Hassagot השגות

Presidential Prerogative

    Walter Berns of the American Enterprise Institute has written an Opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Interrogations and Presidential Prerogative" (Saturday, May 23, 2009, see here) and subtitled "The Founders created an executive with substantial discretionary powers."   The piece is well worth the reading.  I quote from it here.  The italics are in the original article, but the bold face is mine:

Locke argued in the Second Treatise of Civil Government that the "first and fundamental law is the establishment of the legislative power." And so it is that the first article of the U.S. Constitution is devoted to the legislative power. There is safety in law, he said; the law is "promulgated and known to the people," and everyone without exception is subject to it.

But Locke admitted that not everything can be done by law. Or, as he said, there are many things "which the law can by no means provide for." The law cannot "foresee" events, for example, nor can it act with dispatch or with the appropriate subtlety required when dealing with foreign powers. Nor, as we know very well indeed, can a legislative body preserve secrecy.

Obama's Gitmo (Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan)

    Background:  For information about Bagram Detention Center (Afghanistan), see the New York Times article by Tim Golden (updated 4/2/2009)  here.  In particular, consider the following paragraphs from that article.  Emphasis is mine:

The population at Bagram has increased nearly sixfold over the past four years, driven not just by the deepening conflict in Afghanistan but also by the fact that the Bush administration in September 2004 largely halted the movement of prisoners to Guantánamo, leaving Bagram as the preferred alternative to detain terrorism suspects. Human rights advocates pressed the Bush administration to revamp the review process for releasing or transferring the 630 Bagram detainees, all but about 30 of whom are Afghans.

Quotes from Hebrew and Christian Bible in US War Documents

    The Chicago Tribune reported today (Memorial Day, Monday, May 25, 2009) on the use of biblical quotations in American intelligence reports ( "Use of Scripture linked to war documents troubles Jewish, Christian leaders," see here).  The article, by Manya A. Brachear, echoes an Associated Press piece in the Los Angeles Times , "Pentagon cuts daily Bible quote," that appeared on May 19, 2009 , see here. 
    In today's piece, Manya Brachear quotes from two Chicago-based of Christian theologians, Dr. Marc Gopin (representing a Jewish voice) of George Mason University, and a Chicago-based Muslim leader.  Each respondent opposes the use of biblical verses, all taken out of context, between 2001 and 2003.  Manya Brachear apparently did not find, or did not look, for any voice to speak positively about this practice.

Memorial Day: Obama and Cheney on National Security (May 21, 2009), part 2

    This past week, President Barack Obama and Vice President delivered speeches on the same day and on the same theme of national security.  For the text of Obama's speech, see here.  For the text of Cheney's speech, see here.
    In this post, I comment on Cheney's speech on occasion.  Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.  Quotations are indented.

The first attack on the World Trade Center was treated as a law enforcement problem, with everything handled after the fact–crime scene, arrests, indictments, convictions, prison sentences, case closed.

That’s how it seemed from a law enforcement perspective, at least–but for the terrorists the case was not closed. For them, it was another offensive strike in their ongoing war against the United States. And it turned their minds to even harder strikes with higher casualties. Nine-eleven made necessary a shift of policy, aimed at a clear strategic threat–what the Congress called “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” From that moment forward, instead of merely preparing to round up the suspects and count up the victims after the next attack, we were determined to prevent attacks in the first place.

"a law enforcement problem" -- For Obama, the current "war on terror" should be seen in just such a light.

Memorial Day: Obama and Cheney on National Security (May 21, 2009), part 1

    This past week, President Barack Obama and Vice President delivered speeches on the same day and on the same theme of national security.  For the text of Obama's speech, see here.  For the text of Cheney's speech, see here.
    In this post, I comment on Obama's speech.  Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.  Quotations are indented.

Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions. And I believe that those decisions were motivated by a sincere desire to protect the American people. But I also believe that – too often – our government made decisions based upon fear rather than foresight, and all too often trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions. Instead of strategically applying our power and our principles, we too often set those principles aside as luxuries that we could no longer afford. And in this season of fear, too many of us – Democrats and Republicans; politicians, journalists and citizens – fell silent.

Clearly, Obama disagrees with Bush's approach to the Islamist terror that threatened and threatens our country.  That is his right.  Yet, I note here a lack of humility.  Obama does not recognize that different judgments can reasonably be made.  For him, Bush acted from fear and ideological predispositions.

When does the water get too hot?

    The proverbial frog is placed in tepid water and is comfortable.  The water is gently heated; the frog remains content.  As the temperature rises beyond the point its body can survive, the frog dies.
    Much of the Jewish world during the years immediately preceding the Holocaust was like that frog--more or less unaware of the import of the foul wind that swept through Germany and that burst upon much of the rest of Europe.  I wonder whether the position of the Jews in America is akin to that of the Jews of 1930s Europe, akin to the proverbial frog.
    Strong words, a strong reaction to recent trends and events.  Paranoid perhaps?  My view is that one must be vigilant (that is, awake, aware, on watch), serious, informed, and appropriately vocal.  I am not a brave person, but I certainly air my concerns in conversations with family and friends and in posts on this blog. 

A Foul Wind: Accusations of Treachery toward Supporters of Israel

National Journal (an Atlantic Media production) featured a panel of experts on national security  entitled "How to Talk about Israel."  (See at National Journal; launched Monday, March 16, 2009; visited 4/7/09).  A brief citation from the following piece was quoted in "Anti-Semitism and the Economic Crisis" by Ira Stoll on the Opinion page of the Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, 4/7/09.

The Rise of a Bigger Government

What are our President's stated desires and core principles? 

    Although I have not read President Obama's Budget for Fiscal 2010 (see here) nor read all of his recent speeches and statements, I have gleaned certain themes which suggest an answer to this question.  My understanding is informed by my reading, some of which is quoted at the bottom of this post.  I encourage the reader to read to the bottom, to pursue links here and elsewhere, and to make up his own mind.

A Peek Back at October 30, 2008

    Before the presidential election, I expressed strong concerns about an Obama administration.  On October 30, 2008, I wrote:

"In terms of domestic policy, the Obama-Pelosi-Reid team would seek to put into place the following program:

• increase taxes
• redistribute wealth
• punish those who succeed in personal enterprise
• discourage personal enterprise
• politicize the economy even beyond the current state of affairs
• discourage trade
• reward the elderly, the sick, and the young of today at the expense of the elderly, the sick, and the young of the next generation
• transfer even greater powers to the Federal Government
• attenuate even further the private sector in the USA
• arrogate even further the responsibility of the Federal Government to be the moral center of the country"

   Things seem to be moving in the direction that I was afraid they might.

Obama is president-elect and what steps come next.

    Obama is now president-elect.  He gave a beautiful victory speech in Chicago, full of calls for unity, vision, one nation, a beautiful future, G-d bless, and so forth.   338 electoral votes to 157; 51% of the vote to 47%.
    McCain gave a simple and noble concession speech.
    The Democrats are gaining in the Senate and House, though they have not secured a filibuster-proof majority of 61 in the former.
    I hope that Obama will be the entire country's president, and not only the Democrats'.  That he will reach across the aisle.  His victory speech suggests he will.  His record and history do not. 
    I wonder if he has a core.  Noone seems to know what he stands for--his former colleagues on Harvard Law Review among them.  Is he in Bill Ayers' pocket?  Rashid Khalidi's?  Reverend Wright's?  David Axelrod's?  His own?  My wonderings are what undergird my deep anxieties, expressed earlier, about the unfolding of a very liberal Democratic agenda--a big spending, big taxes, anti-personal-intiative agenda.
    At least one national Republican figure has suggested a self-willed banishment to the wilderness for his party (in other words, a time of retreat and regrouping).  As reported in The Wall Street Journal tonight:

"We've lost our credibility," said Scott Klug, a former Republican congressman from Wisconsin who said he fears the party is entering a long period of retrenchment. "We're just going to be in the wilderness for a while."

What aspect of its core will emerge to engage the 4% and more who could have put McCain into the White House?  I feel a desire to go into the wilderness as well.  How the country changes!  How quickly it seems to be sacrificing tradition, loyalty, family, community, and even G-d for individualism and the dream of salvation-in-government.
    Over the last few days I have been preoccupied with the impending results of this day.  A weight has been lifted and we shall see what the morrow brings.   One must of course not despair.

-- H. A. Massig