Political language often frames the public discussion of political issues. “Pro-choice” sounds a lot better than “pro-abortion.” Economic “stimulus” sounds a lot better than government “spending.” The party that better frames the language surrounding the public debate can sometimes win the debate almost by that means alone.
So let me take Jennifer’s perceptive post “Taxes Are Taxes” one step further. It is a mistake to say that Congress is “letting the Bush tax cuts expire.” The proper way of framing the issue is “failing to stop a massive tax increase.” The issue is not tax cuts relative to the 2001 economy, but the prospect of a huge tax increase on the 2010 one.
In April 2008 — long before President Obama engineered an increase in government spending that transformed “billions” into small change, making anything under a trillion a certification of political acceptability (rather than, in Everett Dirksen’s phrase, “real money”) — John F. Cogan and R. Glenn Hubbard described, in an article entitled “The Coming Tax Bomb,” what will happen if Congress fails to act:
This would be the largest increase in personal income taxes since World War II. It would be more than twice as large as President Lyndon Johnson’s surcharge to finance the war in Vietnam and the war on poverty. It would be more than twice the combined personal income tax increases under Presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. The increase would push total federal government revenues relative to GDP to 20%.
All this is before the tax increases the Democrats want to use for cap-and-trade, health care, the Afghan war, etc. — or rather, it is after such tax increases. The strategy appears to be to enact those tax increases first and then engineer another one simply phrased “letting the Bush tax cuts expire.”
It is not too soon to bring this issue to the forefront, even though it will not come to a head until next year. Indeed, as Cogan and Hubbard argued, the prospect of scheduled future tax increases may itself be part of the current economic problem, and making the Bush tax cuts permanent might provide certainty for investors that would spur the economy. In any event, it would be a mistake to defer discussion of this until next year, especially if the debate then is framed as a mere “expiration” of something “Bush” did.
It also demonstrates why a 2 state solution will never be achieved peaceably/through negotiations and/or sustained. The primary goal of the Palestinian polity is clearly the dissolution of independent Jewish political rule and self-determination. How that is achieved is the only area of disagreement between the various Palestinian factions – hence even the 2 staters agree that the right of return is mandatory.
i don’t know what it will take to induce people to stop hoping and projecting and to start realizing that the palestinians today are much more hopeful that israel will disappear than they ever were in the past. this is due to the collapse of the west, which now includes the US. the rise of hamas is only a reflection of that.
furthermore, the population of the west bank can support hamas from afar, without bearing the brunt of its regime.
the bottom line is that arabs hate jews more than they love their own welfare. this includes the israeli arabs, which is the best indicator of how deep and unsolvable the problem is. always did, always will. they never accepted israel and never will, now that they see it abandoned and led by incompetents.
my sense is that the west, including US and israel have past the point where they can defend themselves from the barbarians. europe is already lost and the US is on its way down the drain.
oao
I think its more subtle than Arabs hate Jews – its really the point that Arabs (both Muslims and Christians) cannot tolerate Jewish political independence and self-determination. Both of those groups maintain superseccesionist theologies which cannot be reconciled with that reality without causing painful introspection.
I don’t put a lot of stock in polls. They are too easily manipulated. However, I do agree that Palestinians are more interested in Israel’s destruction than their own welfare. That’s why I think Israel should scrap the peace process and go hard after terrorists. No mercy. They shouldn’t go after non-combatants, but if such people are collateral damage while going after the terrorists, so be it. If Palestinians want a Hamas govt, they can suffer the consequences.
I’m shocked, shocked that anyone is shocked. Arabs have been hating and killing Jews for a couple of centuries, before Mohammed was born. Only the delusional even hope for a ‘Combyah” outcome.
The Arabs hate each other, and all the Arab tribes and klans hate the tribes in Palestine.
Convert them all to Christianity. That’s my solution.
Mr. Pollak,
did you honestly believe that a fake ethnicity dedicated to slaughtering Jews would reject Hamas? Did you really? I’m sorry, but I have trouble believing you really are that stupid.
Stop worrying about appearing extreme. Nothing you say or do will appease your implacable enemies. Muslims and leftists both share an unquenchable thirst to see Israel die.
You aren’t the extremist.
Herbert Rubin
Your comment is an example of noxious bigotry and contributes very little this discussion.
Ziggy Zoggy
Same applies for you as for Herbert Rubin.
Dear YbA’
Thank you for sharing your opinion even if ill formed and unpersuasive. All are welcome here, even the obtuse and the idiots. Kuwait expelled all its Palestinians after the First Gulf War Lebanon wishes to do the same,but has been constrained. No one would weep for the lost Palestinians if they would all vanish.
hey, herbert,
if i am not mistaken, didn’t christianity initiate anti-semitism before islam came about?
YbA,
it’s essentially the inability to accept the gap bewteen reality and the dogma: their religion says islam supremacy, rule over infidels; the reality is that a bunch of jews made hundreds of thousands of arabs run away/lose again and again; they have to face jewish success while they are incapable of doing anything besides killing and destruction, despite zillions of jiziyah. the shame and frustration must be intolerable.
ziggy,
my sense is that civilized people have a hard time internalizing the reality of muslims/arabs living in an alternative universe. it is a form of denial: such reality is too hard to contemplate.
…those who most conspicuously demonstrate their dedication to violence against Israel, not those who desire peace.
Well, that would depend on how one defines “peace,” wouldn’t it?
And at this stage of the game, how Israel’s partners in peace define “peace” ought to be pretty clear.
…more than they love their own welfare.
How Israel’s partners in peace define “welfare” also ought to be pretty clear. The Palestinians have a definite sense of priorities at work here, and who are we (orientialists, westerners, colonialists, Zionists, Zionist lovers, Jews, Jew lovers) to dispute it, to point out that it is misguided, to plead that this is not the way, to proffer millions and millions in aid and assistance to persuade them, to promise them the sky?
It is all really quite simple: For Israel’s partners in peace, Israel’s disappearance is more important than Palestinian welfare. But no, that is not quite right either. Palestinian welfare precisely means Israel’s disappearance.
And if Palesinians suffer because of this, is it not noble to suffer for the sake of one’s ideals, one’s principles, one’s highest aspirations, one’s country? Is it not noble to right a historical wrong? To correct a horrible injustice? To remove a metastisizing cancer? To stamp out a lethal bacilli?
And one speaks of welfare? Of suffering? It would be an honor to suffer to achieve the holy goal. To die. To be a martyr.
Moreover, is it not noble to suffer to right when you are being subsidized to the tune of millions and millions of dollars to do so? When you are being subsidized to wage war against the Zionist criminals? When you are being morally supported and enthusiastically encouraged (even if no encouragement is really needed)?
It’s really not all that complicated.
“Convert them all to Christianity. That’s my solution.”
That’s what Ann Coulter say, “Kill their leaders, and convert them all to Christianity.” It’s a plan.
Can we now dispose with the pretense that their is any significant desire to live side by side with a Jewish state among the Palestinian Arabs? These polling results simply confirm what has been obvious for a very long time. In view of these results, will Israel now wage total war to crush its enemies? We did so against Germany and Japan, killing not only their warriors but also crushing their people’s will to resist. It worked out pretty well. Maybe Israel should try that approach. It sure beats war on the cheap.
Dear Gord,
Right on, bro’.
Victor Davis Hansen has written persuasively about war through the centuries. That is his conclusion, that to have peace, crushing the enemy is the only practical method.
A Carthaginian Peace may not be required, but pretty close.
“Victor Davis Hansen has written persuasively about war through the centuries.”
he must be getting on in years
YbA,
saying it don’t make it so. Try explaining how my comment was inappropriate or hateful. Also try to remember that I’m not the baby killer or one of the scumbags who support the baby killers.
Ziggy Zoggy
you refer to the Palestinians as a “fake ethnicity”. This is a hateful comment – ethnicity is part of identity and identity is determined by those who hold it and those who recognise it. I would suggest that the majority of mainstream commentators would recognise the Palestinian Arab identity and ethnicity. It would be similar to someone arguing that Israeli is a fake ethnicity – because it came into being only in 1948. Incidentally – as an insight into your thinking – do you recognise the African-American ethnicity?
Herbert Rubin
Your comment – suggesting that people be forcibly converted to Christianity is also deeply offensive. It is akin to medieval Christians suggesting that European Jews should be forcibly converted to Christianity to prevent their social intransigence and differences and prevent communal violence. Do you agree with the views of the Spanish Inquisition?
Gord
Total War? The Nazis were also conducting Total War – didn’t work out too well for our Jewish brothers and sisters did it?
YbA,
excuse me, but that’s bull.
there was NO palestinian identity prior to 1967, when the arabs held both the west bank and gaza. had there been one, there would have been a pal state then. the single root to palestinian identity is elimination of the jews from israel. that is not a basis for a real identity, no matter what they “feel”. and, in fact, both fatah and hamas explicitly declare there is no such identity, it is a ruse useful in the struggle to get rid of the jews, that they are all arabs.
the recognition you speak of is out of total ignorance of the nature and history of the conflict. the westerners who speak of palestinian nation, culture, identity have bought the arab propaganda lock stock and barrel for various reasons: anti-semitism, leftist misplaced dogma of anti-colonialism, fear of jihadism. all of this is rooted in ignorance.
since when pointing truth out is hateful?
the conversion comment, whether hateful or not, was silly. i just read about the retiring catholic archbishop of the Holy Land and he does not sound much different than Fatah. the hypocrisy, given how christians are treated in the west bank and gaza vs. israel, is abominable.
YbA:
So the Nazis engaging in genocide is the same as the Israelis putting aside the obviously failed tactics of the last 5 years to engage their enemy with all their resources? What a dope.
Gord
I would suggest the dope is the one calling for total war in the first place – which happens to be you. In WW2 the USSR, the US/UK and Germany were all conducting total war against their enemies – this led to massive civilian casualties – which are today classified as war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide etc. You are calling for this type of conflict for Israel to conduct in Gaza and the WB – don’t you see that there would necessarily be massive civilian casualties in such a process?
oao
Where in my post did I say that there was a Palestinian ethnic identity before 1967? Even if it appeared after 1967 it is still a valid identity and the majority of people who are engaged in this topic recognise this. It is debatable how their identity is constructed and what makes it up (eg. unlike you I don’t believe that it is necessarily elimination of Jews from Israel, rather I believe it is the extinguishing of Jewish political independence in the pre-48 borders – they would prefer that the Jews left the area but to kill them is not the desired goal) but their identity is not questionable. And I can’t believe that your suggesting that the last 35+ years of scholarship on this question by both Palestinian Arab and other academics is all part of a “ruse” to trick people into aiding them in getting rid of Jews – starting to sound a little conspiracy theory there buddy!
Incidentally – I challenge you to point out at least 5 major commentators/writers on this topic who refuse to recognise the Palestinian ethnic identity and only refer to them as Arabs based on your thinking. I’d be curious to see who you come up with if you can.
The conversion comment was beyond silly – it was foolish and is actually an incitement to break a fundamental human right – freedom of religion choice.
Where in my post did I say that there was a Palestinian ethnic identity before 1967?
My point was that that it emerged in 1967 and did not exist prior to that, when the arabs were in control of the territories. Had that been a genuine identity — based on unique common culture and history it would have existed prior to the loss in a war which they started. The arabs NEVER talked about any palestinians except after that loss. It was not an invention of the palestinians themselves, but of the arab states as a weapon against israel.
Even if it appeared after 1967 it is still a valid identity and the majority of people who are engaged in this topic recognise this.
So are we establishing validity now based on majority rule? There are TONS of people engaged in this topic who are completely clueless.
It is debatable how their identity is constructed and what makes it up (eg. unlike you I don’t believe that it is necessarily elimination of Jews from Israel, rather I believe it is the extinguishing of Jewish political independence in the pre-48 borders – they would prefer that the Jews left the area but to kill them is not the desired goal) but their identity is not questionable.
Really? Everything is questionable as long as there is evidentiary basis for questioning. I could not care less what a majority of ignorami decides.
Sure they would prefer the jews go away — easier, speedier and less costly. But in the absence of that they demonstrate daily with action that killing all of them is what they prefer as the next best option. And insofar as Hamas, Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda are concerned, I suggest you educate yourself on what the Quran and other islamic scriptures say about the jews and how they should be handled.
And I can’t believe that your suggesting that the last 35+ years of scholarship on this question by both Palestinian Arab and other academics is all part of a “ruse” to trick people into aiding them in getting rid of Jews – starting to sound a little conspiracy theory there buddy!
That’s NOT a conspiracy theory (in fact the best proponents of conspiracy theory are the arabs), that’s EXACTLY WHAT THEY DO. If you don’t see that you’re extremely naive. But then I see tons of such naivity daily. Not in their wildest dreams could the arabs expect that the west would be so gullible and serve so well as useful idiots.
Incidentally – I challenge you to point out at least 5 major commentators/writers on this topic who refuse to recognise the Palestinian ethnic identity and only refer to them as Arabs based on your thinking. I’d be curious to see who you come up with if you can.
Two reactions to this:
1. Back at you: give me your 5 major commentators and tell me WHY they’re major!
2. Even Israel has agreed to that identity. But it has not done so because it is valid. It has done so for political expediency, deluding itself that if it recognized it, it would get peace. We know what they got instead.
So don’t confuse political compromises and grievance propaganda with validity.
The conversion comment was beyond silly – it was foolish and is actually an incitement to break a fundamental human right – freedom of religion choice
It’s interesting that you took so seriously an obviously silly comment in a blog, but you seem to accept unquestionably an identity which is based on the worst abuses of human rights that the world has known in centuries if not millenia.
Give me a break.
oao
http://fallofknowledgeandreason.blogspot.com/
btw, here’s some apropos vignettes:
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000933.html
one more thing: some of that “scholarship” may be based on a true belief in the palestinian identity as part of the myth. it is rooted in two also unquestionable facts:
1. the myth created to cover up for the shame that their elite and ultimately they ran away and were utterly betrayed by their arab “brothers”. It is a form of denial.
2. the thorough indoctrination with the myth
Videos on Car Rental Resources…
… in government spending that transformed “billions” into small change, making anything under a trillion a certification of political……