President Obama cannot pressure Israel effectively when it comes to suspension of joint military exercises, disruption of the supply of advanced military systems, supporting anti-Israel resolutions at the UN Security Council, etc.

Contrary to President Obama and all prior US presidents (since 1948), Congress has displayed systematic and sweeping bi-partisan support of the Jewish state, which constitutes one of the very few bi-partisan consensus topics on an otherwise highly polarized Capitol Hill. In fact, since the conclusion of the 1993 Oslo Accords – when Israel ceded the Gaza Strip and 40% of Judea and Samaria to the PLO – many US legislators have outflanked Israeli prime ministers from the hawkish side.

According to the US political system of limited government and checks and balances – and unlike all other democracies – the Executive (the President) is balanced by the Legislature (the Congress), which is co-equal and co-determining, independent of the President, possessing the power of the purse and the muscle (but not always the will) to amend and suspend presidential policies, as well as to initiate its own domestic, foreign and national security policy.

Congress has demonstrated its foreign policy and national security muscles – in defiance of presidential policies – by ending the US military involvement in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia (the Eagleton, Cooper and Church Amendments), Angola (the Clark Amendment) and Nicaragua (the Boland Amendment); forcing the USSR to open its gates to free emigration (the Jackson-Vanik Amendment); suspending the supply of AWACs to Iran on the eve of the Khomeini revolution; refusing to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; upgrading US-Israel strategic cooperation in a significant manner; providing Israel with advanced military systems; and forcing the Obama Administration, in February 2011, to prevent Israel’s condemnation in the UN Security Council.

The New Nazism’s First Victim: Truth by Peter Martino

Immigration has not led to integration, as the multiculturalists have wished, but to intimidation.

It is time to draw the line and stand with Israel against terrorism.

When the Turkish neighbors of Leah Rabinovitch, a Jewish woman in Amsterdam, adorned their apartment with a Palestinian flag, she did the same with an Israeli flag. Leah lives in a neighborhood where 48% of the population is of non-Western origin – many of them Muslims. Stones were thrown through her windows, a Molotov cocktail was thrown at her balcony and an anonymous letter was put in her letter box. “Hitler will be back. Death to the Jews,” it said.

Fifteen different policemen, Rabinovitch says, advised her to remove the flag. She refused. She also received a letter from Rochdale, the Dutch company owning the apartment block. “Rochdale has noticed the Israeli flag on your balcony. This is a provocation,” the letter said. The company then urged her to remove the flag and warned that otherwise she would have to cover all costs of vandalism herself. Did the neighbors with the Palestinian flag receive a similar letter? No, they did not. In Europe, displaying the Israeli flag is a provocation, displaying the Palestinian flag is not.

A view of the apartment building in Amsterdam where Leah Rabinovitch lives. After hanging an Israeli flag, she was subjected to stone-throwing, a death threat and a firebombing. (Image source: AT5 News video screenshot)
Seraphina Verhofstadt, another Jewish woman in Amsterdam, also reacted to the many Palestinian and Hamas flags in Amsterdam by displaying the Israeli flag. She received threats that her throat would be slit. When she left her apartment, she was assaulted by youths wearing Palestinian shawls and severely beaten.

In Europe, immigration has not led to integration, as the multiculturalists have wished, but to intimidation. People defending the West and its values, people who show their solidarity with the West’s international allies, such as the U.S. and Israel, are threatened with vandalism and worse.

Unfortunately, at the same time, however, the defenders of Western values are also losing public support among indigenous Westerners, who no longer seem to believe that Israel has the moral right on its side.


Netflix, a bargain Internet venue featuring a cornucopia of movies and TV series for a minimal monthly charge, is a craps shoot, a spin of the roulette wheel, what winning or losing card emerges from the banker’s baccarat shoe.

One thing you can depend on before a movie unreels, European or American, is a series of initial credits: Widget Cinema….in association with Piglet Productions….A Floyd Floozy Film….in cooperation with the Film Board of Patagonia….A Wholesome Fare Film…..a Cayman Island Entertainment Production….together with Melody Lane LLC… partnership with Howling Banshees Studios….Handcrafted Cinema Company….and on and on, each with its own animated graphics. One almost falls asleep waiting for the cast and directorial credits. For a person who grew up with the MGM lion, the Columbia lady, Paramount’s Mount Everest, and even the British Rank/Ealing Studios muscle man hitting a giant gong, and other signature production credits, the parade of entities responsible for most of the movies offered by Netflix is disconcerting. But, apparently that’s “progress.”

After a movie has been made, do these entities vanish like puffballs, or go airborne like dandelion seeds, or roll out of sight like tumbleweeds? Are they intertwined tax dodges, or cinematic pyramid schemes? I have yet to see a single “associated with” name reappear in the credits of any of the independent productions. Major producers, such as TriStar with its white Pegasus, limit such credits to one or two before introducing the major producer. And the older MGM and RKO credits, for example, put the “associated” entities in parenthetical positions somewhere around the major studio’s name. One never really notices them.

That complaint being lodged, here are some appraisals of a handful of Netflix’s offerings.

Barbara Sukowa plays a credible Hannah Arendt, released in 2012, as the German-Jewish author of The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951) and Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil ( 1963). This “docudrama” of her conflict with other Jews about the true nature of the men behind the Holocaust highlights her struggles as she attends Adolf Eichmann’s trial. She was not prepared for the bitter opposition to her covering the trial for The New Yorker, and was ostracized by many of her best friends. This is definitely worth watching qua docudrama, with great chunks of Arendt’s life left out or merely shown in passing, such as her affair with Martin Heidegger, the Nazi intellectual.

Also from 2012 is No God, No Master, a deceptive title because it has little or nothing to do with God or masters. The title is nowhere explained in the film. The phrase was an early anarchist slogan coined by French anarchist Auguste Blanqui in 1880. However, the film is just a very well done “docudrama” of the early years of the FBI’s first director (then known as the Bureau of Investigation), William Flynn, ably portrayed by David Strathairn, and is set chiefly in 1919. It chronicles the detective work of Flynn before he was appointed B.O.I. director. When he stepped down after two years at the post, he was succeeded by J. Edgar Hoover. The story begins with his trying to determine who is responsible for a series of package bombs left on the doorsteps of prominent Boston men or mailed to them.


SPANISH JOURNALIST on why Hamas is never filmed or photographed in action
“If ever we dared point our cameras on them, they would simply shoot and kill us.”
Algemeiner A Spanish journalist told Israeli filmmaker Michael Grynszpan that the reason television news does not broadcast images of Hamas fighters in action is because of fear of immediate execution.
Grynszpan, who directed the film ‘Forgotten Refugees‘, about the 800,000 to 1 million Jews expelled from their homes in the Arab world in the 1950s, posted his interview with the unnamed Spanish journalist on Facebook on Wednesday.

Mushir Al Masri, a Hamas MP and media spokesman, being interviewed by media in front of backdrop showing a destroyed house, and being filmed inside the Al Shifa hospital in Gaza. The photo was posted on Twitter by WSJ correspondent Nick Casey, and has since been removed.

“I met today with a Spanish journalist who just came back from Gaza. We talked about the situation there. He was very friendly. I asked him how come we never see on television channels reporting from Gaza any Hamas people, no gunmen, no rocket launcher, no policemen. We only see civilians on these reports, mostly women and children.”
“He answered me frankly: ‘It’s very simple, we did see Hamas people there launching rockets, they were close to our hotel, but if ever we dared pointing our camera on them they would simply shoot at us and kill us.’”
“Wooh, impressive. Then I asked him ‘Would you mind saying that on camera? I can film you explaining this…’”
“For some reason I cannot really understand, he refused and almost ran away. I guess my camera is as dangerous as Hamas threats…”
“So just for you to know, the truth will never appear on the images you see on television.”

Into the fray: Far too Little, Much too Late: Martin Sherman

To prevent an even more brutal and extreme successor from taking over, Gaza must be dismantled and the non-belligerent population relocated.

Our neighbors want to see us dead. This is not a question that leaves much room for compromise.

– Golda Meir, cited in The New York Times, December 9, 1978

We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.

– Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons, March 1, 1848

If only Israeli strategic policy were founded on the enduring, down-to-earth wisdom embodied in the two preceding quotations. They convey the essence of Israel’s international and regional environments – the cynical self-interest that characterizes the former, and the unbridled brutality that characterizes the latter.

In recent decades, any understanding of these basic precepts seems starkly absent from the formulation – and certainly, the implementation – of Israeli strategic plans.

Politics as moralistic self-recrimination

As The Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens recently pointed out, the conduct of Israel’s international politics, which ought to be an exercise in power and preservation of self-interest, has degenerated into moralistic self-reflection and self-recrimination.

In an international environment characterized by cynical self-interest and a regional environment characterized by unbridled brutality, such behavior is wildly inappropriate, and unless reined in and reversed, self-destructive.

As Operation Protective Edge drags on, needlessly and inexplicably, into its fourth week, one thing is becoming excruciatingly clear: Israel has lost all sense of strategic direction.

In Defense of Zionism By Michael B. Oren

They come from every corner of the country – investment bankers, farmers, computer geeks, jazz drummers, botany professors, car mechanics – leaving their jobs and their families. They put on uniforms that are invariably too tight or too baggy, sign out their gear and guns. Then, scrambling onto military vehicles, 70,000 reservists – women and men – join the young conscripts of what is proportionally the world’s largest citizen army. They all know that some of them will return maimed or not at all. And yet, without hesitation or (for the most part) complaint, proudly responding to the call-up, Israelis stand ready to defend their nation. They risk their lives for an idea.

The idea is Zionism. It is the belief that the Jewish people should have their own sovereign state in the Land of Israel. Though founded less than 150 years ago, the Zionist movement sprung from a 4,000-year-long bond between the Jewish people and its historic homeland, an attachment sustained throughout 20 centuries of exile. This is why Zionism achieved its goals and remains relevant and rigorous today. It is why citizens of Israel – the state that Zionism created – willingly take up arms. They believe their idea is worth fighting for.

Yet Zionism, arguably more than any other contemporary ideology, is demonized. “All Zionists are legitimate targets everywhere in the world!” declared a banner recently paraded by anti-Israel protesters in Denmark. “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any circumstances,” warned a sign in the window of a Belgian cafe. A Jewish demonstrator in Iceland was accosted and told, “You Zionist pig, I’m going to behead you.”

In certain academic and media circles, Zionism is synonymous with colonialism and imperialism. Critics on the radical right and left have likened it to racism or, worse, Nazism. And that is in the West. In the Middle East, Zionism is the ultimate abomination – the product of a Holocaust that many in the region deny ever happened while maintaining nevertheless that the Zionists deserved it.

What is it about Zionism that elicits such loathing? After all, the longing of a dispersed people for a state of their own cannot possibly be so repugnant, especially after that people endured centuries of massacres and expulsions, culminating in history’s largest mass murder. Perhaps revulsion toward Zionism stems from its unusual blend of national identity, religion and loyalty to a land. Japan offers the closest parallel, but despite its rapacious past, Japanese nationalism doesn’t evoke the abhorrence aroused by Zionism.


I realize that one is supposed to grieve incessantly over the loss of civilian life in Gaza, over the deaths of innocent women and children, or over the mourning of mothers for their sons and wives for the husbands. All of them have been robbed of their lives by a cruel world, or just the nefarious Jews who wantonly fire into civilian areas just to kill people.

Israel has certainly publicly embraced this outpouring of anguish, saying all the right things, as in “we deeply regret the loss of civilian life…” or “we do everything to avoid civilian casualties…” or PM Netanyahu’s now-famous sound bite that “we use our missiles to protect our civilians, while they use their civilians to protect their missiles” (it is a good line). And Israel is sincere in these protestations.

Count me among those who found it hard to muster any sympathy for these Gazans, who routinely rejoice over Jewish deaths and would applaud the massacre and slaughter of any Jews. Let’s face a few facts and debunk the canard of the sacred civilian of the Gaza Strip.

First, even their combatants are “civilians,” and intentionally so. In blatant violation of the Geneva Conventions, Hamas terrorists (the same applies to Islamic terrorists across the world) do not wear uniforms and intentionally try to blend in to the “civilian” population. Thus, when they are killed, the familiar scenes of sorrow can appear on the television screen, of the bereaved Arab crying, “look, they killed the teacher…the preacher…the butcher…the baker…the bomb- (rather, the candlestick-) maker.” Israel has to habitually identify – even by name! – these alleged civilians in order to refute the accusation that they are killing civilians. To the Arab way of thinking, no one is ever a soldier; they are all civilians.

Second, as is now well known, Hamas conceals its weapons and launches its rockets from the very heart of its civilian population. They have made their civilians the targets, and official Israel has done an outstanding job in underscoring this point. Homes and hospitals, mosques and schools, are used as both weapons storage sites as well as launching pads for rockets and missiles. That is a war crime, and Israel would do well to ignore all the hollow complaints and continue its offensive until Gaza is rid of Hamas. It would dramatically improve the lives of the civilians in Gaza, however many remain alive.

Of course, Israel’s sensitivity to this issue is such that it undermines the military success of this mission – while certainly acting in a humanitarian way – by warning the Arab inhabitants of targeted areas to leave, and to leave quickly, before a raid. This saves civilian lives, but it also allows Hamas-niks to escape their day of reckoning. In the end, buildings are destroyed, but the enemy, who can soon rebuild those buildings and those weapons sites, lives to terrorize another day


While Israelis are fighting and dying, families huddling in bomb shelters and soldiers going off to face death, the men and women in suits and power suits moving through the great halls of diplomacy are using them as pawns in a larger game.

During the Cold War, Israel was a pawn in a larger struggle between the US and the USSR. Now it is back to being a counter in a larger game.

Israel’s function within the great halls of diplomacy was always as a lever on the Arab states. It was not an end, but a means of moving them one way or another. When the Arab states drifted into the Soviet orbit, the “Special Relationship” was born. The relationship accomplished its goal once Egypt was pried out of the Soviet orbit. It has lingered on because of the emotional and cultural ties of Israel and the US.

Now Obama is using Israel as a lever to push Egypt back into the Islamist camp. Egypt’s rejection of the Muslim Brotherhood broke the Arab Spring. Political Islam, which seemed to be on the ascendance, is back to being a freak show represented by terrorists and Turkey’s mad mustachioed dictator.

Egypt was where Obama went to begin the Arab Spring. Egypt is still his target. Israel is just the lever.

The reason Israel was never allowed to truly win any wars was because it was being used as a lever. By being a “good lever” during the Cold War, it could damage Egypt enough that the latter would come to the negotiating table overseen by the US and move back into the Western sphere of influence.

Israel couldn’t be allowed to win a big enough victory because then there would nothing to negotiate. Likewise, Israel wouldn’t be allowed to keep what it won because then there would be no reason for Egypt to come to the negotiating table. Sometimes Israel would even be expected to lose, as in the Yom Kippur War, to force it to come to the negotiating table.

Swap Egypt for the PLO and that’s how the disastrous peace process happened. Then swap the PLO for Hamas and that is where we are now.

Obama’s initial support for Israel’s war on Hamas was only to the extent necessary to bring the terrorist group to the negotiating table. And then once Hamas comes to the negotiating table, the White House will back its demands against Israel in exchange for getting the Brotherhood on board with its agenda.


Primary: August 26, 2014

To see the actual voting records of all incumbents on other issues such as Foreign Policy, Second Amendment Issues, Homeland Security, and other issues as well as their rankings by special interest groups please use the links followed by two stars (**).

U.S. Senate

Pat Leahy (D) Next Election in 2016.
Bernie Sanders (I) Next Election in 2018.

Not sure of your district? Click here to find out


At Large:
Peter Welch (D) Incumbent**

Rated +2 by AAI, indicating pro-Arab pro-Palestine voting record. (May 2012)


HEALTHCARE “Access to quality, affordable health care for every American is long overdue. The Affordable Care Act will bring peace of mind to millions of working Americans and their families, take decisions about health care coverage out of the hands of insurance companies, expand cost effective preventive services, and improve health care coverage for seniors.” Congressman Welch:

Expanded nationwide a pioneering Vermont health care model that rewards health care providers for improved patient outcomes rather than the number of procedures performed;
Introduced legislation to save taxpayers and seniors $160 billion through the negotiation of lower prescription drug prices for Medicare recipients;
Strongly supports a woman’s right to choose and access to preventive health care services for women; and
Founded the bipartisan Affordable Medicines Caucus, a coalition of House members working to lower prescription drug prices.

ENERGY Voted against construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline without limiting amendments. Congressman Welch:

Is the nationally recognized champion in Congress of energy efficiency investments that create good manufacturing jobs, cut energy bills and improve the environment;
Supports federal investments and incentives to create a 21st century green energy economy; and
Opposes taxpayer subsidies for the oil, nuclear and ethanol industries.

Mark Donka (R) Challenger


HEALTHCARE From the second President Obama forced through a 2,300 page law that no one read with back room deals and not a single Republican vote, ObamaCare became partisan government at its worst – intrusive, expensive and ineffective. Mark will fight to repeal this disastrous piece of legislation and put patients back in control of their own healthcare. To boot, Congress was given an exception from participating. Peter Welch does not have Obamacare, why should you?

BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION The latest assault on our southern border is another clear sign that this administration is incapable of dealing with or anticipating problems that are a direct threat to our national security. Every scandal or situation appears to surprise them. In Congress, he’ll fight to lock down our borders and will continue to oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants. We encourage all who want the promise of the American dream to come to the United State, but there is a legal manner in which to do so. Congress tried amnesty once in 1986!! We need better solutions not empty promises and do-overs at the taxpayers’ expense.

ENERGY It’s time for an all-of-the-above energy policy which embraces our domestic resources, peels back the overreach of the EPA and approves the Keystone XL pipeline. We need to continue to experiment with the aid of technology.

MILITARY In Congress, supporting our soldiers in the field and veterans at home will continue to be one of his top priorities. The top priority of the Constitution is to protect the United States of America. President Obama continues vacant promises. He knew about the VA issues in 2007, acknowledging his intentions to take care of our vets. He did nothing. It’s time to remove the do-nothing crowd from Washington. His bizarre West Point speech was given an appropriate chilling response from the core of our next generation heroes. Another guidepost indicating how out of touch this administration is.

SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL Amidst the turmoil in the Middle East stands Israel as a true friend to America and our best ally in the region. The recent nuclear “treaty” President Obama and John Kerry negotiated with Iran highlights the erosion of our once unbreakable alliance with Israel. In Congress, Mark will call for a renewed American commitment to our trusted ally. President Obama’s abysmal Foreign Policy has the world mocking the US and utterly confused in its global role.
Don Nolte (R) Challenger
Donald Russell (R) Challenger

NRA life member since 1997

Also a member of: ​gun owners of Vermont, gun owners of America

Les Feldick ministries, international fellowship of Christians and Jews,

The veterans of foreign wars, the American legion

Disabled American veterans ,paralyzed vets of America

The Heritage foundation, Marine Toys For Tots

Vermont sheriffs’ assoc. The Humane Society

English As Official Language

Matthew Andrews (Liberty Union) Challenger
Cris Ericson (I) Challenger
Randall Meyer (I) Challenger

No website
Jerry Trudell (I) Challenger

No website

Read more: Family Security Matters
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution


Two months ago during a regular visit to PJ Media I viewed a very short piece about a scientific study on a species of fish from vastly different locations having an identical complex mechanism that the scientist concluded was yet another proof of Darwinian evolution. The PJ Media author (couldn’t find – only remember the point) countered that the scientist’s evidence, rather than pointing to evolution, logically undercut such a conclusion and in fact was supportive of intelligent design, a theory holding that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process. My light bulb went off. Twenty years ago I read a short book on ID. The logic of the theory and examples were so overwhelming for me that I abruptly switched from agnostic to deist. Then, satisfied I could continue to avoid organized religion without guilt, I went on with my life, until that visit to PJ Media. Why was a political site making snarky with a scientific dispute? To quote Vince Lombardi, I thought “what the hell is going out here?” Well let me tell you….

The scientific community overwhelming views humanity as materialist happenstance, attributing nothing exceptional to humans. The universe, galaxy, solar system, earth and everything on it came into existence by an undirected random process they say. These materialists fancy themselves as slowly but surely answering all the origins of universe and life questions. Believers in the super natural can’t get on their bus. Not only are their gods false, but dangerous to scientific progress.

According to a 2013 survey of National Academy of Science members, 93% were self-described atheists. The Academy is the most prestigious American scientific body with 2,200 elected members. That 7% are not atheists is alarming to Neil de Grasse Tyson, an astrophysicist, popular for hosting PBS’s Cosmos and the public face of science in America. He is a very frequent guest on many pop-culture programs (especially Bill Maher), taking delight in mocking religion and making clear the harm religious belief has on science. The March 2014 reboot of Cosmos had an introduction by Obama that featured Carl Sagan’s “the cosmos is all that is, or ever will be” – materialism through-and-through.

As I delved into the ID story it became apparent that science,the systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and reliably applied, is no longer an accurate explanation. It has become a powerful force in the progressive movement, based on dogma and intolerance to marginalize and mock anything that may be edging toward different conclusions when viewing the same scientific evidence, especially ID theory.