Echo from the Indianapolis Star- Donald Trump's wrong Jerusalem action

It's stunning to find these opinion articles in randomly selected national newspapers. I'm amazed by the insightful levels of thought put into letters to the editor by well meaning people, who are challenging the Republican points of view on nearly every issue.

In this "Echo" series, I re-blog letters of particular interest.  

Indianapolis point of view- Jerusalem

Following is an intelligent response published in the Indianapolis Star, the hometown newspaper to Vice President Mike Pence. 

In the letter, an academic contributor named "Atlas" responds to the irresponsible action Donald Trump took in overriding the international community to declare he is moving the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv, to Jerusalem. Not only is this action abrasive to everybody in the Middle East except for Israel, but Pope Francis spoke out against this unwarranted action. Moreover, nobody seems to be concerned about the cost of this action but surely it will be expensive, because land in Jerusalem is scarce (maybe Donald Trump intends to attach the embassy to a Trump Tower - ugh!)


With a brief (slurred*) speech and the stroke (scribble**) of a pen, Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and his promise to relocate the U.S. embassy radically altered 70 years of bipartisan policy in the Middle East. 

Despite the naïve optimism he expressed on Wednesday, no one will be the better for this move, not the United States and not even Israel.

Let’s be clear: the functional capital of Israel — the seat of its parliament (the Knesset), the prime minister’s residence and government ministries — is Jerusalem. 

But like most things in the Middle East, reality is not so simple. Perhaps no city in the world carries more symbolic weight than the City of Peace, where any change to the status quo can cause an international incident.

The 1947 United Nations resolution that partitioned British Mandate Palestine into Jewish and Arab states (which the United States endorsed) defined Jerusalem as an international city to be under United Nations, not Jewish or Arab control. 

Moreover, the Jews accepted partition and the Arabs rejected it, and when the ensuing war ended in 1949, Jerusalem was divided for the first time in its 3,000 year history. Like Berlin in 1945, Jerusalem’s boundaries were defined by where the fighting stopped. 

Jordan captured and annexed the eastern half, which included the Old City’s Abrahamic holy sites (Western Wall, Al-Aksa Mosque and Church of the Holy Sepulcher). The new Jewish state included the city’s modern, western half, and Israel established its capital there. The United States set up its embassy in Tel Aviv. 

Jerusalem remained divided until the Six Day War of June 1967, when Israel captured East Jerusalem from Jordan and declared the reunified city to be Israel’s eternal capital. Israel kept its parliament and other administrative functions in pre-1967 West Jerusalem, and the U.S. and other countries kept their embassies in Tel Aviv. No country today has its embassy in Jerusalem. 

At any time since Israel’s founding in 1948, an American president could have recognized Jerusalem as its capital and relocated the U.S. embassy to the western half. None did. Jerusalem may be the millennia-old spiritual center of the Jewish people and the functional capital of Israel, but not granting that city official U.S. recognition as such has been the political decision of every Democratic and Republican administration since Truman’s. 

Following the 1993 Oslo peace accords, Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama all declared that Jerusalem’s final status must be determined via Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. 

This was the official U.S. policy, until Wednesday. Trump’s policy shift will likely diminish, not enhance, Israel’s physical security. It will undermine U.S. relations with key Arab and Muslim allies, many of whom are fighting ISIS, and also threaten our own security by enhancing terrorist recruitment. Trump is dispatching Vice President Mike Pence to work with Arab allies “to defeat radicalism.” But coming in the wake of Trump’s unapologetic retweeting of anti-Muslim videos and his renewed Muslim travel ban, the timing of the Jerusalem announcement could not be worse. 

(By the way- Mike Pence will not be welcomed for this purpose as already announced by various spokespersons in the region.)

It will feed into jihadist claims that the new president is waging a war on Islam.  Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital without giving anything to the Palestinians will not jumpstart the stalled peace process, as Trump seems to suggest. It will inflame tensions between Israel and the Palestinians and alienate Arab states at a time when, ironically, a de facto anti-Iran alliance between Israel and Saudi Arabia was beginning to flourish. Trump’s Jerusalem policy is also a propaganda coup for Sunni jihadists like Al-Qaeda and ISIS as well as Shiite Hezbollah, all of whom oppose our Arab allies as well as Israel. For someone who claims to be a great deal-maker, Trump blew an opportunity. Instead of handing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a gift of historic magnitude with no strings attached, he could have held back the embassy move to incentivize Israeli concessions toward peace. And if he really wanted to energize negotiations between the two parties, he could have announced that the United States is willing to locate a second embassy in Jerusalem -- for a future state of Palestine. Instead, we will now face the global blowback of Trump’s ill-timed and reckless policy shift. Atlas is professor of political science and director of The Richard G. Lugar Franciscan Center for Global Studies at Marian University. Follow him @PierreAtlas       

*MaineWriter insert

** MaineWriter insert

America must move beyond the 1990s and the Regressive Trump

"...Mr. Trump, saying he was concerned about 'the transnational emergence of almost radical populism, deep anger, a sense of dislocation'.....”- Ken Starr

Donald Trump has not published any cohesive public policies but he contineus to capture media attention on regressive subjects. Even former prosecuter Ken Star understands. 

Kenneth Starr, Who Tried to Bury Bill Clinton, Now Only Praises Him- in The New York Times

By Amy Chozick

Donald Trump has no public policies he can stand behind; rather, he's a muckraker about Secretary Clinton and her considerable accomplishments

An unlikely voice recently bemoaned the decline of civility in presidential politics, warned that “deep anger” was fueling an “almost radical populism” and sang the praises of former President Bill Clinton — particularly his “redemptive” years of philanthropic work since leaving the White House.

The voice was that of Kenneth W. Starr, the former Whitewater independent counsel, whose Javert-like pursuit of Mr. Clinton in the 1990s helped bring a new intensity to partisan warfare and led to theimpeachment of a president for only the second time in the nation’s history.

The presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, increasingly seems to be trying to relitigate the scandals that Mr. Starr investigated, dredging up allegations of sexual transgressions by Mr. Clinton to accuse Hillary Clinton — the likely Democratic nominee — of having aided and enabled her husband at the expense of Mr. Clinton’s female accusers.

But Mr. Starr expressed regret last week that so much of Mr. Clinton’s legacy remains viewed through the lens of what Mr. Starr demurely termed “the unpleasantness.”

His remarks seemed almost to absolve Mr. Clinton, if not to exonerate him.

“There are certain tragic dimensions which we all lament,” Mr. Starr said in a panel discussion on the presidency at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.

“That having been said, the idea of this redemptive process afterwards, we have certainly seen that powerfully” in Mr. Clinton’s post-presidency, he continued, adding, “President Carter set a very high standard, which President Clinton clearly continues to follow.”

He called Mr. Clinton “the most gifted politician of the baby boomer generation.”

“His genuine empathy for human beings is absolutely clear,” Mr. Starr said. “It is powerful, it is palpable and the folks of Arkansas really understood that about him — that he genuinely cared. The ‘I feel your pain’ is absolutely genuine.”

For some time, Mr. Starr, a Christian who is now the president and chancellor of Baylor University, a private Baptist school in Waco, Tex., has sought to put his years as a political combatant behind him. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, some of his associates expressed regret that so much of the Clinton administration’s efforts had been spent fighting those battles rather than addressing the growing threat posed by Osama bin Laden. And in 2010, Mr. Starr told Fox News that he regretted that his investigation of Mr. Clinton had taken so long and that it “brought great pain to a lot of people.”

The panel discussion in Philadelphia was occasioned by the release of “The Presidents and the Constitution: A Living History,” to which Mr. Starr contributed a chapter on Ronald Reagan. The book’s editor, who wrote the chapter on Mr. Clinton, is Ken Gormley, who also wrote the 2010 book “The Death of American Virtue: Clinton vs. Starr.”

“It’s sad that the chapter is so rooted in the unpleasantness, as I used to call it, the recent unpleasantness,” Mr. Starr said.

He did not mention any of the current presidential candidates by name in last week’s discussion. But Mr. Starr, 69, alluded to Mr. Trump, saying he was concerned about “the transnational emergence of almost radical populism, deep anger, a sense of dislocation.”

He also seemed to echo Mr. Trump, however, saying, “Our children are not going to do as well as we did or as our parents’ generation,” and pointing to demographic shifts as a source of “considerable instability.”

Then again, Mr. Starr also alluded to the danger posed by income inequality, a central theme of Senator Bernie Sanders’s campaign. “We simply have not adjusted as a society to what seems to be the 1 percent and the 99 percent,” Mr. Starr said.

But it was Mr. Starr’s keening over the coarsening and polarization of American politics that seemed most noteworthy. He did not volunteer any responsibility for it — though Mr. Clinton, who in 2006 accused Mr. Starr of “indicting innocent people because they wouldn’t lie,” might well lay considerable blame at his feet.

A federal judge in the Reagan administration and the solicitor general under President George Bush, Mr. Starr was named independent counsel in 1994, taking over the investigation of the Whitewater real estate venture and the suicide of Vincent W. Foster Jr., a deputy White House counsel. He expanded the investigation to include the Paula Jones lawsuit and the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Mr. Starr’s conclusion that Mr. Clinton had committed perjury in sworn testimony denying having had “sexual relations” with Ms. Lewinsky eventually led to Mr. Clinton’s impeachment.

“Whether it’s Whitewater or whether it’s Vince or whether it’s Benghazi. It’s always a mess with Hillary,” Mr. Trump recently told The Washington Post.

Mr. Starr now is contending with criticism of his own leadership over Baylor’s handling of sexual assault charges leveled against several of its football players.

In the panel discussion last week, he reached back to an earlier presidency — that of Lyndon B. Johnson. Saying today’s divisiveness “deeply concerns me,” he recalled Johnson’s appealing for comity before a joint session of Congress.

“I remember this so vividly — he said, ‘Come, let us reason together.’ Can we talk with one another?” Mr. Starr said. “The utter decline and erosion of civility and discourse has, I think, very troubling implications.”

He quoted E. Gordon Gee, the president of West Virginia University, as saying, “The world has become a shouting match.”

“There are always places for shouts and strong feelings, but the genius of American democracy and of presidential leadership,” Mr. Starr continued, “is to bring unity out of our diversity. E pluribus unum — out of many, one. And we don’t seem to hear too many voices saying, ‘Let us find common ground.’ "

News media like Good Morning America tries to get to some truth about Never Donald Trump but his surrogates hurt our ears with rhetorical rants rather than answers, as was the case with Corey Lewandowski in a May 24th morning interview.  In fact, there are no substantial Trumponian policies, rather, only lies masked by fear, racism and stoking hate.  Wake Up  America!

Bill Clinton: Call Bluff of 'Spiteful' Republicans

Former President Bill Clinton, whose Democratic administration was the last to experience a partial government shutdown in 1996, advised President Barack Obama not to negotiate with Republicans on the eve of another shutdown. 

It's Republicans who are making unlawful demands. They want to hold the US government hostage because they don't want to obey the health care reform law.

Democrats can't get sucked into a political hostage situation to repeal of the health care reform law, just because selfish right wing Republicans don't happen to like it. Obamacare is already a law. There's lots of other laws we don't like. Gee, I'd like to see Congress amend Second Amendment gun rights laws. Maybe, Congress should close the government down until the Second Amendment is modified to require stronger background checks for those who buy automatic weapons. 

Obviously, Congressional right wing Republicans would rather deprive Americans of access to affordable health insurance than to protect us from preventable gun violence. But, nobody I know is willing to shut down the government to protect about 30,000 preventable gun violence deaths a year (tragically) by modifying the Second Amendment. 

So, why do Republicans want to drive the government into shut down because they don't like the health care reform aka "Obamacare". The only reason for this spiteful behavior is horribly simple. It's because right wing Republicans don't want to support anything proposed by President Obama. Period. In all honesty, if the health care reform law were called "Reagancare" rather than "Obamacare", we'd likely be talking about the law's virtues rather than any potential faults.

Moreover, a majority of Americans don't want to hold the US government hostage to a shut down to repeal the health care reform law. Even Tea Party right wing Senator Cruz agrees that Americans want to uphold the Obamacare law.  

As per the Meet the Press transcript of Sunday September 29th,  Senator Cruz said, "We look at the phrasing....'Uphold this law?' I promise you, if you do any poll on, 'Do you want to uphold this law,' (and) the answer is always yes."

Nevertheless, speaking out of both sides of his mouth, Senator Cruz says Americans don't want Obamacare. Nevertheless, Senator Cruz hasn't asked people in Massachusetts if they like their version of Obamacare, where it's been implemented since 2006.

President Clinton has some good advice:

“I think there are times when you have to call people’s bluff,” Clinton said in an interview with ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” adding that he thought Republican tactics to undermine the 2010 Affordable Care Act seem “almost spiteful.”

Controlling our government with spiteful behavior is incompetent leadership.

Obviously, Republicans must be voted out of office. Their bully tactics can no longer be tolerated, because they're using this methodology to drag our nation into destructive political acrimony.

Our US is a nation of laws. Obamacare is a law. Congressional Republicans are elected to uphold the nation's laws. 

Republicans must stop being spiteful and driven by obsession to repeal Obamacare. They must learn how to govern. It's what they're paid by us the taxpayers, to do. It's called leadership. If they can't do it, they must be fired.

President to President: Clinton Kept the Torch Alive

Classic Clintonian! He knows Americans and speaks to them

President Bill Clinton's thoughtful speech could have continued  for hours! He perfectly delivered at last evening's Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Charlotte NC. His rhythm was perfect, his timing well tuned and he created a melody for truthfulness in politics.  Moreover, Clinton carried President Kennedy's proverbial torch, the one described in his magnificent inaugural speech of January 20, 1960.

Although Clinton was expected to charm an enthusiastic Democratic audience, the exclamation on his last sentence came when President Obama entered the stage, to thank his predecessor for the effective endorsement.

Seeing the two President's together was the fulfillment of President John F. Kennedy's quote, when he said the political torch was passed to a new generation of leadership, transcending time, and politics while segueing America into the future.

Clinton bowed to Obama as the two greeted each other on stage. A touching moment. A meaningful and respectful acknowledgement of mutual leadership. America must hold this moment!

In a 45 minutes long speech, Clinton frequented his comments with off script anecdotes. Clinton was a Teacher in Chief, describing why Republicans are wrong minded about how to lead America.ttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/bill-clinton-speech-text-_n_1850531.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012

Mr. Clinton raised Americans above the horrible angst voters are exposed to, a barrage that began in 2008, when President Obama was elected. He reminded us how Republicans are regressive- they fill their rhetoric with untruths while ignoring their responsibility to compromise 

Point by point, Clinton created a public policy metronome, leading us rhythmically, point by point, to understanding  how Democratic policies improve Americans lives.

President Clinton's explanatory speech told Americans why President Obama must be re-elected.

"When times are tough, constant conflict may be good politics but in the real world, cooperation works better. After all, nobody's right all the time, and a broken clock is right twice a day. All of us are destined to live our lives between those two extremes. Unfortunately, the faction that now dominates the Republican Party doesn't see it that way. They think government is the enemy, and compromise is weakness."

Democrats are justifiably proud of the three President's who carry the political legacy of the "new generation", - President Carter, President Clinton and President Obama. All three are positively showcased in this Democratic National Convention.

Our three living Democratic Presidents carry Kennedy's torch:

"Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans, born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world."

I'm proud to be a Democrat Roman Catholic Woman who has witnessed the political torch passing from one President to another who have moved America Forward.  

President Clinton pointed out in his DNC speech:

"In the last 29 months the economy has produced about 4.5 million private sector jobs. But last year, the Republicans blocked the President's jobs plan costing the economy more than a million new jobs. So here's another jobs score: President Obama plus 4.5 million, Congressional Republicans zero. Over that same period, more than more than 500,000 manufacturing jobs have been created under President Obama – the first time manufacturing jobs have increased since the 1990s."

Clinton sincerely told Americans how much he believes President Obama's leadership will move our nation Forward:  

"I believe that with all my heart", he said.

And I believe it, too.  

Thank you President William Jefferson Clinton.