Tag Archives: John Boehner

47 Wrongs Didn’t Make this Right









Anyone who has read anything I have written till now is aware that I am completely opposed to any negotiations with Iran’s current regime.  I have, and will continue to oppose any deal with a government that sounds frighteningly similar to Hitler’s Nazi Germany.  That being said, the recent actions taken by Republican lawmakers in which they sent a letter to Iran’s government was not only wrong, it was dangerous.

In my post titled Unity or Destruction. Pick One, I discuss the importance of a unified front against evil.  It’s not really a challenge when everyone has the same political opinion and strategy or approach.  So for those who will say they support the letter because these Republicans are right about Iran and the administration is wrong, I offer you the following response. It’s irrelevant.

Here’s some clichés and quotes for you: United We Stand Divided We Fall,  Divide and Conquer, and of course Abraham Lincoln’s:  “A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand”, all apply here. Take your pick.  Just as I did not feel that Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech should have been turned into a partisan issue, and I called out the Democrats who made it one, so too I believe that the break from structure here is a damaging partisan move that hurts the country more than it helps the country.

Make no mistake.  This is more than just a break in protocol.  The entire structure of our democracy is impacted by this global show of a lack in unity within our governmental system.  Not to mention the damage to the office of the President.  Sometimes it has nothing to do with the individual and everything to do with the office. In other words, even if all the criticisms of the president are correct on this issue, insulting the office is never justified by elected American representatives.  That even applies to situations in which they wish to make the case that the policy of the president shows disrespect for his own office.  In other words, 2 wrongs, or in this case 47 wrongs don’t make a right.

When I try to predict some of the responses I might get to this article I realize that in many ways this is as non-partisan as anything I’ve ever written.  Both sides will make their claim.  Some will say the 47 were right for sending the letter.  After all, they don’t support dealing with Iran and feel the president is going against their wishes in conducting these negotiations.  On top of which the danger in dealing with Iran is so great that the ends justify the means. Personally I believe they are laughing today in Tehran and believing they have us just where they want us.  Fighting among ourselves to such a point that we’ve gone out of the family, so to speak.

For those who will say John Boehner did the same thing when he invited Benjamin Netanyahu I say this.  There is a big difference between 47 lawmakers sending a letter to a hostile country contradicting the president than there is in the Speaker of the House inviting the Head of Government of an important ally.

Too many people seem to be taking their eye off the ball and taking actions that are more political than beneficial.  Actions that hurt the structure of the American government impact everyone, and other than our enemies, not beneficially.  We need more elected representatives who stand up for what is right for the nation rather than what they perceive as right for their career or party.  The stakes are too high, and if politicians continue to play these silly games the results will ultimately be catastrophic.

If ever we needed true leadership, something I believe we are sadly missing, it is right now.




The Cowardice of Opposing Netanyahu











I have a theory.  It is a theory that is certain to upset some people.  You see, although I realize that Benjamin Netanyahu is not always the most well-liked man, and has in the past taken a political posture some may see as offensive, I believe most if not all of the opposition to his upcoming address to the United States Congress is rooted in one very dangerous and unattractive character trait.  That trait is cowardice.

There are some who may be in such disagreement and even so offended by this statement that they may have already stopped reading, but to me there is little to no question that this is the basis of most of the opposition.  We live in scary times.  Being afraid does not make one a coward.  My father, may he rest in peace, admitted without shame that during the years he was on the run from the Nazis he did indeed feel fear, despite the impression he gave to many that he did not.  I will say again that the emotion of fear is not what makes one a coward.  In fact I will go one step further and say, that it is one’s reaction to fear that can make one brave just as it is one’s reaction to fear that can make one a coward.  It is on this premise that I maintain that the reaction many have to the fear of the future, is what indeed makes them cowards.

I have met people who do not want to be involved on any level with anything political because of the fear they have for what lies ahead.  I am not judgmental of this approach.  If one chooses to avoid involvement because it frightens them too much, granted they may not be deemed heroic, but they also are doing nothing to actively obstruct or oppose those that do.  They just want to stay far away.  People who run away from danger should not be judged harshly, partially because they have every right to do so, and partially because none of us know when we will make the same choice, but mainly because they impact themselves more than they impact anyone else.  But those whose fear is manifested in the obstruction of what is right, in order to gain favor in the eyes of those who are wrong, are indeed dangerous and irresponsible cowards.

I have tried to find a reasonable answer as to why anyone who claims to love modern civilization would have a problem with the Prime Minister of Israel speaking to U.S. lawmakers about the incredible danger of conducting negotiations on nuclear energy with Iran.  It seems we’ve come a long way from not dealing with terrorists.  Unfortunately we’ve gone the wrong direction. Where we once were a nation with the policy of not negotiating with terrorists, now we have a government hell-bent on conducting negotiations that would lead to the nation sponsoring so many of these terrorists having the ability to possess nuclear weapons.  It is so bizarre that it defies all logic.  Enter Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a man who understands and confronts this danger, and somehow he now becomes public enemy number 1. Somehow members of Congress that have very little to say about Hamas or Isis are emboldened and brave enough to boycott Netanyahu’s speech.  Why?  Because they are cowards.

They are not alone.  There is plenty of support in the press, from celebrities, and from the public as well. To put this phenomenon in simplistic terms, I believe the following mentality prevails.  If we go after the enemy of the bad guys now, maybe the enemy will show mercy on us later.  It’s a little like saying ISIS just needs jobs or the inability to call Muslims that commit acts of terror, Muslim terrorists.  If we don’t speak too harshly against them maybe we’ll be safer when the time comes.  After all, let’s be honest here. Benjamin Netanyahu won’t be sending Israeli hit squads to kill those who oppose him, but active opposition to Iran, Isis, Hamas, or all other equivalent elements of evil could indeed put one’s life in grave danger.  In some perverse way I believe the most high-profile opposition of Netanyahu, with the exception of his Israeli political opposition, is hoping they can establish some credit with the bad guys just in case their master plan of world domination continues on this dangerously successful path.  And all of this is being led by a President who at best is catastrophically misguided, at worst dangerously devious.  Or maybe he is just too scared as well.

I believe the individuals who hold the same level of disdain for Netanyahu’s upcoming speech are either ignorant to the truth and or just as cowardly. Again, anything one says to speak out against Netanyahu is likely to just fade into oblivion, but speaking out against the Ayatollah of Iran for example, well if the wrong person saw that you just might get hurt.

I know there will be those who will vehemently disagree with this theory, but I am almost arrogantly certain this to be the truth.  I will say that in many cases the fear and cowardice is almost subconscious and therefore not something I expect anyone to admit and in some cases even realize, but why else would people oppose anyone defending the future of freedom and modern-day civilization?  I know they will have their responses, claiming this is inappropriate political posturing on both Netanyahu and John Boehner’s part, but even if it is, how on earth could anyone not see that the message Benjamin Netanyahu is sending is so important that those other factors are just not enough to negate the need for his speech. Unless of course you don’t want to make the bad guys angry.  I for one would be far more afraid to oppose a person, in this case Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will be asking Congress to protect the safety and security of every freedom and right we all hold dear, and I say without any fear that I support him 100%.