By Joseph Pruder 

Front Page Magazine

May 2, 2019, Israel observed Holocaust Remembrance Day. It was a good time to re-examine the Jewish state’s relations with the Federal Republic of Germany, formerly Nazi Germany, a nation that perpetrated the greatest crime in history against Europe’s Jews, known as the Holocaust. 

Naturally, many Germans wish the memory of the Holocaust and its German perpetrators to go away and be forgotten. Young Germans do not wish to carry the burden of guilt for the most heinous crime in modern history.

Monetary reparation paid by the Germans to Holocaust survivors for the stolen properties of European Jews notwithstanding, reality today is that Berlin has not done more than lip service to “solidarity with Israel” and its claims of “Israel’s security being Germany’s raison d’état.” 

Germany has been a major contributor to anti-Israel resolutions at the UN General Assembly and other UN agencies. Germany moreover, has aided and abetted the genocidal Islamic Republic of Iran in evading U.S. sanctions.  Germany’s non-governmental agencies (NGO’s) supported by the German government fund various anti-Israel groups in the Palestinian Authority and in Israel itself.

According to the Gatestone Institute, Chancellor Angela Merkel has pressured other European Union states to refrain from moving their embassies from Tel Aviv to Israel’s capital – Jerusalem. 

Merkel not only rejected the Trump administration’s move to relocate the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, she has authorized the allotment of $100 million to the Palestinian Authority’s allocated budget of $300 million, for payment to Palestinian terrorists to kill Jews.

Frank Muller-Rosentritt, a member of the German Bundestag (parliament) committee on foreign relations, representing the opposition Free Democratic Party (FDP) declared, “We must no longer let Israel down at the UN. It is madness that we are constantly on the side of countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Yemen, against Israel.”

It is not only with UN resolutions that Germany sides with Israel’s enemies. Berlin funds anti-Israel Non-Governmental Agencies (NGO’s). The +972 Magazine of the Heinrich Boll foundation, a think-tank associated with the German Green Party, regularly accuses Israel of “Apartheid.” According to NGO-Monitor, the German government funding is one of the least transparent in Europe. 

Still, the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development funds Al-Haq through its program, the Civil Peace Service. Al-Haq, a Palestinian NGO, is the leader in the anti-Israel BDS (Boycotts, Divestments, and Sanctions) movement. 

It engages in legal warfare against Israel. Israel’s Supreme Court identified Al-Haq’s Director General Shawan Jabarin to be a senior activist in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terrorist group. The PFLP was designated as a terrorist organization by the European Union (EU).

Germany has increased its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which serves as an incubator for Palestinian terrorism. Moreover, Germany is undermining the Trump administration, which recently cut its support for UNRWA because it incites violence against Israel and harbors terrorists and their weapons. UNRWA is nurturing the notion of Palestinian “right of return,” which is incompatible with the idea of the Two-State solution that Germany allegedly supports.

The German police issued a report last August claiming that most of the anti-Semitic attacks in Germany were perpetrated by neo-Nazis. This report was undoubtedly directed by the German Federal government that seeks to hide the increasing jihadist terror attacks committed by many of the one million Muslim immigrants from the Middle East and Africa that Angela Merkel invited into Germany. 

This report was disputed by leaders of the German Jewish community who blamed the police for ignoring the vastly numerous anti-Semitic attacks by Muslims.

Another issue that reflects Germany’s hypocrisy is in dealing with Iran. Germany supports the Iranian regime in contravention with the U.S. efforts to isolate the murderous theocratic and oppressive regime.   A regime that vows repeatedly to destroy the Jewish state. 

Merkel has vowed time after time that “Israel’s security is not negotiable,” and yet, her government supports a regime that not only perpetrates terror worldwide, including Europe and Germany, but is also brutal toward its own people.

Under the so-called “2015 nuclear deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)” Iran is continuing to develop its military nuclear program as well as long range ballistic missiles that threatens Europe, and naturally Israel. Greed, rather than concern for global security, not to mention Israel’s security, motivates the German government.

In the meantime, anti-Semitism in Germany is raging. The Catholic daily La Croix headline (February 18, 2019) read, “Alarming rise of anti-Semitism in Germany.” The sub-heading stated that the “Arrival of thousands of immigrants from the Middle East evoked fears of a new anti-Semitism.” 

]In their efforts to assuage their guilt and shake off the “stain on humanity” Nazi Germany committed, some of the younger generation Germans employ these days a shameful moral-equivalency. They are comparing Nazi-Germany’s treatment of Jews with Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Such a comparison is not only outrageous, it is immoral.

Israel has never gassed or murdered innocent Palestinians, as the Nazis did with Jews. Israeli hospitals do not discriminate against Palestinian-Muslim patients, nor are Palestinians required to wear Yellow Star bands as the Germans forced Jews to do. Israel never had nor will have concentration camps, labor camps, and certainly not death camps as the Nazi Germans did. 

Furthermore, Israel has been sensitive to Palestinian poverty, and seeks to elevate Palestinian quality of life. The Israeli government has pursued ways to provide employment for Palestinians. Unfortunately, Palestinian terrorism has undermined this effort to a large extent. It has required Israel to use check-points and a separation wall to save lives. This sort of German moral-equivalency is an insult to Jewish Holocaust survivors in Israel, and to the truth.

With Holocaust Remembrance Day, Israelis might want to consider whether today’s Germany is a friend or foe. One thing is clear, it is time to unmask Germany’s hypocrisy vis-à-vis Israel.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to, Web Page:  “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

The Democrat Green New Deal

How the Green New Deal avoids ‘green eye shades’

By Todd Tiahrt 

The Washington Times  April, 2019

Pipelines are a key link for our families and our country. They fuel the electrical power grid that keeps our lights on, the farms that feed us, the trucks that deliver what we need, and the transportation we use to pick up our kids from school. Yet pipelines are the bane of the radical environmentalists that support the Green New Deal.

The Green New Deal has been praised by not only environmental activists but also by some in the national media, non-traditional liberals, Democratic Socialists and a few presidential candidates, all without regards to the “green eye shades.” 

A opinion piece about the 2013 Budget Committee hearings in Washington refers to the “green eye shades” as the individuals who are excessively concerned with financial matters or small and insignificant details. 

It is those very details, however, that underscore the impracticality of the Green New Deal and reiterate the role that pipelines play in safely transporting fuel to a growing, successful economy.

Consider just the first of the five goals of the Green New Deal, which is to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions within 10 years! Greenhouse gasses are primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) all of which are related to the production, transportation, refinement and use of fossil fuels. So, for the radical Green New Deal advocates their goals include stopping the use of pipelines.

That is why we have seen radical “green” opposition not only to fossil fuels but to one of the safest and most economical means of moving those resources, our pipelines. 

Stymying the construction and operation of this infrastructure not only crushes our economy, but it puts the environment at risk by moving fuels by truck or train both of which add to the risk of spills and are more carbon-intensive transit options.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, “the pipeline network has about 3 million miles of mainline and other pipelines that link natural gas production areas and storage facilities with consumers.” Further, the U. S. Department of Transportation Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration reports that the natural gas delivery system is the safest form of energy delivery in the nation.

Ironically, without these pipelines the goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, which essentially relies on solar and wind power, is completely unachievable. Simply said, you cannot have solar or wind power without the use of fossil fuels, natural gas in particular.

The green eye shades know that the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine so to maintain base load electrical power requires electricity on demand to fill the power gaps. Electrical power on demand is increasingly provided by electrical generators fueled by natural gas transported through our energy infrastructure network. Paradoxically, blocking a pipeline blocks the Green New Deal.

Further, in 2018 our country became the largest energy producer in the world and we are on track to become the largest oil and natural gas exporter within the next five years. The green eye shades know that means growth to our economy, the creation of more jobs and a significant impact on our trade deficit. Key to this growth and job creation is transporting oil and natural gas through pipelines. Hindering pipelines obstructs our future economic growth.

It is no wonder the “green eye shades” are avoided by the proponents of the Green New Deal. Those individuals — and those details — keep the pipelines operating safely, fueling an exciting growing economy, creating more jobs and they are shedding light on the destructive Green New Deal.

Todd Tiahrt is a former member of Congress from Kansas who served on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to Web Page:  Please “Like” on Facebook:  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Scientists Making War on Traditional Masculity by Ben Shapiro

The American Psychological Association proved once again that it is a political body rather than a scientific one.

This isn’t the first time a major mental health organization has favored politics over science—in 2013, the American Psychiatric Association famously reclassified “gender identity disorder” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, calling it “gender dysphoria” and then explaining that living with the delusion that you are a member of the opposite sex is not actually a mental disorder at all.

That ruling was based on zero scientific evidence—much like the original DSM-5 classification of pedophilia as a “sexual orientation” before it was renamed “pedophilic disorder” under public pressure.

The latest example of the American Psychological Association’s political hackery concerns the topic of “traditional masculinity.”

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

In the American Psychological Association journal, it announced that it had released new guidelines to “help psychologists work with men and boys.” Those guidelines suggest that “40 years of research” show that “traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage that echoes both inwardly and outwardly.”

The American Psychological Association explains that “traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance, and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors.”

Never mind that traditional masculinity—a masculinity geared toward channeling masculine instincts of building and protecting, rather than tearing down—built Western civilization and protected it from the brutalities of other civilizational forces. Never mind that traditional masculinity protected femininity and elevated women to equal status in public policy.

Traditional masculinity is actually just men sitting around and eating burgers while grunting at one another about football, all the while crying on the inside because they have been prohibited by society from showing their feelings.

And it’s worse than that.

According to the American Psychological Association, traditional masculinity bumps up “against issues of race, class, and sexuality,” maximizing both interior and exterior conflict.

Dr. Ryon McDermott, a psychologist from the University of South Alabama who helped draft the new American Psychological Association guidelines, suggested that gender is “no longer just this male-female binary.” Rather, gender is a mere social construct that can be destroyed without consequence.

Here’s the American Psychological Association making the extraordinarily dishonest statement that gender differences aren’t biological at all, in contravention of all known social science research: “Indeed, when researchers strip away stereotypes and expectations, there isn’t much difference in the basic behaviors of men and women.”

Destroy masculinity in order to destroy discrimination and depression. Feminize men, and indoctrinate boys.

In order to reach this conclusion, the American Psychological Association has to define traditional masculinity in the narrowest, most negative terms possible—and then other those who disagree as part of the patriarchy. But as a political body, the American Psychological Association has little problem doing this.

All of this is not only nonsense; it’s wildly counterproductive nonsense.

Buried beneath the reams of nonsense in the American Psychological Association report is this rather telling gem: “It’s also important to encourage pro-social aspects of masculinity. … In certain circumstances, traits like stoicism and self-sacrifice can be absolutely crucial.”

But we must never suggest that such traits ought to be included as part of a “traditional masculinity,” because that would make some people feel excluded.

Here’s the truth: Men are looking for meaning in a world that tells them they are perpetuators of discrimination and rape culture; that they are beneficiaries of an overarching, nasty patriarchy; that they are, at best, disposable partners to women, rather than protectors of them. Giving men purpose requires us to give them purpose as men, not merely as genderless beings.

There’s a lot to be said for the idea that our culture has ignored the necessity for men to become gentlemen. But that’s a result of a left-wing culture that denigrates men, not a traditional masculinity built on the idea that men were born to defend, protect, and build.

One thing is certainly true, though: The American Psychological Association has destroyed itself on the shoals of politics. And there’s no reason for honest-thinking people to take its anti-scientific pronouncements seriously simply because it masquerades as scientists while ignoring facts in favor of political correctness.


Poland cancels Israeli delegation’s visit to discuss Holocaust reparations

Poland cancelled the visit of an Israeli delegation scheduled to arrive to discuss the return of Jewish property stolen during the Holocaust.

By David Isaac, World Israel News,  May 13, 2019

Poland’s Foreign Ministry announced on Monday that it was cancelling the visit of a senior Israeli delegation to Warsaw to discuss Holocaust reparations.

The ministry said that it had made the decision after “Israel made last-minute changes in the composition of the delegation, indicating that the talks will focus mainly on issues related to the return of Jewish property during the Holocaust.

The issue of returning property to Jews who suffered during the Holocaust has become a bone of contention between Israel and Poland recently. The issue has led to a wave of protests in Poland.

On Saturday, thousands of Polish nationalists marched to the U.S. Embassy in Warsaw, protesting that the U.S. is putting pressure on Poland to compensate Jews whose families lost property during the Holocaust.

“Why should we have to pay money today when nobody gives us anything?” said 22-year-old protester Kamil Wencwel. “Americans only think about Jewish and not Polish interests.”

Poland views itself as a victim of the Holocaust and not a perpetrator. In 2012, then President Barack Obama caused a diplomatic incident when he referred to a Nazi death camp as a “Polish death camp,” bringing a blistering rebuke from Poland’s prime minister at the time, Donald Tu

“When someone says ‘Polish death camps,’ it’s as if there were no Nazis, no German responsibility, as if there was no Hitler,” Mr. Tusk said at the time. “That is why our Polish sensitivity in these situations is so much more than just simply a feeling of national pride.”

Yesterday, Israel’s Ministry for Social Equality announced the coming departure of the delegation, which would be led by the ministry’s director-general, Avi Cohen Scali.

The announcement read, “The government of Israel views the restoration of the Jewish property and the promotion of Holocaust survivors’ rights as a moral imperative of the Jewish state. No factor, political or anti-Semitic, will stop us from carrying out this important order … The hourglass is running out, and we must act more vigorously before it is too late.”

According to the Walla! news site, Labor Knesset Member Itzik Shmuli took the opportunity to blame the Netanyahu administration. MK Shmuli, who chairs the Pensioners and Holocaust Survivors Caucus, said following the news of Poland’s cancellation, “Anyone willing to negotiate with the Poles about the very memory of the Holocaust should not be surprised that in the end we will be humiliated by the Poles.”

“The entire responsibility is on the government, which instead of fighting in the first place, has put the historical Jewish narrative up for sale,” he said.

Blue-and-White Party co-leader Yair Lapid, tweeted, “Once again the Polish government embarrasses the government of Israel regarding the memory of the Holocaust. It started with the Holocaust-denial law, and has now reached the issue of property restitution (about which one could say ‘you murdered and inherited’).”

The Holocaust-Denial law to which MK Lapid referred was passed by the Polish parliament last year and criminalized any accusation that Poland was complicit in the Holocaust. The law was later amended to make any offenses civil, and not criminal, offenses.

In June, 2018, the Netanyahu administration came under criticism for a joint statement with Poland about the Holocaust. Yad Vashem, the official memorial to the Holocaust in Israel, issued a statement in its wake, saying “A thorough review by Yad Vashem historians shows that the historical assertions, presented as unchallenged facts, in the joint statement contain grave errors and deception”

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to Web Page:  “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

William Barr confirms expanded Justice Department probe of Russia-Clinton links

– The Washington Times – May 1, 2019

Huma Abedin, who has been at Hillary Rodham Clinton's side as her personal assistant or "body woman" since the 2008 presidential race, faced criticism for standing by her husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner, after sexting scandals that damaged his political career. (Associated Press) ** FILE **
Huma Abedin, who has been at Hillary Rodham Clinton’s side as her personal assistant or “body woman” since the 2008 presidential race, faced criticism for standing by her husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner, after sexting scandals that damaged his political career.

Hillary Clinton, The Steele Document Fiasco and Finally Facing the Music

Hillary Clinton Projection Syndrome

By Victor Davis Hanson

By May 2, 2019 6:30 AM

© 2019 Tribune Content Agency, LLC

Her political power is waning, and her attempts to suggest indictment of Trump show her personal fears.

Hillary Clinton recently editorialized about the second volume of special counsel Robert Mueller’s massive report. She concluded of the report’s assorted testimonies and inside White House gossip concerning President Trump’s words and actions that “any other person engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted.”

Psychologists might call her claims “projection.” That is the well-known psychological malady of attributing bad behavior to others as a means of exonerating one’s own similar, if not often even worse, sins.

After 22 months of investigation and $34 million spent, the Mueller report concluded that there was no Trump–Russia collusion — the main focus of the investigation — even though that unfounded allegation dominated print and televised media’s speculative headlines for the last two years.

While Mueller’s report addressed various allegations of Trump’s other roguery, the special counsel did not recommend that the president be indicted for obstruction of justice in what Mueller had just concluded was not a crime of collusion.

What Mueller strangely did do — and what most federal prosecutors do not do — was cite all the allegedly questionable behavior of a target who has just been de facto exonerated by not being indicted.

What Mueller did not do was explain that much of the evidence he found useful was clearly a product of unethical and illegal behavior. In the case of the false charge of “collusion,” the irony was rich.

Russians likely fed salacious but untrue allegations about Trump to ex-British spy Christopher Steele, who was being paid in part by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to find dirt on Trump.

The Russians rightly assumed that Steele would lap up their fantasies, seed them among Trump-hating officials in the Barack Obama administration and thereby cause hysteria during the election, the transition, and, eventually, the Trump presidency.

Russia succeeded in sowing such chaos, thanks ultimately to Clinton, who likely had broken federal laws by using a British national and, by extension, Russian sources to warp an election. Without the fallacious Steele dossier, the entire Russian collusion hoax never would have taken off.

Without Steele’s skullduggery, there probably would have been no Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court–approved surveillance of Trump aide Carter Page. There might have been no FBI plants inserted into the Trump campaign. There might have been no subsequent leaking to the press of classified documents to prompt a Trump collusion investigation.

Given the Steele travesty and other past scandals, it is inexplicable that Clinton has not been indicted.

Her lawlessness first made headlines 25 years ago, when she admitted that her cattle-futures broker had defied odds of one in 31 trillion by investing $1,000 from her trading account and returning a profit of nearly $100,000. Clinton failed to report about $6,500 in profits to the IRS. She initially lied about her investment windfall by claiming she made the wagers herself. She even fantastically alleged that she mastered cattle-futures trading by reading financial newspapers.

To paraphrase Clinton herself, anyone else would have been indicted for far less.

The reason that foreign oligarchs are no longer donating millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and that Bill Clinton is not being offered $500,000 for speaking appearances in Moscow, is simply that Hillary Clinton is not secretary of state. She is no longer in a public position to hector her colleagues into approving pro-Russian commercial deals, such as the one that gave Russian interests access to North American uranium.

As secretary of state, Clinton also sidestepped the law by setting up a home-brewed email server. She transmitted classified documents over this insecure route and lied about it. And she destroyed some 30,000 emails that were in effect under subpoena. Anyone else would have been indicted for far less.

In truth, Clinton was at the heart of the entire Russian-collusion hoax. Even after the election, she kept fueling it in order to blame Trump–Russia conspiracies for her stunning defeat in 2016. Unable to acknowledge her own culpability as a weak and uninspiring candidate, Clinton formally joined the post-election “resistance” and began whining about collusion. That excuse seemed preferable to explaining why she had blown a huge lead and lost despite favorable media coverage and superior funding.

For much of her professional life, Hillary Clinton had acted above and beyond the law on the assumption that as the wife of a governor, as first lady of the United States, as a senator from New York, as secretary of state, and as a two-time candidate for the presidency, she could ignore the law without worrying over the consequences.

For Clinton now to project that the president should be indicted suggests she is worried about her own potential indictment. And she is rightly concerned that for the first time in 40 years, neither she nor her husband is serving in government or running for some office, and therefore she could be held accountable.

NRO contributor VICTOR DAVIS HANSON is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author, most recently, of The Case for Trump. @vdhanson

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to

Web Page:  

“Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

The Democrat Party Is Dead — Unfortunately

The Democrat Party Is Dead

Will Alexander,

The Democrat Party is so unrecognizable today because it’s gone.  The name is still there.  Some of the old faces are there.  But the party of John Kennedy, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Barbara Jordan and Zell Miller is dead.

Today’s Democrat Party is hollowed out by a chronic addiction to hyper-partisan controversies that mimic the feeling of being alive. Controversy gives Dems a constant drip of political dopamine they could never find in solving real problems. And they’re hooked now.

So, we’re witnessing a case of shared psychotic disorder that’s driving the party to self-medicate. Drug of choice? Donald Trump. Democrats are so impaired by their craving to “get Trump” that they imbibe day-in and day-out despite the deadly consequences to their party and to the country.

But while they trip out on Trump – seeing and hearing things that aren’t there – a mess of political misfits are filling the party void.  The new soul of the party is made up of a hodgepodge of misfits who team with rabid, left-leaning media and dark operators to push a pre-capitalist, post Judeo-Christian, anti-American revolution under a Democrat veneer.

Democrats are becoming America’s first “Manchurian” party.

At the slightest whiff of the old left-of-center odor, a Gestapo of tyrants is dispatched to keep fossilized Democrats like Biden and Feinstein whipped into submission.

But rather than killing the cancer in their party, the old Democrats let it go untreated.  Fearing retribution, traditional Dems’ mince their public words into such milquetoast, poll-tested blah-blah that they are unintelligible. Would-be presidents are falling over each other to out-socialist the socialists without calling it socialism.  They want murderers and illegals to vote, free college, free medical, a guaranteed income, reparations, no guns, sanctuary cities, legalized prostitution, a federal law to legalize pot, and they want a duly elected president to be impeached.

Given Biden’s sad Anita Hill apology and his revisionist history on the origins of the “rule of thumb,” he lacks the political magic to raise the party from the dead. To placate the Gestapo, Biden even launched his campaign on an outright lie.  He said Trump dignified white supremacy after Charlottesville.  He didn’t.  But it doesn’t matter that he didn’t.  Charlottesville is political cocaine – a potent white powder that perpetuates the delusion of white power.

Trump’s election didn’t cause the party’s demise, it exposed it.  Democrat derangement has been a problem for years.

Sen. Zell Miller, (D-Ga.) was so alarmed at his party’s scorched-Earth partisanship in 2004 that he openly criticized Sen. John Kerry, spoke at the Republican National Convention that year, and endorsed George W. Bush.  Back then, Democrats had Bush Derangement Syndrome, a condition discovered and diagnosed by Dr. Charles Krauthammer.

“Where is the bipartisanship in this country when we need it most?” Miller asked an enthused Republican crowd. “Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat’s manic obsession to bring down our Commander in Chief.

“Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today’s Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.  And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.

“Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier …  It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom to abuse and burn that flag.

“No one should dare to even think about being Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn’t believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.  But don’t waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking, America is the problem not the solution.”

That warped thinking is even worse, today – especially on illegal immigration. Until Tom Friedman’s halting admission of America’s need for a strong border, no liberal of consequence has talked about what’s happening in plain sight with illegal immigration.

But for Texas Democrat Barbara Jordan, there was a big difference between legal and illegal immigration. President Clinton appointed her to chair the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform (created in 1990) and asked her team to come up with recommendations that could be implemented into policy by 1997. Her recommendations on legal immigration were guided strictly by the national interest.  Recommendations on illegal immigration were guided strictly by the rule of law.

“The issue of immigration is not a partisan issue,” she said at the United We Stand America National Convention in 1995.  “Immigration is not a right, guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution to everyone anywhere in the world who thinks they want to come to the United States.  Immigration is a privilege.  It is a privilege granted by the people of the United States to those we choose to admit.

“We must control illegal immigration before it erodes legal immigration. … The commission defines credibility in immigration policy by a simple yardstick: Those who should get in, get in.  Those who should be kept out, are kept out.  And those who should not be here, are required to leave.

“As a commission we denounce hostility toward immigrants. … But we are a country of laws.  For our immigration policy to make sense it is necessary to make distinctions between those who obey the law and those who violate it.  Therefore, we disagree with those who would label any effort to control immigration as somehow anti-immigrant.  Unlawful immigration is not acceptable.”

These were true Democrats; people who had ideological differences but had the knowledge and experience to articulate why they respectfully disagreed on policy without resorting to constant ad hominem attacks, hateful innuendo and outright lies.   When they felt members of their party were dead wrong on big issues, they had the political courage to unapologetically follow what they saw was in the best interest of the country.

Today, that party is gone.

In its place is a party who has declared war against the opposition party and has hijacked the apparatus of the old Democrat Party to fundamentally change America.  It’s their way, or the highway. It is apologetically capitalist, apologetically American and religiously secular.

 Raising the old party from the dead will take more than a candidate; it will take a miracle.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to, Web Page:  “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Skip to toolbar