The hard Left’s multiculturalist furor at Israel has made enormous inroads into the Democratic party, as we see with the current “reset” policy of the Obama administration, while the old blue-blood, country-club Republicans who tsk-tsked Israel have almost vanished. Over the last 20 years the Left has reconstructed Israel from a bastion of the traditional liberal Jewish tradition into a Western, capitalist hegemonic oppressor, all of which shows the power of campus multculturalism when a tiny democratic country of 7 million can be reconfigured into a colonial power.
And that hard Left is running the country now. At least until January.
…versus the Tea Partiers’ culture of independence. It’s not (just) about the taxes. It’s about the spending, and the perverse incentives built into the system. And as Michael Barone points out, the Susan Roesgens of the world don’t understand that.
I didn’t notice Doug Isbell there, but apparently he was, because he has a report on the conference at Space News. And I haven’t seen much from Leonard David, who I know was there.
And the vile demagoguery of the Democrats in the wake of it, from Glenn Reynolds:
Lies and smears aimed at their fellow Americans, for short-term political gain. This is who they are, and this is what they do. It worked better, however, when there were fewer alternative channels of communication, and when their character was less well-known.
And as he notes, they’re busy going after imaginary “right wing” “terrorists,” while pretending that the real ones, who really do want to destroy our civilization, don’t exist. And they are being ignored to the point that we can’t even describe their motivations. In fact, they were doing it then — the White House and Janet Reno’s justice department shut down any investigation that might have led to the revelation of offshore help for McVeigh. Once they had their white “right-wing” “Christian” (he was an agnostic) terrorist, no need to confuse the American people with John Doe Number Two. Besides, if (say) Iraq had been shown to be involved, they might have had to do something about it.
While in general I think that the new space policy is a vast improvement over the previous one, it is marred by the disdain that the administration displays toward the moon as a useful goal. Paul Spudis (who else) defends the moon against the foolish arguments opposed to it. There may be good reasons not to go back to the moon, but I haven’t heard any, and “we’ve been there” certainly isn’t one. I know for sure that that I haven’t been there.
This new document indicates that work will proceed on development of a heavy lift launch vehicle, with a decision on what vehicle to build coming in 2015 (note well: not building a vehicle, but making a decision on what vehicle to build). How will our decision on heavy lift be more informed in five years than it is now?
If there’s anyone who doesn’t speak for this administration, it’s me, but my answer is: if we start doing the necessary tech demos for autonomous docking/mating, propellant storage and transfer, we may be informed enough to finally convince everyone except the die-hard Apollo cargo cultists and giant penis enviasts that we don’t need a heavy lift vehicle, at least any larger than natural growth versions of what currently exists.
Mark Steyn, on the ugly elephant in the “Palestinian” living room:
If Muslims are so revolted by Jews that they cannot tolerate any living among them, well, they’re free to believe what they want. What is less understandable is the present position of the United States government. The President and his Secretary of State have made it very clear that they regard a few dozen housing units in Jerusalem as a far greater threat to Middle East peace than the Iranian nuclear program. Why is it in the interest of the United States to validate, enthusiastically, the most explicit and crudest bigotry of the Palestinian “cause”?
It’s not bigotry if it’s directed at the Jews, of course.