Morning Jolt - If a U.S. Leader Isn't Offending Palestinian Leaders, He's Probably Doing Something Wrong


NRO Newsletters . . .
Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty

July 31, 2012
In This Issue . . .
1. If a U.S. Leader Isn't Offending Palestinian Leaders, He's Probably Doing Something Wrong
2. Did Valerie Jarrett Really Veto Some Strikes Against bin Laden? Really?
3. When We Accuse the Obama Campaign of Being in Bed With the Press . . .
4. Addenda

Here's your Tuesday Morning Jolt. 

 

Enjoy!

 

Jim

1. If a U.S. Leader Isn't Offending Palestinian Leaders, He's Probably Doing Something Wrong

And those Palestinians always seemed so calm and easygoing beforehand:
 

Mitt Romney told Jewish donors Monday that their culture is part of what has allowed them to be more economically successful than the Palestinians, outraging Palestinian leaders who suggested his comments were racist and out of touch with the realities of the Middle East. Romney's campaign later said his remarks were mischaracterized.

 

"As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality," the Republican presidential candidate told about 40 wealthy donors who ate breakfast at the luxurious King David Hotel.

 

Romney said some economic histories have theorized that "culture makes all the difference."

"And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things," Romney said, citing an innovative business climate, the Jewish history of thriving in difficult circumstances and the "hand of providence." He said similar disparity exists between neighboring countries, like Mexico and the United States.

 

Regarding the Palestinians, when you teach your kids to become suicide bombers, and glorify that as one of the best things your children can aspire to, you're not going to find a lot of innovation, or education, or long-term planning. When Hezbollah and Hamas talk about their desire for a booming economy, they don't mean the term the way we do.

 

Thankfully, Mexico doesn't have a tradition of suicide bombers. In fact, it has what ought to be plenty of ingredients for economic prosperity -- two beautiful coastlines with ports, long agricultural growing seasons, oil and other natural resources, a legendarily hardworking populace. But without the rule of law, the knowledge that your gains will be protected from theft by either a drug cartel goon or some corrupt officeholder, you'll miss out on a lot of growth. A state-run oil company probably doesn't help, either.

 

At Powerline, Paul Mirengoff finds the analysis typically depressing:

 

Israelis may not publicly boast about cultural superiority. But few who have spent time in Israel will believe that Israelis attribute their economic superiority to the oppression of Palestinians or the notion that their neighbors just can't catch a break. Abba Eban's statement that the Arabs "never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity" sums up the prevailing sentiment.

 

But the most ridiculous take on Romney's remark comes not from a Palestinian, but from Abraham Diskin, a political science professor at the Inter-Disciplinary Center near Tel Aviv. The nutty professor said: "You can understand this remark in several ways; you can say it's anti-Semitic -- 'Jews and money.'"

 

You can say that if you're a self-hating Jew. You can say it if you're auditioning for a spot on Team Obama. But you can't say it with any credibility.

 

Our Charles Cooke thinks it is time to acknowledge the obvious, that some cultures serve its members much better than others:

 

This hasn't stopped Think Progress from impressing some poor intern onto the . Its complaint? That "Romney incensed Palestinians." Well, one might ask: So what? Ronald Reagan incensed many in the Soviet Union when he described their system as an "evil empire" and invited them to tear down the Berlin Wall. It doesn't mean that he was wrong.

 

Likewise, many Indians were incensed by British general Charles Napier who took a stand against the Hindu practice of "sati," an ancient practice by which widows were routinely burned alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands. When banning the practice, Napier told the incensed locals:

 

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well! We also have a custom. When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre. Beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."

 

India doesn't have sati any more and the Berlin Wall is no longer there - and those who were afflicted by the two things are better off for it.

 

David Harsanyi asks, "Is anyone really under the impression that the average American voter cares that Mitt Romney insulted the Palestinians?"

2. Did Valerie Jarrett Really Veto Some Strikes Against Osama bin Laden? Really?

As mentioned in yesterday's Three Martini Lunch, I'm not convinced this is the most fertile ground for a criticism of Obama:  

At the urging of Valerie Jarrett, President Barack Obama canceled the operation to kill Osama bin Laden on three separate occasions before finally approving the May 2, 2011 Navy SEAL mission, according to an explosive new book scheduled for release August 21. The Daily Caller has seen a portion of the chapter in which the stunning revelation appears.

 

In Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him, Richard Miniter writes that Obama canceled the "kill" mission in January 2011, again in February, and a third time in March. Obama's close adviser Valerie Jarrett persuaded him to hold off each time, according to the book.

 

Miniter, a two-time New York Times best-selling author, cites an unnamed source with Joint Special Operations Command who had direct knowledge of the operation and its planning.

 

First, I think highly of Richard Miniter, but how would this unnamed source with Joint Special Operations Command know that it was Jarrett who was persuading the president to put off the strike? JSOC would know about the delay, but would they be privy to Obama's conversations with Jarrett? Do the sources know she was the reason for the delay, or do they think she was the reason for the delay?

 

Either way, I figure the Obama administration would love to make the next 99 days as much about the Osama bin Laden strike as possible. Because no matter how convoluted or complicated the decision-making process was, the conversation always ends with ". . . and then we got him." Score one for the incumbent.

 

However, Jeff Goldstein says we ought to recognize the risk involved in Obama's decision: "I think Miniter is being a little tough on the President here, frankly. And that's because Obama had a very good reason for delaying the kill mission: namely, that Valerie Jarrett can be quite unpleasant -- hell, downright mean -- when she doesn't get her way."

 

For what it's worth, Moe Lane is skeptical: ". . . largely because I have a definite dislike of anonymous allegations, particularly when they're not backed up by any other evidence. I find it at least mildly difficult to believe that people would have been able to keep this a secret for this long; this isn't the Bush administration, which means that there's no inherent loyalty there. It's not impossible, but I am definitely wary of any unsourced allegation that happens to reinforce my already low opinion of this administration."

 

Put another way: Apparently Valerie Jarrett made enemies like Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs at times. You don't think guys like that would leak something like that if they knew, in an effort to undermine her influence?

3. When We Accuse the Obama Campaign of Being in Bed with the Press . . .

Hooray for the happy couple:

 

A deputy press secretary for Barack Obama's reelection campaign married an ABC reporter over the weekend. The ABC reporter, Matthew Jaffe, "covering the 2012 presidential campaign," according to his biography on the website of ABC News. "For the past year he traveled around the country covering the Republican primary, from the Iowa Straw Poll to the various debates to this year's primaries and caucuses."

The deputy press secretary Jaffe married is Katie Hogan. Many members of Obama's reelection team and the press celebrated the wedding together Saturday.

Should reporters be covering campaigns for which their spouse works? Should they be writing about the man who seeks to unseat their wife's boss?

 

Daniel Halper notices, "Jaffe and Hogan appear to have registered for wedding gifts at Bloomingdales and Crate & Barrel. A search of BarackObama.com reveals that the newlyweds have not registered with the Obama campaign, which would have allowed well-wishers to send cash donations to the campaign instead of getting wedding gifts."

4. Addenda

In an era of tape-delay NBC Olympics coverage, John Podhoretz goes and ruins it for all of us: "Spoiler: Some people whose names you won't remember next week won some medals."

 

Over on NRO's home page this morning, I take a look at the New Newt Gingrich, trying to settle into the role of supportive surrogate . . .

 

Quick Links:  The Campaign Spot   National Review Online   E-Mail Jim Geraghty
Save 75% . . .  Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the regular subscription rate. Click here for details.

 

Check out all of NRO's free newsletters: Morning Jolt, The Goldberg File, NRO Digest, and NROriginals. Click here for details.

 

Subscribe to NR

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Join the Morning Jolt Mailing List

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This email was sent to johnmhames1.lightofdiogenes@blogger.com by no-reply@nationalreview.com |  
National Review | 215 Lexington Avenue | 11th Floor | New York | NY | 10016

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Megyn Kelly -> Pete Hegseth responds to 2017 rape accusation. 🔥

FOLLOW THE MONEY - Billionaire tied to Epstein scandal funneled large donations to Ramaswamy & Democrats

Readworthy: This month’s best biographies & memoirs