TODD: I was just so curious, looking at the events in Israel and hoping for very little loss of life, something to stop this — maybe a president, you know, like when we had presidents who maintained actual peace between Israel and its enemies to a large degree? So I saw this from Haaretz.com: The Israeli army told foreign media it had ground forces in Gaza; then apologized for misleading them.
Knowing how the mockingbird media views their country, the country of Israel, maybe this was just a brilliant head fake. Why tell them? Because we know on which side they sit. It’s all part of the alignment against the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. I know Israel’s not in the United States, but there’s a similar dynamic. In the first line of this monologue here from March of 2015, Rush defines the very dynamic of the left — and now, as I see it, the party — as he points out that to them the process of talking about peace in the Middle East is the goal, whereas for Trump the goal was actually achieving peace.
RUSH: Have you ever stopped to think, in this whole Middle East peace process — and remember that’s all it is. It’s a process that never ends. It’s a process that recycles and repeats. It’s a chess game and the game never is won or lost. The pieces keep being moved around by different players, depending on the American administration and the Israeli prime minister and whoever’s running the show at the PLO or Fatah or whatever they call themselves on any given day, Hamas, Hezbollah, you name it.
The Middle East peace process is an industry unto itself. It’s not designed to be resolved. The Middle East peace process does not have an achievable objective. We’re all being lied to about this. We’re all being strung along. My whole life there’s been no change in it. We’re all roped into believing that there’s a solution to this, with words, with the right people, doctors, nurses, clean water, whatever, speeches, you name it. There aren’t any such solutions, and there never are to conflicts like this.
Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force, not by the aggressive use of process. This is made especially and abundantly clear in this case because there is no such thing as a two-state solution. I don’t know how much time you out there as individuals pay attention to the Middle East peace process. I wouldn’t blame you if you didn’t pay much attention at all, ’cause it never changes. It’s the same thing.
The news on the Middle East peace process does not change from administration to administration, from person to person, from year to year. Oh, you might have changes that appear to be different, like this two-state solution business, or when the Israelis finally decide to accept the idea of a Palestinian state. But then whenever something like that, which some people would consider progress is made, guess who undermines it?
Hello, Yasser Arafat. Hello, whoever is running the show in negotiations against the Israelis, because they do not want a two-state solution. There is no two-state solution. There’s a one-state solution. A two-state solution actually means the end of Israel. Go take a look at the Hezbollah charter. Take a look at things stated by Yasser Arafat when he was around. Doesn’t matter who. You’ll see, take a look at Iranian caliphate. No matter where you go the objective is wiping out the Jewish state. It doesn’t exist anymore, and neither do the people who at present live in it.
That’s the objective, that’s the only objective. There is no desire to live side by side in peace and tranquility and mutual respect and all of that. There is no such possibility resulting from negotiation. Just never gonna happen. I dare say the people involved in it know it. But the Middle East peace process has become a career. The Mideast peace process is something that when you’re 15 you say, “You know, I want to work there. I want to work there for life. I want to become a diplomat working at the Middle East peace process. I want to be a career appointee to the Middle East peace process so that I am there no matter who the American administration is, president is.”
This whole thing is a joke. What makes it — obviate the two-state solution? Well, the demand for right of return. Right of return is incumbent on a two-state solution. Right of return means that anybody who wants to call themselves a Palestinian anywhere in the world has the right to come back to whatever they designate as the Palestinians state. And, by the way, the Palestinian state is going to be what Israel is now or there’s never gonna be a deal. And who’s gonna make that deal?
Who in Israel is going to negotiate the end of the nation? You know, now that I ask that, I can see that that could happen if you elect the wrong Israeli leftists. Israeli leftists are the equivalent of the current Republican leadership in this country. Just as the current Republican leadership’s scared to death of the Democrats, scared to death of the media, the Israeli left is scared to death of Iran. Everything you hear about the Republican leadership not criticizing Obama: We don’t want to provoke him. We don’t want to make ’em mad. We don’t want to anger the independents. We don’t want to turn away the independents. We don’t want anybody getting mad at us. We don’t want the media criticizing.
Same thing. The Israeli left is the same way, except their objective is placating Iran. They’re neophytes who believe that these people can be appeased. The right of return eliminates any possibility of a two-state solution or existence. Besides that, none of the militant Arab population wants a state of Israel. So all this is academic, is my point. Obama inserts himself in this process. Actually, in the internal affairs of Israel, he inserts himself personally and professionally. He throws down this notion of the race card. He starts the whole thing with the race card. Bibi responds to it and Bibi’s accused as the only one that plays the race card.
But I need to ask you, do you ever wonder why the Democrat Party in this country, whoever, be it Bill Clinton, be it Barack Obama, be it John Kerry, I don’t care, be it Dianne Feinstein, I don’t care, pick one, why are their allies the Palestinians, and why are the Israelis, which is the ally of the United States, why are the Israelis tied, at least at present with Netanyahu as the prime minister, to the conservative or Republican Party? Why is that? That’s more understandable. Shared values, foreign and domestic, same worldview, same Western civilization roots.
But why, no matter what Democrat you mention, no matter what Democrat’s ever in the White House, or whatever Democrat’s secretary of state, whatever Democrat ends up anywhere, why are they always simpatico with the Palestinians? And there is an answer to the question. Without going into it in great detail, it’s no more complicated — I mean there is ideology involved. There’s a common ground. Leftists will find their friends anywhere around the world. They do not have to be American. They do not have to be domestic in any way.
But aside from their ideological commonalities, and there are some between the Palestinians and the Democrat Party, when I say — Hamas, Hezbollah, there’s another reason for it, and that is they feel sorry for ’em. They feel sorry for ’em like they feel sorry for the African-American population in America. They actually look at the Palestinians and they see a bunch of people worthy of pity. “Oh, these poor guys, look at ’em, nobody wants ’em, they’re outcasts. They can’t get along with anybody,” and they look at the Israelis as the big, evil white — even though they’re not — majority.
Israel is the equivalent of the biggest enemy that the Democrats can muster in American conservatism or in the American Republican Party. It’s really no more complicated than that. Well, it is actually because there is ideological common ground as well between the enemies of Israel and the Democrat Party in this country, but in large part it’s really no more complicated than the evil tyranny of a majority and the poor, helpless, put-upon, discriminated-against minority and people of color.
And, as such, the Democrats look upon these minorities not with respect. They look upon them with pity and the bigotry of low expectations. They’re people that can’t do anything on their own. They’re people who can’t survive on their own. They’re poor people, they’re just incompetent and inept, and they need a champion. They need somebody speaking up for them. They need somebody defending them.
The Democrats rush to the cause, make themselves look big and magnanimous, and there’s something magic about always opposing the majority, even when you’re it. You disguise the fact that you’re in the majority, you blame others for being the majority, and you rip ’em to shreds every day just because they are. And just because they’re the majority they’re intrinsically corrupt. They’re automatically cheating.
They’re automatically corrupt. They’re automatically ingrates because they are the majority. And, as such, they’re incapable of being sympathized. They’re incapable of anybody having empathy for them because they’re just evil. In the liberal worldview it does not really require any more detail than that, but there is. There are other reasons to explain why the Democrat Party and the American left is simpatico with the enemies of Israel.
TODD: And compare the time under President Trump to now. The goal of the left is to talk about peace in the Middle East. The goal of President Trump was to achieve it.