is the plan for getting the additional 6,400 employees to and from work every day? “We don’t have a plan.”
• Have you really thought through what the impact on local commuters is going to be, Jim? “Are you kidding? This decision is a victory for Northern Virginia commuters!”

As the massive building began to reshape Alexandria’s West end skyline and the looming traffic Armageddon started to take shape, Moran suddenly spat out all that BRAC flavored Kool-aid and decided that he was against it, and that the Army was to blame for the mess. To give this story some legs, he rented a bus (at taxpayer expense), filled it with media members and boldly made the trek up I-395 from Franconia-Springfield Metro Station to the Mark Center during morning rush hour in order to find out what the traffic was like. Channeling Claude Rains’ Captain Renault character in the movie Casablanca, Moran was shocked, shocked to find out how bad the traffic is on I-395! Now Moran wants a lawsuit (more of our tax dollars at work) to stop the 15 September opening of the building. Of course, all of this comes way too late.

The Army likely does share some of the blame for this. But why do we have representation in the first place if it is not to interject in issues such as this? Consider these facts: the Mark Center is located in the heart of the District where Moran has held sway for decades as a congressman, city councilman, vice-Mayor and Mayor. Moreover, at the time of the decision Moran was a senior member sitting on the powerful House Appropriations Committee as well as on the Subcommittee on Defense Appropriations with jurisdiction over the Pentagon budget. If there was anyone who was uniquely positioned to question the procedure and force reconsideration of this decision, it was Moran.

This leads us to a second set of questions for our Congressman:

• Why didn’t Moran push for litigation to stop the process (as he is now doing) or go on his publicity bus tour (as he did last year) before the shovels started turning dirt?
• Why didn’t Moran hold hearings?
• Why didn’t Moran call for a review of the bid process at the outset?
• Why didn’t Moran insist on a transportation plan before groundbreaking?
• Why didn’t Moran haul the Secretaries of Defense and Army up to his office and give them an “over my dead body” speech?
• Why didn’t Moran weigh in with the local Alexandria city government who at that time also supported this decision?
• How is it that Moran accepted the maximum campaign contribution allowable from the Chairman and CEO of Duke Reality, owners of the Mark Center, less than one month after the site location was announced?

The bottom line is that Congressman Moran had an array of public, procedural and media outlets he could have utilized to fight against a federal building being adversely located in the heart of the District he represents. Instead, he was for the decision before he was against it, and he did nothing to oppose it until it was too late. Now Northern Virginians are stuck with the fallout of this decision, which will manifest in more mind-numbing hours behind the wheel, lost family time and increased stress levels for years to come.