The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy

1.   The only way to win the war on terror (or on what is called “Islamism”) is to terrorize the terrorists.

2.   To refrain from doing so because Islamic terrorists do not fear death is a strategic error.

3.   There are two ways of making them fear death. One is their witnessing unceasing attacks and annihilation of Islamic terrorists; the other is their witnessing the destruction of the visible symbols of their deity.

4.   Of course, the West is incapable of this kind of offensive warfare. Humanism or liberalism, tolerance and multiculturalism, preclude such ruthlessness. Sending our enemies to paradise is too much for self-righteous liberals or compassionate conservatives. Which is why the former abhorred, while the latter gradually deserted, the Bush Doctrine, by which I mean the following: (more…)

If you are wondering why the deluge of information about Obama’s shady past has not eliminated him from the presidential race;

If you are wondering why Obama may become America’s next president despite voluminous evidence of his being a liar and a fraud;

Let me reveal the secret underlying this grotesque state of affairs.

We are living in a postmodern world where truth and falsity are no longer relevant. In Barack Obama postmodernism (moral relativism) unites with the modernism that began with Machiavelli, who deified the self—the self-creating self that dispensed with the verities of the Bible. (more…)

Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, says, “Every [American] citizen interested in our survival as a free and safe country should read [Norman Podhoretz] World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism, 2007, 2008.”

I fully agree, and would only add, please do so before the November election.—Paul Eidelberg

Former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich and former CIA Director R. James Woolsey express the highest praise for Norman Podhoretz’s book World War IV: The Long Struggle Again Islamofascism (NY: Vintage: 2007, 2008).

Iran, a nation of 70 million people, is the epicenter of Islamofascism. Its government may deploy nuclear weapons in less than a year. Senator Barack Obama regards Iran as a mere “nuisance.” This is enough to indicate that an Obama presidency would be disastrous.

Obama is so infatuated with his oratorical skills that he thinks he can persuade Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to halt Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. The junior senator of Illinois Obama ignores the fact that five years of American and European diplomacy and sanctions have only given Iran five more years to develop a nuclear arsenal. (more…)

Herbert Marcuse was the philosopher of the New Left, which surfaced in academia in the 1960s and has since permeated American higher education.

Marcuse’s philosophy is an amalgam of existentialism and Marxism with a dash of Freud. I limit myself to existentialism which more readily solves the mystery of Senator Barack Obama.

The most well-known existentialist in the 20^th century was Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre was a moral relativist who chose to become a Marxist—not because Marxism is true, but because he deemed Marxism a convenient suit for the “nothingness” of his soul—a tabula rasa inherently devoid of identity. Sartre is famous for his philosophical dictum “existence precedes essence.” This dictum raises the question of an individual’s authenticity. To be authentic, one must choose one’s essence, that is, one’s own identity, which may also be called one’s “narrative.”

Of course, the fact that Obama is biracial has intensified his quest for identity. But Obama has also been influenced by existentialism, which requires the individual to mold or create himself. He cannot be authentic by affirming and living according to the principles of his nation’s heritage.

Besides, in this postmodern era of multiculturalism, the heritage of each nation appears arbitrary, another “narrative.” For almost a century, America has been immersed in a partisan, “liberal-conservative” narrative. Obama transcends this narrative, or so he would have us believe. His views of government have much in common with Progressivism. (more…)

Senator Barack Obama personifies an American identity crisis, a crisis also evident among the nations of Europe (to say nothing of Israel).

In Obama we behold a man whose origin and religious faith are mysterious, a man whose patriotism has been placed in question. I do not mention this to disparage Senator Obama, but rather to indicate that America itself and its future have become fearfully problematic.

Professor Samuel Huntington, an eminent political scientist, recently wrote a book entitled Who Are We? The title is both fitting and ironic. Huntington sees in America the ascendancy of multiculturalism, which cannot but erode any clear sense of national identity among American citizens. But Huntington himself is steeped in multiculturalism, since he is a cultural relativist—a far throw from his ancestor, the Samuel Huntington who signed America’s Declaration of Independence.

As a cultural relativist, Huntington cannot affirm “the self-evident truths” affirmed in that Declaration, the truths which America’s Founding Fathers derived from “laws of nature and nature’s God.” Such truths transcend space and time. They transcend “culture” and reject cultural relativism. (more…)

Revisionist historians aside, or those who do not understand Lincoln’s statesmanship, the Civil War that broke out in America after the 1860 election was over the slavery issue. Stated more precisely, the issue was whether slavery was to be extended to the territories of the United States. At issue, along with slavery, was the Declaration of Independence and its fundamental principle of moral equality.

Lincoln understood that if slavery were extended to the territories, slave states would eventually outnumber free states, in consequence of which, the slave states could readily amend the Constitution and extend slavery to the free states. Of course, the exact opposite would happen if the territories became free states. Lincoln steadfastly opposed the extension of slavery, and this meant civil war. So it was yesterday.

Today, however, the government of the United States, with the servile compliance of the government of Israel, wants to extend slavery via a Palestinian state into the territory called the “West Bank.” I say “slavery” because a Palestinian state would be nothing less than a tyranny, and that means human servitude.

Out of ignorance or interest, the candidates in the U.S. presidential campaign have endorsed a Palestinian state even though reason and experience demonstrate that such a state would be ruled by Arab despots and thereby lead to Israel’s demise. Forgotten are the basic principles of the American Declaration of Independence. (more…)

In an article dated October 14, 2008, Iranian-born journalist Amir Taheri writes: “Prepare for a new America: That’s the message that the Rev. Jesse Jackson conveyed to participants in the first World Policy Forum, held at [Evian, France] … last week.” Jackson went on to say: “Obama is about change. And the change that Obama promises is not limited to what we do in America itself. It is a change of the way America looks at the world and its place in it.”

Jackson has more or less confirmed the present writer’s assessment of Barak Obama or what I perceived in his campaign slogan of “Change.” But let me be more precise.

Senator Obama has nothing less in mind than regime change—a radical change in the political philosophy on which the American government is based, namely, the basic principles and values of the American Declaration of Independence.

This revolutionary document affirms that man is endowed with certain inalienable rights, among which are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. An Obama government would substitute a right to happiness for the pursuit of happiness. Such a government would thus be utterly paternalistic—a tyranny. (more…)

Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin may lose the November election unless they speak like real mavericks and distinguish their political positions more sharply from those of their mediocre opponents. They are trailing in the polls for several reasons. The most decisive reason is their own mediocre performance. They are preoccupied too much with bread-and-butter issues on which they cannot score many points. Most significant, however, is their avoidance of the paramount issue confronting America, an issue that transcends the present economic crisis but which can arouse and inspire most Americans.

America is at war. To win this war we need to understand ourselves as well as the enemy. This is a two-fold task that McCain and Palin have failed to address in a serious way.

The enemy is not Islamic extremists that have hijacked Islam. Brave women such as Dr. Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Brigitte Gabriel, born and raised respectively in Syria, Somalia, and Lebanon, have shown that the enemy is simply Islam, a bellicose religion whose disciples have slaughtered 270 million “infidels” since the time of Muhammad. (more…)

Identifying the enemy is a precondition of fighting and winning any war—and the United States and Israel are at war with the same enemy. Indeed, the strategic issue of the presidential election, the issue that most clearly divides Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain, is precisely their different views of the enemy. It may even be said that Obama lacks any serious conception of the enemy!

Perhaps no one has understood the enemy of the United States better than Lee Harris. His book Civilization and Its Enemies is a classic, and unless its insights are internalized by the next President of the United States, Western civilization, now on the slippery slope, may perish.

Harris mentions two kinds of enemies. “First, the enemy is someone whom we have mistreated and oppressed. Second, the enemy is someone who demands to be recognized for his superiority.” The second describes Islam, which regards all “infidels” as sub-human.

If the enemy was simply an oppressed group fighting to have equal recognition of his status vis-à-vis other groups, his enmity could be eliminated or gradually abated by granting him the status he is seeking. (more…)

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, September 15, 2008.

If Israel has a true friend, look not for him in Washington. Last week, it was reported that the Bush administration will not cooperate with Israel should it decide to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. Taken at face value, this will hinder Israel in facing off alone against the much larger Islamic Republic which is equipped with some of the latest military technology from Russia.

True, the U.S. has agreed to sell Israel 1,000 “bunker-buster” bombs and to bolster Israel’s missile defense system. But this is hardly reassuring if Israel is not allowed to refuel its military planes in Iraq, or use Iraqi airspace for a flyover on the way to Iran. Even if Israeli jets were to reach Iran, they might not be able to carry enough bombs to do the job.

If the Bush administration has in effect vetoed an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, one may conclude that, from an objective point of view, it is not strategically concerned about Israel’s survival. Consistent with this unpleasant conclusion, not only is George W. Bush the first president that openly advocated a Palestinian state, but he has offered the Palestinian authority a U.S. guarantee of statehood without conditions—for starters, demilitarization. Surely Mr. Bush knows that a militarized Arab state occupying the Judean and Samarian highlands would make Israel indefensible. Surely he knows, as MK Yuval Steinitz knows and has warned, a Palestinian state would “immediately become an outpost for Iran.” (more…)

Three months from now, American citizens will be voting for the next President of the United States. They will be faced by the choice of voting for Senator John McCain or for Senator Barack Obama. This may well be the most momentous decision of their lives, for in the next few years Iran, if not prevented, will have nuclear weapons. With such weapons and the range of its current launching systems, Iran will dominate not only the Middle East and its enormous oil reserves, but also pacifist Europe on which the economy and therefore the way of life and even the survival of the United States ultimately depend.

So what should be going through the minds of Americans before they vote for Senator McCain or for Senator Obama?

To begin with, let us consider how one of America’s Founding fathers, James Wilson, thought about the general subject of voting.

James Wilson of Pennsylvania was one of six men who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. His contribution to the deliberations of the Federal Constitutional Convention of 1787 was second only to that of James Madison. He was also the principal draftsman of Pennsylvania’s own constitution of 1790. (more…)

Mark Steyn, America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It

Reviewed by Paul Eidelberg

Internationally renowned journalist Mark Steyn is famous for his abrasive yet delightful wit. One wonders, however, how a book subtitled The End of the World as We Know It   can make delightful reading. Perhaps because Steyn’s wit conveys “politically incorrect” truths obscured by timid and shallow pundits.

Like Oriana Fallaci, Steyn not only exposes Islamic imperialism, but also the moral confusion or cowardice of western elites—think of George bush and Barack Obama—who cuddle up to Islam or obscure its bellicose and hateful nature. Steyn quotes Bernard Lewis, the dean of Islamic scholars:

“In 1940, we knew who we were, we knew who the enemy was, we knew the dangers and the issues…. It is different today. We don’t know who we are. We don’t know the issues, and we still do not understand the nature of the enemy.”

America Alone is an urgently needed wake up call. Steyn warns America about what is happening to its NATO allies:    (1) An aging and declining European population has necessitated the importation of foreign workers, primarily Muslim Arabs from North Africa.    (2) Since these Muslims refuse to integrate, they constitute a hostile and prolific population that threatens to inundate the Continent. (more…)

Citing Jack Cashill, “The Mansourian Candidate,” Middle East analyst Emanuel A. Winston discusses various sponsors and mentors who seem to have been behind Barack Obama’s meteoric rise to public prominence and who may have influenced his political orientation.

Among those mentioned are the anti-American author Khalid al-Mansour, the principle adviser of Saudi billionaire Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal; the notorious Columbia University Professor Edward Said, once a member of the PLO; and Syrian-born Tony Rezko, a Chicago politician who became executive director of the Muhammad Ali Foundation to spread Islam.

To these one must add Bill Ayers, founder and theoretician of the Weatherman Underground terrorist organization (1969-1976), now a professor. Then there is the racist and revolutionary ideology/theology of Obama’s most publicized mentor the Rev. “God-damn-America” Jeremiah Wright. Obama attended Wright’s church for twenty years. This is the same Wright who unabashedly expressed his admiration for the Jew-hater Louis Farrakhan, a purveyor of Islam.

And so, as Winston rightly concludes, America is poised to elect a man to the presidency whose known mentors and sponsors put a lie to just about everything Obama has said on the campaign trail. (more…)

Sarah Palin displays what is most lacking in many people in high office: character. Character is far more fundamental and important than “experience,” because without good character, experience will not enable office-holders to deal with the tough issues confronting our country.

A person of character has moral integrity and courage, personal dignity and humility, a strong sense of justice and devotion to the common good, respect for human life and, above all, a love of God. All this I discern in Governor Sarah Palin’s character—a strong, dynamic, yet humble person.

The Jewish sages regard humbleness as the highest virtue. Indeed, the Torah says Moses was the humblest person on the face of the earth. Humbleness is the only adjective the Torah uses to describe Moses. Why? Because humbleness is a precondition for achieving the highest wisdom. No wonder Gentile as well as Jewish philosophers and statesmen esteem Moses as the greatest law-giver of mankind.

I’m not suggesting that Governor Palin or any living person possesses the wisdom of Moses. (more…)

Democracy literally means the rule of the people, which translates into the rule of the majority. Show me a nation in which the people, or a majority of the people, rule.

Consider the world’s leading democracy, the United States. There are about 200,000 million eligible voters in the United States, but as few as 35 percent vote in midterm elections, and little more than a majority vote in presidential elections—and even this is misleading.

A mere 15 percent of Americans polled by the PEW Research Center in July 1999 said they were paying very close attention to the Gore-Bush campaign, and the percentage was lower for those under 30 years of age.

The truth is that few Americans display any serious interest in politics. Carl Boggs reports that a 1997 UCLA poll of 252,000 freshmen at 464 colleges and universities around the country indicated that only 26.7 percent of the respondents said that it was important to keep up with public affairs. (more…)

Since Barack Obama is the first Black presidential candidate in American history, it was essential to make him personally familiar to the American people. This could not be done by speaking of his legislative accomplishments, of which none is worth mentioning. Nor could such familiarity be achieved by speaking of Obama’s experience in world affairs, of which he is less than an amateur.

Obama, whose mentor for many years was “God-damn-America” Jeremiah Wright, had to be given a media image—crafted in a certain way, one that would make Americans feel he was one of them. He had to appear not only as a red-white-and–blue American, but someone like your neighbor, even a friend, someone you often had over for dinner, someone you have known for many years—a family man with family values (contrary to the permissiveness of his Democratic Party).

His wife’s speech at the Democratic National Convention made this transparently clear. She was, oh, so personal, so charmingly intimate. Barack is like you and me. We are all the same despite our differences. We all want change. We all want to make life better for our children. That’s what America is all about—a nation of hopes and dreams.

And so Michelle, like her husband, played on the emotions. She made you feel good, compassionate, perhaps even tearful—at one with everyone. (more…)

Barack Obama has chosen Zbigniew Brzezinski to advise him on Middle East policy. This bodes ill, and not only for Israel.

Back in 1985, I wrote an article on Brzezinski for The Intercollegiate Review. Before citing some of the more relevant passages of that article, it should be borne in mind that Brzezinski, a political scientist, served as President Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser. One does not have to read Carter’s Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid to know that Carter is an anti-Semite. Brzezinski has earned the same reputation.

Not only has Brzezinski publicly defended the anti-Semitic canard that the relationship between America and Israel is the result of Jewish pressure, but he also signed a letter demanding dialogue with Hamas, whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction. It behooves us to understand the mentality of Obama’s Middle East adviser—and more deeply than our so-called experts.

Long before he became Mr. Carter’s national security adviser, Brzezinski rejected what he and most political scientists term the “black-and-white” image of the American and Soviet political systems. (more…)

Former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton recently raised the question of a possible Israeli attack on Iran. Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Bolton urged the US to aid Israel before, during, and after such an attack—if it should take place.

This may mean that Bolton does not believe a US attack on Iran is in the cards. Indeed, pundits report that Washington is opposed to an Israeli preemptive strike because it would “destabilize” the region. And what would a nuclear armed-Iran do to the region—especially now that Vladimir Putin (allied with Iran) is restoring the Cold War, largely by means of Russia’s oil and gas resources on which Europe is dependent?

What does all this mean for Israel? The continuance of a Kadima-led government can only spell further disaster—and not only because Kadima is committed to territorial retreat from Judea and Samaria. That very commitment signifies that the leaders of that ersatz party do not have the guts to deal with the Iranian threat. (more…)

“Humanity,” said Alexander Hamilton, “does not require us to sacrifice our own security and welfare to the convenience, or advantage of others. Self-preservation is the first principle of our nature. When our lives and properties are at stake, it would be foolish and unnatural to refrain from such measures as might preserve them, because it would be detrimental to others.”

It has rightly been said that Hamilton was always adverse to relying on other countries to do for Americans what he believed they ought to do for themselves.

Hamilton was 21 when revolution was simmering in America. Some of his contemporaries argued that the Americans could rely on Britain for relief of their grievances. Hamilton responded: “Tell me not of the British Commons, Lords, [and] ministerial tools … I scorn to let my life depend upon the pleasure of any of them.”

Georgia, invaded by Russia, can expect no aid from its ally, the United States. The same applies to Israel, threatened by a nuclear Iran. (more…)

The must watch 6½-minute video that could change our future—please watch this and take action. Below is a shortcut permanent link to this post.

Six minutes of common sense, by video.

Permalink copy (copy and paste the link below to forward this story):
http://foundation1.org/wp-en/2008/08/11/the-second-american-revolution